Creative Analytic Practices: Onto-Epistemological and Theoretical Attachments, Uses, and Constructions Within Humanist Qualitative Leisure Research

Abstract

▪

Notes

1 For this manuscript I make a distinction between CAP and arts-based research, although such distinction may not always be relevant in practice because applied results can appear similar. Yet if a distinction is considered useful, it would rely on the idea that CAP is grounded in poststructural reconfigurations of language and tends to be engaged most intensely during research representation. On the other hand, arts-based research often is not specifically connected to the poststructural linguistic turn and is more often viewed as having artistic practices included throughout the research process. In particular, arts-based research is any research that “can be conducted using nondiscursive means such as pictures, or music, or dance, or all of those in combination,” whereas CAP is often a response to the linguistic “crisis of representation” and is most often shown through the use of creative means to represent data (Barone & Eisner, 2012, p. 1). Since not all scholars make this distinction and/or find it useful, I chose to give it a nod, but I leave the larger discussion of arts-based versus CAP to be taken up elsewhere.

2 A distinction must be made between humanist qualitative research, which relies on realist ontologies and constructionist epistemologies, and posthumanist qualitative research, which is situated within radical and new material ontologies. This manuscript straddles the line between humanist and postqualitative research, but it is mostly grounded in traditions of humanism, or what Lather would call Qual 1.0, 2.0. and 3.0. See Lather, P. (2013). Methodology-2.1: What do we do in the afterward? International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 634–645.

3 We follow Derrida in putting “scaffolding” sous rature or under erasure in order to “retain the structure of qualitative research methodology—its structuring concepts and categories—because it appears necessary and, at the same time, cross it out because it is inaccurate” yet must not be fully rejected, but opened up (St. Pierre, 2011, p. 613).

4 The term subjectivist is a humanist label for ways of “knowing what we know” that are grounded in postmodern, poststructural, and posthumanist theories. However, those situated within those theories would not accept an epistemological label of subjectivism because within this paradigm the concept of epistemology fails to make sense and is replaced instead by the discussion of radical and new materialist ontologies (Coole & Frost, 2010).