Interrogating Creative Theory and Creative Work: Inside the Games Studio

The expansion of creative and cultural industries has provided a rich source for theoretical claims and commentary. Much of this reproduces and extends the idea that autonomy is the defining feature of both enterprises and workers. Drawing on evidence from research into Australian development studios in the global digital games industry, the article interrogates claims concerning autonomy and related issues of insecurity and intensity, skill and specialisation, work–play boundaries, identity and attachments. In seeking to reconnect changes in creative labour to the wider production environment and political economy, an argument is advanced that autonomy is deeply contextual and contested as a dimension of the processes of capturing value for firms and workers.

Negotiating indeterminacy in studio teaching: Using the zones of material and immaterial play to shape pedagogies and practices in art

The processes of studio-based teaching in visual art are often still tied to traditional models of discrete disciplines and largely immersed in skill-based learning. These approaches to training artists are also tied to an individual model of art practice that is clearly defined by the boundaries of those disciplines. This paper will explain how the open studio program at QUT can be broadly understood as an action research model of learning that ‘plays’ with the post-medium, post-studio genealogies and zones of contemporary art. This emphasises developing conceptual, contextual and formal skills as essential for engaging with and practicing in the often-indeterminate spatio-temporal sites of studio teaching. It will explore how this approach looks to Sutton-Smith’s observations on the role of play and Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development in early childhood learning as a way to develop strategies for promoting creative learning environments that are collaborative and self sustainable. Social, cultural, political and philosophical dialogues are examined as they relate to art practice with the aim of forming the shared interests, aims, and ambitions of graduating students into self initiated collectives or ARIs.

The space of make: A topological account of the studio

Approaches to art-practice-as-research tend to draw a distinction between the processes of creative practice and scholarly reflection. According to this template, the two sites of activity – studio/desk, work/writing, body/mind – form the ‘correlative’ entity known as research. Creative research is said to be produced by the navigation of world and thought: spaces that exist in a continual state of tension with one another. Either we have the studio tethered to brute reality while the desk floats free as a site for the fluid cross-pollination of texts and concepts. Or alternatively, the studio is characterized by the amorphous, intuitive play of forms and ideas, while the desk represents its cartography, mapping and fixing its various fluidities. In either case, the research status of art practice is figured as a fundamentally riven space. However, the nascent philosophy of Speculative Realism proposes a different ontology – one in which the space of human activity comprises its own reality, independent of human perception. The challenge it poses to traditional metaphysics is to rethink the world as if it were a real space. When applied to practice-led research, this reconceptualization challenges the creative researcher to consider creative research as a contiguous space – a topology where thinking and making are not dichotomous points but inflections in an amorphous and dynamic field. Instead of being subject to the vertical tension between earth and air, a topology of practice emphasizes its encapsulated, undulating reality – an agentive ‘object’ formed according to properties of connectedness, movement and differentiation. Taking the central ideas of Quentin Meillassoux and Graham Harman as a point of departure, this paper will provide a speculative account of the interplay of spatialities that characterise the author’s studio practice. In so doing, the paper will model the innovative methodological potential produced by the analysis of topological dimensions of the studio and the way they can be said to move beyond the ‘geo-critical’ divide.

A different kind of studio: Reflecting on the open studio and the artist-teacher

For more than 15 years, QUT’s Visual Arts discipline has employed a teaching model known as the ‘open studio’ in their undergraduate BFA program. Distinct from the other models of studio degrees in Australia, the open studio approach emphasizes individual practice by focusing on experimentation, collaboration and cross-disciplinary activities. However, while this activity proves to be highly relevant to exploring and participating in the ‘post medium’ nature of much contemporary art, the open studio also presents a complex of affecting challenges to the artist-teacher. The open studio, it can be argued, produces a different type of student than traditional, discipline-specific art programs – but it also produces a different kind of artist-teacher. In this paper, the authors will provide a reflection on their own experiences as artists and studio lecturers involved with the two ‘bookends’ of the QUT studio program – first year and third year. Using these separate contexts as case studies, the authors will discuss the transformative qualities of the open studio as it is adapted to the particularities of each cohort and the curricular needs of each year level. In particular, the authors will explore the way the teaching experience has influenced and positively challenged their individual (and paradoxically) discipline-focussed, studio practices. It is generally accepted that the teaching of art needs to be continually reconceptualised in response to the changing conditions of contemporary art, culture and technology. This paper will articulate how the authors have worked at that reconceptualisation within both their teaching and studio practices and so practically demonstrate the complex dialogic processes inherent to the teaching of the visual arts studio.

The ways of things: Objects in the studio

Conventions of the studio presuppose the artist as the active agent, imposing his/her will upon and through objects that remain essentially inert. However, this characterisation of practice overlooks the complex object dynamics that underpin the art-making process. Far from passive entities, objects are resistant, ‘speaking back’ to the artist, impressing their will upon their surroundings. Objects stick to one another, fall over, drip, spill, spatter and chip one another. Objects support, dismantle, cover and transform one another. Objects are both the apparatus of the studio and its products. It can be argued that the work of art is as much shaped by objects as it is by human impulse. Within this alternate ontology, the artist becomes but one element in a constellation of objects. Drawing upon Graham Harman’s Object-Oriented Ontology and a selection of photographs of my studio processes, this practice-led paper will explore the notion of agentive objects and the ways in which the contemporary art studio can be reconsidered as a primary site for the production of new object relationships.

Cinema Cities, Media Cities: The Contemporary International Studio Complex

This report, written for the Australian Film Commission (now Screen Australia) is the first major study of the development and role of studio complexes in the spread of film production around the world. The report is divided in to five chapters. First, it examines policy-making around studios, including government support for new facilities around the world. Second, it situates the phenomenon of the contemporary studio complex within the international production ecology. Third, it provides examples of the three types of studio complex: production precinct; cinema city; and media city. Fourth, it describes the networks of production that sustain studios. And fifth it explores the place of the studio in the relationship between 'local' and international production.

Caught in the act of collaboration: Students’ experiences of collective learning within a real-world design studio context

This study is an evaluation of design students’ perceptions of the benefits of collective learning in a real-world collaborative design studio. Third year students worked in inter-disciplinary teams representing architecture, interior design, landscape architecture, and industrial design. Responding to a real-world brief and in consultation with an industry partner client and early childhood education pre-service teachers, the teams were required to collectively propose a design response for a community-based child and family centre, on an iconic koala sanctuary site. Data were collected using several methods including a participatory action research method, through the form of a large analogue, collaborative jigsaw puzzle. Using a grounded theory methodology, qualitative data were thematically analysed to reveal six distinct aspects of collaboration, which positively impacted the students’ learning experience. The results of this study include recommendations for improving real world collaboration in the design studio in preparation for students’ transition into professional practice.

Survey : The design studio now

In this book for the AASA I provide a response to the question asked by the editors: What is Architecture Studio?

Design studio terrains: Mapping the learning landscapes of Australian architectural education

It has been nearly 25 years since the problems associated with passive learning in large undergraduate classes were first established by McDermott (1991). STEM education, for example North Carolina State University’s SCALE-UP project, has subsequently been influenced by some unique aspects of design studio education. While there are now many institutions applying SCALE-UP or similar approaches to enable lively interaction, enhanced learning, increased student engagement, and to teach many different content areas to classes of all sizes, nearly all of these have remained in the STEM fields (Beichner, 2008). Architectural education, although originally at the forefront of this field, has arguably been left behind. Architectural practice is undergoing significant change, globally. Access to new technology and the development of specialised architectural documentation software has scaffolded new building procurement methods and allowed consultant teams to work more collaboratively, efficiently and even across different time zones. Up until recently, the spatial arrangements, pedagogical approaches, and project work outcomes in the architectural design studio, have not been dissimilar to its inception. It is not possible to keep operating architectural design studios the same way that they have for the past two hundred years, with this new injection of high-end technology and personal mobile Wi-Fi enabled devices. Employing a grounded theory methodology, this study reviews the current provision of architectural design learning terrains across a range of tertiary institutions, in Australia. Some suggestions are provided for how these spaces could be modified to address the changing nature of the profession, and implications for how these changes may impact the design of future SCALE-UP type spaces outside of the discipline of architecture, are also explored.

The Art of Studio Teaching

This project began in 2013, with the award of an internal QUT Teaching and Learning grant. The task we wished to undertake was to document and better understand the role of studio teaching practice in the Creative Industries Faculty. While it was well understood that the Faculty had long used studio pedagogies as a key part of its teaching approach, organizational and other changes made it productive and timely to consider how the various study areas within the Faculty were approaching studio teaching. Chief among these changes were innovations in the use of technology in teaching, and at an organizational level the merging of what were once two schools within different faculties into a newly-structured Creative Industries Faculty. The new faculty consists of two schools, Media, Entertainment and Creative Art (MECA) and Design. We hoped to discover more about how studio techniques were developing alongside an ever-increasing number of options for content delivery, assessment, and interaction with students. And naturally we wanted to understand such developments across the broad range of nineteen study areas now part of the Creative Industries Faculty. This e-book represents the first part of our project, which in the main consisted in observing the teaching practices used in eight units across the Faculty, and then interviews with the unit coordinators involved. In choosing units, we opted for a broad opening definition of ‘studio’ to include not only traditional studios but also workshops and tutorials in which we could identify a component of studio teaching as enumerated by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council’s Studio Teaching Project: • A culture, a creative community created by a group of students and studio teachers working together for periods of time • A mode of teaching and learning where students and studio teachers interact in a creative and reflective process • A program of projects and activities where content is structured to enable ‘learning in action’ • A physical space or constructed environment in which the teaching and learning can take place (Source: http://www.studioteaching.org/?page=what_is_studio) The units we chose to observe, and which we hoped would represent something of the diversity of our study areas, were: • Dance Project 1 • Furniture Studies • Wearable Architecture • Fashion Design 4 • Industrial Design 6 • Advanced Writing Practice 3 • Introduction to Creative Writing • Studio Art Practice 2 Over the course of two semesters in 2013, we attended classes, presentations, and studio time in these units, and then conducted interviews that we felt would give further insight into both individual and discipline-specific approaches to studio pedagogies. We asked the same questions in each of the interviews: • Could you describe the main focus and aims of your unit? • How do you use studio time to achieve those aims? • Can you give us an example of the kind of activities you use in your studio teaching? • What does/do these example(s) achieve in terms of learning outcomes? • What, if any, is the role of technology in your studio teaching practice? • What do you consider distinctive about your approach to studio teaching, or the approach taken in your discipline area? The unit coordinators’ responses to these questions form some of the most interesting and valuable material in this book, and point to both consistencies in approach and teaching philosophies, as well as areas of difference. We believe that both can help to raise our critical awareness of studio teaching, and provide points of comparison for the future development of studio pedagogy in the Creative Industries. In each of the following pages, the interviews are placed alongside written descriptions of the units, their aims and outcomes, assessment models, and where possible photographs and video footage, as well as additional resources that may be useful to others engaged in studio teaching.

Care for care: Studio REV's strategies of engagement

The artists at Studio REV-, along with their allies in the broader non-profit sector, address domestic workers’ rights in the United States. As a social practice art project, NannyVan works to improve how information about domestic rights is disseminated to these workers, whether nannies, elder caregivers or others. As part of a larger project named CareForce, the NannyVan project shows an ethics of care by using design traces as tactics and transversal methods as strategies.