Research in Art and Design

Abstract

Where artists, craftspeople and designers are concerned, the word 'research' - the r word - sometimes seems to describe an activity which is a long way away from their respective practices. The spoken emphasis tends to be put on the first syllable -the re - as if research always involves going over old territory, while art, craft and design are of course concerned with the new. The word has traditionally been associated with; I obscure corners of specialised libraries, where solitary scholars live; I white-coated people in laboratories, doing esoteric things with test-tubes; I universities, rather than colleges; I arms length, rather than engagement; I artyfacts, rather than artefacts; I words not deeds. Recently an opposing tendency has emerged - largely as the pragmatic result of decisions about government funding of higher education - where the word has come to be associated . with: Iwhat artists, craftspeople and designers do all the time anyway; I artefacts, rather than artyfacts; I deeds not words. Much of the debate - and attendant confusion - so far, has .l. . revolved around a series of stereotypes of what research is, what it involves and what it delivers. The debate has also led towards some very strange directions indeed - such as the question (asked in all seriousness) 'does an exhibition of paintings count as research or doesn't it?' This paper attempts to unpack some ofthe stereotypes, and redirect the debate away from some of its more obviously blind alleys .