In defence of stupidity

Publication: Chapter in book/Conference proceedingChapter in edited volume

Abstract

The aim of my contribution is a kind of paradoxical intervention. I want
to challenge the process of gaining a reputation in art by underlining its
intellectual potential and claiming its research-like properties. I can see by
now that there is some reverse motion going on in that scientific studies have
revealed the unpredictability and serendipity of research. And this, in its
turn, is forcing us to change our view as to its teleological predictability.
Nevertheless, artistic research seems be applying scientific methods to gain
academic reputation and funding for research projects. Instead of preserving
and protecting the specificities of artistic work – its unconscious, ineffable,
non-teleological, unexpected character – artistic research forces itself into the
bondage of scientific research practices. So the question is if there is any place
left for the ineffable and idiosyncratic. What are the consequences of an
increasing disciplining, evaluation, and control? It might be that the
outcomes will lose their density and richness altogether, ending up more
artificial than artistic. I therefore plea to rescue art by following William
Kentridge who has pointed out the necessity of the studio as a safe space for
stupidity where uncontrolled searching can take place.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationArtistic Research Will Eat Itself
Editors Geoff Cox, Hannah Drayson, Azadeh Fatehrad, Allister Gall, Laura Hopes, Anya Lewin, Andrew Prior
Place of PublicationPlymouth
Pages357 - 365
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Austrian Classification of Fields of Science and Technology (ÖFOS)

  • 504027 Special sociology

Cite this