‘Research threads’ documents the work in relation to a number of lines of studio enquiry. This provides an opportunity for reflection and an overview of some of the issues and ideas that have emerged out of the developing practice. As with the process of making, the process of writing is itself speculative, providing a parallel mechanism through which to shape (and continually reshape) thinking. Similar to the practical outcomes, any conceptual framework is itself emergent and in flux. As Gregory J. Seigworth and Melissa Gregg observe in relation to the process of establishing theoretical frameworks, ‘Isn’t theory - any theory with or without a capital T - supposed to work in this way? Operating with a certain modest methodological vitality rather than impressing itself upon a wiggling world like a snap on grid of shape setting interpretability?’ * Indeed, the practice often emerges independent of any clearly articulated rationale, yet I would suggest that the process of writing is useful in helping us to become aware of the implications of our actions.
In reality many of the threads of enquiry could be applied to a number of the works. In this respect, the organisation of the practice within project categories is something of a retrospective and pragmatic exercise which doesn’t necessarily reflect the fluidity or the experimental uncertainty through which both the practice and ideas evolved. Further reflections on the developing practice can be found within the ‘Published Material’ section of the site.
* Seigworth, G. J., and Gregg, M. (2010) The affect theory reader. Durham, London:Duke University Press. p.4