Research Catalogue

The following peer review was presented to the author during the process and has influenced the final exposition. It is here presented in a slightly edited form.

Emma Meehan:

The author is knowledgeable about archives in performance and asks interesting questions along with making engaging proposals.

Artistic research occurs in the studio and performance practice exchange between historian, choreographer and dancers, in their play with the archives. The author could make more of their approach to artistic research and how the process fits within the field, maybe with an additional paragraph/comparison with other projects. This is because usually artistic research is led by the artist but in this case, the historian appears to be writing up the outcomes? I think it is an interesting collaborative example therefore.

This exposition fits within the field of dance studies and concerns with reimagining archival performances. It proposes a new approach through focusing on the unknown. It is a small- scale project so significance is in line with that but the thinking behind it connects to the broader concerns in the field.

This submission is strong on research content but raises interesting questions about artistic research. The process engages with artistic research but is the written output engaging with the artistic contribution to practice as much as the research interest? Does this matter? As mentioned earlier, I think a short case can be made for this approach if it is explained why.

I felt the author could have used the exposition format more to share the artistic research practice/process. Some images and videos were included, as well as scroll bars which didn’t always work (sometimes I could not read text as the scroll bars over lapped). I wondered about bringing in the choreographer and dancers to help with the layout. How could the contribution be formatted to share something of the practice? Is there something about the spatial layout which could be explored? There is a lot of linear text which is useful but seems more suited to a more traditional journal format. Could it be broken up with notes from the dancers/choreographer’s diaries? Or audience responses? How can the reader be led from one thought to the next through placement of images and text in a more dispersed way rather than in chunks together? What productive gaps might be left like the performance which allow the reader to engage with the artistic practice?

I think a revision of the language would help as there are many long sentences – if broken up this would help the reader with the flow of the argument.

Overall, this is an interesting case study written up by someone who has knowledge in the field of archives and performance. I think a short argument can be made for this approach as a method for artistic research and any shortcomings (e.g. writing as the historian rather than the choreographer etc.) The language does not always support the reader – I think sentences can be broken up a bit and made clearer to help with the flow for the reader. The exposition is the main area for development – some thought can be given to the sharing of creative material, breaking up chunks of text, fixing scroll bars, to help with organisation and presentation to make more use of the format.

The exposition explores health and resilience in relation to ecology and arts practice. The exposition as a tool to evoke experiences in the viewer is used; I felt disoriented and disconnected which was then reflected in the quotations and interviews. The longer videos were very interesting and gave a moment where as a reader I could focus for a period of time on the juxtapositions. I am curious about the context – how might the cultural context the author is working in affect the practice, language used, outcomes, and inclusivity for different viewers/listeners?

This exposition is interesting in how it explores ‘architectural movement intervention’, interweaving knowledge of specific architectural design components, use value of spaces and the enactment of performance interventions. The exposition contextualises the artistic works through reference to theories of Adorno and Husserl, along with the history of architecture. The author’s in-depth knowledge of architecture is extremely useful in excavating how space links with human participation and bodily performance. Particular elements that inspired me as a reader include the artwork Bevin Court and the Sivill House, where a resident starts jumping rope in the space as the performance intervention takes place. This clearly connects with the author’s discussion of how architectural design encourages communities to interact with and inhabit spaces. I was also drawn to the ‘context of reception’ which explored the setting of the artworks in different spaces, examining how changing ‘site’ can impact the artwork but also how it can further the research ideas on the relationship architecture and artwork.