As I have now started to write papers more actively the subject of artistic research and what that really constitutes becomes an issue. Should I write in an academic tradition or can I let myself use a more ‘poetic’ language? What is the method and how can it be described? What is the object? What is the relation between the artistic output (the practice) and the writing?
These questions are part of an ongoing discussion, especially in the countries that have initiated artistic research programmes such as Finland and Great Britain. Being, as I am, in the middle of the process in a country that has just begun experimenting with the forms of practice based research, it can get rather confusing. There are many different agendas and opinions in circulation. I am hoping that, in the end, it is the content and not the form of a piece of work that matters but this is probably somewhat naïve.
The model I am aiming for at the moment is to combine academic research papers with a reflective analysis in a more poetic language. I find this model kind of intriguing since it allows me to reflect upon the practice in an academic form and to reflect on the reflection (meta reflection) in a more intuitive way. Whether this will prove to be accepteble or not I can’t tell, and maybe it will not work at all. But it takes me out of the locked position that I find myself in at the moment.