My Unit 2 Research Paper is a subject that intrigues me, fascinates me, runs around in my head from dawn ‘til dusk, and yet somewhere encourages me to be a better artist every day.
Spending the last few months researching this subject has allowed me to open my mind to so many new possibilities, and the path is getting clearer - again - every day. The universe is sending signals.
In order to compare the beginning of my quest to the final frontier of the Learning Outcomes and Research Paper at the bottom of this page, here is the full journey (please click on each title for more details):
-
I am intrigued by how it is still possible to wage war against each other, when we all share the same planet?
I am intrigued by how art could help to shape a more equal future between women, men and all genders?
What is the role of art galleries in the discovery of emerging artists in 2026, versus curators, agents, and brand collaborations?
What is surrealism today, and what is the role of women in a modern day surrealism?
How does past trauma affect future art? Lotus feet, corsets, traps, cages, other limitations for women, artists, et al
How does being pulled in several different directions at the same time help artists to pull forward?
Chicken & the egg - To show or not to show? Make art, make art shows?
I am intrigued by how mood affects creativity, and how creativity affects mood
Love the anti-grading example! How could I treat the Research Paper in a different way, like the nonsense → sausage recipe Research Paper?
I am still intrigued by what I was intrigued by at the University of Warwick - What is love? What is Eros? What is beauty? Is there absolute, objective beauty? “Beauty is truth, truth beauty,—that is all. Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.” - Keats’ Ode to a Grecian Urn.
-
Strategic Value - As Artist-Curator, Curator-Gallerist Interview, Hauser & Wirth - Jacqueline, and what is the role of women in balancing the genders in the real world %% 80/20 ? Interviews are not to be the same as them, but to define where I fit in the gaps - Etymology of Curator = Care = Taking care of the objects. Different types of curators → Creator? etc
Strategic Value - As Artist - What is surrealism in the 21st century, and what is the role of women in modern day surrealism? Could link → How does past trauma affect future art? Lotus feet, corsets. Leonora Carrington. Freedom, free association, why not?
Subject of interest - Nonsense & Ideas of Love
Subject of interest - Binaries - Us vs Them
Calligraphy, freedom, brush strokes, just flowing, just having fun
-
What is the role of the artist-curator in shaping contemporary surrealism, and how are women artists redefining freedom, care, and identity through trauma-informed artistic practice?
What is the role of women in 21st-century surrealism, and how do contemporary artists transform historical and personal trauma into new forms of freedom, identity, and imagination?
How does contemporary surrealist art use the transformation of trauma, gendered history, and irrationality to challenge social binaries and imagine new forms of freedom?
-
Strategic Value - As Artist-Curator, Curator-Gallerist Interview (Hauser & Wirth - Jacqueline Moore) and Artist-Curators (like Louise te Poele) and what is the role of women in balancing the genders in the real world %% 80/20 ? Interviews are not to be the same as them, but to define where I fit in the gaps - Etymology of Curator = Care = Taking care of the objects. Different types of curators → Creator? etc
Strategic Value Research Paper Proposal
Defining the Artist-Curator: Gender, Care, and Value Creation in Contemporary Art Ecosystems
This research project investigates the evolving role of the artist-curator within contemporary art ecosystems through a series of interviews with artist-curators, curators, gallery directors, and gallerists operating across the international art world. Through conversations with approximately 10–20 professionals—including figures such as Jacqueline Moore of Hauser & Wirth and other leaders working at the intersection of artistic production, exhibition-making, and cultural management—the project seeks to identify emerging models of practice and uncover opportunities for future practitioners working between disciplines.
The central objective of this research is not to emulate existing career trajectories, but rather to understand where new forms of practice can emerge. As an artist-curator who has already independently conceived and delivered exhibitions and cultural projects with organisations including the British Embassy in Paris, NHS London, Groupe Clarins, Ne Pas Toucher, and Dykonic, I am interested in examining the spaces that remain unoccupied within the current cultural landscape. By understanding how established professionals define their roles, create value, and navigate institutional structures, this research aims to identify the gaps where future artist-curators may contribute most meaningfully.
A key focus of the project concerns gender representation and power structures within the art world. Numerous studies have shown that women constitute the majority of students in art education programmes, often representing approximately 70–80% of enrolment across many fine art and creative disciplines. Yet this demographic dominance is not reflected within the commercial art market. Male artists continue to receive higher levels of representation from major galleries, command significantly larger sales figures, and remain disproportionately represented in museum collections and major exhibitions. If the 70/30 rule in art is traditionally seen as a foundational composition principle stating that 70% of an artwork should be dominated by a unifying element, while the remaining 30% should consist of contrasting accents, I would like to look at the ratio of genders in this way, and the way that the reality post-graduation does not reflect the gender ratio during class - at all.
This apparent contradiction raises important questions. If women constitute the majority of those entering artistic education, why does the distribution of visibility, financial value, and institutional recognition remain skewed towards men? What structural barriers continue to shape professional outcomes after graduation? How do women working as curators, gallery directors, collectors, and cultural leaders negotiate these systems? Furthermore, can artist-curators play a role in rebalancing representation and creating alternative models of cultural value?
Rather than framing this investigation solely through the lens of inequality, the research seeks to understand the specific contributions women make to cultural ecosystems. Women increasingly occupy influential positions as curators, museum directors, cultural producers, and arts administrators. Their roles often extend beyond selection and presentation towards relationship-building, community development, mentorship, and long-term care of artistic practices. These forms of labour are frequently less visible than the production of artworks themselves, yet they are fundamental to sustaining cultural infrastructures.
This leads to a second strand of inquiry: the concept of care within curatorial practice.
The word "curator" derives from the Latin curare, meaning "to care for." Historically, the curator's role was centred upon stewardship: the preservation, interpretation, and protection of objects. However, contemporary curatorial practice has expanded far beyond the management of collections. Today, curators often care not only for objects but also for artists, audiences, communities, narratives, and social relationships.
This shift raises an important question: what does it mean to care in contemporary art?
Care may involve protecting cultural memory, supporting emerging artists, creating spaces for difficult conversations, or facilitating encounters between people and ideas. In this sense, curation becomes an active social practice rather than a purely administrative one. The curator is not merely a selector of objects but a mediator of meaning and relationships.
The interviews conducted for this research will explore how different practitioners understand this responsibility. Participants will be invited to reflect on their definitions of curation, value creation, leadership, and care. Particular attention will be paid to the ways in which personal histories, experiences, and challenges shape professional approaches.
A further objective of the project is to examine the expanding spectrum of curatorial identities. Contemporary practitioners increasingly move fluidly between multiple roles: artist-curator, curator-gallerist, curator-producer, collector-curator, educator-curator, and activist-curator. These hybrid positions challenge traditional distinctions between artistic creation and cultural mediation.
One possible outcome of the research is the development of a broader typology of curatorial practice. Such a framework may include questions such as:
Is the curator fundamentally a caretaker?
Is the curator a creator of contexts rather than objects?
Is the curator a connector between people and ideas?
Is the curator an advocate?
Is the curator a lover of culture and community?
Is the curator a translator between worlds?
Can the curator transform personal experiences of trauma into collective forms of empowerment?
These questions move beyond conventional definitions of exhibition-making and address the emotional, social, and political dimensions of cultural work.
Particularly relevant is the relationship between lived experience and curatorial methodology. Many contemporary practitioners draw upon personal histories, identities, and experiences of exclusion in developing exhibitions and cultural programmes. Trauma, marginalisation, and adversity can become sources of insight, empathy, and innovation. Rather than viewing vulnerability as a limitation, contemporary curatorial practice increasingly recognises it as a source of knowledge and transformative potential.
This perspective aligns with broader shifts within contemporary culture, where leadership is increasingly understood through collaboration, emotional intelligence, and care rather than authority alone. Understanding how successful women in the arts navigate these dynamics may provide valuable insights into alternative forms of cultural leadership that challenge traditional hierarchies.
Methodologically, the research will combine qualitative interviews with literature relating to feminist art history, cultural economics, museum studies, and contemporary curatorial theory. The interview format will allow for the collection of nuanced perspectives that may not emerge through quantitative analysis alone. Participants' reflections will be analysed comparatively to identify recurring themes, contradictions, and emerging models of practice.
Ultimately, this research seeks to contribute to contemporary discussions concerning authorship, cultural value, gender equity, and the future of curatorial work. By examining how artist-curators and curator-gallerists create meaning, support artists, and navigate systems of power, the project aims to better understand the evolving ecology of contemporary art.
Most importantly, the research is intended as an exercise in positioning rather than imitation. The goal is not to follow existing models but to map them, understand them, and identify where new possibilities exist. Through dialogue with established practitioners, the project seeks to locate the spaces between existing categories—between artist and curator, creator and caretaker, institution and community—where future forms of cultural practice may emerge.
In doing so, the research asks a fundamental question: if the curator's role is to care, then what—and whom—should contemporary art care for next?
-
Strategic Value - As Artist - What is surrealism in the 21st century, and what is the role of women in modern day surrealism? Could link → How does past trauma affect future art? Lotus feet, corsets. Leonora Carrington. Freedom, free association, why not?
Strategic Value Research Paper Proposal
Reimagining Surrealism in the Twenty-First Century: Women, Trauma, and the Freedom to Create
This research project investigates the meaning and relevance of surrealism in the twenty-first century, with particular attention to the role of women artists in redefining the movement for contemporary audiences. While surrealism emerged in the early twentieth century as a revolutionary artistic and literary movement concerned with dreams, the unconscious, and free association, its legacy continues to evolve in response to changing social, political, and cultural realities.
The purpose of this research is to examine how surrealist principles continue to operate today and to explore whether contemporary women artists are creating a new form of surrealism that differs from the movement's historical foundations. Through the study of artists, writers, theorists, and contemporary practitioners, the project seeks to understand how personal experience, trauma, memory, identity, and liberation are transformed into visual language.
Historically, surrealism was founded upon the idea of freedom. Influenced by the psychoanalytic theories of Sigmund Freud, early surrealists sought to access the unconscious mind through dreams, automatic writing, chance encounters, and free association. They believed that rational thought restricted creativity and that true artistic innovation could emerge through surrendering control.
However, despite its revolutionary ambitions, surrealism was often dominated by male artists and intellectuals. Women frequently appeared within surrealist imagery as symbols, muses, mysteries, or objects of desire rather than autonomous creators. As a result, many female surrealists occupied a complicated position within the movement, simultaneously participating in and resisting its structures.
One of the most significant figures in this history is Leonora Carrington. Carrington rejected the role of muse and instead established herself as a powerful artistic voice in her own right. Her paintings, stories, and personal mythology challenged conventional ideas of femininity, identity, and reality. Through hybrid creatures, alchemical transformations, and dreamlike narratives, she created worlds in which women possessed agency, power, and imaginative freedom.
Carrington's work raises a question that remains relevant today: what happens when women are no longer represented within surrealism but become its authors?
This research proposes that contemporary surrealism may be increasingly defined through women's perspectives and experiences. While early surrealists explored dreams and the unconscious, contemporary artists often investigate memory, trauma, embodiment, gender, mental health, and social conditioning. The unconscious remains important, but it is no longer detached from lived experience.
A key theme of this project concerns the relationship between trauma and artistic creation.
Throughout history, societies have imposed physical, social, and psychological constraints upon women. Practices such as Chinese foot binding, restrictive Victorian corsetry, and broader systems of gendered control have shaped not only women's bodies but also their cultural representation. These practices can be understood as historical examples of how power becomes inscribed upon the body.
The symbolic significance of these forms of restriction continues to resonate within contemporary art. Artists frequently revisit historical symbols of confinement and transform them into narratives of resistance, empowerment, and self-definition. What was once an instrument of control may become a source of artistic agency.
This raises an important research question: how does past trauma affect future art?
Trauma is often understood as a wound, but it can also function as a catalyst for transformation. Many artists use creative practice as a means of processing difficult experiences, reconstructing identity, and generating meaning from adversity. Art becomes a space where personal and collective histories can be reimagined rather than simply repeated.
Within contemporary surrealism, trauma often appears not as direct representation but through symbolism, fragmentation, metamorphosis, and dreamlike imagery. The surreal offers a language for expressing experiences that may be difficult to articulate through conventional narrative forms. By disrupting logic and realism, artists can communicate emotional truths that exist beyond rational explanation.
This process connects directly to one of surrealism's foundational principles: free association.
Free association involves allowing thoughts, memories, images, and ideas to emerge without censorship. Historically, surrealists viewed this process as a route to the unconscious. In contemporary practice, free association may also function as a method of liberation from social expectations, inherited narratives, and restrictive identities.
The question becomes not simply "What does this image mean?" but rather "Why not?"
Why must reality remain fixed?
Why must identity remain singular?
Why must history determine the future?
Why must logic define artistic possibility?
The phrase "Why not?" represents an important contemporary extension of surrealist thinking. It suggests openness, experimentation, and the rejection of imposed limitations. Rather than seeking a single interpretation, contemporary surrealism often embraces multiplicity, contradiction, and ambiguity.
This research proposes that twenty-first-century surrealism is less concerned with escaping reality than with expanding it. Dreams, fantasy, mythology, and imagination become tools for exploring alternative ways of understanding the world. The surreal is no longer simply an aesthetic style; it becomes a strategy for questioning assumptions and generating new possibilities. My Dream Diary of over 10 years suddenly becomes a very relevant source, at this point.
Particular attention will be given to the contributions of women artists working within this expanded framework. Through case studies of historical and contemporary practitioners, the research will examine how women have transformed surrealism from a movement that often objectified female experience into one that increasingly centres female agency.
Methodologically, the project will combine art historical research, feminist theory, psychoanalytic perspectives, and visual analysis. Key themes will include freedom, transformation, memory, embodiment, mythology, trauma, and imagination. Historical figures such as Leonora Carrington will be examined alongside contemporary artists whose work engages with similar concerns through new media, technologies, and social contexts.
Ultimately, this research seeks to redefine surrealism not as a historical movement confined to the twentieth century, but as an evolving method of thinking and creating. It argues that contemporary surrealism continues to thrive precisely because it offers a space where impossible ideas can be explored, where trauma can be transformed into power, and where new realities can be imagined.
Most importantly, this project asks whether the future of surrealism lies not in reproducing the dreams of the past, but in creating new forms of freedom. If early surrealism sought liberation from reason, then contemporary surrealism may seek liberation from limitation itself.
In this context, women are not merely participants within the movement. They are increasingly its authors, architects, and visionaries, expanding the possibilities of what surrealism can become in the twenty-first century.
+++
These two subjects above are linked to another, third subject…
-
Art does not scale.
Art is not functional.
Art galleries often push prices up, selling promise and a washed-up idea of exclusivity.
Mega galleries are the Starbucks of Art, but Art is not functional - like coffee, clothing, or anything else.
Let me it clear that I am not against galleries - at all. Mega galleries continue to impress and inspire me, deeply.
I am simply imagining a new future for artist-curators / slashers with several tricks up their sleeves, like me.
Art is emotion.
Art is love.
When money = art and art = money, we no longer have emotion or love, we have a controlled human experiment that eradicates error.
Leonora Carrington at Musée du Luxembourg in Paris is on at the right time, in the right year, where surrealism has grown to the next level.
With error comes risk, with risk comes chance, with chance comes open doors for those who would usually be turned away by big galleries.
Ne Pas Toucher also came at the right time, as did our Pride show at the British Embassy, and our show with the NHS in London.
Perhaps what is truly surreal… is the reality of art galleries today.
In the light of that, what is coming next for galleries?
“The biggest challenge I see for galleries if preserving depth and artistic integrity in a culture driven by speed and constant visibility” - Kamel Mennour, President and Founder, Galerie Mennour (via Mennour)
“I believe in hard work, slow burners, and patience. Good art always eventually finds a way to persevere.” - Eva Presenhuber, Owner and Founder, Galerie Eva Presenhuber
“Today, more than ever, our role is not about shouting louder. It is about making the artworld legible.” Iwan Wirth, President, Hauser & Wirth
“Much of what we do is about collector psychology. Dealers often feel pressure to presell major works once previews circulate.” Jessica Silverman, Founder and CEO, Jessica Silverman
“As the landscape changes, we have to adapt in ways that make sense, without losing our core ideals.” Casey Kaplan, Owner and Founder, Casey Kaplan
Galleries that truly care about art will always focus on artistic expression, not blank white-walled galleries that are backed by venture capital funds.
Instead of opening new locations, galleries should bring in new people to the existing locations, expanding the loyal fanbase and growing with their artists.
They should grow up together, build quality over time together, build the same artist from A to Z, instead of picking big names for the easy way out.
New galleries should also focus on creating happenings, events, unforgettable “Kodak Moments” - as good as they were before iPhones.
Surrealism through the inversion of expectation - the fact that surprising interaction was at the heart of every action at Ne Pas Toucher.
Prioritise loyalty with artists, win over the hearts of true art lovers, generation to generation, for decade upon decade.
The gallery of the future may still have white walls, but these walls will hold between them pure joy.
The joy of error, of risk, of chance, of play, of evolution, and by all means possible, of growth.
We could all level up to the next level of spirituality of we let art free every walk of life.
The art… of acceptance. The art… of generosity. The art… of kindness.
“The whole culture is telling you to hurry, while the art tells you to take your time. Always listen to the art.” - Junot Diaz.
Burns, C. (2026) As Pace Gallery cuts artists and staff, the mega-gallery model looks shaky. Financial Times, 11 June. Available at: https://www.ft.com/content/5c661326-0e44-4f74-a63c-40a474fbf923 (Accessed: 11 June 2026).
Embleton, P. (2026) The Model Was Always Broken. The Art of Installation, 9 June. Available at: https://theartofinstallation.substack.com/p/the-model-was-always-broken (Accessed: 11 June 2026).
K-ARTNOW (2026) The Crisis of the Mega-Gallery Model: From an Era of Expansion to Structural Reassessment. K-ARTNOW, 9 June. Available at: https://k-artnow.com/posts.php?co_id=1780981304 (Accessed: 11 June 2026).
-
Unit 1 asks: What kind of artist am I becoming? - “A New Self-Portrait – Turning Fracture into Form. The Alchemy of Life seen through a Surrealist Prism.”
Unit 2 asks: What kind of art world do I want that artist to participate in—and help create? - “Leonora Carrington and the Next Surrealism: Women, Curatorial Care, and the Future of Artistic Freedom“
The links:
In Unit 1, Surrealism appears as one possible language through which I could understand my own artistic practice, placing Carrington alongside Dalí, Tanning, Maar, Oppenheim, Cahun, Miller, Miró and Breton as artists through whom I intend to explore my future practice.
I explicitly planned to research female surrealists like Leonora Carrington – “I shall explore the future of my art practice through the research of several genres: Surrealism: …Leonora Carrington…”
I also planned to investigate how my Dream Diary might become part of my work – “Go to the CSM library and read up on female surrealists like Leonora Carrington, see how to get my Dream Diary involved”
Unit 2 therefore feels like the result of that investigation rather than a new direction. Having investigated Surrealism, I believe its history- and particularly its women - may tell us something important about where art is going next.
1. Surrealism moves from influence to research subject
In Unit 1, Surrealism appears as one possible language through which I might understand my own artistic practice. I place Carrington alongside Tanning, Maar, Oppenheim, Cahun, Miller, Miró, Dalí and Breton as artists through whom I intend to explore my future practice. I also explicitly planned to research “female surrealists like Leonora Carrington” and investigate how my Dream Diary might become part of my work.
Unit 2 therefore feels like the result of that investigation rather than a new direction. I have effectively discovered that one name in the Unit 1 list demands deeper investigation: Carrington. And one genre demands deeper investigation: Surrealism.
Unit 1 says: Surrealism might help me discover my artistic language.
Unit 2 says: Having investigated Surrealism, I believe its history—and particularly its women—may tell us something important about where art is going next.
2. My Dream Diary as a bridge
Unit 1 says that my investigation will move through philosophy, history, religion, literature and: “perhaps even through my own Dream Diary (since 2018 on my phone, since much earlier written in diaries somewhere at home in London).”
Unit 2 arrives at Breton, Freud, free association, dreams, Carrington and the unconscious—and suddenly concludes: “My Dream Diary of over 10 years suddenly becomes a very relevant source.”
The Carrington research isn't simply art-historical research about someone else. It potentially feeds directly back into practice-based research. My dreams become primary material. Carrington's dream-world becomes a historical interlocutor. Freud provides one theoretical context. Breton provides another. Contemporary feminist Surrealism provides another. My artworks become the place where those ideas are tested. That circularity would make Unit 2 substantially stronger.
3. The emotional progression is particularly coherent
There is another powerful continuity:
Unit 1: personal fracture → transformation. I describe a landscape containing “inherited and lived trauma,” but say that from those foundations I want to “build beautiful bridges.” My practice is explicitly positioned between: memory / possibility, history / future, self / society, identity / transformation.
Unit 2: collective fracture → transformation. The Carrington research asks: “How does past trauma affect future art?” And proposes that Surrealism can transform trauma through symbolism, fragmentation, metamorphosis and dream imagery. This feels like an intellectual expansion of the emotional proposition already established in Unit 1. I shall aim to preserve “Turning Fracture into Form” as a recurring conceptual phrase somewhere in Unit 2. It may ultimately become one of the defining concepts of the whole MA.
4. Feminism evolves from subject matter into structural critique
Unit 1 says that my practice explores feminism, gender, identity and injustices that “need to be fixed.”
But Unit 2 asks a more difficult question: Who actually has power in the art world? I move beyond representing women towards examining: female artists → female curators → female gallery directors → female cultural leaders → institutional power → market value.
Unit 2 research therefore shifts feminism from iconography to infrastructure. Carrington is an excellent bridge because her historical problem embodies your contemporary one: What happens when a woman refuses to be the subject/muse/object within somebody else's system and becomes the author of her own world? Unit 2 text explicitly asks precisely this question. That idea mirrors Unit 1 because Unit 1 is also about becoming the author of your own world.
5. Artist versus artist-curator is the one tension I would resolve
There is one genuine difference between the documents that needs careful handling.
Unit 1 repeatedly says: I need to narrow the Swiss Army knife. I envisage becoming primarily an Artist rather than continually multiplying identities. But Unit 2 appears to rediscover the artist-curator as a potentially important future identity. At first glance, that could look contradictory.
Unit 1 already asks: “Is this the same world that Daniella the art exhibition curator also lives in, do they co-create, or are these two different practices entirely?” Unit 2 can answer that question. That is potentially one of your strongest points of continuity. The conclusion may no longer be: I must stop being all these other things to become an artist. It may instead become: I discovered that Artist is not another blade of the Swiss Army knife. Artist is the hand holding the knife. Curating, writing, organising, interviewing, teaching, producing happenings and building communities can therefore become expressions of the artistic worldview, rather than competing professional identities.
6. The business question also evolves form unit 1 to unit 2
Unit 1 contains a fascinating tension. On one hand: “The Future of my Art is Business.”
But later, reflecting on production pressure, I conclude: “Creation should be pure, untainted, and free from business goals.”
That unresolved contradiction becomes a research question in Unit 2. And this is exactly where my gallery critique belongs.
Unit 2 asks what happens when:
art = money
money = art.
It questions scale, mega-galleries, speculation, exclusivity and the pressure to remove risk. That means Unit 2 isn't suddenly introducing an unrelated critique of galleries. It is researching a contradiction discovered through Unit 1 practice: How can an artist survive economically without allowing commercial systems to determine what she creates? That is a much stronger framing than simply “mega-galleries are bad,” which would be too reductive. My research into galleries should therefore remain nuanced: how might galleries protect artistic freedom while remaining economically viable?
7. “Care” connects to Unit 1 more deeply than might initially appear
Unit 2's etymological investigation of curare—to care—could become another major bridge.
Unit 2 asks whether the curator is caretaker, creator, connector, advocate or translator, and whether curatorial practice can transform lived difficulty into collective empowerment.
Unit 1 is already saturated with this impulse. I talk repeatedly about exhibitions, community, helping underrepresented voices, feminism, class projects and creating opportunities for others. I am therefore not introducing care retrospectively as an academic concept. Unit 2 is giving theoretical language to behaviour already present in Unit 1. That is valuable practice-based research:
I did something → I noticed a pattern → I researched the pattern → I developed a theory → the theory changes what I do next.
The biggest difference between Unit 1 and Unit 2 = I would summarise it as a change of camera position.
UNIT 1 — CAMERA FACING INWARD
Who am I? What happened to me? What do I believe? What kind of artist am I? What is my visual language? How do I transform fracture into form? How do I become independent? What happens when I look through my Artist Prism?
UNIT 2 — CAMERA TURNS OUTWARD
What world does that artist inhabit? Who controls that world? Where are its women? Who determines artistic value? What happened to the women of Surrealism? Why Carrington now? Why is Surrealism returning now? What does care mean within curation? What should galleries become?
And ultimately:
What kind of art world do I want to help build?
There is actually a beautiful three-stage structure emerging:
UNIT 1 — SELF - Turning Fracture into Form. Who am I becoming?
=
UNIT 2 — SYSTEM - Turning History into Possibility. What is art becoming?
=
FINAL PRACTICE — WORLD
Turning Possibility into Form. What can I actually make, curate, write, exhibit or initiate that demonstrates my answer? And Carrington can sit almost exactly in the centre. She connects dreams + women + Surrealism + trauma + transformation + authorship + freedom + refusal of categorisation + alternative worlds.
Those are almost all already present in Unit 1. I need one explicit paragraph acknowledging this progression. Otherwise the coherence exists, but the assessors might have to discover it themselves.
“The Artist Prism” from Unit 1 could become the methodology through which Unit 2 is structured. Instead of abandoning the Prism metaphor, Unit 2 could demonstrate what happens once you finally look through it: Carrington, women, galleries, curation, dreams and the future of Surrealism are not six separate subjects—they are different refractions of the same enquiry about freedom, transformation and who gets to author reality.
Mid-August V1:
Mid-September V2:
End of October final version:
Week of 2 November - My finalised interpretation of how I answer all Learning Outcomes will be added this week, alongside my 3 minute video et al.
Learning Outcome 1:
Develop and realise a self-directed programme of learning which draws from wide-ranging subject knowledge. (AC Knowledge, AC Process)
is largely about your art practice – show how this has developed
Learning Outcome 2:
Articulate a thorough understanding of your research and establish an informed critical position. (AC Communication)
is largely about your research paper and all the different elements of research that connect to it
Learning Outcome 3:
Analyse and critically reflect on your practice and its context. (AC Enquiry)
is largely about your reflective thinking and writing on your blog
