Typeset Proof Review Checklist Examples of Chicago Manual of Style

Typeset Proof Review Checklist We recommend that you print the typeset proof and proofread it slowly and with great care. We also suggest that you request a colleague to proofread your paper, as they may notice errors that you miss due to your familiarity with the content. Remember to check your typeset proof for: -

Completeness: inclusion of all text, figures, illustrations, and tables Correct title and subtitle Correct authorship and order of authors Current affiliation details Heading levels Position and size of illustrations and figures Ensuring that captions of illustrations and figures match Position of tables Presentation of quotes Presentation of equations Inclusion of acknowledgements Typesetting or file conversion errors Ensure use of Chicago Manual of Style citations; we recommend the authordate citations and the end-of-article reference list

Examples of Chicago Manual of Style References In-Text Citation: (Pollan 2006, 99-100) - when you want to reference specific pages in the text (Pollan 2006, 99-100; Weinstein 2009) - when a second text is being referenced and you don’t want to reference specific pages within the second text. Listing in End-of-Article Reference List: Book: Pollan, Michael. 2006. The Omnivore’s Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals. New York: Penguin. Article: Weinstein, Joshua I. 2009. “The Market in Plato’s Republic.” Classical Philology 104:439–58. More information on Chicago Manual of Style can be found at http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide.html We prefer author-date citations (the second tab on this page) to notes and bibliography.

Journal Standard Style Order of the Paper: 1. Cover page. 2. Copyright/imprint page. 3. Paper: title/subtitle; author names with affiliation; abstract; keywords; body of paper; acknowledgement (if applicable); reference list; appendix (if any); and about the author section. Journal Standard Style:            

Paper title/subtitle and all headings appear in Title Case, whereby only definite and indefinite articles (e.g. ‘the’ and ‘a’), conjunctions (e.g. ‘and’), and prepositions (e.g. ‘in’, ‘of’ etc.) appear in lower case. Article margins are mirrored to accodomate binding. Author byline will include only the name of the author, university or organization name, and country. Honorifics will not be included. Abstract will appear in italics as a single paragraph. The keyword list will appear in italics and center aligned. Avoid footnotes if at all possible. The first paragraph of the paper will appear in floating style—the first letter will appear in capital case and bold. Hyphenation cannot be altered. No underline will be included. Figure captions are centered below the figure. The figure number and caption appear on the same line. Table titles appear above the table, center aligned. The table number and table title appear on the same line. About the Author section: Honorifics will be reflected in this section. Contact details, such as email addresses, will not be included.

Multi-Authored Papers In the case of multi-authored papers, authors are advised to collaborate when checking the typeset proof. One author should be nominated to either accept or submit corrections on behalf of all of the authors of the paper. We can only accept one set of revisions, or one acceptance of the typeset proof, from the nominated author. Once an author approves the typeset proof, further revisions may not be requested.

Replying to Us After you review the typeset proof that follows, you need to click on the “Author Verify Typeset Proof” button (available at the link where you downloaded the typeset proof). You will then need to select the appropriate option to proceed.

Option 1: Accept Typeset Proof To be selected when your paper is ready for publication - Please thoroughly check the typeset proof before accepting it. You will not have further opportunities to make additional changes after the typeset proof has been accepted. - Once you have accepted the typeset proof of your paper, it will be ready to be published. You will be notified when your paper has been published and given instructions on how to access the published version. Option 2: Request Resubmission of Typeset Proof To be selected when your paper requires corrections, - Please thoroughly check the typeset proof - The typesetter will receive notification of your requested corrections. Once the corrections have been completed, you will be notified of the availability of a revised typeset proof for your approval.

Documenting your Corrections (Option 2) Changes to the Abstract If you wish to make changes to the abstract of your paper, please provide the revised abstract either as a Word document (if there are also changes to the text), or by entering it in the text box provided when you select Option 2. Additional Authors If you need to add a co-author, we require the following information for each additional author: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Name of the co-author Affiliation details Email address of the co-author (Mandatory) Short Biography (limit of 30 words) Long Biography (limit of 200 words, one paragraph only)

Making Corrections within the Body of the Article If you wish to make changes to the body of your article, please list the requested changes in the textbox by referencing the page number, paragraph number, and line in which you are requesting the change. If making substantial changes to the body, please make these changes in the Word document that we have supplied, which you can find directly above the PDF file in your CGPublisher Workflow.

VOLUME 8

The International Journal of

Arts Education __________________________________________________________________________

Drivers of Creativity How Theory Can Inform Contemporary Practice in the Art School Curriculum and Beyond HOWARD RILEY

artsinsociety.com

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTS EDUCATION www.artsinsociety.com First published in 2014 in Champaign, Illinois, USA by Common Ground Publishing LLC www.commongroundpublishing.com ISSN: 2326-9944 © 2014 (individual papers), the author(s) © 2014 (selection and editorial matter) Common Ground All rights reserved. Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the applicable copyright legislation, no part of this work may be reproduced by any process without written permission from the publisher. For permissions and other inquiries, please contact [email protected]. The International Journal of Arts Education is peer-reviewed, supported by rigorous processes of criterionreferenced article ranking and qualitative commentary, ensuring that only intellectual work of the greatest substance and highest significance is published.

Drivers of Creativity: How Theory Can Inform Contemporary Practice in the Art School Curriculum and Beyond Howard Riley, Swansea Metropolitan University of Wales Trinity Saint David, United Kingdom Abstract: This paper discusses an innovative strategy for the integration of theory modules, termed “drivers of creativity,” with the studio practices undertaken in the MA portfolio of courses in fine art, photography, visual communication, and textiles at the Dynevor Centre for Arts, Design, and Media, Swansea Metropolitan University of Wales Trinity Saint David, Wales, UK. It argues that at the heart of the creative process, there lie tensions which drive much—if not all—creative activity in those disciplines. Such tensions emanate from dialectical oppositions which impinge upon all producers of artworks of all kinds, first between notions of individual identity and the “mores” of the social group; and second, the dialectical opposition between the natural environment and human cultural constructions and interventions. These two dialectical oppositions inform the structure and content of the two theory modules undertaken by all first-year students on the MA programmes. The paper is illustrated with a range of visual examples, illustrating both the author’s and students’ practices motivated by the drivers of creativity modules. Evaluation of the quality of the project work is informed by a general criterion: the degree of balance evident between two factors, introduced and explained as “conceptual intrigue” and “perceptual intrigue.” Keywords: Drivers of Creativity, Perceptual Intrigue, Conceptual Intrigue

Introduction: Tension, Relief, Pleasure, Intrigue

I

n their seminal work Psychology of the Arts, Hans and Shulamith Kreitler (1972:6) identify four major theories “…which have served as central foci for psychological studies of the spectator’s experience of art. These are: psychoanalysis, the Gestalt theory, behaviourism and information theory.” This article is not the place to elaborate on these four, however it is worth identifying factors common to all of them: 1. 2. 3.

Experiences of art explained in terms of concepts which have a psychological validity. A reliance upon a homeostatic model of behaviour. An assumption that tension and the relief of such tension are integral to all experiences of art.

To paraphrase the Kreitlers (1972:13), the homeostatic model of motivation assumes that all organisms strive for optimal conditions for their existence and survival. The optimal condition is defined as an equilibrium between internal and external processes as well as among the internal processes themselves. Any imbalance disturbing equilibrium triggers tensions in the organism, tensions which are relieved through actions designed to restore balance. Interestingly, such restoration of equilibrium need not necessarily lead to the prior state of balance, but the establishment of new states of equilibrium rather akin to the way that resolution between thesis and antithesis can result in a new state of synthesis. Even though the Kreitlers’s argument is applied to spectators of art, it would appear equally relevant that the need to resolve tensions can be manifested in the practice of makers of artworks. The article goes on to elaborate how: The Kreitlers (1972:14) enumerate several examples of balance-disturbing factors, such as “…facing an unresolved problem…the perception of an unbalanced figure…being prevented from concluding an interrupted task…” The International Journal of Arts Education Volume 8, 2014, www.artsinsociety.com, ISSN 2326-9944 © Common Ground, Howard Riley, All Rights Reserved Permissions: [email protected]

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTS EDUCATION

This article argues that such examples are singular examples of the two fundamental dialectical oppositions within which the potential for disturbing psychological equilibrium exist: 1. 2.

The dialectical opposition between our need for individual identity and our need for acceptance within the social group. The dialectical opposition between the natural environment and our culturallymotivated compulsion to make representations of, and interventions within that natural environment.

Within the Master’s degree programme, these two oppositions are identified as potential sources of tension leading to a general imbalance of psychological equilibrium, and it is argued that the stimulus to resolve the subsequent tensions is the driver of human creativity. The homeostatic model adumbrated above, essentially based upon a rise in tension followed by a reduction in tension, is, in both psychological and physiological terms, concomitant with the experience of pleasure (Kreitler and Kreitler 1972:13). Specifically in the context of the visual arts, such pleasure can be defined in terms of the degree of intrigue experienced by the viewer encountering the artwork, an intrigue with two components, perceptual intrigue, and conceptual intrigue, derived from an insight of Hegel, who identified a space for art which still seems tenable: halfway between sensual experience and intellectual understanding. For Hegel, (in Graham 1997:174), the distinguishing feature of art is the “sensual presentation of the idea”. I’d like to extrapolate from Hegel’s position, and develop this pair of criteria with which to assess the validity of artwork, regardless of medium, regardless of context: Firstly, the notion of perceptual intrigue: the degree to which the manipulation of the material qualities of the work and its environmental context might stimulate perceptual experiences which cause the gaze to linger, and perceptual complacencies to be challenged; and secondly, the notion of conceptual intrigue: the degree to which a work affords viewers fresh intellectual insights on the theme or concept to which the work alludes. These two linked ideas become the criteria by which students are able to evaluate artwork in the complex context of an MA course.

Drivers of Creativity The rationale of the two theory modules, as stated in the course document for the Masters programme delivered in the Faculty of Art & Design, Swansea Metropolitan University of Wales Trinity Saint David, validated in 2011, explains: The relationship between theory and practice permeates the teaching strategies of the whole MA portfolio. (The portfolio consists of four pathways: Fine Art; Photography; Visual Communication and Textiles.) In particular, the two dialectical relationships which define us as human, and which generate the tensions that we believe drive all human creativity, form the underlying structure of the whole course – the practical modules and the taught theory modules. Those two dialectical relationships are: The opposition between the need for forming an individual identity and the need to conform to the conventions of the social group. The opposition between the need to engage with and manage interventions within our ecological relationship with Nature, and our drive to develop what might be termed ‘Culture’—ways of sharing and otherwise communicating our experiences of that ecological relationship.

RILEY: DRIVERS OF CREATIVITY

As well as addressing these two fundamental sources of creativity, the two ‘Drivers’ modules address issues pertinent to the effective channelling of the creative tensions: issues such as methods for gathering and collating necessary information and other data, and issues to do with the materiality of our practices, and the relationship between such materiality and philosophical aesthetics. The implication here is that creativity itself, within the context of the visual arts, can be understood as a process driven by the psychological need to resolve tensions, and resulting in a visible, material form which offers viewers fresh and original perceptual experiences and conceptual insights into the nature of the subject matter represented. The examples presented below serve to illustrate how an understanding of the underlying tensions which drive creativity can materialise in visual form.

Example of Response to Identified Tensions: 1 As illustration, Example 1 addresses the author’s practice, driven by the opposition between the unpredictability of natural processes, and our need to develop cultural codes through which such chaos may be ordered. Language itself is one such cultural code, the written forms of which are made up of what Ferdinand de Saussure (1916) termed arbitrary signs (alphabets) and structured by cultural conventions (rules of grammar and syntax). Where did the capacity for writing come from? Anthropological research by Iain Davidson and William Noble (1989) explains the capacity developed from our earlier capacity for depiction: the facility for inscribing marks resembling the appearance of the things we notice, and which hold importance in our lives, on surfaces capable of retaining such markings for long periods of time, thus becoming a repository of shareable information. Of course, once the notion of depiction is grasped, the idea that meaning might be given to a non-depictive sign – a symbol – is viable. Figures 1, 2 and 3 may be read as metaphors for the evolution of written codes made up of arbitrary symbols: in the background, a randomness of mark-making representing chaos. In the middle-ground, the square, its visual stability and solidness representing the human capacity for ordering, structuring. Through this capacity emerge the written symbols in the foreground, the universal, cross-cultural possibilities of written codes of communication:

Figure 1 Howard Riley 2012 Depiction Precedes Writing 1. Oil pastel, graphite on Saunders Waterford 300gsm paper. 29x38cms




Example of Response to Identified Tensions: 2 The work of MA student Laura Reynolds illustrates how a material practice can evolve through the attempt to resolve the tensions within the field of gender representation: how individual notions of gender identity can be challenging to the accepted mores of the social group. Her many-layered garment – a dress never intended to be worn but displayed - includes the delicacy of an underlay made of tissue paper, printed repeatedly with the word glimpse, associations of femininity exposed to the male gaze. Overlayering this is a skirt of canvas upon which are secured many bows of fragile paper, each obscuring from view an image of a male, naked except for an enigmatic, Magritte-like bowler hat and sock-suspenders, and carrying a briefcase,


metonymic of the mainly masculine world of city business. The vulnerability of these naked figures clashes with their attributes of male power.

Figure 4 Laura Reynolds 2013

Figure 5 Laura Reynolds 2013

The artist says of her work that “…it has a multi-layered approach, everything feeds into the influence, news, TV, radio, conversation, memories, everyday occurrences, you often start with a very clear idea of what you want to say, but then the aesthetic comes into it, and decisions are made on that basis. Looking at the work retrospectively it’s often easier to see what was at work at the time, influencing those decisions. For me, the empty dress is less a symbol of loss, however prevalent this may be in all our lives, but more as a vessel for dialogue, a container for thoughts and ideas.”


Example of Response to Identified Tensions: 3 MA student Christina Rowlands’ practice is ceramic-based, driven by the tensions produced when cultural interventions affect the natural world. Such a natural, earth-bound material seems suitably ironic as the means to express her despair at the way our society legitimises cultural interventions within the sphere of nature, condoning experimentation on live animals in order to improve the lot of our species at the expense of others.

Figure 6 Christina Rowlands 2013 Diseased Monkey (detail) clay tablet 33x26cms

Figure 7 Christina Rowlands 2013 Tiger clay tablet 27x19cms


Figures 6 and 7 illustrate a monkey and a tiger, each image engrained in the natural material context of clay, reminiscent of the images made at a time when humans were in a much more symbiotic relationship with their animal neighbours, but here representing both as animals made to suffer from human-induced diseases in the name of medical research. The gashes in the clay, made by scratching and scraping on the soft surface with a hard stylus, carry connotations of an angry urgency as well as physical damage, a statement full of shocking immediacy that such behaviour could be tolerated in a so-called civilised culture. The intentional simplicity and crudity of the marks gouged in the clay are in stark opposition to the still widely-held self-image of our technologically sophisticated culture. These pieces refute such self-deception, and graphically communicate the reality of our attitude towards the natural world as a source of exploitation for our own ends, a perception held even long after Ernst Haeckel introduced in 1866 the notion of ecology – the understanding that we cultural sophisticates are an integral part of the planetary household.. We hurt ourselves when we hurt our fellow inhabitants, these panels scream.

Example of Response to Identified Tensions: 4 MA graduate Paul Woodford’s installation and accompanying soundtrack were inspired by the the understanding that we encode our individuality through the systems of objects (Baudrillard 1988) we acquire over time: each item within the installation and each clip of the soundtrack become metonymic of a period of time or a series of personal experiences. He plays on the irony that although each item is selected on the basis of individual choice for personal reasons, they are in fact products of the social organisation we all share.

Figure 8 Paul Woodford 2013 Installation

He explains his installation with accompanying soundscape: The installation was inspired by the Drivers of Creativity MA seminars on semiotics and the research for the essay ‘The cultural artefacts we produce may confirm or challenge the social values of the society in which they are produced. Explore…’ The objects used for the installation were carefully chosen, metonyms for aspects of our material culture. The audio mixes codes to parallel the mixed state of the world and the mixed state of


our consciousness. I was constructing an 'open work/text', I was providing a means of navigation, clues, signposts so that the viewer is positioned alongside the artist. After wandering those intertextual pathways perhaps both, at the end of the walk, might have something to talk about in the pub.

Conclusion The examples presented in this article illustrate the potential for creative practices across a range of activities and media, when those practices are driven by an understanding of the underlying human need to resolve tensions brought about by the basic human dilemmas identified in the Introduction. Studio practices such as illustrated in the examples provide students with opportunities for gaining more insight into their own identities, and the ways that identity recognition can often have an impact upon individual’s creativity. The drive to resolve those tensions occurring between the need to be seen as an individual and the need to be accepted within the social group becomes itself a source of creativity. Moreover, the quality of work produced may be monitored throughout the process of production by a constant assessment of the balance between those two criteria of quality: conceptual intrigue and perceptual intrigue. Within the context of a Masters teaching programme, such accessible criteria for the judgement of quality empower students’ abilities in assessing their own work and that of others.


REFERENCES Baudrillard, J. 1988. “The System of Objects.” In Selected Writings. Cambridge: Polity Press. 10–28. Davidson, I. and Noble, W. 1989. “The Archaeology of Perception.” Current Anthropology 30, no. 2: 125–155. Graham, G. 1997. Philosophy of the Arts. London: Routledge. Kreitler, H. & Kreitler, S. 1972. Psychology of the Arts. Durham, NC: Duke University. Saussure, F. de. 1916(1974). Course in General Linguistics. Glasgow: Fontana/Collins.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS Howard Riley: Head of School of Research and Postgraduate Studies, Dynevor Centre for Art, Design, and Media, Swansea Metropolitan University of Wales Trinity Saint David, Swansea, Wales, UK

The International Journal of Arts Education is one of four thematically focused journals in the collection of journals that support the Arts and Society knowledge community—its journals, book series, conference and online community. The journal explores teaching and learning through and about the arts, including arts practices, performance studies, arts history and digital media. As well as papers of a traditional scholarly type, this journal invites presentations of practice—including documentation of curricular practices and exegeses of the effects of those practices that can with equal validity be interrogated through a process of academic peer review. The International Journal of Arts Education is a peerreviewed scholarly journal.

ISSN 2326-9944