Hey, everyone, thanks so much for such a
fantastic month of discussion. I have been very
interested to see how the discussion has focused
this past week on the place of research within
the fields of arts and the humanities. As the
director of a humanities institute, I am
constantly reminding my scientific colleagues of
the central important of our research mission to
that of the university. But rather than apply
our subject matter to the common good, our
research mission frequently involves continued
critical reflection on the very terms of the
"common," "good," and research itself.
Curiously,just before Simon Biggs made his post
on Sunday, I spoke to him and others assembled
for a workshop I sponsored on "critical
mobilities" at Cornell about the continued
importance of Martin Heidegger's 1954
denunciation of university "research", in "Age
of the World Picture," for its rapidly developing
repetitions of funding models and scientific
projects whose self-willed continuance is too
divorced from critical reflection on its terms,
its aim, and its ground in what Heidegger calls
"erudition." The current British extension of
this research machine in the UK, mentioned by
Simon and Sarah, to necessitate justification of
outcomes and social impact seems to be nothing
less thatn the realization of Heidegger's worst
fears.
While the University system seems to have had no
difficulty comprehending and justifying the
social good if its research of advanced military
weapons, dubious economic systems, and far
ranging surveillane practices, it so easily
calls to court practices in Tactical Media
(thinking of Nick Knouf's account of the
rejection of his research application, not to
mention Ricardo Dominguez's current situation).
Many thanks as well to Mark Bohlen and others
for prompting us to lend an equally critical eye
to our own practices, whether Tactical or
otherwise, which could be led by University
culture to blend into a kind of bland
complacency in which the terms and consequences
of our research practices might distance
themselves for continued critique and critical
reflection.
We'll be announcing May's topic later today,
which will begin tomorrow. It's a striking
coincidence that, while we evolve into the next
discussion, "Process as Paradigm," ( to be led
by guest moderators Susanne Jaschko and Lucas
Evers, in conjunction with their exhibition by
the same name at Laboral), Ricardo Dominguez
will be continuing the process of his legal
"process," as he informs -empyre- today:
Hola all,
The 2nd "investigation" meeting will take place tomorrow Cinco de Mayo at
10am at the Visual Arts Chair's office - same place as last time. I do not
know how long the meeting will go - but the lead legal consul will be with
me and so will Chair Kester (as a silent witness).
What the support communities would can do - you can meet us in front of
Chair office at 10am or join Digital Marcha starting tonight and all day
tomorrow or both.
The Digital Marcha would be Sending a Short or Long E-mail of support of
b.a.n.g lab/EDT's projects starting tonight and all day tomorrow.
The E-mails would be SENT to ASVC Burke who is leading the "investigation"
into b.a.n.g lab/EDT's VR Sit-In performance of March 4th, 2010:
Stephanie Burke - shbu...@ucsd.edu
Abrazos,
b.a.n.g lab/EDT and me
--
Ricardo Dominguez
Associate Professor
Hellman Fellow
"Another University is Possible"
Help restore democracy to California today: http://www.CAMajorityRule.com
Visual Arts Department, UCSD
http://visarts.ucsd.edu/
Principal Investigator, CALIT2
http://calit2.net
Co-Chair gall...@calit2
http://gallery.calit2.net
CRCA Researcher
http://crca.ucsd.edu/
Ethnic Studies Affiliate
http://www.ethnicstudies.ucsd.edu/
Center for Iberian and Latin American Studies Affiliate
http://cilas.ucsd.edu
Hemispheric Institute of Performance and Politics,
Board Member
http://hemi.nyu.edu
University of California, San Diego,
9500 Gilman Drive Drive,
La Jolla, CA 92093-0436
Phone: (619) 322-7571
e-mail: rrdoming...@ucsd.edu
Project sites:
site: http://bang.calit2.net
site: http://gallery.calit2.net
site: http://pitmm.net
blog:http://post.thing.net/blog/rdom
site: http://www.thing.net/~rdom
I suppose this comment from Marc is exactly what
I was trying to get at by using myself as a case
study in my earlier post. I see my role as
engaged in redefining the edges of the research
I am undertaking, through my own practice. I am
aware that other students and researchers look
at the methods I've used, and the 'outcomes', to
structure their own investigations in the field.
That implies some kind of responsibility, which
I'd like to think all creative practitioners
within universities share. In the UK, our latest
Research Assessment Exercise (RAE:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_Assessment_Exercise>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_Assessment_Exercise)
called on our work to be evaluated according to
Originality, Rigour, and Significance. All vague
and wishy-washy terms, but what's coming sounds
even harder to evaluate -- Impact: on society,
on economy, on policy, even on quality of life.
How big are the knots we are going to have to
tie ourselves into to claim that our art
projects have impact? This discussion list would
serve as evidence in the case of bang lab's
work. I'm going to have to befriend many more
journalists, and make my outcomes more
marketable. Urgh.
I digress, but self-awareness of how artistic
production is valued within the university
research machine is indeed something to learn
and share our individual experiences of.
As Beatriz wrote:
"The "problem" that arises is that suddenly all
the work has to be presented as "research" and
once something is called "research" the outside
expectations as to what that is, what function
it should fulfill and within which boundaries it
should operate really change."
So are there tactics for managing expectations?
from a muggy morning in Ottawa,
sarah
On 2 May 2010, at 02:28, Marc Böhlen wrote:
I think the discussion is hitting terminology
walls again. 'Knowledge production' can mean so
much. And I would argue that the arts can (but
don't have to) produce knowledge. There is
ample evidence that artists have contributed to
knowledge in interface design, for example.
Also, 'production' does not mean exclusively
'making', but also reflecting on, criticizing,
contextualizing.
The advantage of casting art practices as a
form of research is that the reason for being
at a research university is self-evident. The
comparatively large amount of time one has for
free experimentation is still without equal in
industry. Also, it gives students more time to
engage in their own work and to receive funding
(to some degree at least). These are clear
advantages that applied schools do not have.
What lies ahead, I think, is the exploration of
new venues of interfacing to the research
university machinery
_______________________________________________
empyre forum
empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
http://www.subtle.net/empyre
--
Timothy Murray
Director, Society for the Humanities
Professor of Comparative Literature and English
Curator, Rose Goldsen Archive of New Media Art
A. D. White House
Cornell University
Ithaca, New York 14853
tele: 607-255-4086
_______________________________________________
empyre forum
empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
http://www.subtle.net/empyre
