Artistic researchers in the performing arts often craft academic writing as well as performance works. This dual activity raises interesting epistemological, methodological and stylistic questions; two tasks, two modes of expression and the ongoing negotiation of their interrelationship. I will discuss this endeavour in the context of PhD theses that contain both academic writing and a performance folio. I will describe some key issues both in general terms and with reference to my own PhD inquiry, in which the relationship between the two tasks underwent considerable negotiation.

All words have histories and connotations, prompting consideration regarding the name we give to academic writing in artistic research. The terms ‘exegesis’ and ‘dissertation’ are often used interchangeably in the academic context, and indeed one could argue that it is immaterial what name we give to a piece of writing, so long as it serves the project as a whole. However, the casualness with which the terms are interchanged can mask an underlying ambivalence about the role of academic writing within higher-degree research in performance. There are some insights to be drawn from examining the terms more closely, and to this end I will look at the etymology of each word. It will become clear that each mode of writing has advantages and disadvantages for artistic researchers.

I will suggest that both academic writing and performance-making should be reconfigured by virtue of their interrelationship in the research context, and describe three writing strategies that I developed during my research. These strategies arose from the exigencies of my particular project and my understanding of artistic research. I spent little time writing about the public performances that comprised my folio, focusing mainly on the larger periods of practice within which the performances resided. This choice may well be appropriate for other performance-makers for whom the practice of improvisation is a necessary bedrock for performance creation, though it will not be appropriate for all artistic researchers.

What's in a Name? Exegetical and Dissertational Writing

The relationship between academic writing and art-making can easily become plagued by the schism between theory and practice that has long permeated Western knowledge structures. Art-making is often construed as practice, and academic writing as theory, and this splitting is detrimental to both activities. One consequence can be that artworks come to be seen as ‘illustrating’ theories. Another is that academic writing comes to be seen as a tool for ‘explaining’ artworks.