Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Pluralization of Academia: Disentangling Artistic Research

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Science under Siege

Part of the book series: Cultural Sociology ((CULTSOC))

  • 298 Accesses

Abstract

Universities have meanwhile opened up to arts-based research, which produces a type of experience- and practice-based knowledge that differs profoundly from traditional scientific knowledge. Advocates of arts-based research repudiate the notion that science has a monopoly on worthwhile knowledge. They do therefore emphasize the particularity of artistic knowledge to endow it with an epistemic status that differs from science, yet does meet generic academic standards. Invoking these more broadly defined academic standards enables them to neither give in on the particularity of art nor contest the authority of science. That the resulting ‘academization of the arts’ has occurred without much opposition from adherents of the traditional epistemic ideals of science testifies to the relativization of the authority of science in academia.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Arlander, Annette. 2013. “Artistic Research in a Nordic Context.” In Practice as Research in the Arts: Principles, Protocols, Pedagogies, Resistances, edited by Robin Nelson, 152–62. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Badura, Jens. 2015. “Erkenntnis (Sinnliche).” In Künstlerische Forschung: Ein Handbuch, edited by Jens Badura, Selma Dubach, Anke Haarmann, Dieter Mersch, Anton Rey, Christoph Schenker, and Germán Toro Pérez, 43–8. Zürich: diaphanes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertram, Ursula. 2012. “Künstlerisches Denken und Handeln.” In Kunstforschung als ästhetische Wissenschaft: Beiträge zur transdisziplinären Hybridisierung von Wissenschaft und Kunst, edited by Martin Tröndle and Julia Warmers, 293–314. Bielefeld: transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, Michael, and Daniela Büchler. 2011. “Communities, Values, Conventions and Actions.” In The Routledge Companion to Research in the Arts, edited by Michael Biggs and Henrik Karlsson, 82–98. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhme, Gernot. 2012. “Ästhetik als Wissenschaft sinnlicher Erfahrung.” In Kunstforschung als ästhetische Wissenschaft: Beiträge zur transdisziplinären Hybridisierung von Wissenschaft und Kunst, edited by Martin Tröndle and Julia Warmers, 319–32. Bielefeld: transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borgdorff, Henk. 2010. “Artistic Research as Boundary Work.” In Art and Artistic Research, edited by Corina Caduff, Fiona Siegenthaler, and Tan Wälchli, 72–9. Zürich: Zürich University of the Arts/Scheidegger & Spiess.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borgdorff, Henk. 2011. “The Production of Knowledge in Artistic Research.” In The Routledge Companion to Research in the Arts, edited by Michael Biggs and Henrik Karlsson, 44–63. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borgdorff, Henk. 2012. The Conflict of Faculties: Perspectives on Artistic Research and Academia. Leiden: Leiden University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Candy, Linda, and Ernest Edmonds. 2011. “The Role of the Artefact and Frameworks for Practice-Based Research.” In The Routledge Companion to Research in the Arts, edited by Michael Biggs and Henrik Karlsson, 120–37. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cobussen, Marcel. 2010. “The Intruder: On Differentiations in Musical Research.” In Art and Artistic Research: Music, Visual Art, Design, Literature, Dance, edited by Corina Caduff, Fiona Siegenthaler, and Tan Wälchli, 46–55. Zürich: Zürich University of the Arts/Scheidegger & Spiess.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coessens, Kathleen, Darla Crispin, and Anne Douglas. 2009. The Artistic Turn: A Manifesto. Leuven: Leuven University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, Harry, and Robert Evans. 2002. “The Third Wave of Science Studies: Studies of Expertise and Experience.” Social Studies of Science 32 (2): 235–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, Harry, and Robert Evans. 2007. Rethinking Expertise. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dombois, Florian, Dieter Mersch, and Julia Rintz, eds. 2014. Ästhetisches Denken: Nicht-Propositionalität, Episteme, Kunst. Zürich: diaphanes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkins, James. 2014a. “Introduction.” In Artists with PhD’s: On the New Doctoral Degree in Studio Art (Second Edition), edited by James Elkins, xii–xxi. Washington: New Academia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkins, James. 2014b. “Six Cultures of the PhD around the World.” In Artists with PhD’s: On the New Doctoral Degree in Studio Art (Second Edition), edited by James Elkins, 3–16. Washington: New Academia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkins, James. 2014c. “List of PhD Programs around the World.” In Artists with PhD’s: On the New Doctoral Degree in Studio Art (Second Edition), edited by James Elkins, 17–34. Washington: New Academia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkins, James. 2014d. “Fourteen Reasons to Mistrust the PhD.” In Artists with PhD’s: On the New Doctoral Degree in Studio Art (Second Edition), edited by James Elkins, 227–78. Washington: New Academia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frayling, Christopher. 1993. Research in Art and Design. London: Royal College of Art.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, Michael, Camille Limoges, Helga Nowotny, Simon Schwartzman, Peter Scott, and Martin Trow. 1994. The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Society. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haarmann, Anke. 2015. “Methodologie.” In Künstlerische Forschung: Ein Handbuch, edited by Jens Badura, Selma Dubach, Anke Haarmann, Dieter Mersch, Anton Rey, Christoph Schenker, and Germán Toro Pérez, 85–8. Zürich: diaphanes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannula, Mika, Juha Suoranta, and Tere Vadèn. 2005. Artistic Research: Theories, Methods and Practice. Gothenburg/Helsinki: Gothenburg University Art Monitor/University of Fine Arts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haseman, Brad. 2006. “A Manifesto for Performative Research.” Media International Australia Incorporating Culture and Policy 118 (February): 98–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heinich, Nathalie. 1993. Du peintre à l’artiste: Artisans et académiciens à l’âge classique. Paris: Minuit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinich, Nathalie. 1998. Ce que l’art fait à la sociologie. Paris: Minuit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, Sheila. 2012. Science and Public Reason. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, Mark. 2011. “Embodied Knowledge through Art.” In The Routledge Companion to Research in the Arts, edited by Michael Biggs and Henrik Karlsson, 141–51. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jung, Eva-Maria. 2016. “Die Kunst des Wissens und das Wissen der Kunst: Zum epistemischen Status der künstlerischen Forschung.” In Wie verändert sich Kunst, wenn man sie als Forschung versteht? edited by Judith Siegmund, 23–44. Bielefeld: transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, Bruno. 1999. Politiques de la nature: Comment faire entrer les sciences en démocratie. Paris: La Découverte.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepenies, Wolf. 1985. Die drei Kulturen: Zwischen Literatur und Wissenschaft. München: Carl Hanser Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesage, Dieter. 2013. “PaR in Continental Europe: A Site of Many Contests.” In Practice as Research in the Arts: Principles, Protocols, Pedagogies, Resistances, edited by Robin Nelson, 142–51. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lesage, Dieter. 2015. “Akademisierung.” In Künstlerische Forschung: Ein Handbuch, edited by Jens Badura, Selma Dubach, Anke Haarmann, Dieter Mersch, Anton Rey, Christoph Schenker, and Germán Toro Pérez, 221–3. Zürich: diaphanes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Little, Suzanne. 2013. “Aotearoa/New Zealand and Practice as Research.” In Practice as Research in the Arts: Principles, Protocols, Pedagogies, Resistances, edited by Robin Nelson, 117–28. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, Niklas. 1997. Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maharaj, Sarat. 2004. “Unfinishable Sketch of ‘An Object in 4D’: Scenes of Artistic Research.” In Artistic Research, edited by Annette Balkema and Henk Slager, 39–58. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malterud, Nina. 2010. “Can You Make Art Without Research?” In Art and Artistic Research, edited by Corina Caduff, Fiona Siegenthaler, and Tan Wälchli, 24–9. Zürich: Zürich University of the Arts/Scheidegger & Spiess.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mareis, Claudia. 2012. “Methodische Imagination: Kreativitätsdenken, Geschichte und künstlerische Forschung.” In Kunstforschung als ästhetische Wissenschaft: Beiträge zur transdisziplinären Hybridisierung von Wissenschaft und Kunst, edited by Martin Tröndle and Julia Warmers, 203–42. Bielefeld: transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mercer, Leah, and Julia Robson. 2012. “The Backbone of Live Research: A Synthesis of Method in Performance Based Enquiry.” In Live Research: Methods of Practice-Led Research in Performance, edited by Leah Mercer, Julia Robson, and David Fenton, 11–9. Nerang: Ladyfinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mersch, Dieter. 2015. Epistemologien des Ästhetischen. Zürich: diaphanes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mörsch, Carmen. 2015 “Undisziplinierte Forschung.” In Künstlerische Forschung: Ein Handbuch, edited by Jens Badura, Selma Dubach, Anke Haarmann, Dieter Mersch, Anton Rey, Christoph Schenker, and Germán Toro Pérez, 77–80. Zürich: diaphanes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mottram, Judith. 2014. “Researching the PhD in Art and Design: What Is It, and Why Do a PhD in Art and Design?” In Artists with PhD’s. On the New Doctoral Degree in Studio Art (Second Edition), edited by James Elkins, 35–70. Washington: New Academia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, Robin. 2013. “Robin Nelson on Practice and Research.” In Practice as Research in the Arts: Principles, Protocols, Pedagogies, Resistances, edited by Robin Nelson, 3–116. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Öberg, Johan. 2010. “Difference or Différance?” In Art and Artistic Research, edited by Corina Caduff, Fiona Siegenthaler, and Tan Wälchli, 40–5. Zürich: Zürich University of the Arts/Scheidegger & Spiess.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pérez Royo, Victoria, José Antonio Sánchez, and Cristina Blanco. 2013. “In-definitions: Forschung in den performativen Künsten.” In Das Forschen aller: Artistic Research als Wissensproduktion zwischen Kunst, Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft, edited by Sybille Peters, 23–46. Bielefeld: transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robson, Julie. 2013. “Artists in Australian Academies: Performance in the Labyrinth of Practice-Led Research.” In Practice as Research in the Arts: Principles, Protocols, Pedagogies, Resistances, edited by Robin Nelson, 129–41. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rosengren, Mats. 2010. “Art + Research ≠ Artistic Research.” In Art and Artistic Research, edited by Corina Caduff, Fiona Siegenthaler, and Tan Wälchli, 106–5. Zürich: Zürich University of the Arts/Scheidegger & Spiess.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiesser, Giaco. 2015. “Dritter Zyklus.” In Künstlerische Forschung: Ein Handbuch, edited by Jens Badura, Selma Dubach, Anke Haarmann, Dieter Mersch, Anton Rey, Christoph Schenker, and Germán Toro Pérez, 225–30. Zürich: diaphanes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, Donald. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. London: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwab, Michael. 2010. “First, the Second.” In Art and Artistic Research, edited by Corina Caduff, Fiona Siegenthaler, and Tan Wälchli, 56–65. Zürich: Zürich University of the Arts/Scheidegger & Spiess.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scrivener, Stephen. n.d. “The Art Object Does Not Embody a Form of Knowledge: Working Papers in Art & Design 2.” Accessed February 20, 2020. https://www.herts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/12311/WPIAAD_vol2_scrivener.pdf.

  • Slager, Henk. 2011. “Differential Iconography.” In The Routledge Companion to Research in the Arts, edited by Michael Biggs and Henrik Karlsson, 333–52. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, Charles Percy. 1959. The Two Cultures. London: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sollfrank, Cornelia. 2016. “A Pervert’s Guide to Artistic Research.” In Wie verändert sich Kunst, wenn man sie als Forschung versteht? edited by Judith Siegmund, 105–22. Bielefeld: transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tröndle, Martin. 2012. “Methods of Artistic Research: Kunstforschung im Spiegel künstlerischer Arbeitsprozesse.” In Kunstforschung als ästhetische Wissenschaft: Beiträge zur transdisziplinären Hybridisierung von Wissenschaft und Kunst, edited by Martin Tröndle and Julia Warmers, 169–202. Bielefeld: transcript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Gelder, Hilde, and Jan Baetens. 2014. “The Future of the Doctorate in the Arts.” In Artists with PhD’s: On the New Doctoral Degree in Studio Art (Second Edition), edited by James Elkins, 211–26. Washington: New Academia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wesseling, Janneke. 2016. Of Sponge, Stone and the Intertwinement with the Here and Now: A Methodology of Artistic Research. Amsterdam: Valiz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, Mick. 2014. “Four Theses Attempting to Revise the Terms of a Debate.” In Artists with PhD’s: On the New Doctoral Degree in Studio Art (Second Edition), edited by James Elkins, 179–94. Washington: New Academia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, Brian. 1996. “May the Sheep Safely Graze? A Reflexive View of the Expert-Lay Divide.” In Risk, Environment and Modernity: Towards a New Ecology, edited by Scott Lash, Bronislaw Szerszynski, and Brian Wynne, 44–83. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Rudi Laermans

Authors
  1. Rudi Laermans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rudi Laermans .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Sociological Research, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Dick Houtman

  2. Institute for Media Studies, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Stef Aupers

  3. Center for Sociological Research, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Rudi Laermans

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Laermans, R. (2021). The Pluralization of Academia: Disentangling Artistic Research. In: Houtman, D., Aupers, S., Laermans, R. (eds) Science under Siege. Cultural Sociology. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-69649-8_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-69649-8_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-69648-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-69649-8

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation