Crit 3: Reflection
Following my recent fine art group critique, I have been reflecting deeply on the direction of my doctoral research and the most effective structure for presenting its findings. I have communicated with Luke, suggesting we discuss a potential shift in direction before taking any formal steps.
Consistent with past group critiques, the recent review highlighted a key tension—a practice-led designation seems to invite surface-level, subjective commentary that frequently bypasses the core theoretical architecture of the project.
To ensure my research is evaluated on its actual conceptual depth, I am considering whether transitioning to a thesis-led (thesis-based) degree—supported by a heuristic examination of my analogue practice—might be the strongest path forward.
I see several strategic advantages to exploring this route:
Securing Specialist Evaluation
A thesis-led submission shifts the primary unit of assessment to the written monograph. This ensures external examiners are forced to evaluate the project on the explicit rigor of its text, judging critical theoretical intersections—such as grounding Isabelle Graw’s framework alongside Husserl’s epoché and Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology of perception (synthesising the lived body and embodied perception)—on their academic merits rather than unexamined panel assumptions.
Leveraging External Benchmarks and Advisory
Moving to a thesis-led model allows us to target specialist examiners and external advisors who actively operate at this theoretical level. Prior to my candidacy here, I was accepted into Elam under a three-supervisor panel that included art historian and critical theorist Greg Minissale—whose published work on new materialism and emergence I am actively extending into analogue photography. Minissale’s focus on embodied material processes forms a productive parallel with art historian and critical theorist Rex Butler, whose alternate expertise in philosophy, historiography, and post-medium critique offers a rigorous counter-weight. Crucially, Butler deeply understands the complexities of Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology in sharp contrast to Cartesian dualism.
Building on discussions with Luke, and his suggestion to approach Greg and Rex as external assessors for my Milestone Confirmation Review, working with evaluators of this calibre eliminates the need to defend fundamental philosophical premises at a doctoral level.
Reframing Theoretical Blind Spots
A full thesis structure provides the necessary textual space within the literature review and methodology to explicitly map out prevailing blind spots in fine art historicity. It allows me to contrast mechanical over-reliance on standard postmodern canons with a grounded phenomenological and new-materialist account, turning current institutional friction into a core academic contribution.
Protecting the Research Architecture
Adopting a heuristic model allows my hand-dependent darkroom practice to function as a rigorous laboratory of emergence, the phenomenological paradox of negative intentionality (constraints/epoché), and positive intentionality (embodied knowing/mind-body synthesis), backed by an unassailable textual framework without requiring me to dilute its theoretical complexity.