One-on-one Online Session (20/11/15) – Discussing progress and developing a plan for inquiry

Last Friday was intended to be an all module campus session, however, a clash of schedules meant that various BAPP students were unable to make it. The session is to be re-scheduled but in its place Paula decided to offer one-on-one Skype tutorials for those who were available. Paula wanted to save much of the material for the session’s workshop but we did touch upon the main topic that will be featured; thinking about the process of inquiry and how to engage with the beginning, middle and end and what that means in relevance to my own practice.

I confessed to Paula that I am not as far along with the module as I would like to be due to my activities as performer demanding so much of my time of late. I am always grateful for the opportunity to audition for projects but that does involve a great deal of preparation and subsequently time away from studies. Paula asked about my current writing style when tackling work on the module. I have always approached tasks in bulks, meaning I spend a concentrated amount of time in one sitting with them. I have previously spoken (see task 1a: continued) about finding creativity and inspiration more easily after having the chance to examine the best method of approach. Paula reminded me that while task work is important in guiding my hand towards the proposal at the end of the study period and indeed the inquiry in the next, I should not feel the need on every occasion to draw them out to essay-like levels of detail. They are, after all, not marked as part of the module and can sometimes be as poignant as a simple description of a concept with reference to a link containing sound bites/audio-visual or any other form of supporting material. The attempt to craft a perfect post can be in vain as your own ideas can evolve and change, let alone other people’s interpretation of it. Subjectivity is what an exchange of ideals is all about and, coincidentally, makes up a lot dialogue within the arts!

With these thoughts in mind, we then began to discuss current progress on my inquiry. I feel I have settled on a decent topic that my previous and ongoing practice will afford exploration for. Paula expressed that the notion of ‘identity’ was important in building an inquiry and that it should be within a field that I already have an established knowledge of. That said, I should also be looking to further this knowledge via investigation into related areas of interest. With regards to my own topic, ‘collaboration in the arts and ethics’, it is vital that I consider other roles that operate within my practice. The performer’s work will be influenced by a number of external parties (director, choreographer lighting & set designers) that are coincidentally working as a team on a given project. All have their role and their right to input, but how is that mediated? Can collaboration exist to satisfy all parties or can it not without a degree of compromise? How do I establish a difference of professional opinion? This type of conversation provides for a much larger canvas when instigating debate. As mentioned in previous posts this module, the greater the scope of information I manage to gather via research, the deeper the dialogue for debate can become.

Conversation. Dialogue. Debate. These are three keywords that Paula highlighted as interlinked when discussing the structure of inquiry. The feedback from my acting tutor (as discussed in task 4c) coincidentally informs this point further. In order to present the clearest, most concise inquiry possible with my topic, I will need to take care in making sure that text is balanced. It is expected that the body of analysis must feature some weight and extended thought. It can be likened to the English literature technique of statement, quotation and comment. This comparison may seem basic but it is the foundation as to how the inquiry will take shape. Paula then listed a sequence in which this will work utilising the aforementioned keywords.

Conversation – A starting point initiated by a particular topic between myself and another individual or party.

Dialogue – Discussing a shift in ideas within the given topic informed by the individual or party’s beliefs and my own. Are there similarities or contrasts to be made?

Debate – Finding practitioner literature in support of views and, if not apparent, instigating whether they still hold any significance.

While I feel I have been touching upon a variation of the proposed writing style within my posts at present in preparation for my inquiry, Paula mentioned that for the purpose of the upcoming proposal only the debate will need to be suggested. Evidence of recorded research will not need to be displayed until it is formally undertaken in module three, just methods as to how I will conduct it as decided by my work on this module. I will need to include examples of existing published literature that can support my topic of inquiry and address any shortcomings in covering my particular angle on a line of inquiry. I will also need to include any initial ethical considerations without relying on those raised by others as will occur when conducting research next study period. I imagine part five, ‘professional ethics’, will help in motivating a thinking about this.

I ended the session with Paula with an invigorated focus. Sometimes, when juggling other activities, it can be difficult to return to studies without feeling a loss of direction. Thoughts and ongoing ideas formed through previous work can become strained. However, taking the time to look back over my posts thus far and re-examining the handbook after a more developed understanding has set in motion a new found awareness. This is to ensure that areas contributing to my proposal at the end of the study period are as detailed as they need to be. This does not include every idea I come across as some will be relevant to my inquiry whilst others will not. Paula equated the process to ‘focusing the camera lens’. To zoom in on what is important in making the inquiry a success.