Research Context & Background

This PhD by practice explores chorography’s significance as a methodological tool in contemporary artistic practice, critically re-examining its historic yet neglected role in the documentation of place. Originating in Classical Geography (Ptolemy, c.149AD), chorography, or “place writing”, is historically understood as the detailed description and mapping of regions. This field-based approach qualitatively maps characteristics of the locale by examining its constituent parts. Historically, it has functioned as both a field-based method of qualitatively mapping and as an artistic or literary mode, linking events to landscape through pictorial and textual representation. Chorography was rediscovered in Renaissance Geography and British Antiquarianism in the 16th-17th centuries. Historically William Camden’s Brittania (1586) is an encyclopaedic approach to a geographic, “topographical-historical” (Mendyk, 1986, p.459) survey of the British Isles, which has been identified as a classic exemplar of the renaissance of a chorographic work “connecting past and present through the medium of space, land, region or country” (Rohl,2011, p.6). Britannia was part of an epic attempt to map the nation and give people a sense of cultural identity and belonging. British Antiquarianism retrieved chorography and recreated it in an expanded field of writing, reinterpreting its legacy, ensuring its survival, restoration, and continued communication.

While chorography has traditionally been seen as a representational tool, recent scholarship in cultural studies, archaeology, and performance has renewed interest in its methodological richness and interdisciplinary potential (Pearson, 2006; Shanks & Witmore, 2010; Rohl 2011, 2012, 2014). Yet there remains an absence of synthesis between these fields, and a lack of attention to gendered, embodied, and performative approaches, which this research addresses. Although chorography is pre-disciplinary, Shanks & Witmore (2010) claim that a genetic link underlies contemporary disciplinary approaches across heritage management, tourism, archaeology, historical geography, and contemporary art practice. They argue for a genealogical understanding of interdisciplinary practices concerned with relations of land, place, memory, and identity to understand present practical and academic positions. It is this link I am trying to follow and establish in contemporary artistic practice and research.

Central to this project is a critical re-examination of chorography in contemporary artistic practice, moving from documentation and representation to performance and embodiment. Drawing on Judith Butler’s theory of performativity (Butler, 1999), the research investigates how the body, particularly the gendered and mobile body, serves as a site of historical crossing, memory, and meaning-making. This shift has profound implications for who and what is remembered or forgotten, and for how places are re-collected and re-presented. Brontë Country, straddling West Yorkshire and the East Lancashire Pennines, has been chosen as the primary site for this investigation. Valued for its literary, historic, and symbolic significance, this landscape is both an active shaping presence (as in Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights, 1847) and a locus for contemporary artistic engagement. The region’s legacy of travel, narrative, fiction, gendered relations (a feature of their writing which is also lacking in chorographic history) and the literary imagination, compounded by the Brontës’ own use of pseudonyms, a strategy adopted in the practice research, renders it an exemplary terrain for rethinking chorography through a feminist, performative, and practice-led lens. This project approaches chorography not as a static or descriptive tradition, but as a speculative, embodied, and interdisciplinary methodology. Artistic practice, including moving image, performance writing, installation, and critical-creative text, serves both to enact and to interrogate chorographic methods: mapping not just physical terrain but also the complex intersections of place, history, narrative, cultural memory, gender, and the performative construction of identity. By combining historical method with contemporary form, the research aims to renew chorography’s relevance, to understand place not only artistically, but physically, contextually, and historically, and to open new possibilities for artistic research in and through place.

Review: Wuthering Heights, Dir: Andrea Arnold

“In Wuthering Heights (Oscilloscope), the English director Andrea Arnold doesn’t so much adapt Emily Brontë’s much-loved 1847 novel as reconstruct it through the fog of a fever dream. This spare, often dialogue-free tone poem is the polar opposite of a Merchant Ivory-style literary costume drama: Rather than re-upholster the familiar story of Heathcliff and Catherine’s doomed love on the moors of Yorkshire, Arnold has chosen to strip it down to the bone. Gone are the multiple nested narrators, as well as nearly the entire second half of the book. What remains is an almost abstract flow of sounds and images that envelop the viewer like sense memories from some forgotten childhood: boots tromping through fields of black muck, twigs scraping at an icy window, dogs barking in the distance, candlelight reflecting off wet skin.

If you went in to this Wuthering Heights with no knowledge of the book or any of its many film adaptations, I’m not sure the contours of the story would ever fully emerge from the literal and metaphorical fog—and if you went in primed for bodice-ripping escapism, you might very well run out gasping with boredom somewhere around the beginning of hour two. But if you can slow down your movie metabolism enough to acclimate to its world, Arnold’s naturalistic retelling grasps an elemental truth about the novel. As much as it’s a story of romantic obsession, Wuthering Heights is a saga of familial hate, an unflinching look at the way cruelty and prejudice get handed down from one generation to the next.

In Arnold’s vision, the hatred heaped on Heathcliff, a foundling adopted by the Earnshaw household as a young teenager, is more explicitly racial than it was in the book. Described by Brontë as a dark-complexioned “gipsy” or “Lascar” of uncertain origin, Heathcliff is played here by two black men (Solomon Glave as a young man, James Howson as an adult), and the epithets hurled at him by his spiteful adopted brother Hindley (Lee Shaw) include the n-word. After Earnshaw père dies suddenly, Hindley and his sister Catherine (played by Shannon Beer as a teen and Kaya Scodelario as an adult) clash over Heathcliff’s fate. Hindley insists he be ejected from the house and kept on as a lowly farmhand, while Catherine begs for Heathcliff to remain a member of the family. When the obstinate, hard-drinking Hindley won’t listen, Catherine simply spirits Heathcliff away from his chores for long tromps on the sodden, windswept moors. (It’s unclear whether their teenage love is ever consummated, but there’s a good deal of wrestling in the mud.) Eventually, Catherine is courted by their wealthy neighbor Edgar Linton (Oliver Milburn), whose proposal forces her to make a choice between civilization (or is it enervation?) and savagery (or is it freedom?).

The decision Catherine makes, and the ever-widening circle of suffering it causes, becomes the focus of much of the rest of the novel, but if Arnold’s impressionistic retelling unfolds from any one character’s point of view, it’s Heathcliff’s. The film opens on him as an adult, back at the farm known as Wuthering Heights, where he’s beating his forehead bloody against a wall that has Catherine’s name carved in it. Soon we jump back in time to learn what it is that’s left him so distraught. From there, the back story comes at us in scattered fragments of memory that seem to combine the perspective of both young lovers (fittingly enough, since, as Cathy avers in the novel, “I am Heathcliff”): the muddy hem of a skirt seen from behind as Cathy runs down a hill. The two of them after a day on the moors, laughing as Cathy identifies feathers they’ve collected. Then, more ominously, an unflinching close-up on the seemingly real slaughter of a young goat (though the credits assure us no animals were harmed in the making of this film, there will also be trapped rabbits and woefully mistreated house dogs.) The primal bond that links the young pair (half-fraternal, half-romantic) is established with no exposition and barely any dialogue—in one scene, Heathcliff’s back is covered in cuts after a savage beating from Hindley, and Cathy licks them clean with the naturalness of an animal grooming its wounded mate.

The screenplay, by Arnold and Olivia Hetreed, must have made for a slim bundle of paper to carry around the set: We hear far less human speech than we do of creaking floorboards and the howling Yorkshire winds that gave the titular farm its name. The sound design by Nicholas Becker is ingeniously layered, allowing all the homely ambient noises of Yorkshire farm life—crying babies, clattering carriage wheels—to coexist at once in the viewer’s ear, all of it bringing us information about what’s happening just outside the frame. (The film’s sonic austerity falters only in the final moments, when a contemporary folk song by the British band Mumford and Sons appears on the soundtrack.) Robbie Ryan’s cinematography (the film is shot on HD video in the same square-shaped ratio he used for Arnold’s last film, Fish Tank) is bleakly stunning. He makes the moors look at once diaphanous and earthy, using a palette so bled of color that the movie appears, at moments, to be shot in black and white.”

Image & text reproduced from https://slate.com/culture/2012/10/andrea-arnolds-wuthering-heights-reviewed-a-vivid-dreamlike-reimagining-from-the-director-of-fish-tank.html (accessed 10/01/25)

Pinhole experiments

Notes: It is proving extremely difficult and time consuming to get an accurately exposed shot from the pinsta camera. The camera only uses sight lines for composition, it throws out a really wide depth of field, apparently it likes being placed on the floor. Pre-flashing with a 1000 lumen flashlight for 30 seconds saves a significant amount of time when exposing. For the bridge for instance I placed the camera on the ground very near to the edge of the bank but it still picked up a lot of foreground. Because of the nature of filmless photography the image comes out in reverse. For the image of the tree we used a tripod between 2-3ft high and because the light was really bright I did not pre-flash and I set the paper speed at 3 (the light affects the paper speed i.e low/poor light 1, strong light 3, bright light sunny day 6), we exposed for 2 minutes and the image as you can see is over exposed.

Brontë Bridge, f229, speed 1, pre-flashed, exposure time 7 minutes
Penistone Hill, f229, speed 3, tripod, not pre-flashed, exposure time 2 minutes