What do we mean when we speak about methods in artistic research? And how does the methods employed in artistic practices differ from the methods employed in research? Henk Borgdorff speaks of methodological pluralism; Darla Crispin explores methods as a way of unfolding, and Annette Alander talk about methods in relation to turbulent research processes: What is common for artistic research methods, if anything? And what kind of methodological transformations occur as artistic practise is reformulated into artistic research, to be shared with the wider community and the field?
Methodological Plurism
In his widely quoted paper “The debate on research in the arts”, Henk Borgdorff states that “art practice qualifies as research when its purpose is to broaden our knowledge and understanding through an original investigation. It begins with questions that are pertinent to the research context and the art world, and employs methods that are appropriate to the study. The process and outcomes of the research are appropriately documented and disseminated to the research community and to the wider public.” (2006, p.10) And he follows up with the urgent question: "How do we know in our research (...) what methods are ‘appropriate to the study’, and what ‘appropriately documented’ entails?" (2006, p.10)
Deliberating over the elationship between artistic research and the academic world, Henk Borgdorff argues that artistic research has no single distinct or exclusive methodology, and it would therefore seem logical to argue for methodological pluralism, reflecting the interdisciplinary nature of artistic research and the way in which artistic researchers steal and borrow methods from all disciplines and fields. “But there is one qualifying condition”, Borgdorf argues, “artistic research centres on the practice of making and playing. Practising the arts (creating, designing, performing) is intrinsic to the research process. And artworks and art practices are partly the material outcomes of the research. That is what ‘material thinking’ means.” (2010, p.29) Emphasising that making and creating are central to artistic research, Borgdorff points out that “artistic practices are reflective practices, and that is what motivates artistic research in the first place.” (2008,p.95) Or expressed in a different way: “We should not say ‘Here is a theory that sheds light on artistic practice’, but ‘Here is art that invites us to think’.” (2008,p.96)
Not much, but perhaps something
In her text On Methods of Artistic Research, pioneer to the field and recurrent seminar leader at The Norwegian Research School, Annette Arlander, asks whether it is possible at all to talk about common research methods for artistic areas as diverse as music, theatre, literature, visual art, dance, film and architecture: "In principle, each art form ought to develop its own methods, based on the working methods employed" (2014. p. 27-28). She argues - and indirectly answers Borgdorf’s question about the appropriateness of methods - that research already plays a central part in artistic work in many areas and that research methods should preferably be developed from the artist’s working methods, "not imposed on an emerging field from the outside" (2014. p. 27). Artistic work in many areas of contemporary art is by nature research, in the form of, for example, exploration, investigation, trial and error, but as she points out, “only rarely developed into a formal research inquiry" (2014. p. 20).
What then sets apart artistic practice and artistic research? Not always that much, according to Arlander. She uses her artistic practice as an example:
"...over the past ten years I have been working with the question: “How to perform landscape today?” This is far too general a question to be really useful as a research question, but it gives me a starting point, something I can try to answer with the help of artistic practice. And the answer I come up with is actually a demonstration: “Like this, perhaps?” But how then are my works artistic research rather than ordinary art making? What makes them a means of creating new knowledge and understanding, rather than simply tools for creating experiences and insights for a potential spectator? Not much, necessarily, but perhaps something: my willingness to place them in relation to earlier research, to use them as an example in conceptual discussions, to openly document and reflect on the working process and, last but not least, my desire to write about them". (2014. p. 36)
Arlander adds a minor caveat here: "For an artistic researcher with a project that is to be reported or reviewed as a thesis, I do not recommend this method. Making art first and contextualising it as research afterwards probably creates more problems than planning a research project that includes art making interlaced with contextualising and reflection”. (2014. p. 36-37)
Although the question of methods is significant, because the methods distinguish different disciplines, Arlander argues that it is most of all comes down to a practical question: "If we agree with [Paul] Feyerabend, that all methods that lead to knowledge are allowed, it is clear that artistic working methods can be as good as any other methods, as long as they are articulated sufficiently clearly. And then the crucial question concerns the purpose. Do I apply these methods to create an artwork, an ambiguous and paradoxical entity, or do I do it to create some form of knowledge, understanding or insight that I can share with others and let others build on? I believe the majority of artistic researchers would choose to answer: Both". (2014. p. 39)
Method and Methodology
According to the Cambridge dictionary a method is simply a particular way of doing something. Often a method includes a tool, for example writing with a pen or a pencil or archiving with a computer software.
A methodology is described as a system of ways of doing, teaching, or studying something; a set of methods used in a particular area of study or activity.
Methods as a way of being
In his doctoral thesis, “You told me”, Magnus Bärtås describes methods as a way of being in the world. He points out that within a work of art, all methods hold their own aesthetics and carry their own gestures, discourse, and history and that methods “manifest their cognitions (…) in the work as well as representing a model of being and acting in society.” (2010, p.43) He argues that “methodology situates an individual at the same time as it suggests a way to relate to and act in the world. (…) A diverse methodology means to try and experiment with different roles, and by extension the interrogation of the functions of different roles.” (2010, p.43) As an example of this he mentions the field of drawing, in which the different methods of creating a line, also produces the image of the person working; be it a teenager, a child, an amateur, a renaissance artist. In this way drawings stages scenes of people working; non-linear narratives that run parallel with and are embedded in the overall story, the motif of the work. With this Bärtås calls for a focus-shift from the methodology of aesthetics to the aesthetics of methodology.
In his thesis Bärtås builds an understanding of “the ideas performed by methodology” (2010, p.45) from a narratological perspective. From this narratological perspective an artwork constitutes a composed sequence of action that can result in a physical object, a time-based work or an event which most often is documented. This sequence of actions is fundamental to the understanding of the work and can be reproduced or retold. Bärtås calls the account of these actions a “work story”. More than just being an account of actions and series of makings, the work story also contain accounts of considerations and relational moments. The work story, as meta-activity, thus has elements of self-interpretation and self-reflection. Bärtås’ reflection of methods as a way of being in the world brings perspective to the role of narrative in art and offers insights into the ways artists can utilise narrative techniques to enhance the impact and meaning of their visual creations.
A topological approach
This moving back and forth between atistic practice and artistic research challenges what language to use and how to move between types of languages. One must consider what language to use when and to what degree the intensity of different language categories should be amplified or reduced. Aslaug Nyrnes suggests, in her text "Lighting from the Side – Rhetoric and Artistic Research", that a reflection in an artistic research project most often exists with varying intensity in-between the researchers "own language, the language of theory and the language of the artistic expression". (2006) In her identification of these three main languages (or topoi as she describes them) Nyrnes highlights not only the existing wide register of one’s own language, the systematic quality of theory and how the artistic expression is "at the heart of the artistic research process" (2006), but also how the correlation between these three languages shed light on "how the researcher moves between the topoi" (2006) and how "this how can be identified as method." (2006) Method in this way "means finding a path that is reliable [..] a way of moving in the language". (2006)
→ Dive deeper: Nyrnes, A. (2006): Lighting from the side. Rhetoric and artistic research. Bergen: KHiB.
→ Dive deeper: Howell, K. E. (2013). An introduction to the philosophy of methodology. SAGE Publications Ltd, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957633
Reclaiming artistic research
In Reclaiming Artistc Research (2019), writer and curator Lucy Cotter explores the field of Artistic Research with artists worldwide, foregrounding art's unique ways of knowing and unknowing and its dynamic engagement with other fields. Through conversations with artists and thinkers covering broad and very varied approaches to artistic research, Cotter's book uncover the importance of the methods already embedded in the artist's practice.
In the foreword to the first edition of Reclaiming Artistic Research, Cotter argues that standard writing conventions already presents a problem in relation to the forms of knowledge and un-knowledge that artistic research unfolds. She writes:
"(...) I am aware that all these structural choices reflect assumptions about how art relates to other forms of knowledge. They declare the status of the visual and the material relative to the linguistic and demonstrate how under-acknowledged hierarchies suppress other registers of knowledge, both material and sensory. In fact, the apparent unimportance of these things bring us to the core of a power struggle within much of the discourse surrounding artistic research until now. Namely, that academic-led protocols often drown out art's sensibilities, even on those occasions when academic and other non-artistic institutions claim to be interested in art's potential to research or create knowledge in other ways. The paradox here is that art's epistemologies open up precisely at the site of representation. They open up through attention to form, through play and through the ability and desire to question the terms of the discourse, rather than provide supplementary knowledge." (2019)
→ Dive deeper: Cotter, L. et al. (ed.), (2019). Reclaiming Artistc Research. Hatje Cantz Verlag, Berlin
The messiness of research
In his conference presentation at Uniarts Helsinki, Against Method? Common Ground? Falk Hübner builds on Henk Borgdorff’s notion of “methodological pluralism” and advocates for a flexible and emergent approach to methods. Like Arlander, he emphasizes that research methods should be considered "as being crafted from inside out, from the very experience and reality of playing and making." (Hübner, 2020).
In his open source book Method, Methodology and Research Design in Artistic Research, Falk Hübner also suggests a flexible approach for the overall research design and a from-scratch design of distinct methods: "This means in particular to provide space for the unknown, and for the occasional messiness of research in and through the arts". (2024).
→ Dive deeper: Hübner, F. (2024). Method, Methodology and Research Design in Artistic Research: Between Solid Routes and Emergent Pathways (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003188841
Unfolding?
In Artistic Research as a Process of Unfolding (2019), Darla Crispin argues that artistic research involves a continuous process of unfolding, where new knowledge and insights emerge through the creative process. Like Borgdorff, Hûbner and more, Crispin emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinarity in artistic research, and she argues that integrating perspectives and methodologies from various fields can enrich the research process and lead to more comprehensive and nuanced insights.
Like many other artistic researchers and writers in the field, Crispin also stresses the importance of thorough documentation and reflective analysis. This practice is essential for communicating the outcomes of artistic research to both academic and artistic communities. At the same time, Crispin acknowledges the often unpredictable nature of artistic practice. She advocates for a flexible and adaptable approach to the research process, allowing for the creative freedom and innovation inherent in artistic practice. A flexible approach that allows for the type of unfolding and uncovering that expands rather than advances. She writes:
"Art is, in part, about making us see more clearly things that lie around us all the time but which we all too often fail to attend to as we should. It is a call to attention that reminds us to work actively, and with all our senses, so as to apprehend life in all its richness and detail. Rather than relating to knowledge as it has generally been perceived in post-Enlightenment Western thought - as a relentlessly advancing vector - if anything, it bears greater resemblances to Eastern traditions of knowledge as the expansion of wisdom through the practice of contemplation. This is a concept that chimes well with ideas of uncovering, expansion and a gradual, narrative-oriented exegesis - and with artistic research as making its contributions to knowledge and understanding in these terms." (2019)
→ Dive deeper: Crispin, D. (2019). Artistic Research as a Process of Unfolding. Norwegian Academy of Music, 3. (https://www.researchcatalogue.net/view/503395/503396)
Research is ceremony
Shawn Wilson is a community psychologist, researcher and educated Opaskwayak Cree that spent much of his life straddling the Indigenous and mainstream worlds. In addition to articulating Indigenous philosophies and research paradigms, Wilson's research focuses on the inter-related concepts of identity, health and healing, culture and wellbeing. In his seminal book Research is Ceremony: Indigenous Research Methods he describes a research paradigm shared by Indigenous scholars in Canada and Australia, and demonstrates how this paradigm can be put into practice. In the book he characterises Indigenous researchers as knowledge seekers who work to progress Indigenous ways of being, knowing and doing in a modern and constantly evolving context and describes the way in which relationships don't just shape Indigenous reality, but constitutes that very reality. The book explores the way "Indigenous researchers develop relationships with ideas in order to achieve enlightenment in the ceremony that is Indigenous research. Indigenous research is the ceremony of maintaining accountability to these relationships. For researchers to be accountable to all [their] relations, [they] must make careful choices in [their] selection of topics, methods of data collection, forms of analysis and finally in the way [they] present information." (Wilson, 2008) Research is Ceremony: Indigenous Research Methods explores Indigenous ontology, epistemology, axiology and methodology. Through working with Indigenous people internationally, Wilson applies Indigenist philosophy within the contexts of Indigenous education, health and counselor education, focusing on the inter-related concepts of identity, health and healing, and culture and wellbeing.
→ Dive deeper: Wilson, S. (2008). Research Is Ceremony - Indigenous Research Methods, Fernwood Publishing. See also "Research is Ceremony: Researching within an Indigenous Paradigm", a presentation by Shawn Wilsonat CTET, Centre for Teaching and Educational Technologies at Royal Roads University in Victoria, British Columbia.
→ Dive deeper: The film (above) offers an insight into Studio Conversations, a research project focused on ways of asking contemporary dance artists about the practices, working and knowing happening in their dancing. Conversation between Gunhild Mathea Husvik-Olaussen, Andrew Hardwidge, Chrysa Parkinson, and Frank Bock.
Where to start?
A good starting point might be to identify and clarify methods already existing in your artistic practise. Whether you are a musician, a designer, a performens artist, a dancer, or a fimmaker, you already have certain things you do and ways of doing this. You may not always have built a clear vocabulary for these methods that run through your artistic practice, but chances are that as methods these are already quite developed. Pinpointing some of the things you do and clarifying the process around this doing will give you a great starting point for thinking about and developing your artistic research methods. Another way to identify methods is by focussing on the tools you use in your practice. The ways in which tools are chosen and employed speaks to the methods of a practice. And these tools, and a further development of them, will often play a big part in an artistic research project and the methodology devised here.
→ Dive deeper: Transrealism
In ), Søren Thilo Funder brings together video, installation, and performance art, in an artistic research project employing storytelling techniques to challenge and reflect on various social and political issue. In his reflection, he goes into depth to not only describe his methods but also identify these where they may not be that obvious. He labels one of these methods "Transrealism": "I [make] use of transrealist fiction writing to create a certain way of engaging with a political reality in my work, but allowing for this reality to transform and open up onto new narratives and ways of engagement. (...) The way that transrealism moves beyond reality in an unrehearsed manner, also allows me to think of this methodology to create a certain openness in the final results, giving leave for an audience to co-narrate, make up own conclusions or ask new questions. (...) [T]ransrealism allows for a certain way of treating research as a fluid material, existing in the strange membrane between fiction and reality, and in this raising questions about truth regimes, knowledge hierarchies, ethics and the role of artistic research." (2024)
Thilo Funder lifts the concept of Transrealism from the field of fiction writing, especially involved with the genre of weird fiction. As a visual artist he recognises the basic principals of this methodology, but sets out to reformulate and reactivate these principals to become relevant to a time-based artistic practice, as well as the field of artistic research. He writes:
"In the way I have used transrealism as a methodology, it moves away from being merely a narrative tool and rather becomes a process of letting the narratively speculative merge with a speculative approach to materiality and aesthetics, ie. the treatment of temporality and time, as well as the forming of aesthetic audio visual formations. There is a certain performativity connected to this form of practice, wherein the speculative process of getting to a certain result is performed in the result itself and in its dialogue with a potential viewer. (...) The transrealist approach is used as a methodology for this research project, not only in the development of new artistic work but also in its reflective work. As methodology the transrealist approach has allowed for a certain fluidness in the way that reflections have unfolded parallel to practice." (2024)
→ Dive deeper: re-radio
In her artistic research project re-radio, Karen Werner explores how radio can be used as a medium for artistic expression, community engagement, and social change. The project emphasize the potential of radio as a dynamic and transformative medium, capable of fostering dialogue, reflection, social reorganisation and new collective narratives. A key aspect of her methods in re-radio is participatory practices. The project initiates and reflects upon multiple workshops and happenings involving community members in the creation and production of radio content. Working closely with specific local communities, in participatory and colaboratory processes, Werner ensures the representation of diverse voices and perspectives. She writes:
"A third aspect of my methodology has been sociality, specifically thinking and talking with others on-air, including interlocuters at a radio station as well as imagined radio listeners. At times these interlocuters are friends; other times they are people excited by the idea of a neighborhood or community radio station. Sometimes we are similar demographically; sometimes we come from different cultures, languages and generations. Sometimes I lead; sometimes I follow. The radio station as an artistic form emerged organically from this longing for sociality. In the ways I approach the radio station, relationality is both a method and an artistic material in the form of conversation." (2025)
In the project she is also utilizing non-traditional formats and structures to push the boundaries of conventional radio, creating both unique and immersive listening experiences, as well as disruptive broadcasts questioning our means of communication. Here she also employs storytelling techniques that blend fiction and reality, (similar to transrealism), to engage listeners and unfold new perspectives.
Finally she also addresses the ethical implications of radio production, including issues of representation, consent, and the impact of the content on audiences.
→ Dive deeper: Playing in the Manner of Ricardo Vinês
Håkon Magnar Skogstad talks about and demonstrate his research methods in Forsker Grand Prix (language: Norwegian).
Sharing archive
Several artistic research project works with the archive as resource or as site for the research. In some cases an archive is the very outcome of the research project. The ‘re-’ in research can in this sense refer to a reinvestigation - a going back into what has been manifested as official account and search again; for what might possibly have happened; what might possibly have been forgotten; have been omitted; overlooked. And from here explore how this re-search resonates, reformulates or renegotiates the archive as site of knowledge. In this re-search, perspectives that has formerly not been taken into consideration may be unfolded or re-imaginations that enable completely new perspectives can emerge. The building of an archive or the re-archiving of histories, situations, material, methods, is a powerful form of sharing, that not only engage in a dialogue with one's field but with a surrounding political reality and the power-relations involved in the question of who gets to narrate history.
→ Dive deeper (project example): Reimagining Tragedy from African and the Global South (RETAGS)
This performance-as-research project is being led by Prof. Mark Fleishman with Mandla Mbothwe in the Centre for Theatre, Dance and Performance Studies at University of Cape Town. The project seeks to create space for an extended interrogation of the vast body of tragic works produced in the theatres of Africa, using performance methodologies as analytical tools to gain purchase on the complex realities of the colonial aftermath. It does this by investigating current events in the postcolony beyond the theatre, through the “prism of tragedy”.
→ Dive deeper: Jayne Batzofin & RETAGS - the challenges of archiving performance-as-research - ARA Podcast, Arts Research Africa Arts, Research Africa Dialogues
Hold on to the question, the method or the material?
Annette Arlander ends her article On Methods of Artistic Research with a recommendation (Arlander, 2014. p. 38-39):
"On the basis of the dilemmas faced by the doctoral students I have followed over the years, I recommend that an artistic researcher, whether a post-graduate or a veteran, holds on to at least one of the following in the turbulence of the research process – the question, the method or the material. (...):
- If one sticks to one’s original question, all means and methods for trying to answer that question are allowable. One can change the methods, the theoretical frame of reference, let the process lead, seek new data, without going off course and losing sight of what one is actually doing. (This attitude is supported by Feyerabend and comes close to common sense – at least in my opinion.)
- If one sticks to a chosen method, and if that method is accepted within the tradition in which one is working, some form of research outcome will be produced even if one abandons the original question and all the assumptions and goals one started with. A method produces some form of outcome. (This attitude resembles a kind of “normal science” tradition, and is one of the reasons why methods are so talked about. The method is considered to guarantee results or scientific credentials.)
- And finally, if one sticks to the material, one can change the questions being asked about it or the methods used to analyse it, and let the material take the lead or speak. (This attitude resembles the way the importance of the material is idealised within qualitative research, and in the humanities in certain contexts.)
Attempting to formulate and fix all of them – question, method and material – in advance and keep to the research plan throughout the process is often pure idealism (and sometimes even damaging) in an artistic research process where every aspect can be in a state of flux" (Arlander, 2014. p. 38-39).
→ Dive deeper: KEM Artistic Methods by Erik Viskil, Falk Hübner, Michel van Dartel, with advice from Liesbet van Zoonen, Anke Coumans and Marcel Cobussen.
→ Dive deeper: What Methods Do - Exploring the transformative potential of artistic research
Documentation of the International Symposium organized April 9th 20024 in Tilburg by Leiden University’s Academy of Creative and Performing Arts (ACPA) and the Platform for Arts Research in Collaboration, in coordination with Fontys Tilburg and the Society for Artistic Research (SAR).
The symposium was an initiative of Route Kunst – Art Route, one of the 25 Routes of the Dutch National Research Agenda (NWA).
The artist as a research tool
Artistic research is characterized by its emphasis on the creative process as both a method and an outcome of research. One of the key aspects of artistic research is its reflexive nature. Artists-researchers are often deeply engaged with their own creative processes, constantly reflecting on their work and its implications. This reflexivity allows them to critically examine their assumptions, methodologies, and outcomes, leading to a deeper understanding of their practice and its broader cultural and social contexts. Unlike scientific research, which often prioritizes objective analysis and empirical data, artistic research also values subjective experience, intuition, and the embodied knowledge of the artist. This approach recognizes that artistic practice can produce unique forms of understanding that are not easily captured by conventional academic methods.
Annette Arlander refers to the book Artistic Research – Theories, Methods and Practices from 2005 by Mika Hannula, Juha Suoranta and Tere Vadén, where they note that “the starting point for artistic research is the open subjectivity of the researcher and her admission that she is the central research tool.” (Arlander, 2014. p. 28).
In tune with Arlander´s idea of the artist as tool, Borgdorff discusses the concept of embodied knowledge, which refers to the tacit, experiential understanding that artists gain through their practice. This type of knowledge is often difficult to articulate through traditional academic means but is crucial to the insights produced by artistic research.
In The Production of Knowledge in Artistic Research Borgdorff writes:
"[T]he experiences and insights that artistic research delivers are embodied in the resulting art practices and products. In part, these material outcomes are non-conceptual and non-discursive, and their persuasive quality lies in the performative power through which they broaden our aesthetic experience, invite us to fundamentally unfinished thinking, and prompt us towards a critical perspective on what there is.m (Borgdorff, 2006. p.47)
(...) Just as the contribution made by other academic research consists in uncovering new facts or relationships, or shedding new light on existing facts or relationships, artistic research likewise helps expand the frontiers of the discipline by developing cutting-edge artistic practices, products and insights." (Borgdorff, 2006. p.54)
Artistic research always involves the creation of new artworks as a primary means of inquiry. The process of making art is documented and reflected on to uncover insights about techniques, materials, concepts and artistic research methods. Commonly used methods include: Autoethnography - the artistic researcher using their own experiences as a primary source of data; Collaborative Research - projects involving collaboration between artists and researchers from other disciplines; Archival Research - artists engaging with historical materials, such as documents, photographs, and recordings, to inform their practice. Archival research can thus uncover forgotten or overlooked aspects of artistic and socio-political history.
Artistic research faces several challenges, including the need to balance creative freedom with academic rigor, the difficulty of articulating tacit knowledge, and the often ambiguous nature of artistic outcomes. However, these challenges also present opportunities for innovation and experimentation. By embracing the unique qualities of artistic practice, researchers push the boundaries of knowledge and the understanding of the arts and their role in society.