Contextsother issues to develop in a cross- breeding manner, looking at choices of specific
artists or projects rather than the general characteristics and conventions of whole
fields, could be the uses and abuses of subjectivity and the dependency on context (on
all levels), though, perhaps i find these particularly interesting only because they are
relevant to my personal artistic research practice. probably the main thing to remember
for an artist researcher (or a supervisor or even an examiner) is: there is not one general
form of research for the artist- researcher to try to approximate, just as there is not one
generally approved concept of art upon which to base art- based research.
Notes(^1) For a video clip see http://www. av- arkki.fi/web/index.php?id=35&artist=2064 (accessed 15
February 2010)
2 in swedish there is a special term for it: ‘utövande konst’, executing art. in Finnish the term
‘esittävä taide’ can mean both performing art and representational art.
3 The characteristics of such broad cultural industries as music and film cannot be discussed ‘from
within’ by this writer, who has some experience in practising theatre, dance, performance art and
contemporary visual art only.
4 For information on the working group see http://www. firt- iftr.org/index.php?option=com_
content&view=article&id=26 (accessed 15 February 2010).
5 a comment by peter eversman at a seminar organised by the graduate school elomedia in
helsinki.
6 What do i mean by this? am i serious about these simplifications? perhaps they can be used
like thought experiments rather than guidelines: if you stick to your question, all means and
methods in trying to answer that question are acceptable, that is, you can change your methods,
your theoretical framework, let the process unfold, find new data, etc., without losing track of
what you are doing. (This is the approach supported by Feyerabend (1993 [1975]), as far as i
understand – and comes close to the common sense in my view.) if you stick to your chosen
method, and that method is valid or at least approved in the research community in which
you work, you will produce some kind of research results, even if you abandon or modify your
research questions and all the aims and assumptions you started with (this comes close to the
‘normal science’ tradition, as far as i understand). and lastly, if you stick to your data, you can
change your research questions and your methods of analysing that data, letting your material
guide you (as is the tradition of qualitative research, as far as i understand).
7 i discussed some of these issues with professors eeva anttila and esa Kirkkopelto when we were
renewing the guidelines for artistic research at the Theatre academy in helsinki.