First WdKA-workshop on ethical attitudes in artistic research

Last winter, the Platform Kunst ≈ Onderzoek published an open call among our members on the topic of ethics. After a selection among six inspiring ideas, the selected project plan was  that of the Willem de Kooning Academy.

Florian Cramer, Miriam Rasch and Harma Staal are organizing a three-part workshop series on ethical questions among students and researchers, focusing on attitudes and research topics that require ethical considerations. The workshops will form the basis for a poster that can be folded into a zine, which will be distributed to all participants and other interested parties.

The first workshop took place on June 4 at the Research Station of the Willem de Kooning Academy in Rotterdam. The topic of this first workshop was ethical attitudes: what does it mean to have an ethical attitude within artistic research and how do you train it? Present were professors, researchers, policy officers, lecturers and ethics committee members.

Discussed examples of problematic ethical attitudes within artistic research included “Move fast and break things” (the notion that you must develop and seize opportunities quickly and “productively,” and that it is not a bad thing if products or people are damaged as a result); “Make make make make” (the idea that you have to keep producing, regardless of your mental health or your ecological footprint); and “theory sampling” (when researchers use inaccurate concepts or definitions and thus can cloud critical theory). The latter also aligns with an idea of ‘fake it till you make it’; that it is best to bluff or lie to propel your career forward.

Gradually, the attitude “But I’m an artist” also emerged, the idea that social or ethical frameworks do not apply or apply less to artists because they would have a unique perspective. What difference does it make in ethical action when someone joins a climate protest from the specific role of artistic researcher? In what areas do art-specific ethical frameworks apply that do not apply when someone joins this same protest as a “person,” and in what areas do they not?

Using worksheets, more examples were collected, divided into three categories: dilemmas related to making (materials, producing and making), sources (resources) and people (co-creation, participants and participants).

Case studies were then discussed in three smaller groups, with a focus on problematic attitudes, but also on what positive attitudes or best practices could look like. Case 1 dealt with lesson plans involving sensitive topics and taboos, and the relationship between supervisors, teachers and students; Case 2 looked at ethical frameworks for art students and organizations within a climate protest; Case 3 discussed a student’s graduate work and the role of informed consent, among other things.

Afterwards, the findings were shared and compared, and the day ended with a joint reflection and a look ahead to the future: the second workshop will deal with (un)ethical subjects, and will take place in the fall of 2025.