In an effort to prise arts-based research away from over-signification, this paper engages the following two questions: (1) For us to give art a research purpose, are we requiring art to do more than it is capable of doing while simultaneously not paying enough attention to what art does? (2) If we think of research as the pursuit and construction of knowledge, then should we not ask what types of pursuits are possible and what types of phenomena are probable when we approach or do research from the practice of art? The paper makes a case for considering art and research as two distinct practices that come together in the pursuit of knowing without becoming one or the other.
DeweyJ. (1934). Art as experience.New York: Capricorn Books.
9.
FraserA. (2012). There is no place like home. In SussmanE., & SandersJ. (Eds.), Whitney Biennial 2012 (pp. 28–33). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
10.
GordonA. (2008). Ghostly matters: Haunting and the sociological imagination (New ed.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
11.
GroszE. (2008). Chaos, territory, art: Deleuze and the framing of the earth.New York: Columbia University Press.
12.
HalberstamJ. (2011). The queer art of failure.Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
KesterG. H. (2011). The one and the many: Contemporary collaborative art in a global context.Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
15.
LatherP. (2007). Getting lost: Feminist efforts toward a double(d) science.Albany: State University of New York Press.
16.
LatherP. (2010). Engaging science policy: From the side of the messy.New York: Peter Lang.
17.
McMahonR. (1999). Eric Voegelin's paradoxes of consciousness and participation.The Review of Politics, 61(1), 117–139.
18.
McRobbieA. (2007). Top girls? Young women and the post-feminist sexual contract.Cultural Studies, 21, 718–737. doi:10.1080/09502380701279044
19.
O'DonoghueD. (2009). Are we asking the wrong questions in arts-based research?Studies in Art Education, SO, 352–368.
20.
O'DonoghueD. (2013). ‘The otherness that implicates the self: Towards an understanding of gendering from a theory of proximity.International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26, 400–413. doi:10.1080/09518398.2013.765611
21.
O'SullivanS. (2006). Art encounters Deleuze and Guattari: Thought beyond representation.New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
22.
PinarW. F. (2006). The synoptic text today and other essays.New York: Peter Lang.
SalihS. (Ed.). (2004). The Judith Butler reader.Maiden, MA: Blackwell.
29.
SpivakG. C. (1993). Outside in the teaching machine.New York: Routledge.
30.
St. PierreE. A. (2002). “Science” rejects postmodernism.Educational Researcher, 31(8), 25–27.
31.
SullivanG. (2011). The artist as researcher: New roles for new realities. In WesselingJ. (Ed.), See it again, say it again: The artist as researcher (pp. 79–102). Amsterdam: University of the Arts, The Hague.
32.
Van WinkelC. (2013). The myth of artisthood.Amsterdam: Mondriaan Fund.
33.
WesselingJ. (Ed.). (2011). See it again, say it again: The artist as researcher. In J. Wesseling (Ed.), See it again, say it again: The artist as researcher (pp. 1–16). Amsterdam: University of the Arts, The Hague.
