Potential External, Internal Examiners and Convenor
We discussed the roles of the two examiners for my viva and also the convenor role, hoping to find the perfection combination. We are now almost at the point where my first supervisor can discuss with the people concerned. I have agreed to provide 300 words abstract as an introduction to my research. All this talking about examiners gives an early impression that the end is in sight but in fact I still have fifteen months to go!
Printing Day considering Surfaces
I briefed my supervisors on the printing day and the detail of the papers that I think best serve my work. We also discussed the possibility of producing a handmade book in large format rather than submitting a commercially printed book. In this context, my first supervisor suggested Peacock Visual Arts based in Aberdeen.
There are benefits of the handmade option, not least that I have more control over quality, schedules and delivery as well as being able to include late practice that might be precluded by an early commercial deadline. I also like the idea of producing a personal, individual and beautiful book. I now plan to visit the Artists’ Book Collection at DJCAD in early September.
Structure of Thesis
We also discussed the structure of my thesis and the various options I had considered. At this early stage, my supervisors were supportive of the chosen model below:
Thesis Structure Model 1 – Alison Price, June 2022
Submission of First Draft of Thesis
My supervisors confirmed that a mid-August delivery of the 1st draft was fine. They confirmed they would provide feedback to me at a meeting on Tuesday 13 September in Dundee. I am pleased that we can do this face-to-face.
Finally, we reviewed some images I had taken at Loch Cill Chriosd. Here is one of their favourites.
Metaphor 100 – Alison Price, June 2022
They confirmed that I should do more work in challenging weather conditions as these images worked well!
Hello Alison. Forgive a comment, out of the blue, and some time since I said anything else…
I just looked at your thesis structure, and I’m sure that you are very familiar with all this, and will have discussed it a lot with Bob and your supervisors, so forgive my intrusion, but to me there’s something significant missing from the structure.
You speak of ‘reflection ON’ but there’s nothing about ‘reflection IN’ nor about ‘reflexivity’. To my way of thinking, the purpose of the PhD is to shape your practice both for the future and while engaged in the act of image-making.
To me, one of Schon’s significant contributions to understanding professional development was to recognise that there’s a progression from reflecting on, reflecting in (technically), [reflecting in (aesthetically)], and reflecting in (affectively). The latter being reflexivity. So, the thesis from my perspective ought to be driven by questions of “how do I respond emotionally differently when creating my work now compared to how I did in the past?”
Probably not helpful at all, but if nothing else, this might be a challenge that an external could bring.
Best wishes
Graham
Good to hear from you Graham and a very helpful comment. I remember Schon’s work and you are right to remind me of its relevance in relation to the structure of the PhD and my journey through practice. Thank you for taking the time to do so.