Experimental Cultures: On the “End” of the Design Thesis and Rise of the Research Studio

1.  “Most work done in preparation for thesis and the thesis itself rarely, if ever, qualifies as good research.” I believe this statement is untrue and at the least unfair, design research is research that often times focuses on the discovery of a problem or question as opposed to an answer.
2.  At what point exactly was it felt as though the work of Rural Studio became research proper. Salomon references their multiple built works together as a view into a localized socio-economic and material curiosity; however the first built work by the studio could not be seen as such. What does this mean for our independent inquiries?
3.  UCLA in my opinion does not belong in this article. They lack the hyper-sensitivity and acute research that Koolhaas provides, or the distinct methodology of Rural Studio. What UCLA is doing seems to be a typical studio that uses L.A. as its site, am I mistaken?

Royal College of Arts: Research in Art and Design

1. “Once we got used to the idea that we don’t need to be scared of “research” – or in some strange way protected from it, the debate can really begin.” I agree with this statement but perhaps the role of research in art/design based scholastic’s is in pursuit of the question not the answer. The purpose of our research should be to generate a well articulated, relevant, and pressing question from which we propose “a solution” not “the solution”.
2. Picasso did not believe sin the act of painting as research “to search means nothing in painting. To find is the thing.” However he did use other’s works as a reference materials or inspiration. Why is he so hesitant to call this research?
3.  Frayling finds the separation of Art/Design from other practices “conceptually strange”, but is it? Although writing, science, design, and art are all practices they yield very different results and implement very different methodology. What is to gain by pretending we are all one?