Scholarship as an Art Form

Methodology

Scholarship, from the hard sciences to the insightful humanities, has been characterized in many different ways since we started to think about this important human activity as an object of study in its own right.1 To name two acclaimed examples: in the early twentieth century BCE, Max Weber denoted science as a vocation, and a few decades afterwards, Thomas Kuhn revolutionized our theoretical notions about the trajectory of the scientific endeavor with his idea of progress in this regard as the shift from and towards different paradigms instead of incremental steps toward a delineated goal that hardly changes.2 All such grand theories about the pursuit of knowledge in a systematic way through communities of dedicated scholars and scientists have their defenders and detractors, and – as with most bold ideas – we can point to many necessary nuances.3 And this is perhaps what makes the works of theorists like Weber and Kuhn so well-known, that we can endlessly debate them. But today, I want to discuss one adjacent idea which is less famous, that of scholarship as an aesthetic or even an art form.

This blog is also available in Dutch.

The Aesthetics of the Pursuit of Knowledge

The idea of scholarship as an aesthetic is perhaps the most immediate. Though the word may seem rather posh, this is not an elusive notion which is far removed from our everyday experience. On the contrary, it is very intuitive! If we picture a scholar or a scientist, we immediately tend to have a rather clear picture in our head. Scientist are always busy in their high-tech labs, for example, wearing spotless white coats that could illuminate a forest road on a moonlit night. And those working in the humanities and adjacent fields might as well have stocks in tweed, arm patches, and bow ties, while they can mostly be found at their antique desks surrounded by ponderous tomes.4 And these assumptions are sometimes the detriment of those actually engaging in the pursuit of knowledge! J.R.R. Tolkien, the famous writer who was also a professor of philology, did not appreciate that a magazine wanted to photograph him while he was sitting at his desk solemnly writing or working on his craft. It would not mirror how his work actually took shape, he wrote to the journalists that had interviewed him.5 But the people working at the magazine can hardly be faulted for the image they intended to put with their journalists’ article. These specific brands of the aesthetics of scholarship and its practitioners are all around us, from movies and television series, to books and comics.6

There is, however, a more serious component to the described impressions of how scholars and scientists are supposed to look. Because these assumptions may also inform the manner in which a scholar or a scientist should look, at least in the eyes of the average person or even those hiring for relevant jobs. As such, persons who do not fit part of such stereotypes may have a harder time to be accepted as an expert or to get to work in (certain) research fields.7 And this can also intersect with other ways of discrimination, such as racism, misogyny, and ableism, amongst many of myriad reasons why a lot of people are still not treated equitably – both by the institutions of their societies as well as in their day-to-day life.8

The deconstruction of this ubiquitous image of researchers is therefore at the forefront of attempts to reshape who is generally seen as an expert. At a Dutch university in the city of Leiden, for example, there used to be a gallery with paintings of the most famous professors from the institution’s storied history. In 2016 an initiative was launched to diversify the gallery with those academic superstars who were not elderly gentlemen.9 Along these lines, it can be assumed, we may employ well-known aesthetic aspects of the pursuit of knowledge in an organized way with the goal of addressing discriminatory assumptions and practices in academia and perhaps even wider society.10

And this is not the only way in which the current importance and influence exerted by such aesthetics may play a benign role in all our lives. Because the pursuit of knowledge, be it through study or science, can also just be beautiful.11 Think of the tightly structured chaos in a laboratory, the beautiful buildings that often comprise college campuses and are dotted with studying, teaching, and collaborating persons, the solemn silence in university libraries, and the disordered elegance of the goings on in many a lecture hall – the look, feel, and perhaps even smell of organized research and education is an experience that offers its own rewards.12 And this is something that even great artists have picked up on. Some of the most famous paintings in the world are connected to the pursuit of knowledge. If I may offer one example that you probably know already: De Anatomische Les van dr. Nicolas Tulp (Eng: The Anatomy Lecture of dr. Nicolas Tulp) by Rembrandt van Rijn, is a gruesome illustration of the search for more information about the human body and, at the same time, can be used to illustrate many of the adjacent ethical dilemmas of – in this example – health research, including the seemingly neglected interests of the deceased on the operating table.13

But the idea of scholarship – including all imaginable forms of research, from observing amino acids to literary reviews – as an art form is not confined to aesthetics. Laboratories, studies, and teaching facilities may be picturesque in their own right, as we saw above, but what is eventually produced there might also be considered art.

Research Products as Art

Because the findings and reporting of science can offer more than knowledge, they themselves can be viewed – and enjoyed – as art! To emphasize, aesthetics should play absolutely no part whatsoever in the use and persuasiveness of scientific data or scholarly research.14 But these data and that research may be admired nonetheless as pieces of art. For example, a book I am currently reading – Statistics: A Very Short Introduction by David Hand – just brims with admiration for the beauty that can be found in the formulas, language, and models in which we try to catch the phenomena that make up the field of mathematics.15 And various products of scholarship have been compared to as many works of art.16 But perhaps the most accessible way in which the results of the organized pursuit of knowledge, be it scientific experiments or the analyses conducted within the humanities, can be experienced as an art form are perhaps the papers, chapters, and books written by scholars and scientists on the basis of their research.

This may not be that surprising. The wording of those papers, chapters, and books is a complicated affair. The language used by researchers (mostly) does not only intend to convey raw facts, but often also aims to explain, to enthuse, and perhaps even to convince.17 And when it happens to be the case that their contents are merely factual, the written output of some scholars and scientists can still be better or worse written than the reporting on other research projects. Academic writing, if I may reference the wonderful guide that Helen Sword wrote in 2012, can actually be stylish.18 And in a very real sense, much of what scholars, scientists, and any others involved with research put to paper is a kind of literature.19

As such, one can often read scientific and scholarly literature in order to enjoy their structure, verbiage, and general insightfulness, in addition to any new knowledge one may acquire. Think of the thought experiments scaffolding the famous trolley problem which we discussed some blogs ago.20 Some of these were as interesting as they were wacky and, notwithstanding their insightfulness and impact, one could almost consider them absurdist literature. It is because of such literary qualities that it is sometimes rewarding to read a book or paper on research which is at least partially considered outdated. Not only is it important to explore the development of existing fields – even the previously-highly regarded research directions that ultimately proved to be dead-ends – as well as the trajectory of hypotheses throughout their various iterations, but even outdated works of scholarship can simply be nice to indulge in. But with all this, and at the risk of repeating myself, it is important to distinguish the current state of science and learning from knowledge that has long since deemed inaccurate, however beautifully their reporting was written or the adjacent experiments elegantly designed.

Conclusion: Art and Aesthetics Inspiring Science and Learning

Not only can the process and reported results of research be perceived and enjoyed as an art form, but art and aesthetics can also inspire those aspiring to conduct or already engaging in science and learning.21 Because research often requires creativity, just like art.22 In addition, the beauty that is found in the works of humanity and nature, can guide research interests and goals.23 The structure and strength of the material that makes up spider webs, for example, fascinates some researchers.24 All the while, the aesthetics and products of scholarship may invite study and other steps, however gradual, towards one day contributing your own efforts to the organized pursuit of knowledge through an actual research institution, including but not limited to universities, or dedicated research companies. Such steps may even inspire a transposed and transformed aesthetic of scholarship in popular culture, such as that of Dark Academy, which we encountered in March.25 And for those who seek a less all-consuming way into the aesthetics of professional knowledge production – to have a sustainable research-life balance, so to speak – there is luckily also a lighter variant titled, say it with me now, Light Academia.26 Though one should always continue to separate the aesthetics from the scientific endeavor itself. As in the end, science and learning are about the proper research procedures, thorough peer review, and correctly reported results, not appearances.27

While discussing those appearances and their societal influence above, I did briefly mention education. The measure to which education, regardless of whether it is conducted in academia or elsewhere, can be considered an art form – or strife to be a work of art – is perhaps a story for another time. But it is evidently true that some lectures, be it in the moment or recorded for posterity, can be considered a performance that may be enjoyed as an experience in and of itself, besides the knowledge imparted.28 Some lectures I had the privilege to attend throughout the years had been more entertaining, I dare to say, than some visits to a theater or cinema. And I hope the same can be said for some of my own writings this year, including this very last blog of 2024.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.

References

  1. Michiel Leezenberg & Gerard H. de Vries, Wetenschapsfilosofie voor Geesteswetenschappen (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2012), p. 14; Jonathan Marks, Why I Am Not A Scientist: Anthropology and Modern Knowledge (Berkely: University of California, 2009), p. 6-10, 14-24.
  2. Max Weber, Politiek als Beroep, Voorafgegaan door Wetenschap als Beroep, Translated by Hans Driessen (Nijmegen: Uitgeverij VanTilt, 2012), p. 6-41; Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (London: The Folio Society, 2020), 90-110.
  3. Eduardo Weisz, “Science, Rationalization, and the Persistence of Enchantment”, Max Weber Studies 2020, 20 (1), p. 10; Ian Hacking, “Introduction to the Fiftieth anniversary Edition”, in: Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (London: The Folio Society, 2020), p. xvii, xxxix.
  4. Antonio Tintori & Rossella Palomba, Turn on the Light on Science: A Research-based Guide to Break Down Popular Stereotypes about Science and Scientists (London: Ubiquity Press, 2017); Frauke Pauwels & Nele Wynants, De Kleren van de Wetenschapper: De Zin en Onzin van Stereotypen in Populaire Cultuur, Maja 2023, 8 (1), p. 25-28.
  5. John R.R. Tolkien, Brieven, Edited by Christopher Tolkien & Humphrey Carpenter (Utrecht: Het Spectrum, 2001), p. 475-476.
  6. Rebecca Janicker (ed.), The Scientist in Popular Culture: Playing God and Working Wonders (Lanham: Abingdon Books, 2022); Merijn van Nuland, “Gastles Maakt Korte Metten met de Mythe van Professor Barabas en Perkamentus”, Trouw December 3d 2024, Vandaag, p. 2.
  7. Hannah Rubin & Cailin O’Connor, “Discrimination and Collaboration in Science”, Philosophy of Science 2018, 85 (3), p. 380-402; Jennifer Schneider, Impact of Undergraduates’ Stereotypes of Scientists on their Intentions to Pursue a Career in Science (Raleigh: North Carolina State University Dissertation, 2010).
  8. Anish Bavishi, Juan M. Madera & Michelle R. Hebl, “The Effect of Professor Ethnicity and Gender on Student Evaluations: Judged Before Met”, Journal of Diversity in Higher Education 2010, 3 (4), p. 245-256; Caroline Criado-Perez, Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Men (London: Chatto & Windus,  2019), p. 88-89; Nicole Brown & Jennifer Leigh, “Ableism in Academia: Where Are the Disabled and Ill Academics?”, Disability & Society 2018, 33 (6), p. 985-989.
  9. Tonie Mudde, “Voor Één Maand Alleen Maar Vrouwen”, deVolkskrant March 8th 2016, Ten Eerste, p. 9. And believe it or not, this was not the only painting-adjacent matter relating to the emancipation of societally disadvantaged persons at Leiden University, see: Wilfred Simons, “Boodschap Is ‘te Complex’ voor Deze Tijd”, Leidsch Dagblad November 15th 2022, Regio, p. 2-3.
  10. Criado-Perez, Invisible Women, p. 103.
  11. Milena Ivanova, “Beauty, Truth and Understanding”, in: Milena Ivanova & Steven French (eds.), The Aesthetics of Science: Beauty, Imagination and Understanding (New York: Routledge, 2020), p. 86.
  12. Milena Ivanova, “The Aesthetics of Scientific Experiments”, Philosophy Compass 2021, 16 (3), p. 4-5.
  13. Jan C.C. Rupp, “Theatra Anatomica: Culturele Centra in het Nederland van de Zeventiende Eeuw”, in: Joost J. Kloek & Wijnand W. Mijnhardt (eds.), De Productie, Distributie en Consumptie van Cultuur (Leiden: Brill, 1991), p. 27; Maaike Bleeker, Anatomy Live: Performance and the Operating Theatre (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2008).
  14. Catherine Z. Elgin, “Epistemic Gatekeepers The Role of Aesthetic Factors in Science”, in: Milena Ivanova & Steven French (eds.), The Aesthetics of Science: Beauty, Imagination and Understanding (New York: Routledge, 2020), p. 23. Though despite this important general observation, especially older scientific endeavors may have sometimes been in some way influenced by aesthetics, see in general: Ivanova, “The Aesthetics of Scientific Experiments”, p. 1-9; Gideon Engler, “Art and Science to Perception: The Role of Aesthetics”, Leonardo 1994, 27 (3), p. 208.
  15. David J. Hand, Statistics: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008).
  16. Steven French, “Performance and Practice Situating the Aesthetic Qualities of Theories”, in: Milena Ivanova & Steven French (eds.), The Aesthetics of Science: Beauty, Imagination and Understanding (New York: Routledge, 2020), p. 186.
  17. Helen Sword, Stylish Academic Writing (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2012), 76-86; Gilles Gaston Granger, “Discussing or Convincing: An Approach Towards a Pragmatical Study of the Languages of Science”, in: Marcela Dascal & Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), Dialogue: An Interdisciplinary Approach (Amsterdam John Benjamins Publishing, 1985) p. 339-352.
  18. Helen Sword, Stylish Academic Writing.
  19. Ibidem, p. 174.
  20. Cain Todd, “Imagination, Aesthetic Feelings, and Scientific Reasoning”, in: Milena Ivanova & Steven French (eds.), The Aesthetics of Science: Beauty, Imagination and Understanding (New York: Routledge, 2020), p. 63-82.
  21. Gideon Engler, “Aesthetics in Science and in Art”, British Journal of Aesthetics 1990, 30 (1), p. 24.
  22. Robert Root Bernstein, “The Sciences and Arts Share a Common Creative Aesthetic”, in: Alfred I. Tauber, (ed.), The Elusive Synthesis: Aesthetics and Science (Dordrecht: Springer, 1996), p. 53.
  23. Ivanova, “The Aesthetics of Scientific Experiments”, p. 3-4.
  24. Charlotte Rose Smith, Spider Silk: From Super Strong Webs to Customisable Synthetic Protein (Nottingham: University of Nottingham Dissertation, 2022). And vice versa! Because proverbially armed with scientific knowledge, we can also better appreciate the aesthetics of the natural world, see: Patricia Matthews, “Scientific Knowledge and the Aesthetic Appreciation of Nature”, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 2002, 60 (1), p. 37-48.
  25. Simone Murray, “Dark Academia: Bookishness, Readerly Self-fashioning and the Digital Afterlife of Donna Tartt’s The Secret History” English studies 2023, 104 (2), p. 349-350.
  26. Parami J. Ranasinghe, “An Exploration of the Dissemination of Knowledge through the ‘Dark Academia’ Aesthetic”, University of Colombo Review 2022, 3 (2), p. 93, 97, note 11.
  27. Engler, “Art and Science to Perception: The Role of Aesthetics”, p. 207.
  28. Mark Girod, “A Conceptual Overview of the Role of Beauty and Aesthetics in Science and Science Education”, Studies in Science Education 2007, 43 (1), p. 52-57. And performances may sometimes be a suitable form for a lecture, see: Patricia Milder, “Teaching As Art: The Contemporary Lecture-Performance”, PAJ: A Journal of Performance and Art 2011, 33 (1), p. 13-27.