- To be able to add something to your field; you need to define the field first.
These words belong to Jennifer Torrence, spoken at her keynote at a Research School seminar held in Oslo, January 2025. In this straightforward statement hides a perceptive notion on the importance of contextualisation, not only in relation to the final delivery of an artist’s project, but really in relation to the artist’s position in the artist’s own field. Artistic research, thus becomes about re-searching the field in which one’s practice is already embedded. And from here, add something new to this field; challenge it, reanimate it, enrich it.
The Artistic PhD Result consists of two parts: the Artistic Result/Practice and the Reflection component. Together, more or less integrated, these two parts should add something to your field; new insights, experiences, expressions, knowledge.
The different PhD institutions have distinct regulations that define the criteria for the Artistic Result/Practice and the Reflection component. Instead of providing a general overview of the requirements, this page presents a list of concerns to consider, when moving towards the final phase of one's research project.
Many of these considerations are, needless to say, part of the research project from the very outset; embedded in the methods, ways of sharing, mapping out of relations and so on. This is also why we recommend revisiting the online resources of earlier moduls, to reflect once again on these parts, from the new standpoint of a further developed project. Hence, on this page we deliberately link back into the resource pool to encourage this form of revisiting.
Of course, the import and extent of the concerns listed here vary from project to project, but every research fellow must in one way or another consider, prepare for and address these following topics.
Contextualisation
A crucial aspect of the artistic research project is how the artist contextualises both the Artistic Result/Practice and the Reflection component. As stated above, it is important to define one’s field in order to situate one’s project properly within this field.
The question of contextualisation also becomes decisive in relation to the very presentation of the PhD result. It is important to ask oneself who the receiver of this research project is. Here, there might very well be several different types of receivers in play. The assessment committee is one. But also, quite often, the result is presented to the public in very specific spaces and situations, with very different audiences. The project can also be contextualised by the medium it is presented in and the connotations, history, accessibility, inclusiveness or exclusiveness of this medium.
The contextualisation is most often something that enters the project early on, often embedded in the method or in the ways of documentation and sharing, but in the final phase of one’s research project it is essential to revisit these consideration and contextualise the final PhD result.
→ Revisit: On methods
→ Revisit: On sharing
The Artistic Result and the Reflection component
In an artistic research project it is important to balance the relationship between the Artistic Result/Practice and the Reflection component. One must accommodate both the integration of the two parts and the separated fields they represent. The balancing act consists of not forgetting the free-standing quality and distinct language of the artistic practice, while emphasising the potential of the reflective component to further unfold this.
Furthermore the two parts may very well represent two very different approaches and work flows, that also must be balanced. The distribution of a research fellow’s time between artistic practice and reflective writing/thinking can be challenging since both require close attention, while also constantly feeding off and influencing one another.
In the final PhD result the research fellow must have taken this balancing act into account both in regards to maintaining the balance between the self-contained knowledge-value and language of the artistic production and the sharing potential of the reflection, but also in regards to the actual labour and timing of the finalising, wrapping and presenting of the two parts of the final result.
Dissertation
The different PhD institutions have distinct regulations that define the criteria for the Artistic Result/Practice and the Reflection component. It is important to read and understand these regulations carefully, since certain matters must be handled in accordance to the regulations. As the research fellow prepares the research project for presentation, the dissertation must also follow certain advised or dictated rules. These rules can pertain to the formatting of both Artistic Result/Practice and the Reflection component, such as work descriptions, institutional crediting, footnoting, source crediting, etc.
But also in relation to different actors, performers or collaborators involved with the project, the research fellow must ensure the proper crediting, acknowledgement and agreements in regards to possible shared rights, payments, representation and so forth. It is equally important here to address, and differentiate between, both juridical and ethical issues. It can be a good idea to revisit the many relations that have informed the entire research process and map out these relations, so they can be included in the final result if needed.
→ Revisit: On ethics
→ Revisit: On relations
The Assessment Commitee
As a research fellow one often has the possibility to way in on the decision on who the members of ones assessment committee. It can be a good idea to make use of this possibility, since the assessment committee is not solely there to assess and examine the artistic research project but also really to give new perspective to the project and it’s ideas and artistic gestures.
The committee’s work can be thought of as a further resource for the research fellow to reflect critically on the final result of the research process, search it’s boundaries and further potentials, and form new questions that can unfold into new explorations. The assessment process, in this regard, can be considered as a conversation that can elevate the research into new perspectives to be further researched in the future, and the research fellow can really profit from thinking in which way, and with whom, one wants to have this conversation.
Viva Voce
After the committee have received the dissertation and given their assessment hereof, the finished artistic research project must conclusively be presented in a public Viva Voce. The specificities of the format for such an oral presentation can again vary between the different hosting institutions, but it is essential for the research fellow to take into account the labour of structuring and rehearsing such an event.
One must consider how to present the entire project in a shorter format and importantly also how to represent the artistic results in this new public format. The research fellow will most likely also receive certain questions, or parts needing clarification, from the committee and the Viva Voce is a good place to address such questions.
And finally, again, the Viva Voce should also be regarded as a potential space for opening up new conversations and get new perspectives on one’s project, that can lead to new future explorations and research projects.
Archiving the result
The Artistic PhD result must also be documented in a permanent format and archived. This permanent, archived documentation will give artistic researchers and others insight into your process and the outcomes and provide the ground for future artistic research.
There are many ways to go about this important culminating element of the artistic research process. Challenges especially emerge when the Artistic Result/Practice must be represented in the kind of formats that a permanent archiving makes possible. But also the interplay between Artistic Result/Practice and the Reflection component, in this phase must be considered; archiving both parts of the project together in a way that respects both components.
Institutions may have their own policies and systems for documenting and archiving. Some PhD institutions require that you document your Artistic PhD results in institutional digital archives and in addition register the results in national archives.
In Norway, the Nasjonalt vitenarkiv (NVA) will replace the former national registration system, Cristin. NVA is designed to support the registration of both Scentific and Artistic Research. NVA gather information on Norwegian research and makes research results and research information openly available.
Archiving is regulated by the law, Arkivloven. The purpose of this Act is to secure archives that have significant cultural or research value or that contain legal or important administrative documentation, so that these can be preserved and made available for posterity.
There are many great examples of how artist researchers have dealt with the challenge of presenting both Artistic Result/Practice and the Reflection component in an archieved exposition. We recommend to look through the Graduated PhD Candidates and Research Fellows page for examples of finished and archieved PhD projects.
→ Dive deeper: Graduated PhD Candidates and Research Fellows
→ Dive deeper: Nasjonalt vitenarkiv
→ Dive deeper: Open science and the FAIR prinicples