Summary Paul Thomas
A summary of the discussion is generated from a number of interesting ideas around new modalities of publishing from the Leonardo 50th year Australian celebration session. A central theme of the discussion was based on the issue of expanding the role of visual language within the peer review system. There was a perceived need for Leonardo to establish a benchmark for standards of peer reviewing to communicate new standards that reflect artistic methodologies. With Leonardo’s desire to expand into new areas of publishing it should endeavor to see the privileging of written language over the visual language as being problematic. This would include exhibitions, artist’s presentations and online presentations and podcasts. An outcome would be if Leonardo tried to define what peer review processes in art and science for non-traditional research outputs look like globally.
The humanities struggle with publishing negative results that might well appear in the online science journals. The longevity of Leonardo is vitally important as it facilitates and democratises an expanded culture by adopting different new publication models and promoting practice-led research groups. Leonardo helps with status and it should see its longevity as a resource in a multitude of different ways.
Notes from discussion
Password – Star
- Open access is something to think about.
- In the arts, we don’t tend to publish negative results.
Journal of negative results.
This should matter in the arts.
- Retraction. Should there be retractions of “bad data”?
In art and humanities, we can’t stand to have a retraction.
Retraction is routine in the sciences.
- PLOS ONE https://www.plos.org/
- Open science here is PLOS’s argument re this: https://www.plos.org/open-access/
- The Artecta is a new for Leonardo online format.
- The network is there and how can we enlarge it participate
- Australia has a long history in working with Leonardo
and LEAF, emerging technologies.
- Artists are in danger of trying to fit in with written
- If you create beautiful formulas.
- Hybrid forms of reality there is not one reality if the idea is beautiful enough it will be a reality. (Ref Einstein)
- Kowtowing down to the strictures of language.
- We need to drive new languages.
- Where does art’s sense of inferiority come from?
Opened up to general discussion:
Julie Louise Bacon: Longevity is important it facilitates and
democratises an expanded culture with different publication/research groups. It helps with status.
Leonardo should see their longevity as a resource in
Facilitate a standard.
Richard Goodwin: Speculative grant writing is not how
science writes grants.
Fantasy component to grant writing.
We need to show science how we communicate a methodology
Julie Louise Bacon: Language is a tool in science.
Language is art’s medium not just a tool.
We need to archive the participation in the discourse.
Julie Louise Bacon:: We should not use retraction as it becomes a dangerous
Precedent. We need to leave a trace of the discourse.
Patricia Flanagan: “Project Anywhere” is an interesting model to consider — it is a global blind peer-reviewed exhibition program. There was an associated conference last year: http://www.projectanywhere.net/conference/
Prue Gibson: I wrote about Michel Serres (The
Natural Contract retracts certain points in an article on Wolf’s Lighthouse) retraction in that it was supportive of his original.
This is a way of leaving a trace
Alternative formats for publication.
Malcolm Riddock: He had been reading Leonardo for a long time and found it incredibly useful, therefore it should continue just as it is.
Lindsay Kelley: Peer reviewer people are not trained in this area. We need to establish if Leonardo could set a benchmark
on who to be endorsed to do peer reviewing
June Kim: Northern Territory University treat artists as researchers
Richard Goodwin: Once we understand as a culture that an exhibition is as good as a book.
Lindsay Kelley: A retraction is a form of reply.
Proactive in the field of parallel modernities
Ross Harley: How to redefine the network so it does not demonstrate
a hierarchy of power.
Lindsay Kelley: Peer reviewing anywhere. Expanded form of peer reviewing and what is being asked
Critical for the Leonardo format to exist.
Julie Louise Bacon