Beyond the PhD, Frankenstein, Knowledge transfer

Knowledge transfer: turning my PhD research into an art exhibition

I haven’t blogged for some time, and that’s because I have been busy on what universities love to call KT – knowledge transfer. I have turned my PhD research into an art exhibition.

From my PhD creative project and exegesis – about 100,000 words all up – comes the first exhibition I have curated – My Monster: The human-animal hybrid  – at RMIT Gallery in Melbourne.  It opens on Thursday 28 June 6-8 pm, and runs to 18 August.

For those who know me as a writer, this evolution of my work into curating is actually not unexpected (my first degree was in visual art – and I have worked at RMIT Gallery for 8 years) – but it’s not the outcome I anticipated from my doctorate in Creative Media.

I thought the outcome would be a book, but what came first is an exhibition is based on my PhD research and taking this into a gallery is a form of knowledge transfer.

It has taken four years since graduating to get to this stage. Why so long? Well, it takes time to pitch new ideas from your research, to submit chapters to publications and conferences, and get knocked back, and resubmit. To pitch manuscript proposals and get rejected, to then pitch exhibition proposals, and have some people think the work is too confronting…it’s a long, tough road and you have to be prepared to love your ideas, research, and stay true to your concept, and think long haul.

Even after you get your doctorate, it takes time and perseverance and faith to keep going, and writing, and researching, just to get any traction for your work. And this is on top of your day job.

I had lots of ideas, images, artists and installations in mind over those four years as a sort of daydream ‘other idea’ about my research. Odd when I spend all my spare time in art galleries, and when I spend all the working week in a gallery…but I was so fixated on the words I thought the images were the optional extra, not the main game.

Then, when I was given the green light to go ahead with the exhibition at the start of this year, I had only six months to jump into action.

It was a tough gig but let me tell you, when someone actually does believe in your work [RMIT Gallery Acting Director Helen Rayment] and champions your research and the opportunity arises to do something with your research, you do whatever it takes to get the job done.

And the timing in the end was perfect – the opportunity arose in 2018 – in the 200th year of the anniversary of the publication of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.

Shelley’s seminal monster novel explores life and death and reanimating flesh. It is also the story of a hybrid outcast, for Frankenstein’s creature was made as a new species, from a combination of both human and animal parts.

Mythology and fiction have long entertained the fantasy of the animal and human fused into one being, and the metaphorical hybrid is embedded in mythology and folklore. The hybrids that appear in art can be whimsical, alluring, and confrontational. While hybrids shock and jolt with their appearance, they also offer an unsettling recognition of the disquieting unease we all feel about our place in the world.

Jazmina Cininas, Blood Sisters, 2016, linocut reduction, 69.5 x 56 cm. Image courtesy of the artist. Artwork features in My Monster: the human animal hybrid

Hybrids are the ultimate metaphor for the outsider. Their very existence is a political act, an affront. Like monsters of old, they are harbingers of a future we may not like, but are intent on creating through each twist and tweak of our species through biotechnology.

Welcome to the journey of My Monster: the human animal hybrid. It’s my PhD research finally seeing the light of day beyond the academic journals and conferences where it has had its publication and airing in front of the academic cohort.

But there is nothing dry and academic about this show, which is delves deeply into animal studies, women’s studies, mothering futures, feminism, critiques on biotechnology and explorations into immersive sound art as well as taxidermy, printmaking, painting, ceramics, sculpture, cinema, and more!

I have gathered together the following amazing artists Rose Agnew, Jane Alexander, Janet Beckhouse, Peter Booth, Jazmina Cininas, Kate Clark, Catherine Clover, Beth Croce, Julia deVille, Heri Dono, Peter Ellis, Moira Finucane, Rona Green, Ai Hasegawa, Rayner Hoff, Sam Jinks, Deborah Kelly, Bharti  Kher,  Deborah Klein, Oleg Kulik, Sam Leach, Norman Lindsay, Sidney Nolan,  Eko Nugroho, Patricia Piccinini, Kira O’Reilly & Jennifer Willet, Lisa Roet, Geoffrey Ricardo, Mithu Sen, Maja Smrekar, Ronnie van Hout, and (((20hz))).

Rona Green, Dusty Rhodes, 2011,
Rona Green, Dusty Rhodes, 2011, hand coloured linocut, 76 x 56 cm. Image courtesy of the artist and Australian Galleries. Art work features in My Monster: The human animal hybrid.

It’s been an incredible journey to translate my research into a visual form. Suddenly, footnotes can come alive as painting, quotes become immersive installations, and references to critical movies become – movies! Now that the exhibition nears completion, seems like it was meant to be all along.

But it’s also been a steep learning curve of taking academic research from the page into an art gallery…and all that curating a major exhibition entails.

Such as – commissioning new work, liaising with overseas artists via email, talking to local artists, juggling space, budget, freight and even wall colors and plinth sizes.

Not to mention writing the catalogue, making a film for the exhibition itself, writing the wall text (condensing 70,000 words of exegesis into 5 x 300 word wall panels…) AND…doing all the media and comms (which is my day job at the gallery). It’s been many late night and long weekends getting the exhibition together – as painfully familiar as doing the PhD and working full time, in fact (what a friend’s husband dubbed ‘the kamikaze method’).

But then, no one says knowledge transfer is a ‘zero cost’ activity; it takes effort and time to make it work.  The main difference is that from the start, I have had to think of a wide audience, and broadly extend my research. All those things your PhD supervisor says ‘now is not the time to be going down that path’ – well, with an exhibition, it is exactly the right time. Time to look at the societal impact of research, to ask the really important questions –

‘so what’, and ‘why now?’

In fact, as they are so concerned with – and deeply enmeshed with – their research, I don’t think many academics or curators actually stop and ask these two important questions;  ‘why should anyone care?’ and ‘why is this show important now?’

I was determined to have my answers ready!

Why should anyone care about human-animal hybrids? After all, we are talking about fictional characters from mythology and science fiction; and from folklore to vampires and werewolves; and from films like The Shape of WaterSplice and The Fly and…hang on, aren’t scientists creating pig-human embryos and human-sheep embryos….?

Right, then! Human-animal hybrids are big news because they have always been within the human imagination and creative expression…AND because we are live in an age of biotechnology where the almost human is right around the corner. How do we feel about this as a society? How do we cope ethically with the possible creation of people made from animal DNA or material?

Doesn’t this sound a lot like…Frankenstein? So – there we go – why the human animal hybrid matters, why we should care, and why now, in the 200th anniversary year of the publication of Frankenstein.

 

 

Advertisements
Appearance, University life

How hot are you? The harsh truth about gendered ageism in academia

barbie face

No one knows what you look like on radio. You can be fat, beyond middle aged, balding, but as long as your voice resonates on the airwaves and your mind and tongue are sharp, you are up for the job – especially if you are a man. Not so for those who flaunt their wares on the screen, however. In a visual medium, ageism will out.

It is a harsh truth of double standards in Hollywood that those in power – men – get to determine who will stay the distance, and who will fade out when they become unf-able – as hilariously revealed in a biting sketch by comedian Amy Schumer and starring Tina Fey, Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Patricia Arquette.

In ‘Last F-kable Day’ that aired in the season premiere of Inside Amy Schumer last week in the United States – and quickly went viral with more than one million views on YouTube – the ageism and sexism in Hollywood was exposed, revealing how women like Fey, Dreyfus and Arquette can look forward to being cast as elderly character actresses while their geriatric male cohorts are pared romantically on screen with women 30 years younger or more.

Women in the entertainment industry rely on their looks just as athletes and dancers rely on their bodies. However, their use by date is about their ‘f-ability’ not ‘ability’ and that, according to the men in power, goes off faster than yoghurt left on a sunny shelf.

But does this also apply to the hallowed halls of academia? In an environment increasingly trading on visual and brand appeal and – of course – pitching as it does to a young (undergraduate) audience, even an industry that supposedly trades on the cerebral isn’t immune to gendered ageism and ‘lookism’.

In fact, be warned – you are on show, not just your glorious brain. In the hotly competitive world of the emerging academic – to get anywhere, you have to be hot – oozing with looks, confidence, and ready for your close up as you are interviewed on your field of expertise.

female statue

As Daisy Dunn writes in her piece for The Telegraph: “To get anywhere, gender regardless, the academic has to think about how others will perceive him. The focus is on communicating academic ideas through a range of media, academic papers, books, conferences and public appearances. If you can’t speak it, you ain’t got it.”

In the age of MOOCS, when a virtual presence and amount of twitter followers counts as ‘media savvy’ and a cue therefore for ‘young’ and ‘modern’, does the Hollywood double standard of ageism and sexism come with the turf?

I have lost count of how many women over 60 who have told me that rising young (male) stars in the university system are ‘uncomfortable around mature women’. And that while older men can sink into the ‘gravitas’ of greying hair, paunch, and ill advised wardrobes, women have a harder and more demanding aesthetic to work.

The minute you start calling out ‘brand identity’ rather than ‘academic references’ you are entering the murky turf of the visual. In fact, there is indeed much academic research that supports the theory that women in academia are also hit by ageism and ‘lookism’.

A 2006 study that set out to explore employees’ experience and understandings of gender and age in higher education to identify if women in higher education experienced the double jeopardy of gendered ageism revealed that physical attractiveness and appearance are seen as relevant to the workplace in higher education.

In the first study to show female academics experience the triple jeopardy of gendered ageism and how they look i.e.“lookism”, authors Jacqueline Granleese (Norwich Business School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK) and Gemma Sayer (Norwich Business School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK) found that women, both academics and non‐academics, experience the double jeopardy of being discriminated against on the grounds of their age and gender in a way that men do not experience.

man statue

It is a sad truth that women are judged by their appearance and while men can be as lined, bald, and geriatric and grey as they like in academia without anyone complaining, women must rage against the dying of the light. By – first of all – dyeing their grey hair.

For women in academia as in Hollywood, appearances count, and do not be fooled into thinking you can get away with wearing outdated clothes, short no fuss ‘wash and wear’ hair, and using your money to jaunt about on overseas holidays (or research trips) when you should be injecting your face with botox and filling the lines of time with derma filler. Teeth whitening, radical weight loss, Spanx, a new wardrobe are mandatory – but hey, you are now TED Talk ready!

sculpture face

According to The Chronicle of Higher Education, research shows that students give better teaching evaluations to professors they think are attractive. “Sites like RateMyProfessors allow undergraduates to broadcast their feelings, sometimes in the crassest terms,” writes Robin Wilson.

So – if women are to be judged, what must they do? Play the game, rather than buck the system? That’s what the late, great Nora Ephron suggested, “There’s a reason why 40, 50, and 60 don’t look the way they used to, and it’s not because of feminism or better living through exercise. It’s because of hair dye.”

Probably all that anyone needs to know about looking fabulous and stylish over a certain age on campus can be found in Alyson Walsh’s blog That’s Not My Age. In her book ‘Style Forever’ Walsh writes that “I strongly believe you don’t have to have youth to have style”. And optimistically writes that “old is the new young”. Well, maybe not if you are hustling it in Hollywood.

Alas, it appears that under the Rules of Men, women are basically a time bomb waiting to go off – first with their biological clock and then with their ‘f-ability time code’ clicking for every day past the end of their biological clock (presumably both clocks don’t go off at once, or that could get messier than a terrorist attack).