Reflections from the field: Exploration of differences between art-based and academic research by a practitioner-researcher on Henrik Ibsen and beyond

Abstract

As an experienced actor and artistic director from Norway, I argue that autoethnography can be a valuable method for conducting academic research on a performer’s own practice. The art is enabling the latter, and the latter is fueling the former. I also explore the difference between academic research and art-based research, particularly since the Bologna Declaration of June 19, 1999, which intensified the work of art academies and higher education to find a place for art-based research within the university system. While dialog and cooperation between the two fields are already resulting in new perspectives, I observe that the exchange remains somewhat limited. Drawing from my experiences at the Centre for Ibsen studies at the University of Oslo, Norway, along with my academic research on Henrik Ibsen and my practice and experience as a performer, I compare these two approaches to research. A main difference is that academic research involves “thinking in print,” whereas art-based research involves “thinking in and through art.” The article argues that there are more aspects that unite than divide the two approaches.