Asia Pacific Artistic Research Network (APARN) conference. Who Speaks? Authorship, Authority, and Authenticity. 29 July 2026
The presentation is now over. Months of anticipation, excitement, anxiety, and preparation culminated in my first performative conference presentation. Standing before an academic audience and presenting my research through performance was both emotionally and intellectually significant. Although I arrived only three days before the conference and became ill during the trip, I was still able to complete the presentation. My voice was weak from constant coughing, and I relied more heavily on my written script than I had intended. Despite these challenges, the performative structure remained intact, and I was able to communicate the central ideas of my research.
Reflecting on the experience, one of the most important practical lessons concerns time management. My colleague and I exceeded the time allocated for our joint presentation, which meant there was unfortunately no opportunity for the audience question-and-answer session. In future conference presentations, I need to rehearse more precisely, calculating the duration of every section while leaving sufficient time for discussion. The conversation that follows a presentation is an important part of academic exchange, and I would like to create more space for it.
Another important realization is that I need to rely less on a written script and become more confident speaking from memory. Reading ensured that I communicated the essential theoretical framework accurately, but it also limited my ability to elaborate naturally on important details that emerged during the presentation.
For example, I briefly introduced the museum mask that inspired part of my research, but afterwards I realised that I could have explained its cultural significance much more clearly. The historical mask was traditionally worn only once each year during a community festival. It served a specific social function: frightening mischievous children while reinforcing moral behaviour through ritual performance. This practical and educational role resonates strongly with my own artistic practice. My mask similarly functions within a cyclical family calendar, becoming part of performative storytelling shared with my daughters. It is not simply an artistic object but a pedagogical and relational one, carrying memory, care, and intergenerational transmission. Making this connection more explicit would have strengthened the relationship between ethnographic observation and my own artistic methodology.
Only after the conference did I fully recognise another important aspect of the presentation. The performative lecture itself embodied the same three-part structure that underpins my artistic research. Rather than simply describing my methodology, the presentation enacted it.
The first stage established an atmosphere before any words were spoken. As I entered the space, I slowly unwound a red thread onto the floor, forming a large circle. This action introduced the idea of cyclical time, repetition, and continuity. Without explanation, the audience was invited to experience the work physically before interpreting it intellectually. The circle became both a visual image and a conceptual framework for everything that followed.
The second stage shifted into spoken academic discourse. Here I presented my research questions, methodology, and theoretical framework. The visual structure created by the thread remained present throughout the lecture, silently supporting the spoken analysis.
The final stage reunited theory and embodied practice. The original soundscape returned, this time accompanied by movement, costume, and the growing sound of the bells attached to my garment. As I rewound the red thread back into a ball, the circular gesture that had opened the presentation was completed. The performance returned to its point of origin, transforming the opening action into a complete cycle rather than an isolated beginning. The increasing sound of the bells reinforced the sense of gathering momentum and embodied energy as the performance reached its conclusion.
Looking back, I realised that these opening and closing gestures were much more than theatrical framing devices. Together they formed a complete performative argument. The thread became a material metaphor for cultural memory itself: memory is continuously unwound, shared, embodied, gathered, and transmitted across generations. By laying the thread onto the floor and gathering it again at the end, I unknowingly visualised the cyclical process of remembering, forgetting, and reactivating knowledge through artistic practice.
This realisation has become one of the most valuable outcomes of the conference. I now understand that the performative lecture should not be viewed simply as a method of presenting completed research. Instead, it functions as an extension of my practice-led methodology. Through movement, sound, material, costume, and spoken reflection, the conference presentation itself became a site of knowledge production. New methodological insights emerged through the act of performing rather than beforehand.
The conference also confirmed that embodied artistic practice can exist comfortably within an academic context. Rather than separating performance from scholarship, I demonstrated that artistic actions can communicate theoretical ideas with both intellectual rigour and emotional resonance.
For future presentations, I would reduce the amount of scripted text and allow more room for spontaneous explanation and dialogue with the audience. I would also rehearse the timing more carefully, ensuring that every section contributes to the overall structure while leaving space for questions and discussion. Finally, I would place greater emphasis on explaining the cultural functions of the objects, masks, and rituals that inform my work, allowing the audience to understand more clearly how ethnographic observation becomes transformed into contemporary artistic research.
This first performative conference presentation has marked an important milestone in my PhD journey. It confirmed that my artistic practice is not separate from my research but is itself a mode of thinking, investigating, and producing knowledge. More importantly, it revealed that the structure of the performance carries meaning in its own right. The performative lecture did not simply communicate my methodology—it embodied it.