0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Work of Art’s Weakest Artists Remain

by Paddy Johnson on July 1, 2010 · 235 comments

Abdi Farah's "I.E.D." (Improvised Explosive Device)

BRAVO promised to send a Work of Art screener yesterday so I could view it in Canada but it never arrived. As such, readers won’t see a recap of this week’s “shocking” art episode. Judging by everything I’ve seen and read though, this episodes only further proves the complaining observations of gallery extras prior to the show’s airing: All the interesting artists were being eliminated. Speaking to this, SPOILER ALERT: John Parot and Nao Bustamante got the axe this week. Shock and awe artist Andrea Serrano was the guest judge.

Neither artist produced particularly strong work, which puts them on par with just about everyone else in this week’s episode (Peregrine Honig’s drawings were the only works that seemed passable to me). There goes the show’s two most legitimate artists.

Just so it’s clear, Work of Art’s weakest artists are, Ryan Schultz, Eric Johnson, Jaclyn Santos, Abdi Farah, and Mark Valesquez. None of them have been eliminated yet and this distortion ripples its way through the media. Yesterday evening NYMagazine critic Jerry Saltz described Abdi’s floor-displayed black heads with wicks as full of “magic and presence.” Yeah right. We’re heading for a grim grand finale with Abdi and Valesquez. If Bravo’s track record remains in tact, Peregrine Honig will be eliminated next week.

Warhol-themed Perrier Bottles Are On The Way Five Jobs: Art Handler Edition Forget About Teaching, Or Unionize, Studies Show

Powered by Facebook Comments

← Older Comments
  • frances

    this show is so ridiculous, i’ve given up on being the least bit interested in who wins. the whole framework of a show with challenges and deadlines to turn out great – or even interesting – art is problematic. but it’s fun to watch. it’s an artworld equivalent of people magazine, and sure, i’ll skim the threads and watch the clips online, but at the end of the day, when i want actual valid information or opinion, i’m going to buy frieze or parkett or check out afc…

    the only thing i dislike is that…the art-making process, as presented on tv, is so…far from what it is for people off tv (even for those artists themselves), and selling that to an audience just seems really un-informative about art, at the end of the day…i just hope it’s conveyed to viewers that this is a game, and what comes out of it isn’t serious or valuable, beyond schlocky pop cultural value…

  • frances

    this show is so ridiculous, i’ve given up on being the least bit interested in who wins. the whole framework of a show with challenges and deadlines to turn out great – or even interesting – art is problematic. but it’s fun to watch. it’s an artworld equivalent of people magazine, and sure, i’ll skim the threads and watch the clips online, but at the end of the day, when i want actual valid information or opinion, i’m going to buy frieze or parkett or check out afc…

    the only thing i dislike is that…the art-making process, as presented on tv, is so…far from what it is for people off tv (even for those artists themselves), and selling that to an audience just seems really un-informative about art, at the end of the day…i just hope it’s conveyed to viewers that this is a game, and what comes out of it isn’t serious or valuable, beyond schlocky pop cultural value…

  • frances

    this show is so ridiculous, i’ve given up on being the least bit interested in who wins. the whole framework of a show with challenges and deadlines to turn out great – or even interesting – art is problematic. but it’s fun to watch. it’s an artworld equivalent of people magazine, and sure, i’ll skim the threads and watch the clips online, but at the end of the day, when i want actual valid information or opinion, i’m going to buy frieze or parkett or check out afc…

    the only thing i dislike is that…the art-making process, as presented on tv, is so…far from what it is for people off tv (even for those artists themselves), and selling that to an audience just seems really un-informative about art, at the end of the day…i just hope it’s conveyed to viewers that this is a game, and what comes out of it isn’t serious or valuable, beyond schlocky pop cultural value…

  • frances

    this show is so ridiculous, i’ve given up on being the least bit interested in who wins. the whole framework of a show with challenges and deadlines to turn out great – or even interesting – art is problematic. but it’s fun to watch. it’s an artworld equivalent of people magazine, and sure, i’ll skim the threads and watch the clips online, but at the end of the day, when i want actual valid information or opinion, i’m going to buy frieze or parkett or check out afc…

    the only thing i dislike is that…the art-making process, as presented on tv, is so…far from what it is for people off tv (even for those artists themselves), and selling that to an audience just seems really un-informative about art, at the end of the day…i just hope it’s conveyed to viewers that this is a game, and what comes out of it isn’t serious or valuable, beyond schlocky pop cultural value…

  • franny

    oh, i don’t even want to get that sucked into commenting about this show BUT i did wish that i had said that

    being someone who does seek further input (on a serious level) by checking out artforum or whatever other form of more ‘high-brow’ information, apart from the portion of the art world watching this show with a dropped jaw, a huge portion of viewers won’t look at further sources for their introduction/knowledge of art…the buck will stop at wanga…eeek

  • franny

    oh, i don’t even want to get that sucked into commenting about this show BUT i did wish that i had said that

    being someone who does seek further input (on a serious level) by checking out artforum or whatever other form of more ‘high-brow’ information, apart from the portion of the art world watching this show with a dropped jaw, a huge portion of viewers won’t look at further sources for their introduction/knowledge of art…the buck will stop at wanga…eeek

  • franny

    oh, i don’t even want to get that sucked into commenting about this show BUT i did wish that i had said that

    being someone who does seek further input (on a serious level) by checking out artforum or whatever other form of more ‘high-brow’ information, apart from the portion of the art world watching this show with a dropped jaw, a huge portion of viewers won’t look at further sources for their introduction/knowledge of art…the buck will stop at wanga…eeek

  • franny

    oh, i don’t even want to get that sucked into commenting about this show BUT i did wish that i had said that

    being someone who does seek further input (on a serious level) by checking out artforum or whatever other form of more ‘high-brow’ information, apart from the portion of the art world watching this show with a dropped jaw, a huge portion of viewers won’t look at further sources for their introduction/knowledge of art…the buck will stop at wanga…eeek

  • Paul

    This show should really just take it’s cast from undergrad art schools. It would be much more interesting all around. The assignments and time frames given are not unlike the ones you get as a student. Using already established artists makes each artist compromise at some point for some assignment. Not every artist is shocking not every artist makes good junk sculptures.

    Besides grab a bunch of 21 – 22 year old kids from art schools all over the world and you get good drama and hopefully some good sexual tension. They would also have potentially more to gain from all of this, exposure, connections, experience. The winning artist gets a gallery contract somewhere decent, final 3 are in a group show somewhere, voila.

  • Paul

    This show should really just take it’s cast from undergrad art schools. It would be much more interesting all around. The assignments and time frames given are not unlike the ones you get as a student. Using already established artists makes each artist compromise at some point for some assignment. Not every artist is shocking not every artist makes good junk sculptures.

    Besides grab a bunch of 21 – 22 year old kids from art schools all over the world and you get good drama and hopefully some good sexual tension. They would also have potentially more to gain from all of this, exposure, connections, experience. The winning artist gets a gallery contract somewhere decent, final 3 are in a group show somewhere, voila.

  • Paul

    This show should really just take it’s cast from undergrad art schools. It would be much more interesting all around. The assignments and time frames given are not unlike the ones you get as a student. Using already established artists makes each artist compromise at some point for some assignment. Not every artist is shocking not every artist makes good junk sculptures.

    Besides grab a bunch of 21 – 22 year old kids from art schools all over the world and you get good drama and hopefully some good sexual tension. They would also have potentially more to gain from all of this, exposure, connections, experience. The winning artist gets a gallery contract somewhere decent, final 3 are in a group show somewhere, voila.

  • Paul

    This show should really just take it’s cast from undergrad art schools. It would be much more interesting all around. The assignments and time frames given are not unlike the ones you get as a student. Using already established artists makes each artist compromise at some point for some assignment. Not every artist is shocking not every artist makes good junk sculptures.

    Besides grab a bunch of 21 – 22 year old kids from art schools all over the world and you get good drama and hopefully some good sexual tension. They would also have potentially more to gain from all of this, exposure, connections, experience. The winning artist gets a gallery contract somewhere decent, final 3 are in a group show somewhere, voila.

  • Jimbo

    I’m really surprised at how many notes here seem to feel that Judith was unjustly termed. She made it very clear that she wasn’t interested in following the instructions. Also, her work for last week was an inside joke only to her and the author (who reportedly wrote backwards letters). Finally, it was lousy visually. What’s to talk about here guys? I am sorry that Nao never really got her act together. She had great promise. Springer’s Final Thoughts: Remember that Reality TV is the idiot bastard son/daughter of News and Soap Operas. There are some bright moments interspersed between a lot of real dreck.

    • Anonamoose

      When I first heard about the show I looked at every portfolio and bookmarked the ones I liked. Then I stumbled across a page that had a poll asking people who their favorites were. All of my selections were at the very bottom of the poll while all the ones I disliked seemed to be at the top. I was confused as hell, and then I spotted the website url, “homorazzi.com”. Then I realized John was at the top, and he was a homosexual. Is it the same way here? Whats going on? Am I not educated enough to like Trong, Judith, or Naos stuff? I don’t like a majority of Johns stuff, but I did find his time machine book cover visually appealing.

      When I read all the discontent about Trong being eliminated, I was like… whhhaaat? He took four tiny tvs.. painted them white.. wrote obscure things on them.. and everyone was surprised he got booted?

      Judith made a blanket that said proud pussy on it, a jumbled pile of wires, and a horrible looking powdery mess on construction paper. She’s just too creative for me.

      I feel like I can’t even say anything about Nao because she didn’t exactly fit onto the show. Her portrait of miles might have caught my attention for 2 seconds (or 10 if I was smoking weed!). Her little city sculpture was okay, but still not my cup of tea. And her last piece was probably something you’d see being hauled away by cops in a New York train station.

      While I liked Johns book cover, his other pieces were pretty drab to me. What was that sculpture anyway? He made it look like an overly gay and overly outdated entertainment system. It wasn’t appealing to me. And finally, he poorly sketched a horrible figure sucking his own dick.

      I must be the dumbest person here, cause I sincerely don’t get why most people could even question them leaving unless they were all close friends with the artists.

      One thing this show has taught me.. I don’t like what seems like these highbrow artists. Judiths attitude blew in some of the deleted scenes on bravotv.com. And the judges really seem to say unhelpful and stupid things at times.

      And this last episode really enforced my opinion that no one should start out a painting with the thought of conveying emotion, shock, or awe first in mind. They should think of composition, color, texture, value, and interest first, if not while pondering the mood.

      I like the show.. maybe I like watching the process more than finding out who the winner and losers are.. but the show satisfies my need for artistic inspiration for now. But, I really kind of wish the show wasn’t a competition. Maybe just following the artists through their processes while they work.. Seeing how they live their lives. What inspires them.

      My favorite contestants on the show, portfolio wise, are probably Abdi, Ryan, Mark, Jaclyn, Peregrine… MAYBE some of Jaime’s stuff. And Erik for being the underdog.. I just want to see him punch one of those judges.. or at least make a piece that amazes them.

      • http://www.artfagcity.com Art Fag City

        Trong, Judith, Nao and John all made weak work in the challenges where they were eliminated, no question. In all cases though, equally weak work was created by less talented artists. Trong – weak yes, but at least he thought about the work. Jaclyn’s hung tv in an aquarium was completely empty. Judith vs Jaclyn – technically Jaclyn’s was the worse piece. Nao and John — not awesome work, but everyone’s sucked. Why not eliminate the less talented artists?

        Also, so far two of the four challenges have been so poorly conceived that the serious artists found the projects completely demoralizing. John was quite clear he wasn’t into the challenge, and Nao, who’s executed legitimately shocking performances didn’t produce one. One can only speculate on the reasons why, but if I were to guess, it’s because any serious artist (but for Andres Serrano) would find that challenge a little too humiliating to complete easily.

        The judging is a problem on this show — only Saltz is any good. Simon de Pury is a problem on this show — He’s not a teacher or an artist, he’s an auctioneer and a business man, and therefore almost completely useless in the studio. Most of all, the producers are a problem for this show. They needed to produce a few original challenges, (and land a couple more media partners). The good artists are being eliminated first because the challenges presented shouldn’t have any relationship to a serious artist’s practice. You could argue that about a reality show in general of course, but I guess I had higher hopes for this. I had hoped the show would illuminate what goes on in the studio, and the criteria for creating a successful work of art. If anything, BRAVO confuses the matter.

    • Anonamoose

      When I first heard about the show I looked at every portfolio and bookmarked the ones I liked. Then I stumbled across a page that had a poll asking people who their favorites were. All of my selections were at the very bottom of the poll while all the ones I disliked seemed to be at the top. I was confused as hell, and then I spotted the website url, “homorazzi.com”. Then I realized John was at the top, and he was a homosexual. Is it the same way here? Whats going on? Am I not educated enough to like Trong, Judith, or Naos stuff? I don’t like a majority of Johns stuff, but I did find his time machine book cover visually appealing.

      When I read all the discontent about Trong being eliminated, I was like… whhhaaat? He took four tiny tvs.. painted them white.. wrote obscure things on them.. and everyone was surprised he got booted?

      Judith made a blanket that said proud pussy on it, a jumbled pile of wires, and a horrible looking powdery mess on construction paper. She’s just too creative for me.

      I feel like I can’t even say anything about Nao because she didn’t exactly fit onto the show. Her portrait of miles might have caught my attention for 2 seconds (or 10 if I was smoking weed!). Her little city sculpture was okay, but still not my cup of tea. And her last piece was probably something you’d see being hauled away by cops in a New York train station.

      While I liked Johns book cover, his other pieces were pretty drab to me. What was that sculpture anyway? He made it look like an overly gay and overly outdated entertainment system. It wasn’t appealing to me. And finally, he poorly sketched a horrible figure sucking his own dick.

      I must be the dumbest person here, cause I sincerely don’t get why most people could even question them leaving unless they were all close friends with the artists.

      One thing this show has taught me.. I don’t like what seems like these highbrow artists. Judiths attitude blew in some of the deleted scenes on bravotv.com. And the judges really seem to say unhelpful and stupid things at times.

      And this last episode really enforced my opinion that no one should start out a painting with the thought of conveying emotion, shock, or awe first in mind. They should think of composition, color, texture, value, and interest first, if not while pondering the mood.

      I like the show.. maybe I like watching the process more than finding out who the winner and losers are.. but the show satisfies my need for artistic inspiration for now. But, I really kind of wish the show wasn’t a competition. Maybe just following the artists through their processes while they work.. Seeing how they live their lives. What inspires them.

      My favorite contestants on the show, portfolio wise, are probably Abdi, Ryan, Mark, Jaclyn, Peregrine… MAYBE some of Jaime’s stuff. And Erik for being the underdog.. I just want to see him punch one of those judges.. or at least make a piece that amazes them.

    • Anonamoose

      When I first heard about the show I looked at every portfolio and bookmarked the ones I liked. Then I stumbled across a page that had a poll asking people who their favorites were. All of my selections were at the very bottom of the poll while all the ones I disliked seemed to be at the top. I was confused as hell, and then I spotted the website url, “homorazzi.com”. Then I realized John was at the top, and he was a homosexual. Is it the same way here? Whats going on? Am I not educated enough to like Trong, Judith, or Naos stuff? I don’t like a majority of Johns stuff, but I did find his time machine book cover visually appealing.

      When I read all the discontent about Trong being eliminated, I was like… whhhaaat? He took four tiny tvs.. painted them white.. wrote obscure things on them.. and everyone was surprised he got booted?

      Judith made a blanket that said proud pussy on it, a jumbled pile of wires, and a horrible looking powdery mess on construction paper. She’s just too creative for me.

      I feel like I can’t even say anything about Nao because she didn’t exactly fit onto the show. Her portrait of miles might have caught my attention for 2 seconds (or 10 if I was smoking weed!). Her little city sculpture was okay, but still not my cup of tea. And her last piece was probably something you’d see being hauled away by cops in a New York train station.

      While I liked Johns book cover, his other pieces were pretty drab to me. What was that sculpture anyway? He made it look like an overly gay and overly outdated entertainment system. It wasn’t appealing to me. And finally, he poorly sketched a horrible figure sucking his own dick.

      I must be the dumbest person here, cause I sincerely don’t get why most people could even question them leaving unless they were all close friends with the artists.

      One thing this show has taught me.. I don’t like what seems like these highbrow artists. Judiths attitude blew in some of the deleted scenes on bravotv.com. And the judges really seem to say unhelpful and stupid things at times.

      And this last episode really enforced my opinion that no one should start out a painting with the thought of conveying emotion, shock, or awe first in mind. They should think of composition, color, texture, value, and interest first, if not while pondering the mood.

      I like the show.. maybe I like watching the process more than finding out who the winner and losers are.. but the show satisfies my need for artistic inspiration for now. But, I really kind of wish the show wasn’t a competition. Maybe just following the artists through their processes while they work.. Seeing how they live their lives. What inspires them.

      My favorite contestants on the show, portfolio wise, are probably Abdi, Ryan, Mark, Jaclyn, Peregrine… MAYBE some of Jaime’s stuff. And Erik for being the underdog.. I just want to see him punch one of those judges.. or at least make a piece that amazes them.

  • Jimbo

    I’m really surprised at how many notes here seem to feel that Judith was unjustly termed. She made it very clear that she wasn’t interested in following the instructions. Also, her work for last week was an inside joke only to her and the author (who reportedly wrote backwards letters). Finally, it was lousy visually. What’s to talk about here guys? I am sorry that Nao never really got her act together. She had great promise. Springer’s Final Thoughts: Remember that Reality TV is the idiot bastard son/daughter of News and Soap Operas. There are some bright moments interspersed between a lot of real dreck.

    • Anonamoose

      When I first heard about the show I looked at every portfolio and bookmarked the ones I liked. Then I stumbled across a page that had a poll asking people who their favorites were. All of my selections were at the very bottom of the poll while all the ones I disliked seemed to be at the top. I was confused as hell, and then I spotted the website url, “homorazzi.com”. Then I realized John was at the top, and he was a homosexual. Is it the same way here? Whats going on? Am I not educated enough to like Trong, Judith, or Naos stuff? I don’t like a majority of Johns stuff, but I did find his time machine book cover visually appealing.

      When I read all the discontent about Trong being eliminated, I was like… whhhaaat? He took four tiny tvs.. painted them white.. wrote obscure things on them.. and everyone was surprised he got booted?

      Judith made a blanket that said proud pussy on it, a jumbled pile of wires, and a horrible looking powdery mess on construction paper. She’s just too creative for me.

      I feel like I can’t even say anything about Nao because she didn’t exactly fit onto the show. Her portrait of miles might have caught my attention for 2 seconds (or 10 if I was smoking weed!). Her little city sculpture was okay, but still not my cup of tea. And her last piece was probably something you’d see being hauled away by cops in a New York train station.

      While I liked Johns book cover, his other pieces were pretty drab to me. What was that sculpture anyway? He made it look like an overly gay and overly outdated entertainment system. It wasn’t appealing to me. And finally, he poorly sketched a horrible figure sucking his own dick.

      I must be the dumbest person here, cause I sincerely don’t get why most people could even question them leaving unless they were all close friends with the artists.

      One thing this show has taught me.. I don’t like what seems like these highbrow artists. Judiths attitude blew in some of the deleted scenes on bravotv.com. And the judges really seem to say unhelpful and stupid things at times.

      And this last episode really enforced my opinion that no one should start out a painting with the thought of conveying emotion, shock, or awe first in mind. They should think of composition, color, texture, value, and interest first, if not while pondering the mood.

      I like the show.. maybe I like watching the process more than finding out who the winner and losers are.. but the show satisfies my need for artistic inspiration for now. But, I really kind of wish the show wasn’t a competition. Maybe just following the artists through their processes while they work.. Seeing how they live their lives. What inspires them.

      My favorite contestants on the show, portfolio wise, are probably Abdi, Ryan, Mark, Jaclyn, Peregrine… MAYBE some of Jaime’s stuff. And Erik for being the underdog.. I just want to see him punch one of those judges.. or at least make a piece that amazes them.

      • http://www.artfagcity.com Art Fag City

        Trong, Judith, Nao and John all made weak work in the challenges where they were eliminated, no question. In all cases though, equally weak work was created by less talented artists. Trong – weak yes, but at least he thought about the work. Jaclyn’s hung tv in an aquarium was completely empty. Judith vs Jaclyn – technically Jaclyn’s was the worse piece. Nao and John — not awesome work, but everyone’s sucked. Why not eliminate the less talented artists?

        Also, so far two of the four challenges have been so poorly conceived that the serious artists found the projects completely demoralizing. John was quite clear he wasn’t into the challenge, and Nao, who’s executed legitimately shocking performances didn’t produce one. One can only speculate on the reasons why, but if I were to guess, it’s because any serious artist (but for Andres Serrano) would find that challenge a little too humiliating to complete easily.

        The judging is a problem on this show — only Saltz is any good. Simon de Pury is a problem on this show — He’s not a teacher or an artist, he’s an auctioneer and a business man, and therefore almost completely useless in the studio. Most of all, the producers are a problem for this show. They needed to produce a few original challenges, (and land a couple more media partners). The good artists are being eliminated first because the challenges presented shouldn’t have any relationship to a serious artist’s practice. You could argue that about a reality show in general of course, but I guess I had higher hopes for this. I had hoped the show would illuminate what goes on in the studio, and the criteria for creating a successful work of art. If anything, BRAVO confuses the matter.

  • http://tommoody.us tom moody

    Just caught a few minutes of WANGA while surfing around cable. It reminds me a lot of “Ace of Cakes.”

  • http://tommoody.us tom moody

    Just caught a few minutes of WANGA while surfing around cable. It reminds me a lot of “Ace of Cakes.”

  • TESS

    Anonamoose,

    your post was excellent

  • TESS

    Anonamoose,

    your post was excellent

  • TESS

    Anonamoose,

    your post was excellent

  • Molly

    Anonymoose – you said “But, I really kind of wish the show wasn’t a competition. Maybe just following the artists through their processes while they work.. Seeing how they live their lives. What inspires them.”

    There is a show like that. It’s called Art21. All the episodes are on Hulu. I highly recommend it.

  • Molly

    Anonymoose – you said “But, I really kind of wish the show wasn’t a competition. Maybe just following the artists through their processes while they work.. Seeing how they live their lives. What inspires them.”

    There is a show like that. It’s called Art21. All the episodes are on Hulu. I highly recommend it.

  • Molly

    Anonymoose – you said “But, I really kind of wish the show wasn’t a competition. Maybe just following the artists through their processes while they work.. Seeing how they live their lives. What inspires them.”

    There is a show like that. It’s called Art21. All the episodes are on Hulu. I highly recommend it.

  • Molly

    Anonymoose – you said “But, I really kind of wish the show wasn’t a competition. Maybe just following the artists through their processes while they work.. Seeing how they live their lives. What inspires them.”

    There is a show like that. It’s called Art21. All the episodes are on Hulu. I highly recommend it.

  • Aaron

    I have mixed feelings about what I’ve seen on the show. For those who have been defending the eliminated artists as a bid to rid the show of it’s better artists, this is my opinion (and I hope it doesn’t come off as anything but):

    1- I have my own feelings on performance art. I think that by enlarge is crap. Having said that though, some crap doesn’t smell as bad as others. Nao Bustamente’s performance (at least in this case) was a far cry from good. Bottom line, if you do something and you can’t explain why you did it (even if there reason isn’t more complicated than “All i cared about was getting pure shock”, then it leaves a dry taste for those who have to sit there and listen to a lack of explanation). I think she deserved to go home- fuck it. And you know what? Even she basically said “Ya, it didn’t go over well, but that’s fine.” Sure, I think John should have stayed, but that’s only because someone else happened to have made an even less challenge appropriate work. Frankly if they could have sent 3 people home, John would have been on that list for me anyway. In fact, all of the bottoms were piss poor, but I guess that’s why there were placed how they were. Further more, I disagree with the general association here that the more accomplished artists in this competition are the better ones. Granted, in criticism objectivity is always going to be a problem, but having looked at the previous works, I can’t say that I feel Nao, John, or Judith do anything exceptional or worth note to me. The only reason I feel anything for Trong’s work at all is the morbid curiosity of where is work comes from and why he really does it. Outside of that, eh.

    2- Judith was in no way appropriate for this game (and I stress the word GAME). Sure, she wasn’t interested in creating a commercial book cover, but if she was interested in trying to win the show, she should have made making a commercial book cover more of a priority. It doesn’t make her a worse artist, just a shitty competitor. End of story.

    3- This thing about Miles being to young to have made enough interesting at the age of 23… can’t say I agree. My opinion may be a bit skewed, I admit, because I belong to the same age bracket. Even so, the lack of success of a young artist is only reflective (I believe in this case) is only due a lack of chances. Had Basquiat not gotten his shot early we may never have heard of him. One of Philip Guston’s most celebrated works was created when he was 17. Please keep in mind, I’m not saying that curators and whom ever else shouldn’t proceed with caution- but even at the ages of 23-25, it doesn’t mean that the artist in question hasn’t been making work for a decade. Of course there is always some risk that a young artist is not yet ripe, but that doesn’t mean that the slightly less mature work isn’t good, or even great. It just means it will presumably get better. The worry that the work will fizzle, dry up, and cease to be good is not exclusive to young artists.

    4- People have been ragging on Abdi a lot- and I so so get it. I think he is very talented, but his personal work is weak. The best thing he has going for him in this competition though is that he is excellent at following directions. Case in point- “make something personal that you find shocking”. He did that. It’s hard to judge his work from TV as opposed to having the opportunity to see it in person (like Jerry Saltz did), so I give it the benefit of the doubt for having the appeal it alleges. Also, unlike some of the other competitors, he did an excellent job of explaining, and the fact that it was personal helps. He probably knew very well how to get an A when he took art classes and completed assignments. I have a hard time understanding how it’s possible that so many people manage to miss that connection, and truly look at this as a battle of artistic merit rather than a competition for the “best grade in class”, where the A+ is just a really awesome prize; and just like in art class, following directions + decent to good aesthetic sensibilities and a little talent = A GOOD GRADE. It’s TV people, get over it. And Bravo TV at that. Just because Real Housewives of New Jersey says that the upper crust of NJ is just as trashy as the cast of Jersey Shore doesn’t make it true- just entertaining. Having said that, just because the work makes it in this competition doesn’t make it better art- just appropriate for what the show wants.

    4- There were a shit load of responses, so I don’t know if any of them had anything to do Jaclyn “stealing Erik’s ideas”, but my 2 cents on that is at least she followed Picasso’s formula of don’t borrow steal. Call it flattery, Erik. The editor made you look like a big baby.

    5- I agree with Paul on the undergrad thing.

    I think that about covers most of my feelings on the subject. Thanks AFG for housing my rant. I look forward to the next post.

    Aaron

  • Aaron

    I have mixed feelings about what I’ve seen on the show. For those who have been defending the eliminated artists as a bid to rid the show of it’s better artists, this is my opinion (and I hope it doesn’t come off as anything but):

    1- I have my own feelings on performance art. I think that by enlarge is crap. Having said that though, some crap doesn’t smell as bad as others. Nao Bustamente’s performance (at least in this case) was a far cry from good. Bottom line, if you do something and you can’t explain why you did it (even if there reason isn’t more complicated than “All i cared about was getting pure shock”, then it leaves a dry taste for those who have to sit there and listen to a lack of explanation). I think she deserved to go home- fuck it. And you know what? Even she basically said “Ya, it didn’t go over well, but that’s fine.” Sure, I think John should have stayed, but that’s only because someone else happened to have made an even less challenge appropriate work. Frankly if they could have sent 3 people home, John would have been on that list for me anyway. In fact, all of the bottoms were piss poor, but I guess that’s why there were placed how they were. Further more, I disagree with the general association here that the more accomplished artists in this competition are the better ones. Granted, in criticism objectivity is always going to be a problem, but having looked at the previous works, I can’t say that I feel Nao, John, or Judith do anything exceptional or worth note to me. The only reason I feel anything for Trong’s work at all is the morbid curiosity of where is work comes from and why he really does it. Outside of that, eh.

    2- Judith was in no way appropriate for this game (and I stress the word GAME). Sure, she wasn’t interested in creating a commercial book cover, but if she was interested in trying to win the show, she should have made making a commercial book cover more of a priority. It doesn’t make her a worse artist, just a shitty competitor. End of story.

    3- This thing about Miles being to young to have made enough interesting at the age of 23… can’t say I agree. My opinion may be a bit skewed, I admit, because I belong to the same age bracket. Even so, the lack of success of a young artist is only reflective (I believe in this case) is only due a lack of chances. Had Basquiat not gotten his shot early we may never have heard of him. One of Philip Guston’s most celebrated works was created when he was 17. Please keep in mind, I’m not saying that curators and whom ever else shouldn’t proceed with caution- but even at the ages of 23-25, it doesn’t mean that the artist in question hasn’t been making work for a decade. Of course there is always some risk that a young artist is not yet ripe, but that doesn’t mean that the slightly less mature work isn’t good, or even great. It just means it will presumably get better. The worry that the work will fizzle, dry up, and cease to be good is not exclusive to young artists.

    4- People have been ragging on Abdi a lot- and I so so get it. I think he is very talented, but his personal work is weak. The best thing he has going for him in this competition though is that he is excellent at following directions. Case in point- “make something personal that you find shocking”. He did that. It’s hard to judge his work from TV as opposed to having the opportunity to see it in person (like Jerry Saltz did), so I give it the benefit of the doubt for having the appeal it alleges. Also, unlike some of the other competitors, he did an excellent job of explaining, and the fact that it was personal helps. He probably knew very well how to get an A when he took art classes and completed assignments. I have a hard time understanding how it’s possible that so many people manage to miss that connection, and truly look at this as a battle of artistic merit rather than a competition for the “best grade in class”, where the A+ is just a really awesome prize; and just like in art class, following directions + decent to good aesthetic sensibilities and a little talent = A GOOD GRADE. It’s TV people, get over it. And Bravo TV at that. Just because Real Housewives of New Jersey says that the upper crust of NJ is just as trashy as the cast of Jersey Shore doesn’t make it true- just entertaining. Having said that, just because the work makes it in this competition doesn’t make it better art- just appropriate for what the show wants.

    4- There were a shit load of responses, so I don’t know if any of them had anything to do Jaclyn “stealing Erik’s ideas”, but my 2 cents on that is at least she followed Picasso’s formula of don’t borrow steal. Call it flattery, Erik. The editor made you look like a big baby.

    5- I agree with Paul on the undergrad thing.

    I think that about covers most of my feelings on the subject. Thanks AFG for housing my rant. I look forward to the next post.

    Aaron

  • Aaron

    I have mixed feelings about what I’ve seen on the show. For those who have been defending the eliminated artists as a bid to rid the show of it’s better artists, this is my opinion (and I hope it doesn’t come off as anything but):

    1- I have my own feelings on performance art. I think that by enlarge is crap. Having said that though, some crap doesn’t smell as bad as others. Nao Bustamente’s performance (at least in this case) was a far cry from good. Bottom line, if you do something and you can’t explain why you did it (even if there reason isn’t more complicated than “All i cared about was getting pure shock”, then it leaves a dry taste for those who have to sit there and listen to a lack of explanation). I think she deserved to go home- fuck it. And you know what? Even she basically said “Ya, it didn’t go over well, but that’s fine.” Sure, I think John should have stayed, but that’s only because someone else happened to have made an even less challenge appropriate work. Frankly if they could have sent 3 people home, John would have been on that list for me anyway. In fact, all of the bottoms were piss poor, but I guess that’s why there were placed how they were. Further more, I disagree with the general association here that the more accomplished artists in this competition are the better ones. Granted, in criticism objectivity is always going to be a problem, but having looked at the previous works, I can’t say that I feel Nao, John, or Judith do anything exceptional or worth note to me. The only reason I feel anything for Trong’s work at all is the morbid curiosity of where is work comes from and why he really does it. Outside of that, eh.

    2- Judith was in no way appropriate for this game (and I stress the word GAME). Sure, she wasn’t interested in creating a commercial book cover, but if she was interested in trying to win the show, she should have made making a commercial book cover more of a priority. It doesn’t make her a worse artist, just a shitty competitor. End of story.

    3- This thing about Miles being to young to have made enough interesting at the age of 23… can’t say I agree. My opinion may be a bit skewed, I admit, because I belong to the same age bracket. Even so, the lack of success of a young artist is only reflective (I believe in this case) is only due a lack of chances. Had Basquiat not gotten his shot early we may never have heard of him. One of Philip Guston’s most celebrated works was created when he was 17. Please keep in mind, I’m not saying that curators and whom ever else shouldn’t proceed with caution- but even at the ages of 23-25, it doesn’t mean that the artist in question hasn’t been making work for a decade. Of course there is always some risk that a young artist is not yet ripe, but that doesn’t mean that the slightly less mature work isn’t good, or even great. It just means it will presumably get better. The worry that the work will fizzle, dry up, and cease to be good is not exclusive to young artists.

    4- People have been ragging on Abdi a lot- and I so so get it. I think he is very talented, but his personal work is weak. The best thing he has going for him in this competition though is that he is excellent at following directions. Case in point- “make something personal that you find shocking”. He did that. It’s hard to judge his work from TV as opposed to having the opportunity to see it in person (like Jerry Saltz did), so I give it the benefit of the doubt for having the appeal it alleges. Also, unlike some of the other competitors, he did an excellent job of explaining, and the fact that it was personal helps. He probably knew very well how to get an A when he took art classes and completed assignments. I have a hard time understanding how it’s possible that so many people manage to miss that connection, and truly look at this as a battle of artistic merit rather than a competition for the “best grade in class”, where the A+ is just a really awesome prize; and just like in art class, following directions + decent to good aesthetic sensibilities and a little talent = A GOOD GRADE. It’s TV people, get over it. And Bravo TV at that. Just because Real Housewives of New Jersey says that the upper crust of NJ is just as trashy as the cast of Jersey Shore doesn’t make it true- just entertaining. Having said that, just because the work makes it in this competition doesn’t make it better art- just appropriate for what the show wants.

    4- There were a shit load of responses, so I don’t know if any of them had anything to do Jaclyn “stealing Erik’s ideas”, but my 2 cents on that is at least she followed Picasso’s formula of don’t borrow steal. Call it flattery, Erik. The editor made you look like a big baby.

    5- I agree with Paul on the undergrad thing.

    I think that about covers most of my feelings on the subject. Thanks AFG for housing my rant. I look forward to the next post.

    Aaron

  • Aaron

    I have mixed feelings about what I’ve seen on the show. For those who have been defending the eliminated artists as a bid to rid the show of it’s better artists, this is my opinion (and I hope it doesn’t come off as anything but):

    1- I have my own feelings on performance art. I think that by enlarge is crap. Having said that though, some crap doesn’t smell as bad as others. Nao Bustamente’s performance (at least in this case) was a far cry from good. Bottom line, if you do something and you can’t explain why you did it (even if there reason isn’t more complicated than “All i cared about was getting pure shock”, then it leaves a dry taste for those who have to sit there and listen to a lack of explanation). I think she deserved to go home- fuck it. And you know what? Even she basically said “Ya, it didn’t go over well, but that’s fine.” Sure, I think John should have stayed, but that’s only because someone else happened to have made an even less challenge appropriate work. Frankly if they could have sent 3 people home, John would have been on that list for me anyway. In fact, all of the bottoms were piss poor, but I guess that’s why there were placed how they were. Further more, I disagree with the general association here that the more accomplished artists in this competition are the better ones. Granted, in criticism objectivity is always going to be a problem, but having looked at the previous works, I can’t say that I feel Nao, John, or Judith do anything exceptional or worth note to me. The only reason I feel anything for Trong’s work at all is the morbid curiosity of where is work comes from and why he really does it. Outside of that, eh.

    2- Judith was in no way appropriate for this game (and I stress the word GAME). Sure, she wasn’t interested in creating a commercial book cover, but if she was interested in trying to win the show, she should have made making a commercial book cover more of a priority. It doesn’t make her a worse artist, just a shitty competitor. End of story.

    3- This thing about Miles being to young to have made enough interesting at the age of 23… can’t say I agree. My opinion may be a bit skewed, I admit, because I belong to the same age bracket. Even so, the lack of success of a young artist is only reflective (I believe in this case) is only due a lack of chances. Had Basquiat not gotten his shot early we may never have heard of him. One of Philip Guston’s most celebrated works was created when he was 17. Please keep in mind, I’m not saying that curators and whom ever else shouldn’t proceed with caution- but even at the ages of 23-25, it doesn’t mean that the artist in question hasn’t been making work for a decade. Of course there is always some risk that a young artist is not yet ripe, but that doesn’t mean that the slightly less mature work isn’t good, or even great. It just means it will presumably get better. The worry that the work will fizzle, dry up, and cease to be good is not exclusive to young artists.

    4- People have been ragging on Abdi a lot- and I so so get it. I think he is very talented, but his personal work is weak. The best thing he has going for him in this competition though is that he is excellent at following directions. Case in point- “make something personal that you find shocking”. He did that. It’s hard to judge his work from TV as opposed to having the opportunity to see it in person (like Jerry Saltz did), so I give it the benefit of the doubt for having the appeal it alleges. Also, unlike some of the other competitors, he did an excellent job of explaining, and the fact that it was personal helps. He probably knew very well how to get an A when he took art classes and completed assignments. I have a hard time understanding how it’s possible that so many people manage to miss that connection, and truly look at this as a battle of artistic merit rather than a competition for the “best grade in class”, where the A+ is just a really awesome prize; and just like in art class, following directions + decent to good aesthetic sensibilities and a little talent = A GOOD GRADE. It’s TV people, get over it. And Bravo TV at that. Just because Real Housewives of New Jersey says that the upper crust of NJ is just as trashy as the cast of Jersey Shore doesn’t make it true- just entertaining. Having said that, just because the work makes it in this competition doesn’t make it better art- just appropriate for what the show wants.

    4- There were a shit load of responses, so I don’t know if any of them had anything to do Jaclyn “stealing Erik’s ideas”, but my 2 cents on that is at least she followed Picasso’s formula of don’t borrow steal. Call it flattery, Erik. The editor made you look like a big baby.

    5- I agree with Paul on the undergrad thing.

    I think that about covers most of my feelings on the subject. Thanks AFG for housing my rant. I look forward to the next post.

    Aaron

  • Michelle

    I am LIVID that Nao is gone even though she did not deliver a particularly shocking work. I am not sure how any of the remaining artists will be able to deliver a really worthwhile show at the Brooklyn Museum either due to being at the beginning of their career or not being very captivating as artists. Since that is a major prize, it would make better sense, if not better television, to have the artists just make their own work.

  • Michelle

    I am LIVID that Nao is gone even though she did not deliver a particularly shocking work. I am not sure how any of the remaining artists will be able to deliver a really worthwhile show at the Brooklyn Museum either due to being at the beginning of their career or not being very captivating as artists. Since that is a major prize, it would make better sense, if not better television, to have the artists just make their own work.

  • Allan

    They got rid of the best artists and annoying Miles is still on the show. I’ve seen his portraits in past Interview magazines in the 90′s. And the sleeping artwork, I don’t get. Art is supposed to make you feel something, I felt more from Trong’s television. Ironically, he’s playing the camera and the judges.

    This is based solely on who they think are going to make good tv. John and Judith were the most interesting artists. John’s shocking painting was damn good. I thought it was courageous. Everyone’s were safe. And past judgements like that awesome cover for The Time Machine should count for something. Just like it does, most of the time, in Top Chef.

    Judith made me laugh so hard with that Pride and Prejudice artwork, which was actully interesting to me. I actually like Jamie Lynn’s drawing style as well. Esp. the Dracula for the book challenge. And her view of Christianity is refreshing, because that’s how most Christians I know are. I think she’s the next to go. But I most likely won’t be there to watch it.

  • Allan

    They got rid of the best artists and annoying Miles is still on the show. I’ve seen his portraits in past Interview magazines in the 90′s. And the sleeping artwork, I don’t get. Art is supposed to make you feel something, I felt more from Trong’s television. Ironically, he’s playing the camera and the judges.

    This is based solely on who they think are going to make good tv. John and Judith were the most interesting artists. John’s shocking painting was damn good. I thought it was courageous. Everyone’s were safe. And past judgements like that awesome cover for The Time Machine should count for something. Just like it does, most of the time, in Top Chef.

    Judith made me laugh so hard with that Pride and Prejudice artwork, which was actully interesting to me. I actually like Jamie Lynn’s drawing style as well. Esp. the Dracula for the book challenge. And her view of Christianity is refreshing, because that’s how most Christians I know are. I think she’s the next to go. But I most likely won’t be there to watch it.

  • Fanni Tutti

    Peregrine is cut soon. Judith, get gone. Abdi, your big teeth are odd, your art is weak. Why do they give you so much screen time? Mark is a passable commercialist. Miles is an artist. His OCD is BS. Nao, you smell of academia.

  • Fanni Tutti

    Peregrine is cut soon. Judith, get gone. Abdi, your big teeth are odd, your art is weak. Why do they give you so much screen time? Mark is a passable commercialist. Miles is an artist. His OCD is BS. Nao, you smell of academia.

  • Matthew Choberka

    I’m hating this show, way beyond the enjoyable “love-to-hate” that sometimes can accompany reality-TV, but I do feel a kind of professional obligation to keep up with it, to know just how badly our field is being misrepresented here. It actually makes one wonder, do other shows that purport to give a glimpse into a discipline or profession also fail so miserably? Comparisons to Top Chef, say, are maybe illuminating…I noticed the other day that far more time and specificity was devoted on TC to critique, to discussion of what made dishes work, or not…crits are glided over on “Work” in the worst way.

  • Matthew Choberka

    I’m hating this show, way beyond the enjoyable “love-to-hate” that sometimes can accompany reality-TV, but I do feel a kind of professional obligation to keep up with it, to know just how badly our field is being misrepresented here. It actually makes one wonder, do other shows that purport to give a glimpse into a discipline or profession also fail so miserably? Comparisons to Top Chef, say, are maybe illuminating…I noticed the other day that far more time and specificity was devoted on TC to critique, to discussion of what made dishes work, or not…crits are glided over on “Work” in the worst way.

  • Claire

    What’s disappointing to me in this shock art episode which included Andres Serrano as a guest artist is Bravo’s censorship of the art that was created. If you are asking artists to create work which is shocking, and have a guest judge who has had to fight censorship of his own work, why would you then have the audacity to cover portions of artwork like the penis in John’s painting for example? Total hypocrisy! Maybe the artists could paint clothes on the figures of the Sistine chapel for next weeks challenge? I also thought that the critique of Noa’s piece was unfair. I found her performance to be very interesting and although she could not verbalize the main idea of her piece, doesn’t every viewer bring their own experience to a work of art? I though Andres interpretation was very interesting and an appropriate response and critique of her work, and also shared his viewpoint. Remember that artists do not stand around at museums defending and explaining their work to viewers.

  • Claire

    What’s disappointing to me in this shock art episode which included Andres Serrano as a guest artist is Bravo’s censorship of the art that was created. If you are asking artists to create work which is shocking, and have a guest judge who has had to fight censorship of his own work, why would you then have the audacity to cover portions of artwork like the penis in John’s painting for example? Total hypocrisy! Maybe the artists could paint clothes on the figures of the Sistine chapel for next weeks challenge? I also thought that the critique of Noa’s piece was unfair. I found her performance to be very interesting and although she could not verbalize the main idea of her piece, doesn’t every viewer bring their own experience to a work of art? I though Andres interpretation was very interesting and an appropriate response and critique of her work, and also shared his viewpoint. Remember that artists do not stand around at museums defending and explaining their work to viewers.

  • Aaron

    Claire- I agree with you, to a point
    The censorship thing- Bravo TV is Bravo TV. Theres not much else to it. I agree that, especially given its lack of actual realism, it seems almost funny to censor it. In any case with regard to Nao’s piece, as I said in my prior response, I’m a strong believer that even if you say something as simple as “the only idea behind this was to be shocking” or “I wanted the shock to come from the viewer’s interpretation” its a million times better than “beats me, I just did it.” And while its true that artists dont stand around in museums or galleries defending what the work is about, often that job/message is passed through the gallerist or curator. And, frankly, if said “arts professional” isn’t able to understand a work’s message or purpose, it makes the ability to sell it (or sell its cultural value) to anyone that comes in and see’s it. Once it loses that, it becomes worthless for the shower to show it. In my experience, it’s very hard to talk about something passionately when you have no idea what its about (or not about).

  • Aaron

    Claire- I agree with you, to a point
    The censorship thing- Bravo TV is Bravo TV. Theres not much else to it. I agree that, especially given its lack of actual realism, it seems almost funny to censor it. In any case with regard to Nao’s piece, as I said in my prior response, I’m a strong believer that even if you say something as simple as “the only idea behind this was to be shocking” or “I wanted the shock to come from the viewer’s interpretation” its a million times better than “beats me, I just did it.” And while its true that artists dont stand around in museums or galleries defending what the work is about, often that job/message is passed through the gallerist or curator. And, frankly, if said “arts professional” isn’t able to understand a work’s message or purpose, it makes the ability to sell it (or sell its cultural value) to anyone that comes in and see’s it. Once it loses that, it becomes worthless for the shower to show it. In my experience, it’s very hard to talk about something passionately when you have no idea what its about (or not about).

  • http://jessepatrickmartin.blogspot.com/ Jesse P. Martin

    There are fewer forms of writing (or address) less contemptible, aggravating, and befuddling than the artist’s statement. Explanations of what a work is “about” – especially if they’re forged and condensed for a dealer or docent to explain or justify a work’s “value,” “cultural” or otherwise – should not be taken as scripture or a way in which to access a work’s proper “meaning.” Promoting this as how art is “supposed” to be understood only reinforces the peddling of more didactic, prescriptive work and wrongheaded faith in anything that’s slickly sound-byted. Hence, WANGA.

    There are so many ways to view, write, think, make, and talk about art. Surprisingly (?), the conversations about WANGA have been fairly repetitive, although the amount of people who want to talk/write about it is inversely-proportional to the quality of what’s being discussed. So, bravo Bravo for “expanding” the “dialogue” about “art.” But the fact that WANGA is such a confusing nightmarish cartoon shitball is actually the best thing about it, because at least it’s reaffirmed that art is one of the more unwieldy, shape-shifting “themes” to contend with.

  • http://jessepatrickmartin.blogspot.com/ Jesse P. Martin

    There are fewer forms of writing (or address) less contemptible, aggravating, and befuddling than the artist’s statement. Explanations of what a work is “about” – especially if they’re forged and condensed for a dealer or docent to explain or justify a work’s “value,” “cultural” or otherwise – should not be taken as scripture or a way in which to access a work’s proper “meaning.” Promoting this as how art is “supposed” to be understood only reinforces the peddling of more didactic, prescriptive work and wrongheaded faith in anything that’s slickly sound-byted. Hence, WANGA.

    There are so many ways to view, write, think, make, and talk about art. Surprisingly (?), the conversations about WANGA have been fairly repetitive, although the amount of people who want to talk/write about it is inversely-proportional to the quality of what’s being discussed. So, bravo Bravo for “expanding” the “dialogue” about “art.” But the fact that WANGA is such a confusing nightmarish cartoon shitball is actually the best thing about it, because at least it’s reaffirmed that art is one of the more unwieldy, shape-shifting “themes” to contend with.

  • http://www.judithannbraun.com Judith Braun

    I know this may be a petty point to some, but it’s bugged me this week. That opening statement in episode 4, by Miles…that he “finally got a good night’s sleep since I was gone”…and “didn’t have to fake anymore bathroom breaks to get away from me”. It’s total BS….since we had exactly ONE conversation while I was on the show, the one they used a clip of. That was it, PERIOD. We had about zero contact. He’s a fucking liar!

  • http://www.judithannbraun.com Judith Braun

    I know this may be a petty point to some, but it’s bugged me this week. That opening statement in episode 4, by Miles…that he “finally got a good night’s sleep since I was gone”…and “didn’t have to fake anymore bathroom breaks to get away from me”. It’s total BS….since we had exactly ONE conversation while I was on the show, the one they used a clip of. That was it, PERIOD. We had about zero contact. He’s a fucking liar!

  • rafa

    i find it funny when they call eachother douchebags. like they’re both douchebags

  • rafa

    i find it funny when they call eachother douchebags. like they’re both douchebags

  • thelakeeffect

    Am posting this a day before I will view a DVR’d last episode.

    Noting that the last comment above appears to be posted 2 weeks ago. People should catch up!!!

    LOTS has happened on this show…(see the official website…)

    Last week, in the “Opposites” episode…the judges’ decisions seemed too arbitrary.

    Mark got the axe…

    Don’t think he necessarily would have deserved to win the whole thing, but I was generally NOT impressed with his portfolio but was mostly IMPRESSED with his work for the show (If there’s a MOST IMPROVED category—MARK would win)! Wish I could have seen his whole bookfor the Child ARt thing. Is it on Bravo’s site??? And I just missed it?

    Nicole still least known..Not impressed with her toenail thing, her styrofoam pencil thing, and just moderately impressed with her outside art thing (Looks like a cousin of Mark’s multisurface book art thing).

    Peregrine…She has decent watercolor skills (as seen in her portfolio) but her anatomical skills are lacking (Observe the arms on many of the women she’s painted…Not quite correct.) Sorry,but that BUGS me.

    She lacks depth and range in her viewed work…On the show so far…Only One piece (reminiscent of her rather unstructured childhood) is scary & moving.

    Otherwise…”yawn”.

    I didn’t know her much—but was NOT impressed by how she directed her last episode’s art partner.Mark..and then he was kicked out instead of her. Did her probably different (or even lacking) religious education mean…she had no real concept of heaven & hell???

    The judging sometimes makes general sense….(as in thebook cover episode…even the child episode) but here judging was random.

    Is this show just not a fair test of art judging? Or are the NY judges always so random???

  • thelakeeffect

    Am posting this a day before I will view a DVR’d last episode.

    Noting that the last comment above appears to be posted 2 weeks ago. People should catch up!!!

    LOTS has happened on this show…(see the official website…)

    Last week, in the “Opposites” episode…the judges’ decisions seemed too arbitrary.

    Mark got the axe…

    Don’t think he necessarily would have deserved to win the whole thing, but I was generally NOT impressed with his portfolio but was mostly IMPRESSED with his work for the show (If there’s a MOST IMPROVED category—MARK would win)! Wish I could have seen his whole bookfor the Child ARt thing. Is it on Bravo’s site??? And I just missed it?

    Nicole still least known..Not impressed with her toenail thing, her styrofoam pencil thing, and just moderately impressed with her outside art thing (Looks like a cousin of Mark’s multisurface book art thing).

    Peregrine…She has decent watercolor skills (as seen in her portfolio) but her anatomical skills are lacking (Observe the arms on many of the women she’s painted…Not quite correct.) Sorry,but that BUGS me.

    She lacks depth and range in her viewed work…On the show so far…Only One piece (reminiscent of her rather unstructured childhood) is scary & moving.

    Otherwise…”yawn”.

    I didn’t know her much—but was NOT impressed by how she directed her last episode’s art partner.Mark..and then he was kicked out instead of her. Did her probably different (or even lacking) religious education mean…she had no real concept of heaven & hell???

    The judging sometimes makes general sense….(as in thebook cover episode…even the child episode) but here judging was random.

    Is this show just not a fair test of art judging? Or are the NY judges always so random???

← Older Comments

Previous post:

Next post: