This is Matthew Draper’s Readings which is about Research in Art and Design by Christopher Frayling Volume 1 No. 1 1993/1994
Is Fine Art research comparable with scientific research?
It is very difficult to put art practices in research categories. And it seems like the text discussion aims to post-rationalize art as a research activity which is difficulty, IMO.
I love Frayling’s style of writing and how it relates to the period where you see an emergence of art and design as research and how research (actually) started as non-scientific endeavour. However, we see examples of artists driving the cognitive (instead of expressive) like Constable’s clouds and Stubb’s animals.
I am now reading Failure: why science is so successful by Stuart Firestein and it describes how the faults and errors have contributed to science. As a result, a trial-and-errors process and approach has evolved in scientific research. To me this can be a parallel approach to art research. Indeed, it is very difficult to describe what research is.