Any art teacher who strives to link artmaking to

the lives and interests of students understands

the importance of personal connections.

Interdisciplinary Study:Research as Part of Artmaking

BY PAULA EUBANKS

As education budgets shrink, art teachersneed to find ways to position the studyof art closer to mainstream academicsby exploring concepts that cut across

disciplinary boundaries. Art teachers can chal-

lenge students to do serious and thorough researchabout subject matter partnering with teachers inother areas to select subject matter that is alreadypart of the curriculum or go beyond it for extracredit. Supported by at least two teachers, thestudents gather both visual and verbal informationand make art that is based on a solid grasp of bothfacts and underlying concepts or big ideasembedded in the research.

what does this look like? How does is work? The artistsdiscussed here, Cheryl Goldsleger and Joe Peragine, lookoutward as they mine data about their subject matter andinward for a lens through which to focus it. They gathervisual and verbal information about their subjects, andwhen they begin to use the data in their work, they focuson how it relates to personally felt issues and problems.They take the data apart and put it back together, trans-forming it in a way that makes sense to them, makingcomplex associations, often using metaphor to create newmeaning. This is a model for interdisciplinary study withunifying themes in which visual art is the expression ofideas supported by solid research and, conversely, theresearch is extended by the artmaking. In this way studentsreinforce what they learn by expressing it visually. I willshow how research fits into the creative process for theartists, consider some art historical precedents, explorehow two artists and a scientist integrate research in otherfields with art, and discuss classroom application.

Research as Part of the Creative Processand Creativity Theories

Research is usually considered a scientific rather thanan artistic exploration. Connecting research andartmaking requires an interpretation of the stages of thecreative process. Wallas (1926) defines the stages or phasesof the creative process as preparation, incubation,illumination, and verification. In the case of the artistsdiscussed here, preparation could be defined to includeresearch. In a more recent study about the creative processspecific to artists. Mace and Ward (2002) describe thecomplexity and fluidity of the artistic creative process as1) conception, 2) idea development, 3) making the art,and 4) completion. Idea development is much likepreparation in the Wallas model. Coldsleger and Peraginedescribe their creative processes as very similar to thesemodels. As part of preparation or idea development, theydo research.

Any art teacher who strives to link artmaking to the livesand interests of students understands the importance ofpersonal connections. Getzel and Cziksentmihalyi .studiedthe creative process in college-level art students and foundthey were "inspired by personally felt problems" (Getzel &Cziksentmihalyi, 1976, p. 77). Similarly, in Studio Art asResearch Practice: Inquiry in the Visual Arts, Sullivan laysout a basis for considering artmaking as research activityin which he defines a research problem as "broad but alsopersonally relevant" (2004, p. 102.). Walker (2001), writingfor K-12 art teachers, also explores personal connection asimportant in artmaking. Both Goldsleger and Peragine cantrack interest in their subject matter to a personal issue thatbecomes a theme (Ulbricht, 1998) or a big idea (Jacobs,1989; Walker, 2001) that runs like a thread though all theirwork. This is consistent with today's post-modern K-12 arteducation emphasizing personal connections in additionto skill building and formal concerns.

48 ART EDUCATION / March 2012

Art Historical PrecedentsDoing research as part of artmaking is not a new idea.

Theodore Gericault (1791-1824) conducted meticuloushistorical research for the Rafl of the Medusa. He read publishedaccounts and interviewed survivors of a famous shipwreck tolearn the facts and be inspired. He collected documents andinterviewed survivors. He also did technical research by visitingthe morgue at Hôpital Beaujon and filling his studio withcadavers so that he could accurately draw the figures in hispainting. As part of his idea development, he did a series ofpreparatory drawings that told the story of the events he hadresearched and chose to show the moment when a rescue ship isspotted for the final composition (Aldhadeff, 1988; Eitner,1983).

Gericault researched human events; other artists, such asMaria Sybilla Merian (1647-1717) did scientific research.Merian, born into a family of artists and printers, was a hybridartist/scientist. She did scientific research that paved the way forfuture biologists and especially ecologists. In South America,she hacked her way through the rain forests to observe insectsin their environment. Not satisfied to simply draw specimens ofbutterflies, she raised them so she could understand their lifecycle. She took notes as the eggs hatched into caterpillars,changed into pupae, and then finally butterflies. In her booksabout caterpillars she pioneered a holistic, ecological approach

by showing all the forms of an insect (caterpillar, pupa, andbutterfly) and by combining those insects with flowers andplants on which they depend. Like an artist, she attendedcarefully to formal concerns, adding extra flowers, plants,insects, etc. to add color and interest in her compositions. Herresearch was thorough, scientific, and groundbreaking(WettengI, 1998; Reitsma, 2009; Todd, 2007). Merians researchwas about subject matter, whereas Seurat researched formal andtechnical issues.

Rather than simply relying on his perceptions to depictaccurately what he saw, Georges Seurat (1859-1891), theoriginator of pointillism, studied scientific treatises and appliedthe laws of physics related to light and color in nature devel-oping a "formula for optical painting" (Homer, 1964, p. 157).Seurats research advanced his art; on the other hand, HansHaacke's (b. 1936) research is his art. He is also a hybrid, bothan artist and a social scientist (Becker & Walton, 1975), whoseresearch is often about power and money in the art world. Forexample, Shapsolsky et al. Manhattan Real Estate Holdings, AReal-Time Social System as of May 1, 1971, which was censoredbefore it opened at the Guggenheim, consisted of straightfor-ward photographs of 142 slum properties in Manhattan alongwith typewritten, carefully researched information about whoactually owned each property.

Two Artist/Researchers: Role Models for StudentsCheryl Goldsleger (b. 1951) a painter who often works in

encaustic, bases her most recent work on research about thefirst American women architects. Her artistic practice istransformative research (Sullivan, 2005). She investigatessubject matter by gathering both visual and verbal data. Shealso researches technical and formal issues.

Like Seurat, Goldsleger does technical research specific to art.She created computer models then worked with a lab at GeorgiaTech to make three-dimensional drawings and plasticarchitectural components for her paintings. Goldsleger exploresform such as composition, layering, and other abstract issues.She reads extensively about women architects and their work.Goldslegers research is as rigorous as any, but she is notsatisfied and wants to go further: "I want to do real research,not just what is convenient" (Goldsleger, 2004). Theorganization of all this data was limited. Goldsleger said, " Ithought to myself T need to get organized' which resulted in asimple filing system with only four folders" (Goldsleger, 2004).The organization is in her head.

Goldsleger gathers data during the preparation phase of thecreative process, and organizes it through at least partlyunconscious processes during the incubation phase (Wallas,1926). She frames it in terms of "getting an idea." She looks atimages, reads, and sketches until an idea arises. Her ideas seemto be the end point of an internal organizational process thatrequires both interesting visual material (architectural plansand drawings) and interesting concepts. Sometimes she found awoman architect with interesting ideas but unappealing visualmaterial. At other times visually interesting material was notaccompanied by interesting concepts:

I found a lot of work that I liked. It appealed to me just interms of the geometry and the kind of visual presenta-tion but they were the same old ideas in new clothes,ideas that did not relate to the overall theme of architec-ture in moving society in some way (Goldsleger, 2004).

She researched the architecture of Julia Morgan but couldn'tget an idea from the Hearst Gastle at San Simeon. She readmore, discovered that Morgan designed a number of women's

Cheryl Goldsleger, City Club 1,2005, graphite on mylar, 18" x 20".Used with permission.

March 2012 / ART EDUCATION 49

institutions, and finally decided to use her work for YoungWomen's Christian Associations and the Berkeley Women'sCity Club because they showed Morgan's commitment towomen and women's institutions. "She [Morgan] was verymuch supported by women who hired her to design thingsfor them and so maybe that actually speaks more about myinroads in this project than San Simeon, than some glitzycastle for a rich guy" (Goldsleger, 2004). When she found allthat she needed—exciting visual material and interestingideas—she moved into shifting back and forth betweenconsidering content and form, a phase described by Mace andWard (2002) as "making the art." Goldsleger said "The initialstages are very concrete stages where everything gets laid outand then once I start with the watercolor and pencils and sortof building up the values, that's when it starts to go more backand forth [between content and form] because I'll see that an

area needs [this or that]" (Goldsleger, 2004). Here the formand the subject matter merge and she does what Sullivan(2005) describes as "thinking in her medium."

The ideas behind the architecture are very important toGoldsleger. Before she began to research women architects,her drawings and paintings were based on architectureselected for its visual qualities but she did not read or studyabout the buildings or the builders: "[Before] it was just meand the architecture. [Then] it became some sort of atriangle... of me and the architecture and the overriding ideaof the architecture" (Goldsleger, 2004). Goldsleger provides arole model for students to delve deeply into the subject ofartwork—not just mine the visual material for imagery thatcan be appropriated, but analyze and interpret the materialand then synthesize their ideas through making visualimages.

Goldsleger provides a role

model for students to delve

deeply into the subject of

artwork—not just mine the

visual material for imagery

that can be appropriated, but

analyze and interpret the

material and then synthesize

their ideas through making

visual images.

rightJoe Peragin, corrugated tank.Images used with permission

50 ART EDUCATION / March 2012

Joe Peragine (b. 1961) is a painter, sculptor, and filmmakerwho thinks in multiple media. His exhibition. Hell onWheels, was based on in-depth research about Shermantanks. He works in a way that meets Sullivan's definition ofartistic practice as transformative research (Sullivan, 2005).He gathered both visual and verbal data, reading very widelyabout Sherman tanks: novels, historical accounts, andtechnical manuals. Peragine collected diagrams, preparatorydrawings, illustrations, photographs, and movies. He drewSherman tanks from both life and memory. His technicalresearch included learning sewing techniques in order tomake a tank out of duftle bags and a new method of glazingthe surface of his paintings by sanding between two coats of atwo-part resin.

Making art for Peragine involves developing metaphoricalmeanings: "It [the Sherman tank] is this wonderful metaphorin that something is built to perfect specification and thenyou try to modify it and everything you modify throws twoother things out of whack. In life it's that way too" (Peragine,2004). He learned how vulnerable the Sherman tank was onthe battlefield, in spite of its impenetrable appearance, so hebuilt tanks out of cardboard and fabric and drew tankdiagrams that broke them down into little pieces. His tanksare metaphors for life's frailty, a theme that runs through allof his work. A critic sees the personally felt connection: "Thetanks became metaphors for the artist's own insecurity in hisrole as paternal protector" (McClintock, 2005, p. 42).

About a method for organizing the data, Peragine said "Ihope one will emerge... I run down a lot of different paths inhopes that they will meet up at some point. If one becomes adead end |other] paths get wider" (Peragine, 2004). Heanalyzed and interpreted his research material beforetransforming visual material andideas into artwork so that histhinking is informed and deep.Like Goldsleger, the organizationis in his head. Wallas (1926) wouldsee the organization, analysis, andinterpretation as incubation.Peragine talked about a point inthe creative process when "theaesthetics of the drawing takeover" (Peragine, 2004) and aboutletting the work "speak back as I'mgoing" (Peragine, 2004) so thatthere is a kind of conversationbetween the artist and work. Inthis phase, form and contentmerge and, like Goldsleger, hethinks in his medium.

A Scientist and Art/Science ConnectionsScientist Carol Ruckdeschel lives and works at Cumberland

Island National Seashore where she researches the island'secology and its animals, reporting what she finds in booksand scientific papers. She has tracked the life and death of seaturtles on Cumberland Island for more than three decades.She investigates alligators, searching out their nests anddocumenting the details of their eating patterns. Recently sheanalyzed the stomach contents of 73 island shrews to seewhat they were eating and gain some insight into theirecology. Carol Ruckdeschel is a scientist who uses her artisticskills to support her scientific research. For her, drawing isintegral to her scientific practice:

I have always drawn as a way to help me see thingsbetter.... And if I miss something, which is rarely thecase, I can almost go to the key [scientific encyclo-pedia] without the animal because then I've got it inmy head (Ruckdeschel, 2004).

Her skills are especially evident in two books about seaturtles that she co-authored and illustrated (Ruckdeschel,Shoop, & Zug, 2000; Ruckdeschel & Shoop, 2006). She drawsdirectly from life rather than the usual practice of relying onexisting keys. She also does interpretive drawings of thingsshe imagines, such as the drawing that takes the viewerunderwater into a sea turtle's environment. Sometimes shedraws for the pleasure of it:

"Pictures kind of burn in your mind sometimes and youseem to go through cycles where you see beauty more thanreality... you start seeing shadows instead of the light andthen you know it's time to do some artwork" (Ruckdeshel,2004). Like Maria Sybilla Merian, she is a hybrid.

Carol Ruckdeshell,Underwater Turtle.

Used with permission.

March 2012 / ART EDUCATION 51

Carol Ruckdeshell, Nesting Turtles.Used with permission.

scientists have had an avocation in

arts and many artists have been amateur

or professional scientists. Scientists and

artists share similar psychological profiles

and the more artistic pursuits scientists

enjoy as adults, the more likely they are to

be successful as scientists (Root-Bernstein &

Root-Bernstein, 1999 & 2004).

Ruckdeschel is not alone in her combination of interests.Many scientists have had an avocation in arts and manyartists have been amateur or professional scientists.Scientists and artists share similar psychological profilesand the more artistic pursuits scientists enjoy as adults,the more hkely they are to be successful as scientists(Root-Bernstein & Root-Bernstein, 1999 & 2004).

ConclusionCreative people must integrate in a useful way diverse

skills, talents, and intellectual and aesthetic interests into afunctional whole if the combination that results is to be ofvalue (Root-Bernstein & Root-Bernstein, 2004). Thisrequires the ability to find useful points of contactbetween the fields—places where integration can bemeaningful, where science (or other disciplines) and artcan become a synergistic whole. This is possible whenresearch becomes part of the creative process, when aknowledge base informs artmaking, providing a contextin which meaning can be made.

This approach to artmaking has been recommended forK-12 students. In Teaching Meaning in Art Making,Walker (2001 ) describes art as an activity that creates newmeanings. She recommends beginning by building aknowledge base about the subject of the work in a waythat is consistent with what Goldsleger and Peragine do.By integrating disciplines in this way, art students doserious research, mining library and Internet under thedirection of partnering teachers who may need to guidestudents in the choice of topics to fit curriculum andavailable resources. Topics should be narrow enough toinclude specifics, broad enough to get sufficient material,visually and intellectually appealing, and connected to bigideas and personal interests. Combining visual elementscan be done with computer software or simply by usingtracing paper. Just as disciplines are integrated, so visualelements and conceptual ideas must be combined in thisopen-ended approach to making art. Asking students toreflect on their work and process should run like a threadthroughout.

Art can support research in other disciplines, as it doesfor Ruckdeschel, but research in other disciplines canalso inform and enrich artmaking, as it does forGoldsleger and Peragine. For the art to express a deepunderstanding, there must be what the Root-Bernsteinsterm a "functional integration" of disciplines, likeGoldsleger's triangle that includes the artist, the work,and the ideas behind the work.

Paula Eubanks is a retired Associate Professor of ArtEducation from Georgia State University. E-mail:pkeubanks@gmail.com

52 ART EDUCATION / March 2012

REFERENCESAldhadeff, A. (1988). The raft of the

Medusa: Gericault, art and race.Munich: Prestel.

Becker, H., & Walton, |. Social Scienceand the work of Hans Haacke. InFraming and being framed: Sevenworks 1970-75. New York: NewYork University Press.

Eitner, L. (1983). Cericault: His lifeand work. London: OrbisPublishing.

Getzels, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M.(1976) The creative vision: Alongitudinal study of problemfinding in art. New York: Wiley.

Goldsleger, C. (2004). Personalcommunication. May 25, 2004.

Homer, W. ( 1964). Seurat and thescience of painting. Cambridge,MA: MIT Press.

lacobs, H. (1989). Interdisciplinarycurriculum: Design andimplementation. Alexandria, VA:Association of Supervision andCurriculum Development.

McClintock, D. Hell on Wheels. ArtPapers. May 2005, p. 42.

Mace, M., & Ward, T. (2002).Modeling the creative process: Agrounded theory analysis ofcreativity in the domain of artmaking. Creativity ResearchJournal ¡4(2) 179-192.

Peragine, J. (2004). Personalcommunication, August 14, 2004.

Reitsma, E. (2009). Maria SybillaMerian & daughters: Women of artand science. Amsterdam/LosAngeles: The Rembrandt HouseMuseum/The J. Paul GettyMuseum.

Root-Bernstein, R., & Root-Bernstein,M. (1999). Sparks of genius: Thethirteen thinking tools of the world'smost creative people. Boston:Houghton Mifflin.

Root-Bernstein, R. & Root-Bernstein,M. (2004). Artistic scientists andscientific artists: The link betweenpolymathy and creativity. InRobert Sternberg, ElenaGrigorenki & [erome Singer, Eds.,Creativity: From potential torealization. Washington, DC:American PsychologicalAssociation.

Ruckdeschel, C , Shoop, C. R., & Zug,G. (2000). Sea turtles of theGeorgia coast. St. Marys, GA:Cumberland Island Museum.

Ruckdeschel, C , & Shoop, C.R.(2006). Se« turtles of the Atlanticand Gulf coasts of the UnitedStates. Athens, GA: University ofGeorgia Press.

Ruckdeschel, C. (2004). Personalcommunication, August, 14, 2004.

Sullivan, G. (2004). Studio art 3Sresearch practice. In Elliot Eisner& Michael Day, Eds., Handbook ofresearch and policy in arteducation. Mahwah, N): LawrenceErlbaum Associates.

Sullivan, G. (2005). Art practice asresearch: Inquiry in the visuai arts.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publications.

Tbdd, K. (2007). Chrysalis: MariaSybilla Merian and the secrets ofmetamorphosis. New York:

Harcourt, Inc.

Ulbricht, ). (1998). Interdi.sciplinaryart education reconsidered. Art

Education 51(4) 13-17.

Walker, S. (2001). Teaching meaning inart making. Worcester, MA: Davis

Publications.

Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought.New York: Harcourt Brace

Jovanovich, Inc.

WettengI, K. Ed. (1998). Maria SibyllaMerian: Artist and naturalist1647-1717. Stuttgart:Verlag GerdHatje.

Pursue your goals.Live your life.Messiah College graduate programs make it possible.

Master's in Art EducationWith a program and faculty reflecting Messiah's commitment to and

reputation for academic excellence, Messiah College's M.A. in art education

is designed to enhance your abilities as an artist educator in grades K-12.

• Two specialized thesis options: Studio or Research

• Courses are instantly applicable to your everyday work.

• A deferred tuition option is available.

New online class sessions every fall, spring and summer.

messiah.edu/arteducation 717.796.5061

Online I Flexible I Affordable

March 2012/ART EDUCATION 53

Copyright of Art Education is the property of National Art Education Association and its content may not be

copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written

permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.