READING DIARY for TT MAY PHD SESSION 2024, PUBLIC TALK - 'CREATIVE NONFICTION AND THE GENRE OF THESIS WITH ROBYN FERRELL'
For the May 2024 PhD public talk, I read the two suggested readings. READING 1: ‘An ambiguous genre’: thoughts on creative non-fiction and the exegesis - Rachel Robertson, Daniel Juckes, Marie O’Rourke and Renee Pettitt-Schipp, explores the possibilities of exegesis in the context of creative non-fiction writing and the Research Question Model used at Curtin University for creative theses.
The model suggests that the creative work and the exegesis are simply differently formatted approaches to address the same research question, and that integrating the two into the PhD dissertation/exegesis/thesis creates a solution to the theory/practice divide. Benefits of this model include accepting the authority and conventions of different disciplines to help researchers understand and communicate with different types of academic disciplines.
Robertson et al include Post Graduate Researchers working in non-fiction, where the distinction between creative and scholarly work can blur. They suggest a. that the voice and literature used in both parts of their theses may be similar, making it difficult to differentiate between the two, and b. that the insistence on distinctions between creative and exegetical work is questionable, especially in the context of creative non-fiction.
Increasingly a flexibility of guidelines, including the use of the essay form to conceptualize a creative non-fiction thesis, is proposed as a solution to the age-old discrimination. In creative practice-based or practice-led doctoral work, the obvious importance of both creative scholarly knowledge production, and the exegesis/thesis production to "academically justify" the creative work cannot be overlooked. As the work develops, the value of an organic approach to creative research and writing that allows for flexibility is discussed.
Because the creative and exegetical aspects were so entangled they were impossible to separate, some PGRs found that their research demanded an "integrated thesis" approach. This fusion required a shift, an acknowledgement of the challenges, and a need to allow for a fused or braided PhD thesis.
Overall, Robertson et al raises important questions about the distinction between creative and scholarly work (specifically in non-fiction, but this can readily apply to all PhD creative practice-led or practice-based research. And, they suggest alternative approaches to conceptualizing as well as (re-)structuring the creative (non-fiction) theses.
SUGGESTED READING 2: 'Exegetical essentials: a framing structure and template for a comprehensive exegesis in the creative arts' - Donna Lee Brien, Alison Owens, Gail Pittaway and Irene Waters'
Top 10 points include:
1. Exploration of issues surrounding the Curtin Research Question Model and the suggestion of increasingly flexible guidelines, including the use of the essay form for creative non-fiction theses.
2. A group discussion between co-authors re: input/data gathered in colleague and postgraduate emailed responses to several questions posed by Rachel.
3. Both creative and scholarly knowledge production are equally important for (practice-based or practice-led) doctoral work, and separate but connected (even integrated) PhD dissertation/exegesis/thesis is considered a viable way to manage this.
4. The PhD dissertation/exegesis/thesis is viewed as a theoretical discussion in direct dialogue with creative work, and a justification for creative work that may not be seen as "sufficient" in an academic sense. (A not-great predicament.)
5. The requirement to separate ways of knowing and modes of expression is seen as perpetuating divisions and prioritizations within academia.
6. Some PhD candidates initially intended to produce a parallel text thesis but later found that an integrated approach was more suitable for their research.
7. The essay genre is known for its transgression of boundaries and lack of a fixed definition, and, since and because of Barthes, who relied almost exclusively on the format, also for its academic acceptability.
8. Bensmaia argues that the essay complicates genres rather than being a single genre or a mixture of genres.
9. The essay can be seen as a way for genres to communicate with each other, making it a useful framework for integrated creative PhD dissertations/exegeses/theses.
10. Scholarly debate and trends in creative non-fiction publishing suggest a closer synthesis of the "traditional academic scholarly", and the creative, allowing for high-quality aesthetic works that are also high-quality academic scholarship.
Note: Included in the study, among others, are the following two charts (lists here), illustrating where creative works are currently and successfully being presented within PhD dissertations (exegeses or theses.) Basically, in order to create one coherent text, rather than including the creative work as an appendix, both models feature the creative work. In the first, the creative work framed by the 'Abstract' and the 'Introduction,' and in the second, it is framed by thesis 'Introduction' and the 'Literature Review' sections.
"THESIS STRUCTURE 1
Background/Preface (Abstract)
Creative work
Introduction including...
Research question
Literature review
Methodology
Results
Findings/Discussion
Conclusion"
“THESIS STRUCTURE 2
Background/Preface
Introduction including...
Research question
Creative work
Literature review
Methodology
Results
Findings/Discussion
Conclusion
*Table 2. Possible creative arts thesis formats, framing creative work with exegetical text (Brien 2017)"... p.14.
