TV review: ‘Work of Art: The Next Great Artist’ on Bravo | Culture Monster | Los Angeles Times
Of course, if you evaluate the show by the standards of contemporary art it won’t pass. But those standards are misapplied here. Bravo is running a game show, not a group exhibition.
{ 4 comments }
It seems to me that Mr. Knight is evaluating the show as a TV show, his main point being “Don’t. Bore. The Audience.” If you’re talking about the 17th Century bit he brought up with regards to the first challenge, I’d have to say that I was wondering the same. Surely with the names they have on board (de Pury, Saltz, etc.), I thought, they’ll at least have interesting, contemporary challenges. Instead, this first challenge reminded me of the art teacher’s assignments from Ghost World. Laaame.
That said, I don’t see why one couldn’t make a show that adheres to contemporary visual arts standards. Who knows, people might even learn something.
It seems to me that Mr. Knight is evaluating the show as a TV show, his main point being “Don’t. Bore. The Audience.” If you’re talking about the 17th Century bit he brought up with regards to the first challenge, I’d have to say that I was wondering the same. Surely with the names they have on board (de Pury, Saltz, etc.), I thought, they’ll at least have interesting, contemporary challenges. Instead, this first challenge reminded me of the art teacher’s assignments from Ghost World. Laaame.
That said, I don’t see why one couldn’t make a show that adheres to contemporary visual arts standards. Who knows, people might even learn something.
Yes, but part of his evaluation of the show rests on the success of the artists. So at the beginning of the review he says this:
“Equally disturbing: Not a single artist challenges this antique idea.”
That’s a performance evaluation, not a show evaluation. And then near the end,
“Rather than making art, the cast is charged with dramatizing the act of making art.”
Again, I think this is an evaluation of the process. Bravo claims to be bringing people “the next great artist” but anyone with a whit of sense knows that there’s some willful suspension of disbelief in that scenario.
Anyway, we’ll see how the show proceeds from here. So far, I agree, the standards look awfully conservative. But then again, I thought the winner of that challenge earned it.
Yes, but part of his evaluation of the show rests on the success of the artists. So at the beginning of the review he says this:
“Equally disturbing: Not a single artist challenges this antique idea.”
That’s a performance evaluation, not a show evaluation. And then near the end,
“Rather than making art, the cast is charged with dramatizing the act of making art.”
Again, I think this is an evaluation of the process. Bravo claims to be bringing people “the next great artist” but anyone with a whit of sense knows that there’s some willful suspension of disbelief in that scenario.
Anyway, we’ll see how the show proceeds from here. So far, I agree, the standards look awfully conservative. But then again, I thought the winner of that challenge earned it.
Comments on this entry are closed.