Methodology of Arts (Reflection)

 

 

As cited by Gray and Malins(1993), we are now in a combined stage of Quantum Science Methodology[since 1900], and Social Science Methodology[since 1850]. We can distinguish right from wrong, be aware of correction and logic. Meanwhile, we are happy and frequent to look back and criticise the existing rules, not afraid to accept new science and ideas, glad to see change. It is a golden age for artist that have never been better.

 

The point is, however, what the procedure of art should be formed as. When we mentioned about fine art, which is used to think as an anti-method procedure of creation, actually can be seen as a sequential and even regular one in some ways. Gray(1993) tried to shape it in her essay[attached image]. Likewise, Cornock(1978,1983,1984) pretended to identify it follows:

Generation
Selection
Synthesis
Articulation
Presentation
Critical Discussion

Is the regulation the final revolution of artistic methodology? The answer is no. We can still find some flexible and elastic examples even in a chaos and dilemmatic kind of art – postmodern, to reclaim that dogma is not always sticked on.

Traditionalism and futurism are both honoured and subverted, embraced and eschewed, in a double process of destroying and preserving that which has gone before, towards a new synthesis.

(Hayworth, 1993, np)

 

What and who should be the reason and the dominance of research  and procedure in art? In my point of view, these are all depend on the inspiration and purpose of art, as well as the motivation and method of creation in the specific artefact. Art is such a complicated manifestation that is shaped and formed in centuries, which result in numerous connection and affiliation with culture, religion, humanities and social. This is the reason why it is hard to generalise in one for all, and the reason why it is worth to try.

 

 

 

REFERENCES:

• Carole, G. and Julian, M. (1993). Research Procedures/Methodology for Artists & Designers. Aberdeen: the Robert Gordon University, p.7.

• Cornock, S. (1983). ‘Methoddology for Students of Fine Art’. Journal of Art & Design Education, Vol.2, No.1, 1983.

  Cornock, S. (1983). ‘Strategies in Fine Art Art’. Journal of Art & Design Education, Vol.3, No.2, 1984.

  Cornock, S. (1983). ‘Notes Towards a Methodology for Students of Fine Art’. Leicester Polytechnic Monograph, 1978.

• Rayworth, A. (1993). Seminar Contributions and Notes, GRU.

Research Procedures/Methodologies (Proposal)

According to Gray(1993), the way of research in history can be grouped as three stages[attached image]. In Newtonian Science Methodology stage, people knew few things, they were desired to discover everything; when time went to the Quantum Science Methodology, people acknowledge correct things from incorrect ones; finally we stepped in the Social Science Methodology stage, in which people can observe, think, and criticise those we found.

So, what we can do with these methodologies? Gray explained in her essay, that “Artistic” Methodology of today is actually get profound influence from the different stages of research procedures/methodologies. My group, in term of this topic, focused on Social Science Perspective, upon cultural, educational and behavioural aspects, in which Bio Hacking is used.

Datalism is a potential way to trace back culture. Some of traditional culture and art, for example, are covered as intangible culture, such as festival and sacrifice. They are difficult to measure in material but easier to analysis with data.

In term of education, Bio Hacking can be used into self-analysing, physical training, or experience sharing, which may be also linked with data as above.

As to behaviour, we can probably think about how we could improve interaction and communication, or alternatively, self-control behaviour.

It is true that critical thinking and combined science is gradually forming the culture, communication, behaviour and even art. We can do more things than ever before. However, what we should think, is never the less.

 

 

 

REFERENCES:

• Carole, G. and Julian, M. (1993). Research Procedures/Methodology for Artists & Designers. Aberdeen: the Robert Gordon University, pp.2-5.

About Customised Content #V&A Project#

UGC(User Generated Content) is a phrase from internet, while I think it from the perspective of V&A project. In my opinion, it refers the art work that can present different and customised content which depends on input of audience. To be specifically, it is the kind of art work that everyone can get different content, and all is made by himself.

In term of V&A project, customised content make the artefact itself more unique and attractive. What`s more, it can construct a better sense of immersion for the exhibition, bringing more possibilities of interaction between audience and exhibit, which would benefit the next part of narrative design. Following photos are cases we found when we did surveys in V&A Museum.

While I was doing this project, I was thinking about how to guide audience to input the original content, which is the base of the following steps. There is a normal way for printers, which is inputing content through keyboards, then transfer it from computer to printers. However, for a artefact of exhibition, there are two disadvantages if we do like this. Firstly, typing is a behaviour that requires a whole period of time for audience in concentration, which may interrupt the process of exhibition; secondly, typing restricts the category of inputting content, which may not generate enough original input in difference.

In term of the first drawback, we aimed to shorten the time needed for inputting. For example, audience can interact with the printer through switching the stick, twisting a knob, or pushing a button. However, for this way of inputting, original content it generate is still not ample enough. We want more kinds of inputting information to generate more creative feedback and interaction.

In term of the second drawback, we tried to collect original information through recording sound. It is because that sound is a ample content itself, which may include much information. Besides, sound from different audience is quite different. Therefore, we can generate more abundant content based on it. What`s more, we can even just collect environmental sound effect, instead of asking audience to be recorded. This ensures the smooth process of exhibition.

• User generated content is a efficient way to make an artefact interactive. For example, present the customised content through the same procedure. What can be found in this case, is that it would be more attractive if we can take the initiative to complete the generation of content, instead of ask audience to type something. It is not easy for audience to use a machine that possibly they have never seen. However, there must be something that can be customise, like sound.