Showing doing. The art–science debate in a performative perspective

Abstract

The relationship between art and science plays an important role in the evolution of Interpretive Consumer Research (ICR). The discussion is currently stuck between a conception of art as mimesis (imitating reality), and as poiesis (imaginative creation of reality). The consequence is an inability to move beyond the frame of art or science and release the potentials of both sides. This paper introduces a performative perspective on art in a research context. Instead of separating art and science, a performative perspective tends to integrate both aspects in a processual and behavioural way. A central aspect is the concept of performance as restored behaviour that is characterized by a tension between the mimetic and the 'real'. Hereby, the act of 'doing something' transforms into 'showing doing'. Social and aesthetic behaviour becomes intertwined and advances a traditional, object-oriented concept of art. In a performativity context, doing research also becomes another form of 'showing doing' with an enactement impact. Such a perspective goes beyond a view which sees art only as a data source or an additional element of presenting research results. Art as a performance disrupts the linear notion of the research process, so that artistic modes and performances are at the intersection of method, research, object of research and representation of research.

Undoing gender through performing the other

“…This study incorporates the methodology of performance theory, following which all human action and interaction can be seen as performances (Carlson 2003;Schechner 2006). The approach focuses on the doing and the live, forming an ontology and epistemology based on interaction and experience (Bode 2010), in which understanding emerges through acting in and engaging with one's context in a dynamic manner (Denzin 2003). Following Carlson (2003), the focus is then not on exploring whether things are being repeated, as the underlying assumption is that they always are, but rather on how things are being repeated.…”

Engaging the audience through videography as performance

“…Carlson (2003) elaborates that performance is an event in space and time that takes form neither as behaviour itself nor the cultural rules guiding it, but rather emerges as the negotiation of the two. In consumer research, performance has been addressed by Deighton (1992) and Bode (2010).…”

Constructing the object of research in the manner of Piet Mondrian

“…One movement assumes that art and research are two complementary entities (Belk, 1986). Following Bode (2010), three main focuses characterize this stream of research. The first one deals with artworks, cultural objects and the whole market system as data to increase our understanding of phenomena related to consumption and marketing (Hirschman, 1987;Holbrook and Grayson, 1986;Schroeder, 2006;Visconti et al, 2010).…”

“…This seminal call lead to an agenda extension in interpretive consumer research, opening up to the study of consumer aesthetics and hedonistic consumption (Holbrook, 1980; Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982; Hirschman and Holbrook, 1982). From that point on, two different ways of conceiving the relation between art and research have structured the field (Bode, 2010).…”

“…Thus, marketing papers should be evaluated based on aesthetic criteria (Brown, 1996). Bode (2010) goes further to promote a conceptualization of the art–science nexus based on the idea of performance as an act of ‘showing doing’ (Bode, 2010: 139). Finally, some authors advocate art – especially poetry – as the final product of research, given the specificity of poetic speech with regards to scientific language (Schouten, 1999; Sherry, 2008; Sherry and Schouten, 2002).…”