A/r/tography as Living Inquiry Through Art and Text – Stephanie Springgay and Rita L. Irwin Sylvia Wilson Kind
What is the point of defining Artography?
Does it limit people’s accessibility, by overcomplicating art research, segmenting the subject from other disciplines more than intertwining them?
Is it magic?
Is it tangible, who does it serve?
Does it serve as a guide for art educators, a new way of research that allows for slippage, making, and other modes of inquiry?
Or does it rid artists of accountability (oh, yes, that was part of the process; that was a mistake)
(unfinished work)
(walking in the woods a creative process, enter: another magical realm)
I am not sure if Artography stands up in the name of art practices or separates the subject further from the others, into a further division of categories. Irwin’s six renderings of Artography seems like a different version of a DBAE model, but maybe like a reactionary force against it (using of scraps, entering cracks and constantly living in question.)
The object, the artwork, becomes less important than the discussions surrounding it. And there’s no definite end of becoming an artist or teacher, it is a continual journey.