Monday Blog post time. I've had two weeks with little else to do but think about my PhD. I have moved passed the RD2 crises and vaguely forgotten about new materialism. I have written 5000 words which is really a stream of consciousness that in trying not to repeat itself, repeats itself. I have just read it and in some ways within the drivel it maps out an area of theory that tries to think about what art means within what I'm going to call my study. I seem to have avoided reading any critical literature from a contemporary art perspective. I'm pretty happy with this as it's what I need at the moment- to take back a little bit of the territory of art for myself - this is also what I notice I do on my projects.
I had a very short phone supervision with Kate on Friday as MMU would not let me in due to Covad 19 virus. I told Kate that I felt I was getting distracted by the history and theory of Adventure play including loose parts approaches and that this had never been the focus of the PhD. I said I needed to pull back to the idea of residency and foreground art.
There is obviously a problem here in that if I'm suggesting that residency is a mode of enquirer or knowledge production then it may need to have an area of inquiry other than itself. Of course I now know that this establishes a binary or duality that may not be useful but it still feels that without an area of exploration that sits outside the exploration of what it means to be in residence then everything gets circular and inward looking- its not a method its just a residency.
Regardless of this concern I need to be clear that my PhD is not about adventure play or early literacy - it just happens to be located in two residencies within these spaces of enquirey. The settings are part of a broader assemblage they are not the objects of study.
Can a new materialist approach or lens afford a way to explore the artists residency in a way that will add to understanding and create new knowledge? So practically am I working through some stuff that could free up the fixed definitions of what residency is and what art can do within research and within the world. This desire feels like a worthwhile and consistent trace through my practice, It is one of the threads that the PhD has put under tension. In some way preventing me taking for granted some of the givens that allow the practice to continue as a practice. What I tried to explain to Abi as the artists 'secret plan' that even they don't really know about, only that it exists and it determines actions. Its interesting getting a little distance with the work with Abi as I can see the tiny parts of art falling out of the project. Some of the bits of art make me feel like a fool, they seem pointless, some feel like a joke, like I'm not being serious or been taken seriously but mostly in retrospect they feel OK.
I think this will happen with the adventure playground work - at the moment it doesn't feel much like art or much like a residency - its not located and the theory aspect of my life drops me into a bit of a muddle- I feel like I'm playing some sort of serious game of catch up - mainly with myself.
Is their a crux here? something that revolves around the nature of art and what it means - a really practical question about whether we need it and if it does anything. Is art transcendental in its nature? its essence? is any attempt to locate it materially a case of defusing its potency or agentive qualities. If so then is the best solution to trundle on in constructed oxymoronic ignorance. I can see the points of art and practice as they emmerge - I can identify them as I look back and I can see where the things I'm doing do not conform to the secret plan or emerge as art. This then must be some sort of progress - not really to share with anyone but at least to give myself a bit of a handhold for taking a breath.
No comments:
Post a Comment