Abstract

The relationship between the written and artistic work in practice-based Ph.D. dissertations is often ambiguous, leaving the student to languish as they navigate ill-defined expectations tied to a daunting ideal of ‘scholarly writing’ they feel pressured to meet, uncertain about its purpose in relation to their artistic practice. This ambiguity about the place of writing in practice-based Ph.D. programmes has been at the forefront of debates in the European Union’s Bologna Process. In this article, Álvarez investigates the problem writing presents in the context of doctoral programmes in which creative practice is the cornerstone of the thesis project. Probing expectations that the written portion of the dissertation serve an exegetical function that explains the significance of the work of art, Álvarez examines the ways in which written requirements in practice-based Ph.D. programmes trouble foundational premises of art-making in relation to knowledge-making and offers a way of framing writing that collapses the hierarchy being writing and art-making.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call