“Grim
up North?”
presentation
16th September 2016
This was my first academic presentation and it was
gratifying to be a part of a well-organised and well-attended symposium. The
symposium itself was supported by the Heritage Consortium of Universities and
the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC). It was ably organised by two
PhD researchers, Michael Reeve and Andrew McTominey. I've posted about the day itself here.
I presented on my
research by practice to date, with the title “Using Urban Wandering and Visual
Outcomes to investigate Northernness : How did I get here?”. Within my
powerpoint presentation, I used photos from my urban wandering as backdrops to
the slides, with the intention of adding context and interest to the paper.
I started by describing
how my practice is fuelled by my own lived experience and is an investigation
into what’s happened, and what is happening, to me – hence my subtitle, “how
did I get here?” (which also links back to my 3-minute presentation at the“Heritage Show & Tell” back in March – this presentation built on that
one). I then mentioned my emerging methodology of wandering and response to
investigate Northernness and positioned this as a synthesis of academic
research, wandering and visual outcome.
I went on to talk a
little about my own lived experience – my own personal narrative – as context
for my research, mentioning my family as Engineers and the trauma of redundancy
when the industry closed down. I explained that when I restarted my art
practice, it quickly became apparent that I was expressing “what’s inside me”.
I showed an example of my work (on the slide below), and that when I came to
write my MA proposal, I needed to express this in a more elegant written format
– hence the research question on the slide below. And that was how I “got
here”, i.e. presenting my work to a room full of historians!
Next, I talked a little
about my theoretical perspectives, admitting I had no background in heritage,
but quoting Harrison on heritage: the ideas of heritage concerning people,
places, objects and practices, and heritage only happening if something is at
risk – and obviously our industry was at so much risk that it disappeared. I
also quoted Bathmaker on life history as the life story in its social context,
which resonated with Jack Southern’s comments on microhistory earlier in the
day. I used these two points to illustrate my argument that the two work together
– heritage and identity, past and present.
After this came the
main point of the presentation – the urban wandering, and beyond. I showed some
images of my wandering from Woodhouse to Armley and talked about my purpose of
seeking Northernness, and how it then became clear to me that I was also moving
into the area of psychogeography, showing a definition of pyschogeogrpahy from
Tina Richardson. I talked about crossing the boundary into Armley, findng the
canal, the repurpsoed mill, factories derelict an in use, and how I took the
splashes of colour – e.g. the yellow of some skips – to be a sign of life
amidst the soot-ingrained bricks of the buildings. I told the story of me being
in my Dad’s space, but not our space together, and yet it was no longer his
space as the industy had moved on – an example of the quotidian of yesterday
forming the heritage of today. I explained that this had been a really direct
and immersive experience of the theoretical perspectives of heritage and
identity and I re-quoted Richardson’s quote of Abdelhafid Khatib, one of the
founders of psychogeography: “at the same time as being a form of action, it is
a means of knowledge”.
 |
| Explaining one of the Armley abstracts (photo: Mel Dewey) |
 |
| Further explanations about developing a visual language to depict embodied experience (photo : Mel Dewey) |
Explaining that this
was the start of a personal visual language of Northernness, I went on to talk
about how it had taken on a life beyond the wandering, giving a new sense of
direction and purpose. It carried on in car journeys, with me taking pictures
of anything and everything I found interesting and industrial and Northern, and
I cited the example of the pylon abstracts, produced using the same methodology
as the Armley abstracts from the picture in the slide below. I concluded this
section with images of some outcomes from the Holbeck wandering, explaining
that I had introduced printing using the shapes I’d seen.
My talk finished with a
brief mention of my next steps: more visual and academic research, the
possibility of collaboration, and the definite undertaking of further
wanderings.
Reflection
I’d rehearsed the talk
a few times, and had tested it out on a couple of people to ensure there was a
logical flow, so I was quite confident about getting up and presenting. That
said, I was still nervous when I stood up. However, it went well, I said what I
wanted to say, only one slide got stuck, and I was more or less within my
15-minute slot.
It was clear that my
research was at a much earlier stage than most of the other presenters, who
were all PhD candidates or Early Career Researchers. However, I didn’t see this
as a problem, simply a fact. There was a difference in presentation style and
that’s something for me to consider
if/when I do another presentation. My presentation was much more
personal than the others, although that is in part because my research by art practice
is very personal. The others’ talks were clearly part of their ongoing research
– a window into their research at this time, so to speak – whereas my
presentation was a business-style affair with a definite beginning, middle and
end and slides that had been prepared specifically for the occasion (some
others had obviously done this, some not). I prefer the business-style presentation
but I do wonder if perhaps mine was a little too personal on this occasion;
however, there is no escaping that my life history is the basis of my research.
I also made a point of including lots of visuals in my presentation rather than
just loads of text. I do think this helped maintain interest.
After my panel, some
people came up to talk to me. I hadn’t anticipated this and it was a shock, and
a pleasant surprise, to find that people were interested in my work. The
psychogeography element definitely captured people’s imagination. I think most
people in the audience were from some kind of history background and I think
the psychogeography angle gave them a way into my art practice. This was an interesting
and potentially useful revelation. One participant told me he had done something
similar as part of his undergraduate studies and that he had actually walked to
some of the same places as myself. He did say he would share his writings with
me but that hasn’t happened yet, which is a shame. He was also complimentary
about my art work which was really gratifying.
Cate Benincasa, who was
formerly a lecturer at Leeds College of Art and is now a Senior Lecturer at the
University of Huddersfield was really encouraging and complementary about my
talk and told me I had pitched it at the right level. That was really useful and
encouraging feedback. She also complemented me on the red pylon abstract which
I was very pleased about.
I realised afterwards
that this is the first time I’ve shown my recent work to anyone publicly. I’m
glad I didn’t realise it beforehand or I would have been very nervous. To have
the work complemented was fantastic.
Dr Henry Irving of
Leeds Beckett University also approached me regarding a possible participation
in Leeds Beckett’s “Being Human” festival event, when he and colleagues will
lead participants on short walks around Leeds City Centre and help them produce
written response. He was interested in possibly producing visual responses.
This is really interesting and I hope it will come off.
The whole experience
was a really good one and I hope I can give another paper at some point. Although
the preparation took a long time, the research I did will form the basis of my
dissertation, which I will write on the same topic.
