TY - JOUR
T1 - How do you make a classroom operate like a work of art? Deleuzeguattarian methodologies of research-creation
AU - Springgay, Stephanie
AU - Rotas, Nikki
N1 - Funding Information:
Van der Tuin’s arguments are similarly reflected in recent scholarship on research-creation. In Canada, our largest academic funding body, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, as a move to acknowledge that artists teaching in universities were engaged in research and yet required a distinct category and criteria by which their work would be accessed, adopted the term research-creation. This move opened up the ways that research methodologies had previously been framed and accounted for. However, the formal adoption of research-creation did not invent new ways of thinking research, but simply folded “art” into its midst. Thinking critically about research-creation, Manning and Massumi through their work at the Senselab in Montreal, have pushed the boundaries of research-creation by reconceptualizing the “term” beyond simple delineations that recognize the intersections between art practice and social science research. Manning (2014) argues that current models of research, including most arts-based research, separate matter from perception, which leads to a fragmentation between awareness and the activity that generates awareness. As such, “[w]hat emerges is an account of experience that separates out the human subject from the ecologies of encounter” (p. 3). This disciplinary model in which the phenomena of research and the knowing subject are separated shapes knowledge as static, fixed and organized according to pre-formed categories. In other words, positing the conditions or terms of research before the exploration or experimentation, “results in stultifying its potential and relegating it to that which already fits within pre-existing schemata of knowledge” (p. 4). We must, Manning contends, find ways of activating thought that is experienced rather than known, that is material and affective, and where experience accounts for “more than human” encounters. This emphasis on unknowability means that the conventional understandings of methodology and method need to be undone. To that extent, St. Pierre (2013) wonders if we can even think about conventional methodologies through new materialist theories? Can we retain the concepts from qualitative research such as interviewing, observation, or data collection? What might these “methods” look like from a materialist perspective? Is that even possible? Or, as we argue, do we start anew? Do we think materially from the outset?
Publisher Copyright:
© 2014, © 2014 Taylor & Francis.
PY - 2015/5/28
Y1 - 2015/5/28
N2 - This paper engages with Guattari’s query about, how to make a classroom operate like a work of art? Guattari’s question is not intended to be prescriptive or dogmatic. Rather, his thinking engenders a way of thinking about art as an affective event that has the capacity to invent new relations and new ways of learning. In the first section, we attend to concepts like “objectile” and “depth perception” in order to think about difference affectively. From there we discuss Deleuze’s movement-image and time-image in order to problematize humanist notions of recognition and generosity and propose a politics of experimentation that is never fully intelligible and known. In the final section, to support our claim that affect and movement are crucial to new materialist research we re-turn to a methodology of research-creation as diagrammatic, in order to further consider the implications of an enfolding, affective, moving ecology for educational research.
AB - This paper engages with Guattari’s query about, how to make a classroom operate like a work of art? Guattari’s question is not intended to be prescriptive or dogmatic. Rather, his thinking engenders a way of thinking about art as an affective event that has the capacity to invent new relations and new ways of learning. In the first section, we attend to concepts like “objectile” and “depth perception” in order to think about difference affectively. From there we discuss Deleuze’s movement-image and time-image in order to problematize humanist notions of recognition and generosity and propose a politics of experimentation that is never fully intelligible and known. In the final section, to support our claim that affect and movement are crucial to new materialist research we re-turn to a methodology of research-creation as diagrammatic, in order to further consider the implications of an enfolding, affective, moving ecology for educational research.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84929028927&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84929028927&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/09518398.2014.933913
DO - 10.1080/09518398.2014.933913
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84929028927
SN - 0951-8398
VL - 28
SP - 552
EP - 572
JO - International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education
JF - International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education
IS - 5
ER -