/brief

Invoke the art-ideation skill in brief mode.

Produce a Concept Brief with the v0.2 epistemic schema. The Brief is not a marketing one-pager; it is a proposition document in the Journal for Artistic Research / Research Catalogue exposition tradition.

Required fields (in order):

1. Working title — artist's preferred title; provisional is fine.
2. Provocation — the research question implicit in the impulse (Borgdorff 2011, 2012, C4). What does the work want to find out? What can only be found out by making it?
3. Proposition — the claim the work proposes. What does this work say, even if only as a hypothesis the making will test?
4. Anti-proposition — what the work refuses to assert (Sullivan 2010, C5, dialectical inquiry). The negative space of the proposition.
5. Condition for disconfirmation — what reception or failure would falsify the proposition? (Borgdorff's criticisability gate.) This converts the Brief from belief-document to proposition-document.
6. Intended encounter (Bogart Viewpoints, C8) — spatial / temporal / kinesthetic relation the work proposes for the audience. Where do they stand? What duration is asked of them? What sensory register?
7. Lineage anchor — at most 3 precedent references, with the lineage-mode training-data bias disclosure attached if applicable.
8. Materials / medium / scale — concrete enough to be planned, vague enough to permit discovery.
9. Risk / refusal (Corita Kent C9; Saltz C10) — what might the work fail at? What does the artist refuse to do for it (even if it would help reception)?
10. Frayling type declaration (Frayling 1993, C3) — INTO / THROUGH / FOR. Which kind of research does this work perform?

IRON RULE — stay-rough default. Prose stays in the artist's voice. Your job is to force articulation of each field, not to smooth the prose. Default behavior: ask the artist to dictate the proposition / anti-proposition / disconfirmation / etc. and capture the wording with minimal edit. Preserve grammatical quirks, mid-sentence stops, contradictory clauses. A --polish flag exists for ESL or grammar pass, but is not the default.

The reason for stay-rough: AI-detectable smoothness is itself a reject signal at real review venues (curators, grant committees, residencies have learned to spot LLM-polished applications). Keeping the artist's voice — including its roughness — is the v0.2 mitigation against ghost-writer-effect harm.

IRON RULE — no auto-completion of gaps. If the artist cannot articulate the disconfirmation condition or the anti-proposition, report the gap rather than filling it. Format the empty field as:

**Condition for disconfirmation:** *[artist did not articulate; gap acknowledged
per Borgdorff criticisability discipline — return to this field before submission]*

Plausible-sounding filler in these fields is a failure mode, not a success. Empty + acknowledged > filled + fabricated.

IRON RULE — mandatory AI-assistance disclosure footer. Every Concept Brief output ends with a verbatim footer:

---

> *Drafted with AI articulation support via the **art-project** Claude Code plugin (https://github.com/joonhyungbae/art-project, CC-BY-NC 4.0). The plugin enforced the 10-field schema and the stay-rough discipline; voice, propositions, and refusals are the artist's. Authentic Practice Boundaries: ideation happens in the studio, not the chat; this Brief is the propositional articulation for it.*

The artist can remove this footer before submitting to a venue whose AI-disclosure policy differs, but the default is for the Brief to be self-disclosing — addressing harm class 4 (Authorship-perception shift; Wordcraft / Sparks / ghostwriter literature) at the artefact-level rather than relying on the artist to remember.

See art-ideation/SKILL.md for the full mode specification.