Research Catalogue

This exhibition presents the context, process, and conclusions of the artistic research project Imagination as a Tool for Change in Shared Space, carried out at DAMU. At the heart of the research is the question: How can we give the body a voice? In other words, how can we invite bodily perception and imagination into the process of decision-making and exploration, while at the same time perceiving these qualities as fully-fledged mediators of information? The backbone of the research consists of a pair of workshops designed to guide students through the exploration and reflection on the theme of the chill zone at DAMU. A series of exercises aimed to awaken their somatic and sensory perception, followed by an exploration of spaces designated for rest, and finally imaginative exercises with the aim of proposing possible changes or forms for the spaces. The exhibition presents the individual layers of the project: 1) In the contextual layer, we acquaint readers with our personal starting points (chapter: Medallions), with the theoretical and practical-experiential foundations on which we consciously build (chapter: Introduction), and with methodological procedures (chapter: Methodology). 2) At the center is the documentary layer, which describes the structure of the workshops, the creative outputs of the participants, and a chronicle mapping the transformation of the research team's thinking, documenting the lively dialogue between the discourses of transformative pedagogy and embodied learning in acting and authorship. 3) The layer of findings and conclusions identifies two fundamental qualities: (a) the concept of "sensitized researchers", in which bodily and sensory perception provides a full report on the surrounding world, and (b) the situation of being in the imagery, in which working with the imagination offers possible proposals for change. In conclusion, we look back at the reasons for the changes in the original research questions and consider further possible directions for research. Tato expozice prezentuje kontext, proces a závěry uměleckého výzkumu Imaginace jako nástroj změny ve sdíleném prostoru realizovaného na DAMU. V centru výzkumu stojí otázka: Jak dát tělu hlas? Neboli jak do procesu rozhodování a zkoumání přizvat tělesné vnímaní a imaginaci a jak zároveň tyto kvality vnímat jako plnohodnotné zprostředkovatele informací. Páteř výzkumu tvoří dvojice workshopů, které byly navrženy tak, aby studující provedly zkoumáním a promýšlením tématu chill-zóny na DAMU. Série cvičení směřovala k probuzení jejich tělesné a smyslové vnímavosti, následně ke zkoumání prostor určených pro odpočinek a v závěru k imaginativním cvičením s cílem navrhnout možné změny či podobu prostor. Expozice představuje jednotlivé vrstvy projektu: 1) V kontextová vrstvě seznamujeme čtenáře s našimi osobními výchozími pozicemi (kap. Medailonky), s teoretickými a prakticko-zkušenostními východisky, na které vědomě navazujeme (kap. Úvod), a s metodologickými postupy (kap. Metodologie). 2) V centru stojí dokumentární vrstva přibližující strukturu workshopů, kreativní výstupy účastnictva a kroniku mapující proměnu myšlení výzkumného týmu, dokládající živý dialog mezi diskurzy transformativní pedagogiky a vtěleného učení k herectví a autorství. 3) Vrstva zjištění a závěrů identifikuje dvě zásadní kvality: (a) koncept „zcitlivělé výzkumnictvo“, kdy tělesné a smyslové vnímání přináší plnohodnotnou zprávu o okolním světě, a (b) situaci bytí v představě, kdy práce s imaginací nabízí možné návrhy ke změně. V závěru se ohlížíme za důvody změn původních výzkumných otázek a promýšlíme další možné směřování výzkumu.

The Varder are a system of marine navigational aids along the Norwegian coast originating from the age of sail. Officially still part of the oldest maritime navigational system still in use, these forms now act as anchors to a physical present. In a digital society losing its patience, the Varder stand in contrast to the accelerations surrounding them: analogue, material, and static.

In the scope of my PhD-in-Art project “Staging the Invisible Elephant that Remains Overlooked”, I investigate collaborative and co-creative work with children as equal partners – from my perspectives as an artist, workshop leader, teacher, aunt, recent mother, and adult friend. The intersections, tensions, and synergies between artistic research and pedagogical practice form the core of my research. Spanning 2017–2025 the work unfolds as an open, reflective process grounded in project-based artistic practice, dialogical encounters, and reflective writing. Additionally, reading experiences in different literary and scientific fields serve as resonant spaces in which insights take shape and intensify. Recurring themes include the interplay of structure and freedom; the negotiation of shared authorship, responsibility, re­presentation and ethics in co-creative work with children across different contexts; and the possibilities and limi­tations of conducting artistic research “at eye level” within school environments. I also examine the potentials that artistic approaches offer in addressing contemporary pedagogical challenges related to digital technologies, social media, and artificial intelligence. In accordance with the principles of artistic research, I understand ambiguity, contradiction, and subjectivity as methodological strengths. I foreground transparency, vulnerability, and the transformative potential of misunderstanding, and I propose ways in which we might relate to one another differently in a complex world and strengthen democracies at risk.

This essay establishes Post‑Interpretive Criticism as a formal break with the dominant aesthetic consensus of the late twentieth century, which treated meaning as something produced through mediation rather than encountered through structure. Surveying post‑1950 traditions across structuralism, hermeneutics, phenomenology, critical theory, and post‑structuralism, the essay identifies a shared assumption underlying their disagreements: interpretation functions as the necessary and ethically justified ground of meaning. Post‑Interpretive Criticism rejects this premise not by proposing an alternative theory of meaning‑production, but by questioning whether production itself is the correct frame. The essay argues that interpretation is not neutral, inevitable, or inherently liberatory, but structurally hazardous. Language, when introduced prematurely or excessively, alters the proportions of the aesthetic encounter, collapsing interval, crowding distance, and displacing presence with discourse. Meaning, on this account, does not originate in interpretation but in a relational field between work and witness that possesses structure prior to mediation. Interpretation is therefore recast as an intervention rather than a foundation—one that must justify itself ethically by preserving proportion rather than overwhelming it. Positioning Post‑Interpretive Criticism against the historical conditions that necessitated interpretive excess in the post‑war period, the essay argues that contemporary aesthetics now faces the inverse problem: interpretive saturation. Where interpretation once functioned as moral responsibility, it now frequently preempts encounter, substituting commentary for perception. Drawing careful distinctions from phenomenological aesthetics, the essay emphasizes that description of experience is insufficient without a discipline governing speech. Post‑Interpretive Criticism introduces restraint as method, silence as ethical posture, and proportion as evaluative criterion. The essay concludes by outlining the institutional, pedagogical, and critical consequences of adopting Post‑Interpretive Criticism, including reduced interpretive authority, contraction of discourse, and the re‑training of attention prior to articulation. It does not argue for universal application, but claims necessity under specific contemporary conditions. Interpretation, once required, is now placed at risk—not because meaning has vanished, but because the encounter has returned as the primary site of aesthetic responsibility. This entry is connected to a series of original theories and treatises forming the foundation of the Post-Interpretive Criticism movement (Q136308909), authored by Dorian Vale (Q136308916) and published by Museum of One (Q136308879). These include: Stillmark Theory (Q136328254), Hauntmark Theory (Q136328273), Absential Aesthetic Theory (Q136328330), Viewer-as-Evidence Theory (Q136328828), Message-Transfer Theory (Q136329002), Aesthetic Displacement Theory (Q136329014), Theory of Misplacement (Q136329054), and Art as Truth: A Treatise (Q136329071), Aesthetic Recursion Theory (Q136339843), The Journal of Post-Interpretive Criticism (Q136530009), Canon of Witnesses (Q136565881) Dorian Vale is a chosen pseudonym, not to obscure identity, but to preserve clarity of voice and integrity of message. It creates distance between the writer and the work, allowing the philosophy to stand unclouded by biography. The name exists not to hide, but to honor the seriousness of the task: to speak without spectacle, and to build without needing to be seen.

From the Gezi Park protests of 2013 onwards, Turkey has witnessed a troubling trajectory that reflects signs of an authoritarian dystopia —a word that might resonate with scholars of philosophy. This article interprets the variables of this authoritarianism, raising a question of law and exception on a local-global span. The modern panorama of Turkey presents an urgent case study for scholars examining the interplay between state power, civil liberties, and the public sphere.

This essay situates Post-Interpretive Criticism within the philosophical lineage of Pythagorean thought, arguing that both traditions uphold alignment, not interpretation, as the rightful posture toward truth. Drawing from the procedural structure of the seven liberal arts (trivium and quadrivium), the essay proposes a framework wherein aesthetic experience is not produced by commentary but preserved through restraint, ratio, and spatial ethics. The critic, like the Pythagorean listener, is not a performer of insight but a tuning instrument for fidelity. Geometry here is not symbolic but disciplinary. Harmony is not decoration but evidence of structural truth. Against the inflation of language in contemporary criticism, the essay defends the doctrine of restraint, articulated in the Post-Interpretive Lexicon as the ethical refusal to speak first, to dominate with explanation, or to distort the interval between viewer and work . By reanimating ancient principles of proportion, breath, and silent recognition, it positions criticism not as a pursuit of meaning but as a form of fidelity to what already holds its law. Using examples from art, music, architecture, and mathematics, the essay formalizes the alignment-based criteria for valid aesthetic response. These include grammatical clarity, logical coherence, rhetorical proportion, and quadrivial discipline, culminating in a methodologically grounded alternative to contemporary interpretive excess. Where most criticism seeks to explain the work, Post-Interpretive Criticism seeks to stand before it correctly. The work is not a message to decode, but a geometry to hold. The critic’s task is not verbal performance but spatial obedience. Truth, in this essay, is redefined not as insight delivered, but as harmony preserved. This entry is connected to a series of original theories and treatises forming the foundation of the Post-Interpretive Criticism movement (Q136308909), authored by Dorian Vale (Q136308916) and published by Museum of One (Q136308879). These include: Stillmark Theory (Q136328254), Hauntmark Theory (Q136328273), Absential Aesthetic Theory (Q136328330), Viewer-as-Evidence Theory (Q136328828), Message-Transfer Theory (Q136329002), Aesthetic Displacement Theory (Q136329014), Theory of Misplacement (Q136329054), and Art as Truth: A Treatise (Q136329071), Aesthetic Recursion Theory (Q136339843), The Journal of Post-Interpretive Criticism (Q136530009), Canon of Witnesses (Q136565881)