Agnieszka Mlicka | 'artist in theory, researcher in practice'


Published Articles, Book/Art Reviews and Dissertations

Mlicka, A., 2017. Facilitating Spatial Negotiation: A Pragmatic Approach to Understanding Public Space. The Journal of Public Space, 2 (2). Forthcoming.


Mlicka, A., 2016. Imagining a 'Relational' Painting. Journal of Contemporary Painting, 2 (2), pp. 322-326.*


Mlicka, A., 2014. Painting Architecture: Towards a Practice-Led Research Methodology. Studies in Material Thinking, 10, pp. 1-19.


Mlicka, A., 2013. Painting with Architecture in Mind ed. by Edward Whittaker and Alex Landrum (review). Leonardo, 46(5), p. 503.


Painting as a Function of People and the City: A Conversation between Painters Frank Creber and Agnieszka Mlicka


The Neon in Nature: An Updated Understanding of Experiencing Landscape through Painting

A review of the work of the artist Martin Stynes.


Engaging Artists in the Debate on 21st Century Cities

Published on the RSA website, 1 July 2011


Drawing the City: Motives and Methods

MA Painting dissertation, Wimbledon College of Art and Design, University of the Arts London, July 2007


The Intangible made Physical; Interview with Artist Katherine Lubar

Published in the Cherwell Newspaper, Oxford, 17 Feb 2006


The Psychology of the Interior

BA Fine Art dissertation, The Ruskin School of Art, University of Oxford, June 2006



* Notes to the article Imagining a 'Relational' Painting, published in the Journal of Contemporary Painting:

Co-Responding/Corresponding: An Experimental Approach to Writing as Dialogic Practice

Writing is increasingly explored as a critical practice in contemporary art. Yet, it raises three important questions:

1. How is interdisciplinary research realised in academia through collaborative publishing?

2. What writing method or format can reflect collaborative art practice?

3. How can writing about painting 'proceed' with painting rather than describe painting?


In response to these three questions, I have tested a novel approach to academic writing. Instead of the standard approach in which a single author develops an argument in juxtaposition to other writing/practice, I have invited two authors for a correspondence on a specific issue, anticipating that a co-response will emerge. My role in this process is threefold: to define and frame a question which pushes the boundaries of the current discourse; to edit their writing in order to transform the conversation into a unifying co-response (one answer that contains two, probably conflicting, viewpoints); and to provide a conclusion which reflects on the collaborative writing process itself, thereby suggesting how an answer might be observed in the text in terms of its content and form.


In this experimental approach, the writing becomes and remains a platform for discussion rather than an individual's response. The authors transcend their disciplinary knowledge and challenge each other through further questions and provocations. As a speculative method, I was particularly interested to what extent a conflictual situation can be created, and whether the authors will allow the writing to move beyond their own field of knowledge.