Falk Hübner’s lectorate and expertise is relevant for this proposal. He has a
background as composer, theatre maker, researcher and educator. He is active
in a huge diversity of collaborations within and outside of the arts. His
research focuses on the social-societal potential of artistic research, research
methodologies, and the relation of the arts and art education in relation to
society. Artistic Connective Practices aims to provide a perspective on
complex issues through a number of core values, such as connecting through
spending time together, rooted in agreed common ground, mutual respect and
endless curiosity; affinity, integrity and kinship. With non-hierarchical and
emergent forms of collaboration in an inclusive and diverse context as point of
departure, these core values will be developed into research questions and
concrete artistic research projects in the future of the lectorate.
Michelle Teran’s lectorate and practice is relevant for this PD proposal. As an
educator, a practicing artist, and a researcher working within the
interdisciplinary field contemporary art. Her research areas encompass
socially engaged and site-specific art, transmedia storytelling, countercartographies,
social movements, urbanism, feminist practices, critical
pedagogy, and activism. Her subject areas included networked performance,
transmedia storytelling, surveillant architecture, urban infrastructures,
psychogeography, microhistory, urban geography, critical cartography, and
interactive interface design. Michelle Teran contributes to the Neighbourhood
Academy in the Prinzessinnengarten, a Berlin-based, self-organized open
platform for urban and rural knowledge, sharing cultural practice and
activism, located within an urban garden in Kreuzberg.
Robin Deacon (born 1973 Eastbourne, England) is a British artist, writer and
filmmaker currently based in the USA. His interdisciplinary practice has
spanned a variety of disciplines and themes, including explorations of
performer presence and absence, the role of the artist as biographer, the
possibility for journalistic approaches to arts practice, and the mapping and
ethics of performance re-enactment. He graduated from Cardiff School of Art
in 1996, going on to present his performances and videos at conferences and
festivals in the UK and internationally in Europe, USA and Asia. He he was
Course Director of the Drama and Performance Studies program at London
South Bank University and was Professor and former Chair of Performance at
the School of the Art Institute of Chicago. Currently he is the head of SPILL
festival.
Jasper Delbecke (°1988) studied Theatre and Performance Studies at Ghent
University and Freie Universität Berlin. In 2014 he graduated as Master in Art
Science: Theatre and Performance Studies (Ghent University) and he is
currently finalizing his PhD: The essay following the new documentary turn in
performing arts: Tracing the essay in contemporary theatre and performance
practices. The doctoral research explores how the form and the discourse of
the essay appears within the field of contemporary performing arts. Jasper
Delbecke is one of the initiators for the international conference From the
scenic essay to the essay-exhibition. Expanding the essay form in the arts after
literature and film. (27 - 29 April 2022), co-organized with research centre
S:PAM - Studies in Performing Arts and Media (Ghent University)
and KASK & Conservatorium (HOGENT – Howest).
|
Proposed in the T&S Plan |
Achieved or adjusted |
|
Falk Hubner |
7 meetings (online + in person) + written feedback With Falk it’s been mostly shorter practical meetings, about things , and |
|
Michelle Teran |
With Robin I have had great meetings on the artistic research practice and the research in relation to education and non-human actors. There is an understanding of the practice on o very conceptual and natural manner, The associations and suggestions really make visible underlying layers fo the artistic research practice. It also makes me think sharper about the collective aspect. |
|
Falk and Michelle |
3 meetings (in person) With Falk and Michelle I have had 2 meetings |
|
Jasper Delbecke |
1 meeting (online) + written feedback With Japer I can go into depth about essaying and the extension to performance, installation and collectivity. |
|
Robin Deacon |
3 meetings (online) With Michelle, I get a lot of new references from fields that are new to me, like queer studies and feminist and activist theorists and practitioners. I can talk into depth about the practice of lecture performances and critical practices (like critical pedagogy, social activism). |
|
Full supervision team |
To be planned in April/May |
|
Other feedback |
I have received feedback form Dr. T. Witty on the research, I have discussed the research with critical friends and asked for feedback on the topic On Pitbulls from experts (collectives and researchers) |
|
Note: external supervisors were contracted in December 2023, which is effectively 4 months of external supervision. |
|
|
Reflection: I would like more structure in the meetings, next step will be to plan the schedule ahead for academic year 2024/2025. |
|
Dear supervision team,
Next Friday is our first joint meeting, I am really looking forward to it! Here is the edited overview with some additional information. The main topics are on collectivity and the workshop. No preparation is required except for going through the provided material in contextualisation.
PD Joint Meeting:
Friday 31 May
13.00-15.00 CET
Jitsi link: https://meet.jit.si/On_Essaying
Agenda:
1: Introduction - 15. min
Discussing feedback + Research Catalogue exposition (structure, aesthetics, maps)
2: Discussion: Topics - 45 min. (see below)
Discussing the concept of collectivity as concept in relationship to the research (topic), a start for creating collective space for research (RooM and WRaP).
3: Workshop - 45 min. (see below)
During the meeting I would like to do an extended version of this workshop (theorized in the article and practices in the previous workshops) and discuss the format.
4: Closing - 15 min.
Closing words and next steps
Part 1: Introduction - 15. min (13.00-13.15)
General update + Research Catalogue exposition (structure, aesthetics, maps)
Thanks for the feedback! I would love to individually plan the year in advance after this meeting.
Setup:
not as presentation, not as evaluation, ot as a conclussion
but sharing process and discussion points
for critical inquery, input and references from different perspectives
Update:
Research Drive
Essaying maps in the RC:
The last topic came mostly from my persoal positioning: still dont know the place in the essaying but it seems to be a really great source of inspirtion where I get my fragments, same for daily life/seemingly unrelated events like restauration work
Essaying characteristics:
doubt: Every single
experience, every single experiment through which we
reproduce that experience, is essentially an isolated piece of
knowledge and through carrying out the experiment a number
of times we verify it as such. Within
Considering all this, we can
easily see the danger of connecting an individual experience
with a preconceived idea, or of wanting to prove by means of
individual experiments relations that are not altogether
sense perceptible — that the creative power of thought has
already formulated.
Part 2: Discussion: Topics - 45 min. (13.15- 14.00)
Discussing the concept of collectivity as concept in relationship to the research (topic), a start for creating collective space for research (RooM and WRaP).
From the feedback:
What is your own role and position in the collective process, and
how do you safeguard your own voice? The collective is also a collection of individual voices - and
your own is one of them, an important one.
Collectivity as concept
My point of departure for collectivity is the The experiment as mediator of subject and object by Goethe (in German versuch is translated into essay and experiment). He talks about a collective of individual perspectives in science from a essayistic perspective. I am also using the dissemination of Anja Groten Figuring things out together (2023) using the term ‘Ontological design’ and the notion of dissensus (Design and Dissensus: Framing and Staging Participation in Design Research, Mahmoud Keshavarz, Ramia Mazé).
- Discussing the notion of a collective of individual perspectives
- Discussing essaying and specifically dissensus as mediator
- Discussing other relevant references
Contextualisation: where I first got the idea for collectivity, its dated, and perhaps essaying is more radical, but it is cosidered an essayistic science
Article Goethe - The experiment as mediator of subject and object
SAR IMA Individual Member Alliance
Collective (research) spaces
The core aspect I want to highlight and investigate on the collectivity of essaying are the notions of proximity and borders.
Essaying borders on art and science, between the personal/experiential and intellectual, it is the in-between space, looking for friction, doubt and ambiguity. The title of a new Erasmus + research is Essays beyond borders (Thijs Lijster) exactly for this reason. The notion of dissensus is closely related to these borders and essaying providing space for friction. According to Goethe, exploring bordering phenomena is essential in experimenting.
With RooM I want to investigate the border between the institute and society, between art and society (especially in the current political landscape) and between different social economical classes. I want to investigate the notion of border objects in the context of design (Pitbulls as border objects, RooM as a border object). With WRaP we aim to create a collective space where we can encounter each other.
QC1: I am now in the starting phase, thinking about practical issues as; how does it look? When am I there? What will I do?
QC2: Are there other references (practice or theory) I can use?
Contextualisation:
D: Collective (research) spaces
RooM (Research Open Office Mobile)
Link RC: https://www.researchcatalogue.net/view/2078805/2377976
WRaP (Workspace Research as Practice)
Link RC: https://www.researchcatalogue.net/view/2078805/2333250?c=0
Part 3: Workshop - 45 min. (14.00-14.45)
This workshop will be an edited version of the previous workshos and based on the article I published. Your feedback is very welcome, I will use it to edit the workshop for the Master Scenography at the Art Academy in Utrecht, and for the Master Art Education at Fontys.
RC overview page: https://www.researchcatalogue.net/view/1726729/2555377
Contextualisation:
A: Article: Essaying as (Collective) process
Attached you fid the final version of my research article: Essaying as (collective) process for LKCA art education journal Kunst + Creatief edition 65 (online soon). This article is in Dutch, but I will create an English abstract on my RC exposition.
Link LKCA: https://www.lkca.nl/publicaties/cultuur-plus-educatie/
B: Event: Essayism and Pedagogy
I organized the second edition of the series: The Essay and the University with dr. Thijs Witty for NICA at Leiden University. Jasper was one of the main speakers. The title is: Essayism and Pedagogy
Link NICA: https://www.nica-institute.com/event-the-essay-in-the-university-symposium-spring-2024/
C: Workshop: Essaying ways of knowing
Together with the four core members of the SAR SIG research group: Essaying and Pedagogy we created a workshop: Essaying ways of knowing for the SAR Forum last week.
Link RC: https://www.researchcatalogue.net/view/2057064/2564446?c=4
Extra:
Workshop PD: https://www.researchcatalogue.net/view/1726729/2709376
Workshop Haze: https://www.researchcatalogue.net/view/1726729/2388253
4: Closing - 15 min. (14.45-15.00)
Closing words and next steps
Make time, spend time:
Dive into reading
Dive into making
seeing the worksopas artistic - make a work
practice of essayig
arrchiveof essaying -
pedagogy of essayig
giving worksops - ghent- internationally
urrent concept: collectivity
Next concept: performativity
Extra:
From the feedback:
Questions of labour are interesting as well: Are others (collaborators, participants, animals, non-human objects such as engines) working for Emily, or with her? And how does this play into the different questions of the PD research project?
When are her pit bull dogs used as essay subjects, and when do they become co-conspirators?
fragments: Is there any hierarchy of knowledge? Are all fragments of
knowlege flat and on the same level?