Developing the formal structures of artistic practice-as-research

In this article I discuss a topic that is emerging as a valuable paradigm for creative practitioners - practice-as-research. There is some controversy over this term that, I believe, goes to the heart of our understanding of the nature of knowledge. The controversy relates to the idea that practice and research are two inherently different types of activity and therefore that it impossible to engage in one ‘as’ the other. Tim Ingold’s (2011) work on the anthropology of knowledge and skill alongside a broader stream of work on cognition and perception (see for example Lakoff & Johnson 2003 and Gibson 1979) suggests that both artistic practice and academic research involve ‘puzzle-solving… carried on within the context of involvement in a real world of persons, objects and relations.’ (Ingold 2011, p.419). The argument revolves around the notion that there is no such thing as disembodied or abstract knowledge and that all knowledge is both embodied and personally related to the world one inhabits. As such, the written word provides a schematic system for representing the much richer communication processes of speech and bodily experience. The written word, however, can only be understood through reference to our lived experience. Lave (1990, p.310) has termed this ‘understanding in practice’ as a knowledge ‘based on rich expectations generated over time about its shape’ (Lave 1990, p.323). Scholarly research outputs and their modes of publication are still firmly entrenched in the printed word. I will explore strategies for communicating the non-verbal knowledge that forms the basis of much practice-as-research

Creativity: can artistic perspectives contribute to management?

Today creativity is considered as a necessity in all aspects of management. This working paper mirrors the artistic and managerial conceptions of creativity. Although there are shared points in both applications, however deep-seated and radically opposed traits account for the divergence between the two fields. This exploratory analysis opens up new research questions and insights into practices

The Serendiptichord: Reflections on the collaborative design process between artist and researcher

The Serendiptichord is a wearable instrument, resulting from a collaboration crossing fashion, technology, music and dance. This paper reflects on the collaborative process and how defining both creative and research roles for each party led to a successful creative partnership built on mutual respect and open communication. After a brief snapshot of the instrument in performance, the instrument is considered within the context of dance-driven interactive music systems followed by a discussion on the nature of the collaboration and its impact upon the design process and final piece

Four PPPPerspectives on Computational Creativity

From what perspective should creativity of a system be considered? Are we interested in the creativity of the system’s out- put? The creativity of the system itself? Or of its creative processes? Creativity as measured by internal features or by external feedback? Traditionally within computational creativity the focus had been on the creativity of the system’s Products or of its Processes, though this focus has widened recently regarding the role of the audience or the field surrounding the creative system. In the wider creativity research community a broader take is prevalent: the creative Person is considered as well as the environment or Press within which the creative entity operates in. Here we have the Four Ps of creativity: Person, Product, Process and Press. This paper presents the Four Ps, explaining each of the Four Ps in the context of creativity research and how it relates to computational creativity. To illustrate how useful the Four Ps can be in taking a fuller perspective on creativity, the concepts of novelty and value explored from each of the Four P perspectives, uncovering aspects that may otherwise be overlooked. This paper argues that the broader view of creativity afforded by the Four Ps is vital in guiding us towards more encompassing and comprehensive computational investigations of creativity