The Shape of Things To Come: A Bleak Outlook

great critique. i too think peregrine honig’s piece, Peregrine Honig, A Conversation Between a Widow and Herself, 2009, Mixed media is the best for the very reasons you state.

great critique. i too think peregrine honig’s piece, Peregrine Honig, A Conversation Between a Widow and Herself, 2009, Mixed media is the best for the very reasons you state.

I think you are spot on here paddy. They raved over tv head, which was crazy to me. Erik is horrible and high schoolish. Liked John and Peregrine… Plus, what did miles use from the junk pile? just curious. he’s totally being strategic with his whole persona thing. lame.

I think you are spot on here paddy. They raved over tv head, which was crazy to me. Erik is horrible and high schoolish. Liked John and Peregrine… Plus, what did miles use from the junk pile? just curious. he’s totally being strategic with his whole persona thing. lame.

I think you are spot on here paddy. They raved over tv head, which was crazy to me. Erik is horrible and high schoolish. Liked John and Peregrine… Plus, what did miles use from the junk pile? just curious. he’s totally being strategic with his whole persona thing. lame.

great critique. i too think peregrine honig’s piece, Peregrine Honig, A Conversation Between a Widow and Herself, 2009, Mixed media is the best for the very reasons you state.

I think you are spot on here paddy. They raved over tv head, which was crazy to me. Erik is horrible and high schoolish. Liked John and Peregrine… Plus, what did miles use from the junk pile? just curious. he’s totally being strategic with his whole persona thing. lame.

Miles put his junk under the bed.

Miles put his junk under the bed.

Miles put his junk under the bed.

im terrified to watch this show. i think i’ll just rely on your commentary and not waste the time…..

ugh, this show just kinda sends bad shivers down my spine… for so many reasons…..

great write up on a train wreck of a show. why again are the judges participating. i dont really get it…

im terrified to watch this show. i think i’ll just rely on your commentary and not waste the time…..

ugh, this show just kinda sends bad shivers down my spine… for so many reasons…..

great write up on a train wreck of a show. why again are the judges participating. i dont really get it…

good critique… I didn’t know how to feel about Trong’s work but it definitely exceeded Santos’s work. For me at least.

good critique… I didn’t know how to feel about Trong’s work but it definitely exceeded Santos’s work. For me at least.

good critique… I didn’t know how to feel about Trong’s work but it definitely exceeded Santos’s work. For me at least.

I missed the episode last night so I’m following you on this one.

When it comes to garbage not too many artists are brilliant enough to create a striking piece.

As for Jaclyn Santos piece, dear Lord that was awful!! along with Ryan’s & Erik’s.

I missed the episode last night so I’m following you on this one.

When it comes to garbage not too many artists are brilliant enough to create a striking piece.

As for Jaclyn Santos piece, dear Lord that was awful!! along with Ryan’s & Erik’s.

I missed the episode last night so I’m following you on this one.

When it comes to garbage not too many artists are brilliant enough to create a striking piece.

As for Jaclyn Santos piece, dear Lord that was awful!! along with Ryan’s & Erik’s.

I missed the episode last night so I’m following you on this one.

When it comes to garbage not too many artists are brilliant enough to create a striking piece.

As for Jaclyn Santos piece, dear Lord that was awful!! along with Ryan’s & Erik’s.

Trong’s piece seemed like pandering to the judges, to the audience, seriously, ‘what would Tom Friedman do?’ what does it mean? Deliberately opaque and embarrassingly insidery…the TV in water piece may have been too literal, but at least it was coherent…

Trong’s piece seemed like pandering to the judges, to the audience, seriously, ‘what would Tom Friedman do?’ what does it mean? Deliberately opaque and embarrassingly insidery…the TV in water piece may have been too literal, but at least it was coherent…

Trong’s piece seemed like pandering to the judges, to the audience, seriously, ‘what would Tom Friedman do?’ what does it mean? Deliberately opaque and embarrassingly insidery…the TV in water piece may have been too literal, but at least it was coherent…

Trong’s piece seemed like pandering to the judges, to the audience, seriously, ‘what would Tom Friedman do?’ what does it mean? Deliberately opaque and embarrassingly insidery…the TV in water piece may have been too literal, but at least it was coherent…

I don’t think it was that opaque. Tom Friedman is known to work with every day objects and Trong was just rummaging around a heap of those objects. He’s got five hundred cameras around him, so he thinks to himself, “I hate reality tv, it’s so fake” Then he wonders, “What would Tom Friedman do”. He looks at his thrown away computer. “I’m a PC” it tells him. There’s self-mocking and inevitable failure built into the reading of this piece.

I don’t think it was that opaque. Tom Friedman is known to work with every day objects and Trong was just rummaging around a heap of those objects. He’s got five hundred cameras around him, so he thinks to himself, “I hate reality tv, it’s so fake” Then he wonders, “What would Tom Friedman do”. He looks at his thrown away computer. “I’m a PC” it tells him. There’s self-mocking and inevitable failure built into the reading of this piece.

I don’t think it was that opaque. Tom Friedman is known to work with every day objects and Trong was just rummaging around a heap of those objects. He’s got five hundred cameras around him, so he thinks to himself, “I hate reality tv, it’s so fake” Then he wonders, “What would Tom Friedman do”. He looks at his thrown away computer. “I’m a PC” it tells him. There’s self-mocking and inevitable failure built into the reading of this piece.

So, he is literally looking for help from TF, because he’s so out of his element? Not a good sign. Like painting a target on your back in this context. And what’s the Jesus reference? (wwjd?) He thinks TF’s a God, or he thinks other people thinks he’s a God? Also, there’s obviously a place for a critique of reality TV, but, ‘I hate reality TV?’ That’s the best he could come up with?

So, he is literally looking for help from TF, because he’s so out of his element? Not a good sign. Like painting a target on your back in this context. And what’s the Jesus reference? (wwjd?) He thinks TF’s a God, or he thinks other people thinks he’s a God? Also, there’s obviously a place for a critique of reality TV, but, ‘I hate reality TV?’ That’s the best he could come up with?

So, he is literally looking for help from TF, because he’s so out of his element? Not a good sign. Like painting a target on your back in this context. And what’s the Jesus reference? (wwjd?) He thinks TF’s a God, or he thinks other people thinks he’s a God? Also, there’s obviously a place for a critique of reality TV, but, ‘I hate reality TV?’ That’s the best he could come up with?

So, he is literally looking for help from TF, because he’s so out of his element? Not a good sign. Like painting a target on your back in this context. And what’s the Jesus reference? (wwjd?) He thinks TF’s a God, or he thinks other people thinks he’s a God? Also, there’s obviously a place for a critique of reality TV, but, ‘I hate reality TV?’ That’s the best he could come up with?

Hi AFC… I put a version of this post on FB too… with a few additions.

Several things…

Bravo completed ALTERED my self-portrait in the first episode… (I have to say this every time I talk about Bravo because I am still aghast that they did this:-)

About the elimination piece… admittedly not my greatest work, but you sit around in the studio and you see what else is being made, and you say to yourself, “there are some awful things here. All I need is to be GOOD ENOUGH” to move on to the next round. It’s a competition and that was my strategy.

There was a lot of nastiness firing at me and it felt like children throwing a massive tantrum. Unfortunately I am not on the show to play Principal. And I just don’t want to win that bad!

I pointed out to the placement and configuration of my sculpture, how the 3 tvs faced the one lone tv — essentially a portrait of the judges and artist being judged (so on the contrary, the work does relate to me a lot). It was a playful piece about my ambivalence, and what I thought was also everyone else’s ambivalence about being in a reality tv show. Which is why the texts and fonts on the 3 color tvs make the comments they do – the “child” unit in the middle broadcasts “I’m a P.C.” A wordplay not only on the Apple commercials but also meaning “politically correct.” A miniature battle of the elitists and masses.

Like Mark’s altar, WWTFD also plays on WWJD? – the religion that is media and spectacle.

How can one be subversive on such a reality tv show beyond Miles’ blatant posturing or simply being mean, or whatever else that is base — which, like violence, is too easy? That was the question I was asking with this piece.

Answer: The sculpture was a script and the judges and artists followed it and played it out exactly. Can you therefore imagine Jerry Saltz saying “I hate reality tv/I HATE MYSELF”, China burping “I’m a P.C./PRETTY CHINA?” and Jeanne spewing “It’s so fake!/LIKE ME”? Fits nicely I would think.

I wasn’t going to get caught up in the tedium of being cruel. I can save that for another, more methodical project. For Jerry to say “You are not an artist” is absolutely ridiculous. Every artist commonly makes bad work, but that doesn’t validate Jerry’s comment. Case and point, go have a look at John Kessler’s row boat public art piece that he made for Planet Thai in exchange for a thousand Pad Thai dinners, or something like that. I respect John’s work, but not all of it is good, and some of it is really bad. But that is the nature of being an artist… the bad work is necessary to get to the good stuff – that is process!

Last thing, you know something is awry when five supposedly very opinionated judges think exactly the same, and no one had a single constructive thing to say except Bill’s “playful” comment, who, before that, said my work needed too much explanation and that Tom Friedman’s work had an aura to it that mine was missing.

Tell me, do you think any of these judges are smart enough to figure out that Tom Friedman stared at that sheet of paper for a 1000 hours if he hadn’t told them in his MFA thesis?

Okay, the work still may flunk, but you can at least see all the nuance that the judges completely refused to acknowledge in any constructive way.

And last last thing. Miles’ comment to me was in regard to the technical proficiency of my work (I think he would have liked to see one more coat of white paint)…. On the contrary, setting up a silk screening studio involves labor, but nothing different from any artist who has had to do the same at home in a closet. It’s deceptive, and everyone worked their butts off. Granted I think his work was top three this go round (whereas the previous was a banal duplicate of his own self-portrait – it may as well just have been a portrait of Nao’s ass crushing his face).

My work looked exactly as I intended it to. No more. No less. But he’s immature and likes to stick his foot in his mouth (when his thumb isn’t in it). As one of Erik’s friends said this morning… “The only asshole in Miles work is Miles.”

See how easy it is to be cruel? Boring…

What are the judges’ excuses? Do they see things in color, black and white, or both?

Hi AFC… I put a version of this post on FB too… with a few additions.

Several things…

Bravo completed ALTERED my self-portrait in the first episode… (I have to say this every time I talk about Bravo because I am still aghast that they did this:-)

About the elimination piece… admittedly not my greatest work, but you sit around in the studio and you see what else is being made, and you say to yourself, “there are some awful things here. All I need is to be GOOD ENOUGH” to move on to the next round. It’s a competition and that was my strategy.

There was a lot of nastiness firing at me and it felt like children throwing a massive tantrum. Unfortunately I am not on the show to play Principal. And I just don’t want to win that bad!

I pointed out to the placement and configuration of my sculpture, how the 3 tvs faced the one lone tv — essentially a portrait of the judges and artist being judged (so on the contrary, the work does relate to me a lot). It was a playful piece about my ambivalence, and what I thought was also everyone else’s ambivalence about being in a reality tv show. Which is why the texts and fonts on the 3 color tvs make the comments they do – the “child” unit in the middle broadcasts “I’m a P.C.” A wordplay not only on the Apple commercials but also meaning “politically correct.” A miniature battle of the elitists and masses.

Like Mark’s altar, WWTFD also plays on WWJD? – the religion that is media and spectacle.

How can one be subversive on such a reality tv show beyond Miles’ blatant posturing or simply being mean, or whatever else that is base — which, like violence, is too easy? That was the question I was asking with this piece.

Answer: The sculpture was a script and the judges and artists followed it and played it out exactly. Can you therefore imagine Jerry Saltz saying “I hate reality tv/I HATE MYSELF”, China burping “I’m a P.C./PRETTY CHINA?” and Jeanne spewing “It’s so fake!/LIKE ME”? Fits nicely I would think.

I wasn’t going to get caught up in the tedium of being cruel. I can save that for another, more methodical project. For Jerry to say “You are not an artist” is absolutely ridiculous. Every artist commonly makes bad work, but that doesn’t validate Jerry’s comment. Case and point, go have a look at John Kessler’s row boat public art piece that he made for Planet Thai in exchange for a thousand Pad Thai dinners, or something like that. I respect John’s work, but not all of it is good, and some of it is really bad. But that is the nature of being an artist… the bad work is necessary to get to the good stuff – that is process!

Last thing, you know something is awry when five supposedly very opinionated judges think exactly the same, and no one had a single constructive thing to say except Bill’s “playful” comment, who, before that, said my work needed too much explanation and that Tom Friedman’s work had an aura to it that mine was missing.

Tell me, do you think any of these judges are smart enough to figure out that Tom Friedman stared at that sheet of paper for a 1000 hours if he hadn’t told them in his MFA thesis?

Okay, the work still may flunk, but you can at least see all the nuance that the judges completely refused to acknowledge in any constructive way.

And last last thing. Miles’ comment to me was in regard to the technical proficiency of my work (I think he would have liked to see one more coat of white paint)…. On the contrary, setting up a silk screening studio involves labor, but nothing different from any artist who has had to do the same at home in a closet. It’s deceptive, and everyone worked their butts off. Granted I think his work was top three this go round (whereas the previous was a banal duplicate of his own self-portrait – it may as well just have been a portrait of Nao’s ass crushing his face).

My work looked exactly as I intended it to. No more. No less. But he’s immature and likes to stick his foot in his mouth (when his thumb isn’t in it). As one of Erik’s friends said this morning… “The only asshole in Miles work is Miles.”

See how easy it is to be cruel? Boring…

What are the judges’ excuses? Do they see things in color, black and white, or both?

While reading your post, Paddy, and again while reading Trong’s assessment (FWIW I guessed in the first 15 minutes of the show that Trong would be eliminated based on my premise, “It’s only a production.” He’s too ‘heady’ and reserved.) it is not the artists’ work that we must ultimately judge each week, but the critique from the judges. Is it as rigorous as it could be or, if their comments of substance are left on the cutting room floor along with a fair representation of each artist’s work, are they content to be represented by clichés and soundbites? After all, who else is watching this show besides artists and their long-suffering partners and/or parents? ;-) Turn that idiotic catch phrase “Your work of art doesn’t work for us” on its head so folks can learn a thing or two as the show progresses.

While reading your post, Paddy, and again while reading Trong’s assessment (FWIW I guessed in the first 15 minutes of the show that Trong would be eliminated based on my premise, “It’s only a production.” He’s too ‘heady’ and reserved.) it is not the artists’ work that we must ultimately judge each week, but the critique from the judges. Is it as rigorous as it could be or, if their comments of substance are left on the cutting room floor along with a fair representation of each artist’s work, are they content to be represented by clichés and soundbites? After all, who else is watching this show besides artists and their long-suffering partners and/or parents? ;-) Turn that idiotic catch phrase “Your work of art doesn’t work for us” on its head so folks can learn a thing or two as the show progresses.

I was right: Trong won.

I was right: Trong won.

I was right: Trong won.

I was right: Trong won.

Don’t mess with Trong ! :)

Don’t mess with Trong ! :)

Don’t mess with Trong ! :)

Don’t mess with Trong ! :)

@trong – i admire your honesty, mainly the fact that you admitted to looking around the room at the other works and then attempted to create a piece “good enough.” i think paddy hit some sort of nail in the target on the bull’s eye head…. “There’s self-mocking and inevitable failure built into the reading of this piece.” you poked fun at yourself and most importantly, you poked fun at the money maker— tis tis, goodbye. don’t stand in the way of reality.
i actually think your piece should have been the winner for having the guts to question, what the fuck am i doing on this show?

cheers.

@trong – i admire your honesty, mainly the fact that you admitted to looking around the room at the other works and then attempted to create a piece “good enough.” i think paddy hit some sort of nail in the target on the bull’s eye head…. “There’s self-mocking and inevitable failure built into the reading of this piece.” you poked fun at yourself and most importantly, you poked fun at the money maker— tis tis, goodbye. don’t stand in the way of reality.
i actually think your piece should have been the winner for having the guts to question, what the fuck am i doing on this show?

cheers.

@trong – i admire your honesty, mainly the fact that you admitted to looking around the room at the other works and then attempted to create a piece “good enough.” i think paddy hit some sort of nail in the target on the bull’s eye head…. “There’s self-mocking and inevitable failure built into the reading of this piece.” you poked fun at yourself and most importantly, you poked fun at the money maker— tis tis, goodbye. don’t stand in the way of reality.
i actually think your piece should have been the winner for having the guts to question, what the fuck am i doing on this show?

cheers.

@trong – i admire your honesty, mainly the fact that you admitted to looking around the room at the other works and then attempted to create a piece “good enough.” i think paddy hit some sort of nail in the target on the bull’s eye head…. “There’s self-mocking and inevitable failure built into the reading of this piece.” you poked fun at yourself and most importantly, you poked fun at the money maker— tis tis, goodbye. don’t stand in the way of reality.
i actually think your piece should have been the winner for having the guts to question, what the fuck am i doing on this show?

cheers.

Paddy, thanks.
First and foremost, Miles is really working the OCD angle, so much so that I have come to call it FauxCD. It is so annoying. I actually liked Trong’s piece a lot. The amusing thing is, I think of Trong as a one name artist (Trong) and did not remember Trong’s last name. Therefore I assumed the WWTFD was asking What Would Trong …. Do? Although I get the TF reference (and the jesus thing, too) I was looking further up the food chain of Jeremy Deller’s “What would Neil Young do?”.
Anyway, it is so obvious this show is about product and not art that it has already started to make my hair hurt.

Paddy, thanks.
First and foremost, Miles is really working the OCD angle, so much so that I have come to call it FauxCD. It is so annoying. I actually liked Trong’s piece a lot. The amusing thing is, I think of Trong as a one name artist (Trong) and did not remember Trong’s last name. Therefore I assumed the WWTFD was asking What Would Trong …. Do? Although I get the TF reference (and the jesus thing, too) I was looking further up the food chain of Jeremy Deller’s “What would Neil Young do?”.
Anyway, it is so obvious this show is about product and not art that it has already started to make my hair hurt.

Paddy, thanks.
First and foremost, Miles is really working the OCD angle, so much so that I have come to call it FauxCD. It is so annoying. I actually liked Trong’s piece a lot. The amusing thing is, I think of Trong as a one name artist (Trong) and did not remember Trong’s last name. Therefore I assumed the WWTFD was asking What Would Trong …. Do? Although I get the TF reference (and the jesus thing, too) I was looking further up the food chain of Jeremy Deller’s “What would Neil Young do?”.
Anyway, it is so obvious this show is about product and not art that it has already started to make my hair hurt.

Also, I was so taken with the delicate elegance and beauty of Peregrine Honig’s piece, that my immediate thought was “they will never pick her work” as it required time and contemplation, characteristics these judges seem to have no interest in.

Also, I was so taken with the delicate elegance and beauty of Peregrine Honig’s piece, that my immediate thought was “they will never pick her work” as it required time and contemplation, characteristics these judges seem to have no interest in.

Also, I was so taken with the delicate elegance and beauty of Peregrine Honig’s piece, that my immediate thought was “they will never pick her work” as it required time and contemplation, characteristics these judges seem to have no interest in.

Also, I was so taken with the delicate elegance and beauty of Peregrine Honig’s piece, that my immediate thought was “they will never pick her work” as it required time and contemplation, characteristics these judges seem to have no interest in.

Huh. looking at his white-washed piece, I was sure he really meant Tom Sachs.

Huh. looking at his white-washed piece, I was sure he really meant Tom Sachs.

Huh. looking at his white-washed piece, I was sure he really meant Tom Sachs.

Huh. looking at his white-washed piece, I was sure he really meant Tom Sachs.

Paddy,
You’re contempt for Jaclyn Santos is a seriously misdirected. You are making the crucial mistake of letting your contempt for Santos as a person cloud your judgement of her art. All these pieces need to be judged as though you know nothing about who created them. As for Honig’s piece… how is that any more inventive that Trong’s? Just because there is some black netting around the TVs and they happen to work? It’s 2 TVs staring at each other instead of 4.
I applaud Bravo for creating a show that revolves around artists but I can see this becoming a real train wreck. The producers of these kind of shows want drama and conflict. As they continue to key in on those things,I can see the art becoming less important than the personalities. A trap that you fell into already Paddy.

Paddy,
You’re contempt for Jaclyn Santos is a seriously misdirected. You are making the crucial mistake of letting your contempt for Santos as a person cloud your judgement of her art. All these pieces need to be judged as though you know nothing about who created them. As for Honig’s piece… how is that any more inventive that Trong’s? Just because there is some black netting around the TVs and they happen to work? It’s 2 TVs staring at each other instead of 4.
I applaud Bravo for creating a show that revolves around artists but I can see this becoming a real train wreck. The producers of these kind of shows want drama and conflict. As they continue to key in on those things,I can see the art becoming less important than the personalities. A trap that you fell into already Paddy.

Paddy,
You’re contempt for Jaclyn Santos is a seriously misdirected. You are making the crucial mistake of letting your contempt for Santos as a person cloud your judgement of her art. All these pieces need to be judged as though you know nothing about who created them. As for Honig’s piece… how is that any more inventive that Trong’s? Just because there is some black netting around the TVs and they happen to work? It’s 2 TVs staring at each other instead of 4.
I applaud Bravo for creating a show that revolves around artists but I can see this becoming a real train wreck. The producers of these kind of shows want drama and conflict. As they continue to key in on those things,I can see the art becoming less important than the personalities. A trap that you fell into already Paddy.

Paddy,
You’re contempt for Jaclyn Santos is a seriously misdirected. You are making the crucial mistake of letting your contempt for Santos as a person cloud your judgement of her art. All these pieces need to be judged as though you know nothing about who created them. As for Honig’s piece… how is that any more inventive that Trong’s? Just because there is some black netting around the TVs and they happen to work? It’s 2 TVs staring at each other instead of 4.
I applaud Bravo for creating a show that revolves around artists but I can see this becoming a real train wreck. The producers of these kind of shows want drama and conflict. As they continue to key in on those things,I can see the art becoming less important than the personalities. A trap that you fell into already Paddy.

I am truly sad to see Trong go. He was obviously one of the more thoughtful and interesting artists on the show, and it’s a shame the judges (one of which I know personally and am completely disappointed in) didn’t keep him on.

Excellent commentary, Paddy. Keep it up.

Also, I have to say I’m disappointed with the number of figurative painters on the show. Do we really need this many whose practices are so similar and so narrow?

I also know quite a few of the judges who decided which artists would make it onto the show as well as a number of artists who tried out and didn’t make it (and who, for the most part, have interesting, inter-disciplinary art practices), and it’s still a total mystery to me how some of the final contestants who were chosen made the final cut.

Nonetheless, I will still watch, and I will still route for the two artists that remain- Peregrine and John (who doesn’t seem to get hardly any attention) who are the best of the bunch.

I am truly sad to see Trong go. He was obviously one of the more thoughtful and interesting artists on the show, and it’s a shame the judges (one of which I know personally and am completely disappointed in) didn’t keep him on.

Excellent commentary, Paddy. Keep it up.

Also, I have to say I’m disappointed with the number of figurative painters on the show. Do we really need this many whose practices are so similar and so narrow?

I also know quite a few of the judges who decided which artists would make it onto the show as well as a number of artists who tried out and didn’t make it (and who, for the most part, have interesting, inter-disciplinary art practices), and it’s still a total mystery to me how some of the final contestants who were chosen made the final cut.

Nonetheless, I will still watch, and I will still route for the two artists that remain- Peregrine and John (who doesn’t seem to get hardly any attention) who are the best of the bunch.

I am truly sad to see Trong go. He was obviously one of the more thoughtful and interesting artists on the show, and it’s a shame the judges (one of which I know personally and am completely disappointed in) didn’t keep him on.

Excellent commentary, Paddy. Keep it up.

Also, I have to say I’m disappointed with the number of figurative painters on the show. Do we really need this many whose practices are so similar and so narrow?

I also know quite a few of the judges who decided which artists would make it onto the show as well as a number of artists who tried out and didn’t make it (and who, for the most part, have interesting, inter-disciplinary art practices), and it’s still a total mystery to me how some of the final contestants who were chosen made the final cut.

Nonetheless, I will still watch, and I will still route for the two artists that remain- Peregrine and John (who doesn’t seem to get hardly any attention) who are the best of the bunch.

I actually thought Trong purposely tried to get himself removed from this show. With his talent and experience he must have known that this show lacks integrity and is all about drama; i.e., Miles taking a bubble bath on the first eposide. Admittedly he didn’t have a rubber ducky. The goal of this show is not to discover the best artist. The goal is to keep the audience entertained by creating drama via editing. The result is to find the best actor who should therefore be awarded an Emmy. The judges should be ashamed of their lack of objectivity.

I actually thought Trong purposely tried to get himself removed from this show. With his talent and experience he must have known that this show lacks integrity and is all about drama; i.e., Miles taking a bubble bath on the first eposide. Admittedly he didn’t have a rubber ducky. The goal of this show is not to discover the best artist. The goal is to keep the audience entertained by creating drama via editing. The result is to find the best actor who should therefore be awarded an Emmy. The judges should be ashamed of their lack of objectivity.

Jeez, there’s this massive artistic opportunity here and none of the artists have noticed it yet. It’s like they don’t remember that they have a national audience that will be experiencing their artwork VIA A TELEVISION. This is really important for viewers – think the Nixon and Kennedy debate, 1960. Henderson almost approaches awareness of this, as her work looks like a TV commercial for the vacuum – a little slice of ‘hyperreality.’

Unfortunately I doubt the judges are aware that the pieces need to function on TV as well. I suspect that we’ll run into a big divide between crowd favorites and judges’ picks because of this in the next few episodes, if we haven’t already.

Jeez, there’s this massive artistic opportunity here and none of the artists have noticed it yet. It’s like they don’t remember that they have a national audience that will be experiencing their artwork VIA A TELEVISION. This is really important for viewers – think the Nixon and Kennedy debate, 1960. Henderson almost approaches awareness of this, as her work looks like a TV commercial for the vacuum – a little slice of ‘hyperreality.’

Unfortunately I doubt the judges are aware that the pieces need to function on TV as well. I suspect that we’ll run into a big divide between crowd favorites and judges’ picks because of this in the next few episodes, if we haven’t already.

Jeez, there’s this massive artistic opportunity here and none of the artists have noticed it yet. It’s like they don’t remember that they have a national audience that will be experiencing their artwork VIA A TELEVISION. This is really important for viewers – think the Nixon and Kennedy debate, 1960. Henderson almost approaches awareness of this, as her work looks like a TV commercial for the vacuum – a little slice of ‘hyperreality.’

Unfortunately I doubt the judges are aware that the pieces need to function on TV as well. I suspect that we’ll run into a big divide between crowd favorites and judges’ picks because of this in the next few episodes, if we haven’t already.

Really anxious to see what this show does to the credibility of all involved when this season ends. I’m equally curious to see if any of the esteemed judges sign on to do a second season. Prediction: Bill Powers quits dealing art and goes to work for Bravo full-time, and finds he is happier and more at home than he ever felt in the art world. I also really want to have a few brews with Judith Braun.

Please keep this up AFC, this is good, necessary recap and great comment feedback.

Really anxious to see what this show does to the credibility of all involved when this season ends. I’m equally curious to see if any of the esteemed judges sign on to do a second season. Prediction: Bill Powers quits dealing art and goes to work for Bravo full-time, and finds he is happier and more at home than he ever felt in the art world. I also really want to have a few brews with Judith Braun.

Please keep this up AFC, this is good, necessary recap and great comment feedback.

Really anxious to see what this show does to the credibility of all involved when this season ends. I’m equally curious to see if any of the esteemed judges sign on to do a second season. Prediction: Bill Powers quits dealing art and goes to work for Bravo full-time, and finds he is happier and more at home than he ever felt in the art world. I also really want to have a few brews with Judith Braun.

Please keep this up AFC, this is good, necessary recap and great comment feedback.

This show is not intended to appeal to artists, apparently. It is for the provinces. But it’s so weak in its content and the credentials of the judges and most contestants, that I can’t imagine any non-artists watching it either. It’s like a second (or third) rate art school freshman class with everything meaningful and useful removed. It makes a mockery of us all to the larger public, cable TV audiences. Plus, J.S. is just embarrassing himself, gaining a broader audience, and losing the respect of the art community.

In addition to my own artistic practice, I teach freshman and sophomore art students in the NYC area. I can say without any hesitation that many my 17, 18, and 19 year old newbies make work that leaves these schmucks in the dirt. Want to be an artist? Put in some time and learn something about yourself and those that preceded you. Pay your f***ing dues in the real world with real people. Art takes time. It takes introspection. It takes sincerity. None of this is here. Work of Art is simply trying to put an enormous square peg into a tiny round hole. Sad and predictable failure.

This show is not intended to appeal to artists, apparently. It is for the provinces. But it’s so weak in its content and the credentials of the judges and most contestants, that I can’t imagine any non-artists watching it either. It’s like a second (or third) rate art school freshman class with everything meaningful and useful removed. It makes a mockery of us all to the larger public, cable TV audiences. Plus, J.S. is just embarrassing himself, gaining a broader audience, and losing the respect of the art community.

In addition to my own artistic practice, I teach freshman and sophomore art students in the NYC area. I can say without any hesitation that many my 17, 18, and 19 year old newbies make work that leaves these schmucks in the dirt. Want to be an artist? Put in some time and learn something about yourself and those that preceded you. Pay your f***ing dues in the real world with real people. Art takes time. It takes introspection. It takes sincerity. None of this is here. Work of Art is simply trying to put an enormous square peg into a tiny round hole. Sad and predictable failure.

This show is not intended to appeal to artists, apparently. It is for the provinces. But it’s so weak in its content and the credentials of the judges and most contestants, that I can’t imagine any non-artists watching it either. It’s like a second (or third) rate art school freshman class with everything meaningful and useful removed. It makes a mockery of us all to the larger public, cable TV audiences. Plus, J.S. is just embarrassing himself, gaining a broader audience, and losing the respect of the art community.

In addition to my own artistic practice, I teach freshman and sophomore art students in the NYC area. I can say without any hesitation that many my 17, 18, and 19 year old newbies make work that leaves these schmucks in the dirt. Want to be an artist? Put in some time and learn something about yourself and those that preceded you. Pay your f***ing dues in the real world with real people. Art takes time. It takes introspection. It takes sincerity. None of this is here. Work of Art is simply trying to put an enormous square peg into a tiny round hole. Sad and predictable failure.

This show is not intended to appeal to artists, apparently. It is for the provinces. But it’s so weak in its content and the credentials of the judges and most contestants, that I can’t imagine any non-artists watching it either. It’s like a second (or third) rate art school freshman class with everything meaningful and useful removed. It makes a mockery of us all to the larger public, cable TV audiences. Plus, J.S. is just embarrassing himself, gaining a broader audience, and losing the respect of the art community.

In addition to my own artistic practice, I teach freshman and sophomore art students in the NYC area. I can say without any hesitation that many my 17, 18, and 19 year old newbies make work that leaves these schmucks in the dirt. Want to be an artist? Put in some time and learn something about yourself and those that preceded you. Pay your f***ing dues in the real world with real people. Art takes time. It takes introspection. It takes sincerity. None of this is here. Work of Art is simply trying to put an enormous square peg into a tiny round hole. Sad and predictable failure.

With that said, I agree with most of your evaluations Paddy, esp. that Santos blows.

With that said, I agree with most of your evaluations Paddy, esp. that Santos blows.

I really appreciate getting to see some of the other artists’ work. I never saw Mark’s work, etc. Thanks.

I realize now that this show does not care about educating the public – only wants to be entertaining…Duhhhh! Sometimes I am too naive. I just read on another site that the producers have a say in who stays and who gets thrown off AS WELL as the Judges.

I really appreciate getting to see some of the other artists’ work. I never saw Mark’s work, etc. Thanks.

I realize now that this show does not care about educating the public – only wants to be entertaining…Duhhhh! Sometimes I am too naive. I just read on another site that the producers have a say in who stays and who gets thrown off AS WELL as the Judges.

I really appreciate getting to see some of the other artists’ work. I never saw Mark’s work, etc. Thanks.

I realize now that this show does not care about educating the public – only wants to be entertaining…Duhhhh! Sometimes I am too naive. I just read on another site that the producers have a say in who stays and who gets thrown off AS WELL as the Judges.

With that said, I agree with most of your evaluations Paddy, esp. that Santos blows.

I really appreciate getting to see some of the other artists’ work. I never saw Mark’s work, etc. Thanks.

I realize now that this show does not care about educating the public – only wants to be entertaining…Duhhhh! Sometimes I am too naive. I just read on another site that the producers have a say in who stays and who gets thrown off AS WELL as the Judges.

So far the judge’s decisions and opinions seem to be completely random and arbitrary.

One good thing howeve that seems new to these ‘creative’ reality shows (as opposed to Survivor) — the contestants creative work is commenting on their bizarre situation. I’ve never seen a dish or garment that attempted that.

So far the judge’s decisions and opinions seem to be completely random and arbitrary.

One good thing howeve that seems new to these ‘creative’ reality shows (as opposed to Survivor) — the contestants creative work is commenting on their bizarre situation. I’ve never seen a dish or garment that attempted that.

So far the judge’s decisions and opinions seem to be completely random and arbitrary.

One good thing howeve that seems new to these ‘creative’ reality shows (as opposed to Survivor) — the contestants creative work is commenting on their bizarre situation. I’ve never seen a dish or garment that attempted that.

So far the judge’s decisions and opinions seem to be completely random and arbitrary.

One good thing howeve that seems new to these ‘creative’ reality shows (as opposed to Survivor) — the contestants creative work is commenting on their bizarre situation. I’ve never seen a dish or garment that attempted that.

Quote from Victor directed to Paddy et al:
“All these pieces need to be judged as though you know nothing about who created them.”

This is a reality TV show we’re talking about. It’s all about passing judgments on work based on the artist’s personality. Besides, purity in judgment should be a dirty idea by now in the art world. It’s unattainable and smacks of Postmodernist contextualizaton.

Quote from Victor directed to Paddy et al:
“All these pieces need to be judged as though you know nothing about who created them.”

This is a reality TV show we’re talking about. It’s all about passing judgments on work based on the artist’s personality. Besides, purity in judgment should be a dirty idea by now in the art world. It’s unattainable and smacks of Postmodernist contextualizaton.

Quote from Victor directed to Paddy et al:
“All these pieces need to be judged as though you know nothing about who created them.”

This is a reality TV show we’re talking about. It’s all about passing judgments on work based on the artist’s personality. Besides, purity in judgment should be a dirty idea by now in the art world. It’s unattainable and smacks of Postmodernist contextualizaton.

@t.whid: Elyse Sewell, first season, America’s Next Top Model. Critiqued the entire show from start to finish, until she threw the competition in the third to last round. The judges asked her why she thought she deserved to win the competition and she told them no one “deserved” it. She went on to give a scientific explanation for why people instinctually respond to certain types of faces and symmetry, and how modeling has nothing to do with skill and everything to do with genetics. Blank stares from the judges all around. They eliminated her on the grounds that “she thought she was better than everyone else”. Best member cast on a reality show ever.

@t.whid: Elyse Sewell, first season, America’s Next Top Model. Critiqued the entire show from start to finish, until she threw the competition in the third to last round. The judges asked her why she thought she deserved to win the competition and she told them no one “deserved” it. She went on to give a scientific explanation for why people instinctually respond to certain types of faces and symmetry, and how modeling has nothing to do with skill and everything to do with genetics. Blank stares from the judges all around. They eliminated her on the grounds that “she thought she was better than everyone else”. Best member cast on a reality show ever.

@t.whid: Elyse Sewell, first season, America’s Next Top Model. Critiqued the entire show from start to finish, until she threw the competition in the third to last round. The judges asked her why she thought she deserved to win the competition and she told them no one “deserved” it. She went on to give a scientific explanation for why people instinctually respond to certain types of faces and symmetry, and how modeling has nothing to do with skill and everything to do with genetics. Blank stares from the judges all around. They eliminated her on the grounds that “she thought she was better than everyone else”. Best member cast on a reality show ever.

@t.whid: Elyse Sewell, first season, America’s Next Top Model. Critiqued the entire show from start to finish, until she threw the competition in the third to last round. The judges asked her why she thought she deserved to win the competition and she told them no one “deserved” it. She went on to give a scientific explanation for why people instinctually respond to certain types of faces and symmetry, and how modeling has nothing to do with skill and everything to do with genetics. Blank stares from the judges all around. They eliminated her on the grounds that “she thought she was better than everyone else”. Best member cast on a reality show ever.

can you cancel a show two episodes in?

Pongratz

can you cancel a show two episodes in?

Pongratz

can you cancel a show two episodes in?

Pongratz

Thanks paddy, great stuff, im tuned in to AFC!

Thanks paddy, great stuff, im tuned in to AFC!

Thanks paddy, great stuff, im tuned in to AFC!

@paddy re: Elyse Sewell — That’s awesome!

@paddy re: Elyse Sewell — That’s awesome!

@paddy re: Elyse Sewell — That’s awesome!

@Hypothete: Word. WANGA’s form warrants that we verbally stone everything on it.

@t.whid: It’s only taken, what, two-decades for reality-show contestants (and their “creative work”) to become self-aware? Maybe that’s why they routinely cast blinking one-celled morons like Jacyln (@Victor Borans: and her work sucks as much as she does).

@AFC: You’re quoting history. And Tyra will EAT A BITCH ALIVE (http://bit.ly/a9oxn1).

@Hypothete: Word. WANGA’s form warrants that we verbally stone everything on it.

@t.whid: It’s only taken, what, two-decades for reality-show contestants (and their “creative work”) to become self-aware? Maybe that’s why they routinely cast blinking one-celled morons like Jacyln (@Victor Borans: and her work sucks as much as she does).

@AFC: You’re quoting history. And Tyra will EAT A BITCH ALIVE (http://bit.ly/a9oxn1).

@Hypothete: Word. WANGA’s form warrants that we verbally stone everything on it.

@t.whid: It’s only taken, what, two-decades for reality-show contestants (and their “creative work”) to become self-aware? Maybe that’s why they routinely cast blinking one-celled morons like Jacyln (@Victor Borans: and her work sucks as much as she does).

@AFC: You’re quoting history. And Tyra will EAT A BITCH ALIVE (http://bit.ly/a9oxn1).

@Hypothete: Word. WANGA’s form warrants that we verbally stone everything on it.

@t.whid: It’s only taken, what, two-decades for reality-show contestants (and their “creative work”) to become self-aware? Maybe that’s why they routinely cast blinking one-celled morons like Jacyln (@Victor Borans: and her work sucks as much as she does).

@AFC: You’re quoting history. And Tyra will EAT A BITCH ALIVE (http://bit.ly/a9oxn1).

I’m not going to comment on the art, although I certainly have my opinions. What I love about the show is the dialogue that it creates. “Reality Show” has become such a misnomer, but I’m still intrigued. I know that I should be watching with a grain of salt.

Keep up with the reviews, I enjoyed reading this one, and I appreciated Trong’s input. I’ve always believed that everyone’s opinion when it comes to art is valid, but education (I thought Nao’s piece in the first episode was brilliant – but only if you knew the story) can help shed light where there wasn’t any before.

I’m not going to comment on the art, although I certainly have my opinions. What I love about the show is the dialogue that it creates. “Reality Show” has become such a misnomer, but I’m still intrigued. I know that I should be watching with a grain of salt.

Keep up with the reviews, I enjoyed reading this one, and I appreciated Trong’s input. I’ve always believed that everyone’s opinion when it comes to art is valid, but education (I thought Nao’s piece in the first episode was brilliant – but only if you knew the story) can help shed light where there wasn’t any before.

Elyse Sewell is still my fav. reality show contestant. She fell asleep during, if I recall correctly, some obnoxious instructional thing by Ms. Jay on walking. HA! Plus, she was Marty from The Shins’s girlfriend and they are also indy awesome. Word.

Elyse Sewell is still my fav. reality show contestant. She fell asleep during, if I recall correctly, some obnoxious instructional thing by Ms. Jay on walking. HA! Plus, she was Marty from The Shins’s girlfriend and they are also indy awesome. Word.

I am really disappointed by the judges not knowing Tom Freidman. I have a feeling though that the real reason why Trong was eliminated was that he is too level headed for the show. Perhaps if he played the role of a train wreck better he would have had a better chance.

I am really disappointed by the judges not knowing Tom Freidman. I have a feeling though that the real reason why Trong was eliminated was that he is too level headed for the show. Perhaps if he played the role of a train wreck better he would have had a better chance.

I am really disappointed by the judges not knowing Tom Freidman. I have a feeling though that the real reason why Trong was eliminated was that he is too level headed for the show. Perhaps if he played the role of a train wreck better he would have had a better chance.

I’m finding the whole meta-narrative inexplicably interesting, never having tuned into any reality tv episode previously (well, even now I am watching this online after the fact but that counts, right?)

Have contestants on other, similar, shows made such extensive use of the commenting back channels to flesh out all of the important things, from their point of view, that got left on the cutting room floor? It’s been educational (well, okay, maybe fascinating is a more honest word here) to sift through it all and attempt to determine meta-narratives solely via comments on facebook pages and blogs like AFC from the actual artists involved. Not to mention Jerry Saltz’s recaps for his magazine column.

Trong, if you are reading this, in what way did Bravo alter your self-portrait? And to what ends? That seems even a step beyond disseminating Nao’s “I know what you’re thinking, maybe Nao’s too established an artist for this program” which was ripped from the context of a hilarious intro reel montage she’s posted to youtube.

Of course, none of this has to do with art, per se. But really, how close to art with any sort of integrity can the products that the contestants are spitting out on command be, anyway? And how in the world, even if good art was produced, would the actual visceral impact of the work be translatable via television to an audience that is so far removed from standing in front of the actual piece?

I’m finding the whole meta-narrative inexplicably interesting, never having tuned into any reality tv episode previously (well, even now I am watching this online after the fact but that counts, right?)

Have contestants on other, similar, shows made such extensive use of the commenting back channels to flesh out all of the important things, from their point of view, that got left on the cutting room floor? It’s been educational (well, okay, maybe fascinating is a more honest word here) to sift through it all and attempt to determine meta-narratives solely via comments on facebook pages and blogs like AFC from the actual artists involved. Not to mention Jerry Saltz’s recaps for his magazine column.

Trong, if you are reading this, in what way did Bravo alter your self-portrait? And to what ends? That seems even a step beyond disseminating Nao’s “I know what you’re thinking, maybe Nao’s too established an artist for this program” which was ripped from the context of a hilarious intro reel montage she’s posted to youtube.

Of course, none of this has to do with art, per se. But really, how close to art with any sort of integrity can the products that the contestants are spitting out on command be, anyway? And how in the world, even if good art was produced, would the actual visceral impact of the work be translatable via television to an audience that is so far removed from standing in front of the actual piece?

I’m finding the whole meta-narrative inexplicably interesting, never having tuned into any reality tv episode previously (well, even now I am watching this online after the fact but that counts, right?)

Have contestants on other, similar, shows made such extensive use of the commenting back channels to flesh out all of the important things, from their point of view, that got left on the cutting room floor? It’s been educational (well, okay, maybe fascinating is a more honest word here) to sift through it all and attempt to determine meta-narratives solely via comments on facebook pages and blogs like AFC from the actual artists involved. Not to mention Jerry Saltz’s recaps for his magazine column.

Trong, if you are reading this, in what way did Bravo alter your self-portrait? And to what ends? That seems even a step beyond disseminating Nao’s “I know what you’re thinking, maybe Nao’s too established an artist for this program” which was ripped from the context of a hilarious intro reel montage she’s posted to youtube.

Of course, none of this has to do with art, per se. But really, how close to art with any sort of integrity can the products that the contestants are spitting out on command be, anyway? And how in the world, even if good art was produced, would the actual visceral impact of the work be translatable via television to an audience that is so far removed from standing in front of the actual piece?

I’m finding the whole meta-narrative inexplicably interesting, never having tuned into any reality tv episode previously (well, even now I am watching this online after the fact but that counts, right?)

Have contestants on other, similar, shows made such extensive use of the commenting back channels to flesh out all of the important things, from their point of view, that got left on the cutting room floor? It’s been educational (well, okay, maybe fascinating is a more honest word here) to sift through it all and attempt to determine meta-narratives solely via comments on facebook pages and blogs like AFC from the actual artists involved. Not to mention Jerry Saltz’s recaps for his magazine column.

Trong, if you are reading this, in what way did Bravo alter your self-portrait? And to what ends? That seems even a step beyond disseminating Nao’s “I know what you’re thinking, maybe Nao’s too established an artist for this program” which was ripped from the context of a hilarious intro reel montage she’s posted to youtube.

Of course, none of this has to do with art, per se. But really, how close to art with any sort of integrity can the products that the contestants are spitting out on command be, anyway? And how in the world, even if good art was produced, would the actual visceral impact of the work be translatable via television to an audience that is so far removed from standing in front of the actual piece?

@Victor Borans: Santos provides a statement for her work on her website, which describes the ideas behind her piece. “Water is the source of life for humans, yet deadly to electronics.” she writes. “In a pathetically ironic way, I used my art to regain a dominant position over “television” and objectify it: displaying it to the world in a state of vulnerability that would enable the viewer to partake in my experience, while examining his own relationship to the object.”

First of all, how much effort does it take to exert dominance over an inanimate object? That’s just bullshit. She’s created a mirror of her own experience being on display, and kills the appliance that will soon be the framing device of her own display in a juvenile display of aggression.

Past this weak concept, the artist’s execution utterly fails. She applies the glue of the aquarium poorly, the frame applied to the front of the piece is tacked on. The rope overstates an already overstated idea.

If you want to defend this work, be my guest, but as far as I’m concerned there’s nothing redeeming about it.

As for, “All pieces need to be considered as if you know nothing about them”. Tell that to the art world. Reena Spaulings, Tom Friedman, Merlin Carpenter, Thomas Demand, Cornelia Parker, and a seemingly endless list of other artists seem to be doing just fine bucking that advice.

P.S. I think it’s a pretty naive to think that personalities don’t play a role in an artists success in the art world. That’s not to say the work isn’t part of it, but it’s a more complicated relationship than you’ve expressed.

@Victor Borans: Santos provides a statement for her work on her website, which describes the ideas behind her piece. “Water is the source of life for humans, yet deadly to electronics.” she writes. “In a pathetically ironic way, I used my art to regain a dominant position over “television” and objectify it: displaying it to the world in a state of vulnerability that would enable the viewer to partake in my experience, while examining his own relationship to the object.”

First of all, how much effort does it take to exert dominance over an inanimate object? That’s just bullshit. She’s created a mirror of her own experience being on display, and kills the appliance that will soon be the framing device of her own display in a juvenile display of aggression.

Past this weak concept, the artist’s execution utterly fails. She applies the glue of the aquarium poorly, the frame applied to the front of the piece is tacked on. The rope overstates an already overstated idea.

If you want to defend this work, be my guest, but as far as I’m concerned there’s nothing redeeming about it.

As for, “All pieces need to be considered as if you know nothing about them”. Tell that to the art world. Reena Spaulings, Tom Friedman, Merlin Carpenter, Thomas Demand, Cornelia Parker, and a seemingly endless list of other artists seem to be doing just fine bucking that advice.

P.S. I think it’s a pretty naive to think that personalities don’t play a role in an artists success in the art world. That’s not to say the work isn’t part of it, but it’s a more complicated relationship than you’ve expressed.

@Victor Borans: Santos provides a statement for her work on her website, which describes the ideas behind her piece. “Water is the source of life for humans, yet deadly to electronics.” she writes. “In a pathetically ironic way, I used my art to regain a dominant position over “television” and objectify it: displaying it to the world in a state of vulnerability that would enable the viewer to partake in my experience, while examining his own relationship to the object.”

First of all, how much effort does it take to exert dominance over an inanimate object? That’s just bullshit. She’s created a mirror of her own experience being on display, and kills the appliance that will soon be the framing device of her own display in a juvenile display of aggression.

Past this weak concept, the artist’s execution utterly fails. She applies the glue of the aquarium poorly, the frame applied to the front of the piece is tacked on. The rope overstates an already overstated idea.

If you want to defend this work, be my guest, but as far as I’m concerned there’s nothing redeeming about it.

As for, “All pieces need to be considered as if you know nothing about them”. Tell that to the art world. Reena Spaulings, Tom Friedman, Merlin Carpenter, Thomas Demand, Cornelia Parker, and a seemingly endless list of other artists seem to be doing just fine bucking that advice.

P.S. I think it’s a pretty naive to think that personalities don’t play a role in an artists success in the art world. That’s not to say the work isn’t part of it, but it’s a more complicated relationship than you’ve expressed.

@Victor Borans: Santos provides a statement for her work on her website, which describes the ideas behind her piece. “Water is the source of life for humans, yet deadly to electronics.” she writes. “In a pathetically ironic way, I used my art to regain a dominant position over “television” and objectify it: displaying it to the world in a state of vulnerability that would enable the viewer to partake in my experience, while examining his own relationship to the object.”

First of all, how much effort does it take to exert dominance over an inanimate object? That’s just bullshit. She’s created a mirror of her own experience being on display, and kills the appliance that will soon be the framing device of her own display in a juvenile display of aggression.

Past this weak concept, the artist’s execution utterly fails. She applies the glue of the aquarium poorly, the frame applied to the front of the piece is tacked on. The rope overstates an already overstated idea.

If you want to defend this work, be my guest, but as far as I’m concerned there’s nothing redeeming about it.

As for, “All pieces need to be considered as if you know nothing about them”. Tell that to the art world. Reena Spaulings, Tom Friedman, Merlin Carpenter, Thomas Demand, Cornelia Parker, and a seemingly endless list of other artists seem to be doing just fine bucking that advice.

P.S. I think it’s a pretty naive to think that personalities don’t play a role in an artists success in the art world. That’s not to say the work isn’t part of it, but it’s a more complicated relationship than you’ve expressed.

AFC – Thank you so much for bringing attention to Peregrine’s work! (Though I’m a little biased as I know her from my hometown.) But I was frustrated that Bravo flipped by her work so quickly I actually had to go back and pause the tv to really see what she’d done. Apparently Peregrine was too well behaved for the editors to give her any time.

Trong – I appreciated the way you calmly handled Miles’s outburst on screen. I’m sad to see you go, I would have liked to see more of your work. I’m mortified to hear that they altered your self portrait! That’s horrible!

I wish Bravo hadn’t chosen at least 2 artists with mental impairments (Narcoleptic OCD Miles and Eric with his brain injury) as it does nothing to help fight the stereotypical “crazy artist” image. Ah well. It is what it is. Maybe it will act as a spring board for more people getting interested in contemporary art. We can only hope.

AFC – Thank you so much for bringing attention to Peregrine’s work! (Though I’m a little biased as I know her from my hometown.) But I was frustrated that Bravo flipped by her work so quickly I actually had to go back and pause the tv to really see what she’d done. Apparently Peregrine was too well behaved for the editors to give her any time.

Trong – I appreciated the way you calmly handled Miles’s outburst on screen. I’m sad to see you go, I would have liked to see more of your work. I’m mortified to hear that they altered your self portrait! That’s horrible!

I wish Bravo hadn’t chosen at least 2 artists with mental impairments (Narcoleptic OCD Miles and Eric with his brain injury) as it does nothing to help fight the stereotypical “crazy artist” image. Ah well. It is what it is. Maybe it will act as a spring board for more people getting interested in contemporary art. We can only hope.

AFC – Thank you so much for bringing attention to Peregrine’s work! (Though I’m a little biased as I know her from my hometown.) But I was frustrated that Bravo flipped by her work so quickly I actually had to go back and pause the tv to really see what she’d done. Apparently Peregrine was too well behaved for the editors to give her any time.

Trong – I appreciated the way you calmly handled Miles’s outburst on screen. I’m sad to see you go, I would have liked to see more of your work. I’m mortified to hear that they altered your self portrait! That’s horrible!

I wish Bravo hadn’t chosen at least 2 artists with mental impairments (Narcoleptic OCD Miles and Eric with his brain injury) as it does nothing to help fight the stereotypical “crazy artist” image. Ah well. It is what it is. Maybe it will act as a spring board for more people getting interested in contemporary art. We can only hope.

AFC – Thank you so much for bringing attention to Peregrine’s work! (Though I’m a little biased as I know her from my hometown.) But I was frustrated that Bravo flipped by her work so quickly I actually had to go back and pause the tv to really see what she’d done. Apparently Peregrine was too well behaved for the editors to give her any time.

Trong – I appreciated the way you calmly handled Miles’s outburst on screen. I’m sad to see you go, I would have liked to see more of your work. I’m mortified to hear that they altered your self portrait! That’s horrible!

I wish Bravo hadn’t chosen at least 2 artists with mental impairments (Narcoleptic OCD Miles and Eric with his brain injury) as it does nothing to help fight the stereotypical “crazy artist” image. Ah well. It is what it is. Maybe it will act as a spring board for more people getting interested in contemporary art. We can only hope.

@Trong what did you expect from a reality TV show?

Just because something is intellectually sound doesn’t mean it is great art.

The problem is that you don’t have to dumb down art for the general viewing public. The public may not get why Trong made that piece but when he explains it, yes they will get it like anyone else. It does not mean they will like it any better and I don’t think they have to.

They can easily Google Tom Friedman and judge his work too. I have to say though Tom Friedman has that X factor where his work is intellectually sound, visually pleasing, as well as technically intoxicating.

There are so many great artists now. You really don’t need a reality show to find them.

@Trong what did you expect from a reality TV show?

Just because something is intellectually sound doesn’t mean it is great art.

The problem is that you don’t have to dumb down art for the general viewing public. The public may not get why Trong made that piece but when he explains it, yes they will get it like anyone else. It does not mean they will like it any better and I don’t think they have to.

They can easily Google Tom Friedman and judge his work too. I have to say though Tom Friedman has that X factor where his work is intellectually sound, visually pleasing, as well as technically intoxicating.

There are so many great artists now. You really don’t need a reality show to find them.

@Trong what did you expect from a reality TV show?

Just because something is intellectually sound doesn’t mean it is great art.

The problem is that you don’t have to dumb down art for the general viewing public. The public may not get why Trong made that piece but when he explains it, yes they will get it like anyone else. It does not mean they will like it any better and I don’t think they have to.

They can easily Google Tom Friedman and judge his work too. I have to say though Tom Friedman has that X factor where his work is intellectually sound, visually pleasing, as well as technically intoxicating.

There are so many great artists now. You really don’t need a reality show to find them.

I am fully prepared to be reamed by you in the future, but I was so happy to get positive feedback on my quiet sculpture. The light from the television I got to work shifted static through the storm screen. I really enjoy Rochelle Feinstein’s work and I felt the moment was a testament to her disco ball installations.

I am fully prepared to be reamed by you in the future, but I was so happy to get positive feedback on my quiet sculpture. The light from the television I got to work shifted static through the storm screen. I really enjoy Rochelle Feinstein’s work and I felt the moment was a testament to her disco ball installations.

I am fully prepared to be reamed by you in the future, but I was so happy to get positive feedback on my quiet sculpture. The light from the television I got to work shifted static through the storm screen. I really enjoy Rochelle Feinstein’s work and I felt the moment was a testament to her disco ball installations.

‘Past this weak concept, the artist’s execution utterly fails. She applies the glue of the aquarium poorly, the frame applied to the front of the piece is tacked on. The rope overstates an already overstated idea.”
And the editing revealed such in a strong manner. I felt contempt when she wasnt, at least in the bottom three.
A problem with Trongs piece is he didnt have enough time, but i guess i’m not revealing anything groundbreaking. I would like to see him move forward with the piece. Simply more craftsmanship, which time would give , would make for a more successful piece.

‘Past this weak concept, the artist’s execution utterly fails. She applies the glue of the aquarium poorly, the frame applied to the front of the piece is tacked on. The rope overstates an already overstated idea.”
And the editing revealed such in a strong manner. I felt contempt when she wasnt, at least in the bottom three.
A problem with Trongs piece is he didnt have enough time, but i guess i’m not revealing anything groundbreaking. I would like to see him move forward with the piece. Simply more craftsmanship, which time would give , would make for a more successful piece.

‘Past this weak concept, the artist’s execution utterly fails. She applies the glue of the aquarium poorly, the frame applied to the front of the piece is tacked on. The rope overstates an already overstated idea.”
And the editing revealed such in a strong manner. I felt contempt when she wasnt, at least in the bottom three.
A problem with Trongs piece is he didnt have enough time, but i guess i’m not revealing anything groundbreaking. I would like to see him move forward with the piece. Simply more craftsmanship, which time would give , would make for a more successful piece.

‘Past this weak concept, the artist’s execution utterly fails. She applies the glue of the aquarium poorly, the frame applied to the front of the piece is tacked on. The rope overstates an already overstated idea.”
And the editing revealed such in a strong manner. I felt contempt when she wasnt, at least in the bottom three.
A problem with Trongs piece is he didnt have enough time, but i guess i’m not revealing anything groundbreaking. I would like to see him move forward with the piece. Simply more craftsmanship, which time would give , would make for a more successful piece.

The more I think about it the more offended and annoyed I get that none of the regular judges nor the mentor are artists. I think the reason Top Chef seems to reward good, innovative chefs is not just because food seems more accessible, but is because Tom Collichio is a serious chef, and so insists on discussing and judging the food seriously. I find Michael Kors to be a little bland and conservative, but at least he’s a designer, and so constantly refers to design history on Project Runway. An artist in the core group of judges would (I hope) inject some intelligent discussion about art. Or at least object to China Chow saying that no one can see Nao’s little photograph, or call Jerry out on pretending not to know who Tom Friedman is. It seems to be in keeping with the way much of the art world treats artists generally — not as experts or stars but as servants to the dealers and collectors.

The more I think about it the more offended and annoyed I get that none of the regular judges nor the mentor are artists. I think the reason Top Chef seems to reward good, innovative chefs is not just because food seems more accessible, but is because Tom Collichio is a serious chef, and so insists on discussing and judging the food seriously. I find Michael Kors to be a little bland and conservative, but at least he’s a designer, and so constantly refers to design history on Project Runway. An artist in the core group of judges would (I hope) inject some intelligent discussion about art. Or at least object to China Chow saying that no one can see Nao’s little photograph, or call Jerry out on pretending not to know who Tom Friedman is. It seems to be in keeping with the way much of the art world treats artists generally — not as experts or stars but as servants to the dealers and collectors.

Mark, totally agree with most of the things you’re saying. I was just making the point that so little of what the work is actually about was aired, which does a disservice to understanding the art. There is a time issue with the episodes too, and I understand that.

As for your first question…. the only thing I didn’t expect from this particular reality show was how caricatured the judges were. You appreciate that there are serious people on the show, but you just don’t expect them to behave like buffoons.

Mark, totally agree with most of the things you’re saying. I was just making the point that so little of what the work is actually about was aired, which does a disservice to understanding the art. There is a time issue with the episodes too, and I understand that.

As for your first question…. the only thing I didn’t expect from this particular reality show was how caricatured the judges were. You appreciate that there are serious people on the show, but you just don’t expect them to behave like buffoons.

I find the program fascinating, as an artist. Fully agree that Peregrine Honig did the best work this week. Actually think she did the best work LAST week, too, but had to go to the ‘deleted scenes’ on the Bravo Website to see it. (You honestly can’t show a nude portrait on an “art” show, Bravo?)

Trong is a gifted artist, and I appreciated his comments above. But let’s face it: The whole thing was a bit pretentious.

Loved Parot’s work, for no real reason. It just made me smile. His and Honig’s pieces hit that indescribable “resonance” thing. I just got them.

And to the critics? Yes, it’s reality TV. Yes, a lot is edited out. Yes, it’s somewhat contrived.

But there’s some interesting stuff happening, involving some gifted artists. And it’s a whole, big bouquet of fun.

I find the program fascinating, as an artist. Fully agree that Peregrine Honig did the best work this week. Actually think she did the best work LAST week, too, but had to go to the ‘deleted scenes’ on the Bravo Website to see it. (You honestly can’t show a nude portrait on an “art” show, Bravo?)

Trong is a gifted artist, and I appreciated his comments above. But let’s face it: The whole thing was a bit pretentious.

Loved Parot’s work, for no real reason. It just made me smile. His and Honig’s pieces hit that indescribable “resonance” thing. I just got them.

And to the critics? Yes, it’s reality TV. Yes, a lot is edited out. Yes, it’s somewhat contrived.

But there’s some interesting stuff happening, involving some gifted artists. And it’s a whole, big bouquet of fun.

I find the program fascinating, as an artist. Fully agree that Peregrine Honig did the best work this week. Actually think she did the best work LAST week, too, but had to go to the ‘deleted scenes’ on the Bravo Website to see it. (You honestly can’t show a nude portrait on an “art” show, Bravo?)

Trong is a gifted artist, and I appreciated his comments above. But let’s face it: The whole thing was a bit pretentious.

Loved Parot’s work, for no real reason. It just made me smile. His and Honig’s pieces hit that indescribable “resonance” thing. I just got them.

And to the critics? Yes, it’s reality TV. Yes, a lot is edited out. Yes, it’s somewhat contrived.

But there’s some interesting stuff happening, involving some gifted artists. And it’s a whole, big bouquet of fun.

@AFC: I think it’s fair to say that your milkshake has brought the boys to the block.

@AFC: I think it’s fair to say that your milkshake has brought the boys to the block.

Tom Friedman is a little problematic of a choice because there are two well known people working with that name, and most people watching the show will think of the New York Times writer, Thomas Friedman. However, there are plenty of artists that you could choose that work with junk or found bits.

I can’t actually find the video for episode two online, and don’t have a TV, so thanks Paddy for the rundown.

Tom Friedman is a little problematic of a choice because there are two well known people working with that name, and most people watching the show will think of the New York Times writer, Thomas Friedman. However, there are plenty of artists that you could choose that work with junk or found bits.

I can’t actually find the video for episode two online, and don’t have a TV, so thanks Paddy for the rundown.

I think reading the posts here is more interesting than watching the show, which can only be judged by reality tv standards. that said, miles is the winning “reality tv personality”, however calculated his quirky wide-eyed persona may be. also–bill powers, what, they couldn’t get anyone else?

psssst @jessepmartin it’s “yard”. her milkshake brings all the boys the yard. (I can teach you, but I have to charge)

I think reading the posts here is more interesting than watching the show, which can only be judged by reality tv standards. that said, miles is the winning “reality tv personality”, however calculated his quirky wide-eyed persona may be. also–bill powers, what, they couldn’t get anyone else?

psssst @jessepmartin it’s “yard”. her milkshake brings all the boys the yard. (I can teach you, but I have to charge)

I think reading the posts here is more interesting than watching the show, which can only be judged by reality tv standards. that said, miles is the winning “reality tv personality”, however calculated his quirky wide-eyed persona may be. also–bill powers, what, they couldn’t get anyone else?

psssst @jessepmartin it’s “yard”. her milkshake brings all the boys the yard. (I can teach you, but I have to charge)

I think reading the posts here is more interesting than watching the show, which can only be judged by reality tv standards. that said, miles is the winning “reality tv personality”, however calculated his quirky wide-eyed persona may be. also–bill powers, what, they couldn’t get anyone else?

psssst @jessepmartin it’s “yard”. her milkshake brings all the boys the yard. (I can teach you, but I have to charge)

[...] that just explains everything, don’t it? (Screengrab by C-M.) 0 Comments Tags: bravo, the next great artist, work of [...]

I’ll say one more thing…. and this was also a little surprising…. the work looks much better seen on tv…. just like it added 10 pounds to my anemic frame!!!!:-)

I don’t think many of the artists expected to be making what would qualify as great work under these circumstances.

Completely agree with Lizzie’s assessment of the judges. Right on point!

Sam, I’ve had a couple of brews with Judith.. Highly recommended!

Greg.org, Tom Sach reference noted:-) Those tvs are made of foamcore:-)

I also liked a gallerist friend’s comments on the show: ” Art is about talent, intellect, knowledge and most importantly: history and knowing it so well as to remold it and write new rules. WIth this show they are trying to give Art a sense of accessibility as if it were a MacDonald cheeseburger.”

Everyone on the show is an “insider” save for Erik. Why pretend otherwise? If that were not the case, then Jerry should go and write reviews at sidewalk art festivals and Jeanne could exhibit the next great Kincaid….

I’ll say one more thing…. and this was also a little surprising…. the work looks much better seen on tv…. just like it added 10 pounds to my anemic frame!!!!:-)

I don’t think many of the artists expected to be making what would qualify as great work under these circumstances.

Completely agree with Lizzie’s assessment of the judges. Right on point!

Sam, I’ve had a couple of brews with Judith.. Highly recommended!

Greg.org, Tom Sach reference noted:-) Those tvs are made of foamcore:-)

I also liked a gallerist friend’s comments on the show: ” Art is about talent, intellect, knowledge and most importantly: history and knowing it so well as to remold it and write new rules. WIth this show they are trying to give Art a sense of accessibility as if it were a MacDonald cheeseburger.”

Everyone on the show is an “insider” save for Erik. Why pretend otherwise? If that were not the case, then Jerry should go and write reviews at sidewalk art festivals and Jeanne could exhibit the next great Kincaid….

I’ll say one more thing…. and this was also a little surprising…. the work looks much better seen on tv…. just like it added 10 pounds to my anemic frame!!!!:-)

I don’t think many of the artists expected to be making what would qualify as great work under these circumstances.

Completely agree with Lizzie’s assessment of the judges. Right on point!

Sam, I’ve had a couple of brews with Judith.. Highly recommended!

Greg.org, Tom Sach reference noted:-) Those tvs are made of foamcore:-)

I also liked a gallerist friend’s comments on the show: ” Art is about talent, intellect, knowledge and most importantly: history and knowing it so well as to remold it and write new rules. WIth this show they are trying to give Art a sense of accessibility as if it were a MacDonald cheeseburger.”

Everyone on the show is an “insider” save for Erik. Why pretend otherwise? If that were not the case, then Jerry should go and write reviews at sidewalk art festivals and Jeanne could exhibit the next great Kincaid….

I’ll say one more thing…. and this was also a little surprising…. the work looks much better seen on tv…. just like it added 10 pounds to my anemic frame!!!!:-)

I don’t think many of the artists expected to be making what would qualify as great work under these circumstances.

Completely agree with Lizzie’s assessment of the judges. Right on point!

Sam, I’ve had a couple of brews with Judith.. Highly recommended!

Greg.org, Tom Sach reference noted:-) Those tvs are made of foamcore:-)

I also liked a gallerist friend’s comments on the show: ” Art is about talent, intellect, knowledge and most importantly: history and knowing it so well as to remold it and write new rules. WIth this show they are trying to give Art a sense of accessibility as if it were a MacDonald cheeseburger.”

Everyone on the show is an “insider” save for Erik. Why pretend otherwise? If that were not the case, then Jerry should go and write reviews at sidewalk art festivals and Jeanne could exhibit the next great Kincaid….

You can download the episode from Amazon and watch it on your computer.

You can download the episode from Amazon and watch it on your computer.

You can download the episode from Amazon and watch it on your computer.

You can download the episode from Amazon and watch it on your computer.

I’m wondering what kind of non-disclosure agreements the contestants signed. (and did they have to sign a non-disclosure for the non-disclosure?)

Judith, Trong, you can trust us. Just tell us who wins so that we can get in early on the buying frenzy. (or will Sarah Jessica Parker make sure that you never show in NYC again?)

I’m wondering what kind of non-disclosure agreements the contestants signed. (and did they have to sign a non-disclosure for the non-disclosure?)

Judith, Trong, you can trust us. Just tell us who wins so that we can get in early on the buying frenzy. (or will Sarah Jessica Parker make sure that you never show in NYC again?)

I’m wondering what kind of non-disclosure agreements the contestants signed. (and did they have to sign a non-disclosure for the non-disclosure?)

Judith, Trong, you can trust us. Just tell us who wins so that we can get in early on the buying frenzy. (or will Sarah Jessica Parker make sure that you never show in NYC again?)

I’m wondering what kind of non-disclosure agreements the contestants signed. (and did they have to sign a non-disclosure for the non-disclosure?)

Judith, Trong, you can trust us. Just tell us who wins so that we can get in early on the buying frenzy. (or will Sarah Jessica Parker make sure that you never show in NYC again?)

I am thoroughly enjoying the show and find the quality of the art and judges quite high.

It also seems to me that Trong is a sore loser.

I thought his piece lacked thought and was poorly executed compared to the other work.Move on Trong.

I am thoroughly enjoying the show and find the quality of the art and judges quite high.

It also seems to me that Trong is a sore loser.

I thought his piece lacked thought and was poorly executed compared to the other work.Move on Trong.

I am thoroughly enjoying the show and find the quality of the art and judges quite high.

It also seems to me that Trong is a sore loser.

I thought his piece lacked thought and was poorly executed compared to the other work.Move on Trong.

I think this show allows what insider art lacks to provide the public. The snobbery in the art world makes it very intimidating to the general public, this show allows it to become intimate, right in the viewers home – to make their own decisions. I think the show deserves a little bit more respect and reflection, before anyone’s noses poke up too high in the air…

I think this show allows what insider art lacks to provide the public. The snobbery in the art world makes it very intimidating to the general public, this show allows it to become intimate, right in the viewers home – to make their own decisions. I think the show deserves a little bit more respect and reflection, before anyone’s noses poke up too high in the air…

I think this show allows what insider art lacks to provide the public. The snobbery in the art world makes it very intimidating to the general public, this show allows it to become intimate, right in the viewers home – to make their own decisions. I think the show deserves a little bit more respect and reflection, before anyone’s noses poke up too high in the air…

@Vinness: Thank you! I must have been thinking of “Jenny from the block…” So, AFC’s milkshake brings Jenny from the block, and the boys to the yard.

@Vinness: Thank you! I must have been thinking of “Jenny from the block…” So, AFC’s milkshake brings Jenny from the block, and the boys to the yard.

I’m really enjoying Paddy’s commentary as a complement to the show. For the sake of drama we are not given access to the substance of the critique, which is disappointing. Of course, they can’t let the guy, who says he hates reality tv make it to the next round. Trong, Peregrine: How many hours were you given to make the work?

I’m really enjoying Paddy’s commentary as a complement to the show. For the sake of drama we are not given access to the substance of the critique, which is disappointing. Of course, they can’t let the guy, who says he hates reality tv make it to the next round. Trong, Peregrine: How many hours were you given to make the work?

I’m really enjoying Paddy’s commentary as a complement to the show. For the sake of drama we are not given access to the substance of the critique, which is disappointing. Of course, they can’t let the guy, who says he hates reality tv make it to the next round. Trong, Peregrine: How many hours were you given to make the work?

I’m really enjoying Paddy’s commentary as a complement to the show. For the sake of drama we are not given access to the substance of the critique, which is disappointing. Of course, they can’t let the guy, who says he hates reality tv make it to the next round. Trong, Peregrine: How many hours were you given to make the work?

- Although Miles is an amazing artist, he still bugs the hell out of me. Am I the only person who doesn’t think that he actually has OCD?

I know several people with OCD and it is often quite debilitating. There is no way that he could be on a reality TV show and manage to make the things he has with that illness. After the show is done airing I bet he’ll blog about how the OCD business was some kind of performance piece!

– Also, I don’t think that it was fair to send Trong home. When seeing the show I couldn’t help but think that most of the art was terrible. I thought two of the worst pieces were done by Nicole and Abdi, who were both in the top 3!!!

Abdi was probably picked because stupid TV audiences like cliches – a TV head, seriously? Nicole was probably picked because of her aunt.

- Although Miles is an amazing artist, he still bugs the hell out of me. Am I the only person who doesn’t think that he actually has OCD?

I know several people with OCD and it is often quite debilitating. There is no way that he could be on a reality TV show and manage to make the things he has with that illness. After the show is done airing I bet he’ll blog about how the OCD business was some kind of performance piece!

– Also, I don’t think that it was fair to send Trong home. When seeing the show I couldn’t help but think that most of the art was terrible. I thought two of the worst pieces were done by Nicole and Abdi, who were both in the top 3!!!

Abdi was probably picked because stupid TV audiences like cliches – a TV head, seriously? Nicole was probably picked because of her aunt.

- Although Miles is an amazing artist, he still bugs the hell out of me. Am I the only person who doesn’t think that he actually has OCD?

I know several people with OCD and it is often quite debilitating. There is no way that he could be on a reality TV show and manage to make the things he has with that illness. After the show is done airing I bet he’ll blog about how the OCD business was some kind of performance piece!

– Also, I don’t think that it was fair to send Trong home. When seeing the show I couldn’t help but think that most of the art was terrible. I thought two of the worst pieces were done by Nicole and Abdi, who were both in the top 3!!!

Abdi was probably picked because stupid TV audiences like cliches – a TV head, seriously? Nicole was probably picked because of her aunt.

- Although Miles is an amazing artist, he still bugs the hell out of me. Am I the only person who doesn’t think that he actually has OCD?

I know several people with OCD and it is often quite debilitating. There is no way that he could be on a reality TV show and manage to make the things he has with that illness. After the show is done airing I bet he’ll blog about how the OCD business was some kind of performance piece!

– Also, I don’t think that it was fair to send Trong home. When seeing the show I couldn’t help but think that most of the art was terrible. I thought two of the worst pieces were done by Nicole and Abdi, who were both in the top 3!!!

Abdi was probably picked because stupid TV audiences like cliches – a TV head, seriously? Nicole was probably picked because of her aunt.

this show is horrible. the “here’s some shit, make something” aspect makes me so angry. the criticism is sub-par at best. i feel like jerry gets less face time than some of the other judges like bill powers, just because powers makes more absurd or shocking observations. I think if anyone from middle america is watching this they must be thinking that artists are all wacky, defective, or just fucked up. I would have to say that this show might make the art world even more insular, using this dumbed-down version of what “Art” is as a catalyst.

i will say jon kessler, was interesting to see on the show. that was probably the only thing that made sense this last episode, yet no one really made anything that was kinetic. trong’s “what would tom friedman do?” joke was pretty lame. i’m guessing friedman wouldn’t phone it in by painting 4 tv’s and calling it a day. Lame.

this show is horrible. the “here’s some shit, make something” aspect makes me so angry. the criticism is sub-par at best. i feel like jerry gets less face time than some of the other judges like bill powers, just because powers makes more absurd or shocking observations. I think if anyone from middle america is watching this they must be thinking that artists are all wacky, defective, or just fucked up. I would have to say that this show might make the art world even more insular, using this dumbed-down version of what “Art” is as a catalyst.

i will say jon kessler, was interesting to see on the show. that was probably the only thing that made sense this last episode, yet no one really made anything that was kinetic. trong’s “what would tom friedman do?” joke was pretty lame. i’m guessing friedman wouldn’t phone it in by painting 4 tv’s and calling it a day. Lame.

this show is horrible. the “here’s some shit, make something” aspect makes me so angry. the criticism is sub-par at best. i feel like jerry gets less face time than some of the other judges like bill powers, just because powers makes more absurd or shocking observations. I think if anyone from middle america is watching this they must be thinking that artists are all wacky, defective, or just fucked up. I would have to say that this show might make the art world even more insular, using this dumbed-down version of what “Art” is as a catalyst.

i will say jon kessler, was interesting to see on the show. that was probably the only thing that made sense this last episode, yet no one really made anything that was kinetic. trong’s “what would tom friedman do?” joke was pretty lame. i’m guessing friedman wouldn’t phone it in by painting 4 tv’s and calling it a day. Lame.

@nancy, you are not alone. I call it FauxCD.

@nancy, you are not alone. I call it FauxCD.

i am really enjoying the discussion and criticism. having trong comment here and offer insight into what happened and explain his work is fantastic. when reality judges make such poor decisions, like eliminating trong, it makes me not want to watch any more. it ruins the whole show for me. of course, i’m going to watch it until the end. looking forward to more, thanks paddy.

i am really enjoying the discussion and criticism. having trong comment here and offer insight into what happened and explain his work is fantastic. when reality judges make such poor decisions, like eliminating trong, it makes me not want to watch any more. it ruins the whole show for me. of course, i’m going to watch it until the end. looking forward to more, thanks paddy.

AFC…Elyse Sewell from Top Model…so great. Anyone, if you haven’t watched her rants on youtube…do!….

BETH: Yeah, “reality tv” meets “blogoshpere”! … more parallel universes… BUT…just FYI….the Judges have Bravo blogs, and us contestants are blocked from commenting on them. They need protection …because they get paid!

Same subj: I find the pre-dawn instant RECAP by JS in nymag like a desperate preemption of the show.

AFC: Reading all this…and biting my tongue. I wrote Bravo the other day saying, “I’m being cool, but I’m not on ice”. :-)

SAM: Anytime! Friend me!

LIZZIE: Agree, not one artist on the panel?

But…tho I went in with my eyes open to play a game….it was beyond disheartening to witness the way Trong was sent home….
ok, biting tongue…ouch!

AFC…Elyse Sewell from Top Model…so great. Anyone, if you haven’t watched her rants on youtube…do!….

BETH: Yeah, “reality tv” meets “blogoshpere”! … more parallel universes… BUT…just FYI….the Judges have Bravo blogs, and us contestants are blocked from commenting on them. They need protection …because they get paid!

Same subj: I find the pre-dawn instant RECAP by JS in nymag like a desperate preemption of the show.

AFC: Reading all this…and biting my tongue. I wrote Bravo the other day saying, “I’m being cool, but I’m not on ice”. :-)

SAM: Anytime! Friend me!

LIZZIE: Agree, not one artist on the panel?

But…tho I went in with my eyes open to play a game….it was beyond disheartening to witness the way Trong was sent home….
ok, biting tongue…ouch!

Judith, thanks for the additional inside scoop in reply to my questions to Trong. It’s interesting how they allow all of the contestants some degree of free reign to provide background commentary on outside blogs but not on Bravo’s judges’ blogs. I’d imagine you are all having to do a bit of a dance around the line that Bravo has drawn that determines what you are allowed to divulge (opinion-wise, obviously not results-wise). Appreciate your candor so far.

Judith, thanks for the additional inside scoop in reply to my questions to Trong. It’s interesting how they allow all of the contestants some degree of free reign to provide background commentary on outside blogs but not on Bravo’s judges’ blogs. I’d imagine you are all having to do a bit of a dance around the line that Bravo has drawn that determines what you are allowed to divulge (opinion-wise, obviously not results-wise). Appreciate your candor so far.

BETH….you got it. Walking a line….but I have to accept that this is the dotted line I signed on. It’s hard… but I’m trying to let it go to have a life of its own. I don’t think I’m doing a great job at that!!! …but that’s my more lofty intention. My impulsive self wants to jump in and correct and fill in everything! urrrgh…. Then I realize that in “real-ality”…it will all be gone and forgotten soon!

I’m not doing a blog because, guess what…. I have ART to make!!! :-))

BETH….you got it. Walking a line….but I have to accept that this is the dotted line I signed on. It’s hard… but I’m trying to let it go to have a life of its own. I don’t think I’m doing a great job at that!!! …but that’s my more lofty intention. My impulsive self wants to jump in and correct and fill in everything! urrrgh…. Then I realize that in “real-ality”…it will all be gone and forgotten soon!

I’m not doing a blog because, guess what…. I have ART to make!!! :-))

I like the show. Think it’s entertaining. Not sure why anyone would think too deeply about it, or get too concerned with what the judges think. Art can’t really be measured in episodic, reality TV terms, so just enjoy the show for what it is or don’t watch it.

I like the show. Think it’s entertaining. Not sure why anyone would think too deeply about it, or get too concerned with what the judges think. Art can’t really be measured in episodic, reality TV terms, so just enjoy the show for what it is or don’t watch it.

Waaah! I had hoped Trong would be on the show for longer. Am enjoying Abdi's enthusiasm and earnestness. His TV head game-boy actually had a point of view, even though not a terribly original one. He is 22! Hoping that Nao and Judith will start to "Bring it". Loved Nicole's TV tomb and Ryan's bed sans sleep stunt. He literally poisoned every one though by working with toxic materials in the studio. I wish we had gotten to see more of John's piece! Also, thought Jamie's piece held up. Then, I heard the comment about how she just placed the objects with out transforming – and agreed with that. I love this show! And, I don't watch tv normally. I thought I would hate it, but it is neat watching the different personalities emerge as the artists make work in a studio together.

Waaah! I had hoped Trong would be on the show for longer. Am enjoying Abdi's enthusiasm and earnestness. His TV head game-boy actually had a point of view, even though not a terribly original one. He is 22! Hoping that Nao and Judith will start to "Bring it". Loved Nicole's TV tomb and Ryan's bed sans sleep stunt. He literally poisoned every one though by working with toxic materials in the studio. I wish we had gotten to see more of John's piece! Also, thought Jamie's piece held up. Then, I heard the comment about how she just placed the objects with out transforming – and agreed with that. I love this show! And, I don't watch tv normally. I thought I would hate it, but it is neat watching the different personalities emerge as the artists make work in a studio together.

[...] love the show, Work of Art. But, I think it is entertaining. For me it works best when paired with Paddy Johnson’s commentary on Art Fag City. [...]

check out America’s Greatest Artist – JML at

http://www.jessicalogsdon.com