Contextshowever, the scientific way of representation is also a clear and distinct form of
mediation. after all, the scientific metaphors and narratives frame our perception
and faculty of imagination to quite a large extent. precisely that process of scientific
mediation is the core of attention for many artistic research projects today. at stake
are specifically projects rearticulating the medial processes of the sciences, the visual
boundaries of art history, the narrative logic of history, and the iconography of the
social sciences in the form of an artistic methodology.
The results of these artistic research processes are by definition mutually inspiring.
on the one hand, in these confrontations, artists become necessarily aware of a more
transparent contextualizing of the research process; on the other hand, a more fluid
form of contextualizing will no doubt make the scientist inevitably reconsider the
framework of their own paradigms. indeed, in these confrontations, proper catalyzing
will be possible, since dynamic exchanges between as yet distinct forms of knowledge
could occur, whereas existing molecular boundaries could ultimately be shattered
and cause novel constellations of knowledge production to be generated. Those are
forms of knowledge production coming into being by unexpected connections between
the standardized mediation of the scientific knowledge production and the artistic
knowledge production aiming for different modes. Therefore, the question is whether
this latter form of knowledge production could be defined. intending to define artistic
knowledge also implies to accept implicitly or explicitly – and thus to partake in – the
established academic power- knowledge system of accountability checks and evaluative
supervision, as Foucault once claimed.
Though acceptance does not necessarily imply submission or surrender to
these parameters, a fundamental acknowledgment of the ideological principles
inscribed in them remains a prerequisite for any form of access, even if one
copes with them, contests them, negotiates them, and revises them.
(holert 2009)not only defining, but even merely speaking about artistic knowledge production
seems to include positioning oneself with respect to academic frames of thought. does
one, in line with James elkins, choose to present artistic knowledge in such a way
that it will be recognized as a position in the debate about knowledge production by
a more extended academic conglomerate (elkins 2005b)? or does one choose a more
deconstructive point of view as irit Rogoff does in arguing that alternative practices
of communality and knowledge generation might provide an empowering capacity
(Rogoff 2007)?
Yet, both positions assume that this form of knowledge production can only be the
sole outcome of a researching practice characterized at all times by an absolute open,
non- disciplinary attitude and an insertion of multiple models of interpretation.^9 in spite
of much academic scepticism, today there is indeed a visual research practice satisfying
the essential components of widely accepted research. particularly artistic research
projects critically scrutinizing the process of scientific mediation clearly underscore
that view. Research conducted by artists – similar to research in the traditional sciences
such as the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences – is also guided by the,
since time immemorial, most important maxim of any scientific activity: the awareness