15

TRansFoRmaTional

pRaCTiCe: on The plaCe

oF maTeRial noVelTY in

aRTisTiC Change

Stephen Scrivener

What is the relationship between research and art? This is the central question in the
international, academic debate around the topic of arts- based research. This way of
putting the question places the emphasis on the relationship between the one thing
and the other, setting them apart from the outset. This is my emphasis, but it is strongly
evident within the literature in expressions such ‘research into art’, ‘research through
art’, ‘research for art’, ‘arts- based research’, ‘practice- based research’, etc.^1 all such
constructions separate research and art, framing thought such that it excludes the
possibility that the practices of art include practices that merit the label research, or
that its products include outcomes that contribute to knowledge and understanding.
in practice, it has proven difficult for academics to view things otherwise when so
much of the debate has been set within change in national educational and research
policy; increases in undergraduate, postgraduate and doctoral student numbers;
reduction in teaching funding; and the availability of new research funding in some
countries, e.g. the uK. These changes have made it almost impossible to explore the
question of whether or not art already embodies a research function when funding
bodies and the like have already predefined the terms of any conclusion. The context
of the debate, which might be argued is its cause, has confined us to think that we
have to show that research in fine art, say, is like research in physics, or sociology, etc.
and how have we done this? The answer, for the most part, is by implicitly or explicitly
treating the criteria and expectations of the ‘other’ field as a standard for comparison
(Chapter 2). if, as Biggs and Büchler suggest (Chapter 5), different fields have different
values, we should not be too surprised to find that the seeming universality and
permanence of these criteria and expectations have promoted disturbance in the art
academy (scrivener 2006), whilst at the same time making it difficult to see research
in any kind of art practice or outcome. it would appear that even if we take current
artistic practices as our starting point, these practices have still to become research.