My favorite public art of all time is Jeff Koons' flower "Puppy" installation at Rockefeller Center mounted ten years ago this summer. The 43-foot tall sculpture is just one instance of Jeff's engagement with the public realm. Perhaps the other most memorable example is his silver bunny float in the Thanksgiving Day Parade a few years back. Engagement is the key word here, for as we get older we tend to disconnect socially, physically, mentally and we must push ourselves to stay activated, to fight stagnation and entropy. That's our challenge.
Outdoor art is often forced to pass another litmus test, especially when it's shown in a less urban setting. I'm thinking of a piece like Franz West's colorful twists, "The Ego and the Id," currently on view through August at the South East corner of Central Park. I believe it was in the book Against Nature where the author states that for something manmade to be considered truly beautiful, it must be able to hold it's own amidst the splendor of nature. Using this benchmark, I would argue that "Scales" should have won the public art challenge.
Personally I was OK awarding their team the victory and still sending Erik home, but the rules as laid out before us were that the person eliminated must be on the losing team. And I do agree that "Scales" capacity for interaction and possible public safety risks were factors in the decision-making process. Jerry really liked this episode and his point about the tree house being pointed skyward toward the World Trade Center - unbeknownst to its creators - is the type of deconstructionist opportunities in contemporary art that draw me to it as a creative field.
One quick side note - the park on Canal Street where the challenge took place just happened to be under a temporary billboard of an empty bed by Felix Gonzales Torres, which felt like some kind of invitation to participate from beyond. The best part is that to the casual passerby you'd never know what is was or who made it ... and you don't have to!
So, you had two teams of artists who between them managed to come up with one concept--"let's make people look at the sky", and then you had one team whose work overall was judged weaker--the "Scales" piece. So, why, exactly, did you send home the one person out of the two groups who kept trying to inject something more interesting into the pieces? It seemed pretty obvious to this viewer that the very reason the "Scales" piece was uninspiring and looked somewhat unfinished is that the other three kept rejecting ideas from Erik which would have made it a much stronger piece. When one person is the "leader" of a group, it falls on that person to take the blame when the group fails, not onto a person whose ideas that leader rejected.
I haven't watched this show before tonight, and I have to say I wasn't inspired to tune in again, if this is the criteria for judging.
Kicking Erik off was short sighted and a small minded response to his couragous stance on the creation of his "team". He was stuck in a group of immature, short sighted, self indulgent individuals who, simply because his perspective was different chose to alienate him entirely from the group. His behavior, in my opinion, was mild given what he was faced with. He was in a no win situation and for the judges to take out this talented artist in favor of far less talented pretenders is offensive. This decision took what was a mildly entertaining show and reduced it to simple fluff that is not worth watching. I will not watch again.
I was really disappointed in Erik especially at the end when Peregrine tried to say goodbye. He showed poor sportsmanship and deserved to go home. The red team worked so well because they didn't all try to put "their mark" on the piece. The blue team seemed to be getting along until Erik decided to criticize every member of the team.
I think that sending Erik home because his team ganged up on him was just wrong. He seemed to get along fine with all the other artists, but the "in-crowd" just didn't want to listen to him. That was hardly his fault. I agree with him about Miles' antics. I'm not real crazy about the work Miles has created, but the judges are in love with him, and I don't understand why. He's just really good at justifying himself and his work. They even do it for him, finding excuses for why he is sleeping in the middle of a showing.
When I saw the promo blurb of Jeanne criticizing one of the pieces for coming close to very bad 60's/70's art, I was sure she was speaking of "Scales" All it needed was bean bags and a lava lamp. If Erik went home being blamed for the uncollaborativeness of the piece, then it should really have been Jacqueline. She put the brakes on any collaboration with her passive-aggressive response to anyone else ideas, allowing for only hers (Miles at least from what I saw began to ask for and accept everyone's ideas, keeping the atmosphere open and welcoming). Peregrine ceased to exist against the strong personality of first Miles then Jacqueline. They never allowed for a group discussion of what the sculpture should be, could be. Because of that, the result was a sculpture that was dis-jointed with too many elements that did not work together fluidly. Please don't credit them with the Twin Towers airspace. That's just plain insulting, Bill.
I think it was completely disingenuous of your show to kick Eric off for this challenge. Has he deserved to go home in the past? Yes. Is he the "next" great artist? No.
But to rig the competition to kick him out for a project that was someone else's vision is insane and makes this "competition" a joke.
That you basically agreed that the judging was fixed not on deciding which work was the best, but on who you wanted to kick off, demonstrates a lack of integrity and a showcases everything wrong with reality shows and the art world.
Was there any chance both of the installations could have been designated losers? One looked like a poor effort at playground design (although at least it had a bit of grace to it's design), while the other looked like something from a 1970s DR WHO episode from the end of a season when there was only about $20 left to design the set.
Both Teams seemed to miss a golden opportunity, The results were less than inspiring but I do agree with the judges decision and congrats to Nichole. She not only generated a solution, she led the team cohesively with focus and determination, to the winners circle, no easy feat! Her teams spirit showed itself as a positive part of the work, and to her credit, they unanimously voted her the winner! Many Public art works enrich the all to often impersonal, utilitarian environment, some alter our very outlook on life. One of my favorites is the "Alice in wonderland" sculpture in Central Park, every time I pass it, even in the rain, children seem to climb all over it as they engage their imagination in a world all their all.
You have an incredible opportunity to bring an understanding and appreciation of art to the masses in a way that no museum or gallery could and I think, unfortunately you're blowing it. During the first season of Project Runway I became completely obsessed with the show because it was the first time I had seen the creative process represented in a reality show. I wondered at that time, if fine art would or could be next. I support this shows efforts but it reminds me of all the other bad versions of creative reality shows. The lack of continuity in the editing makes the comments disconnected. Important points are lost or immediately contradicted and not in a good way. Project Runway had an educational aspect to it - there was a true dedication to showing the creative process and how it worked. Everything supported the idea of design including the use of the Saturn car - it was explained to the audience and reinforced. This show just throws an Audi in the mix and it is confusing. Project Runway created an incredible support system: a famous design institution as home base, a design educator to mentor and who could actually help the designers with real feedback, a judge who was actually a designer and had insights that non designers don't have, etc. This show has picked judges that are all from the business side of art or just people who know artists? Therefore the comments are flat and one sided and really don't have that extra insight that an artist would provide. Serrano wanting to keep Nao is a case in point. I understand why the guest judges are the artists - but it is not enough. The projects are goofy - a book cover - that is graphics and therefore Judith rebelled - no one understood that - an artist would have. At least have someone who could acknowledge and understand the artist response and be able to give the audience some insight even if there is a historical reference.
I have been a fan of Miles, but his condition manifests itself as incapable of feeling for another, a necessary ingredient for teamwork. Jaclyn ...nothing more needs to be said.... at least Miles has an excuse. I feel Erik was "done wrong" ...his group lost because they wouldn't listen to him and lost a vital worker who could have added dimension to the piece. They failed to work as a team and Erik got sacked. The other team had easy personalities. Jaclyn and Miles are NOT team players and Erik pleaded with them to let him have some input. The other piece was so done before and unoriginal. There are many like it around from the 70s which are in need of re-painting! Sadly Erik let them screw him at his loss.
Hello Mr. Powers,
I have just finished watching the latest episode and was disappointed in the Judges. A team challenge was presented to the group while someone had immunity. For future episodes this is a bad idea. Someone having immunity should not be in a team challenge as it increase the percentages of an elimination from 25% to 33% for the remaining members of a team. It also presents the problems of gamesmanship where that person does not really need to pull their weight. How do you justify eliminating someone based on the decision of another artist or artists who cannot be eliminated. The judges and the show creators failed to understand the concept of Team. Teams win or lose together. Individuals should not be dismissed as much as it should be the team. Next time try doing it in pairs for elimination if you do not want to lose four people at once yet want to do team challenges. You can spin it that should all 4 be eliminated because of 1 but should 1 be eliminated because of the other three. Who stands up for the one? Based on the shows design it appears that you are unable to view the behind the scenes actions of the individuals as wellas we only see what the producer wants us to see, but I am disappointed in Erik's dismissal. The treatment he received to me was unfair. Maybe views of the behind the scene actions should not determine the vote of the art but maybe they should be considered. At least there would be understanding and truth. Yes some people can say for Erik to be the team player, but he had it right that if he is not allowed to put a stamp on the art piece he would more than likely be eliminated and in the end he was right. Whether it was courage or self preservation Erik had the guts to say what happened, why he didn't like the piece and was dismissed. Based on what was provided to us for viewing did any of the judges really ask the other three members why they did not accept Erik's ideas or how much they contributed. Was there any validation to what was said by the Blue Team. Did anyone ask the Red Team. The funny thing about "Scales" was that it was pointed in the direction of open sky that was once occupied by the Twin Towers. Some may find this offensive that the artist was not more thoughtful of what was there, others may not realize and for others it may not matter, but watching Miles pretend he cares was comical. If he cared about others he would have cared about making an extra effort to include Erik or be open to Erik's ideas. Erik's idea of a snake like Scales design was more intriguing then Miles cheap patchwork scales design. Miles should be considered for an Emmy. He plays himself as a nice guy and humble but appears more of a loner, is somewhat arrogant and a jerk, but not in front of the judges. He appears solemn, quiet and introverted. His pieces all seem to represent the same basic meaning of either lonliness or solitude. Miles gives us the same type of art. It is boring. Would you go to an art gallery to see the same art theme over and over and over. It might be interesting but I am not sure of the wow factor when your expecting the same piece. Can you also create a challenge where Jaclyn cannot use a camera. Can you please realize that her art always seems to be an expression of vulnerabiltiy or is vulnerable because that people are looking at her. You know what Jaclyn.. deal with it. I can't believe she won that challenge and that other challenge where someone can put a comment on an 8x10 with a sharpie. Some people call that an autograph or graffiti. Not all graffiti is art. Talk about self absorbed and somewhat arrogant. She asks others for advice but can't think for herself in the end. Is this really an artist or someone who is unable to complete something without the aid of others because she cannot think for herself. The ending of the show was just so nice. The Red Team sorry to see Erik go and the remiaing Blue Team members acting so pretentious to care that he was eliminated when they wanted him out earlier is both laughable and screams of hypocrisy. Does there really need to be another Season for this show when its players lack character. The viewing of an individual's art is no different then that of a TV show. When each episode remains the same and is predictable, eventually you stop watching and move on. I'm guessing this will get edited ,, even this part ,,hahahaha but I thank you for the opportunity to voice my opinion.
I'm not an artist and I don't know much about art but I know what I like and so far this show isn't it. I was hoping this would be more about the art that we all understand and enjoy, fine art but it's so much more about installation art or graphic or photo art or, God help me, performance art that it's just not my cup of tea. I probably will not watch this again or finish watching for the rest of the season since it is something that does not turn me on nor does it interest me to hear these judges talk to themselves about how much they know about what 'art' is. If you want a show about art for the 'everyday' consumer, then you're going to have to impress us, your true audience, rather than yourselves. This show is way to pretentious for it's own good.
What happened tonight was wrong from the beginning! Erik was clever enough for trying but those three had a plan from the beginning and he wasn't part of it!!! Judges what can I say besides maybe you should change job!! Erik good job and good luck on your future works of art!
Just as his compatriot told Erik to insist on his ideas, you should have insisted that Scales win. It was much more compelling. The other piece seemed pure 60s geometry on playground.
It's too bad the judges can't see the contestants interacting. I think Erik's points were well taken. The posturing and narcissism of two of his teammates really made it impossible for him to contribute, even though he tried. You all took the safe and obvious route of sending him home, even though the rest of the group should have been disciplined for not welcoming his ideas and attempting to incorporate them.
I suppose this season has been pre-recorded ages ago, so any suggestions are moot. But I wish the judges would consider the obvious narcissism of those who do self portraits over and over and the contestant who complains about men leering at her while at the same time revealing her body continually. Very tiresome.
I loved the show before the judges rewarded team Blue for ganging-up on Eric. Blue's no-doubt liberated art-school girls channeled their pre-feminist angst and passive-aggressiveness in scene after scene as they dismissed Eric's ideas. The girls were not about to let Eric mess up the Miles formula for success. And it would be their success too, or at least they hoped. This has ruined the show for me and I will never watch again. Miles was my favorite, too, so I am hurt to see how inflexible his process was. He seems more flat, one-dimensional now. Judges, you are totally conventional in your running of this show. The show lost its uniqueness, tonight. Read or re-read The Art Spirit by Robert Henri. You will be reminded that artists such as Eric are to be valued and encouraged, not terminated like an underperforming businessperson. It turned my stomach.
You all dropped the ball on tonight's episode. Erik was the one authentic person on the show and you guys ditched him. It seemed as though the insight the audience had, the judges were not privy to. Miles, Jaclyn and Peregrine were boorish and their plastic personalities ruined a truly honest person's attempt to be judged on his own merit. Everything Erik suggested was shot down by Miles and seconded by his henchwomen. Their talent seems to be judged by art school degrees not what they produce. The three amigos sure ruined any credibility the show had with me. The honorable thing to do would have been to boot Miles for creating the piece and the tension that sunk Erik. Jaclyn's dishonesty is showing her true identity. She denied Erik gave her the idea for her winning entry when it was so evident to viewers a couple weeks back. And don't even get me started on "falcon girl". She's psychotic and a prodigy in her mind only. Watch out gang! If you don't pick up some credibility this show will be a one year wonder and a good idea will have gone down the tubes.
Yes, well..nice commentary. Well thought out, too..too bad you didn't all stick to the point, and send the "artist" home who was responsible for the design, concept, and most of the execution of said piece...instead, sending home the one the others attacked for not shutting down and following Mile's "vision" blindly into the sun like the rest of them did. Sending Erik home was just wrong..plain and simple.
You were "ok" with awarding the team a win and still sending Erik home? That is quite a statement. Have you watched the actual episode and seen what actually went down?
In a world filled with ego and bravado, his voice was shut down in every moment he tried to speak up, his ideas cast out by Miles who was a self-appointed Napolean in this "team" project.
Say what you will about Erik's behavior, but Miles acted in a very inappropriate way as well and when he threated Erik, I think he crossed a line. Maybe we didn't get to see it all for the episode - but your comment here seems heavy and excuses the outrageous behavior of Miles (and Peregrine and Jackie) in favor of outcasting the one person who from the start said "I want to make sure that when they ask 'what part did you play in this' that I can have something to point to."
From the beginning, Erik knew he was fighting an uphill battle to have his ideas heard and considered...in the end, they weren't and I upstand why he quit on his "team" - as the addage goes, with friends like those, who would need enemies.
Quote "...And I do agree that "Scales" capacity for interaction and possible public safety risks were factors in the decision-making process'..."
Am trying to remember if SAFETY and Insurance Liability were discussed when instructions were given.
(As an insurance inspector, I too had a concern about "Scales" tho the basic design (modified) would have been fine...)
One of the many adult capitalist real world things usually not taught in art school. Human (particularly CHILD safety) and Legal Liability. There, the winning sculpture's little figures sticking a few inches out of the ground - would also FAIL---as they are Trip & Fall Hazards!!!
My issue is with how the loss and elimination were presented. The reasons given for the loss were all part of Miles' design. He was clearly the leader of the group. He should have gone, no matter what. If, after eliminating Miles for being the brain behind the losing piece, the judges still felt that Erik had to go, then he should have been eliminated as well.
It's a shame that the team decided to shoot down everything Erik suggested. I have a feeling they did it, not because of some adherence to the concept, but because they have bias against Erik's lack of art education. And frankly, I think vines would have helped this piece by covering the clunky, inorganic framework at it's base.
Once again an elitist stance has prevailed. I believe the notion that in order to "understand" art one needs to attend an academia setting, swallow all of the jargon and then regurgitate the lingo, is a westernized one-point perspective that is flawed and tends to alienate, in this case Erik. Sometimes knowing less about the things we do may bring forth new ways or ideas that were previously unforeseeable. That is why in recent times "outsider" art or native works (eg. Aboriginal) have fallen under the art world radar and have gained much more attention (and selling for a lot of $). Mile's work, though engaging and thought provoking, seem to me to be one -dimensional. Like many attending today's art schools they tend to produce works that are so similar and familiar to one another. A recent visit to some of our contemporary galleries and museums can attest to that. All this is not to say that being educated in the art field cannot bring forth positive results and great artists that hold our attention and intrigue us more than once. It's just that so few are capable of doing this. I believe that many of these successful artists guarded against the pitfall of accepting all they were taught as all truth and refuting the mentality that that exists not only in the art world but also others spheres of life, and that is chanting and living by the mantra, "your either with us or against us". Erik was the underdog amongst the rest and someone who I believe could have brought to the table something unexpected. It was a shame that he had to be exiled not for his artistic merits and ideas (refuted by his group) but rather ostracized for not having the group mentality just previously mentioned.
I don't have a problem of why you chose the other team to win in order to kick off Eric. I was just amazed that during discussion the Red team's project located in a public park where you would are encouraging people to interact with the sculptures,this would included children running around, that not a single person thought of children/adults tripping or falling down on the small pieces (especially the pointed pyramid)!
The Next Great Artist.....no.
THe Next Great Artist cannot and will not be dictated by a panel of three - five judges (only one of which has any artistic credibility) and a Television Network. All great artists are found once when we reflect upon our history and when we say "how'd we forget about him or how did we miss her". This show is an attempt to bring art into the mainstream but it is by no means a service to any young artist out there.
These challenges are not well thought out and that's mainly because the "Greats" take a whole lifetime to create a piece that conveys the way they feel - Constantine Brancussi spent his whole life looking for the essence of a Bird in Space and the result is amazing. I don't think telling an artist - or in this case a 'contestant' - to paint/sculpt/build/whatever something that is laid out by a committee is not going help determine the measure of one's artistic ability. You don't need to be a book cover illustrator to be great, a sculptor to be great or anything other than what you are inspired to do. Inspired is the key word there as opposed to being forced - aka challenges.
Erik is spot on in his assessment of Miles. I for one am stone cold bored with Miles and like many others, cannot comprehend the judges' fascination with him.
i like nicole (is that her name?) but thought that she won for leadership and a decent rationale. the work itself was pretty boring and derivative. Myle's idea for a new york escape was fine but he either has some real sleep issues or else he's neurotic (or both). Funny how he didn't need a nap when he wanted to take control of the group. He seems to be a smart guy who is charming the judges but honestly, if he gives us another box to take a nap in as his project I'm going to zzzzzzzzzz (what? sorry, i nodded off. lol). And Erik -- you got sent home too early. You had a lot to offer this group and show. However, you did get caught up in your own junk and unfortunately for you, no one else seemed to make a bigger mistake so you took the fall.
"Personally I was OK awarding their team the victory and still sending Erik home, but the rules as laid out before us were that the person eliminated must be on the losing team." Bill Powers aka egomaniac
Erik was told from day 1 by you Bill- that he didn't have it. Miles has been told from day 1 by you- he is all that. It was pretty amazing to watch you both crush someone who was scared and real, someone who had the most to lose. He is probably petrified to create now. Miles could easily have led this guy-- listened to him-- helped him to grow, instead he led him to his explosion. Once he got him to that place then all three let him know he offended the king. (He actually told him he shot himself in the foot) Now regular people will have to uplift Erik buy his work etc. but it wont matter cause guys like you will always hate his work and prefer an asshole(the piece) as long as an ego maniac is sleeping next to it. Good luck to Erik, I'll buy something from him in hopes it will help him recover from the beating he took by the 'in' crowd.
Erik was the only relatable artist on this show. For him to be pushed out by his team was truly sad. His rant nailed Miles perfectly: Miles has made three pieces that are about curling up and going to sleep. If that is all he has to say by this point the judges should have seen through him and sent him home. His piece lost and no one but him had any input in it: the two women were conned into thinking they had contributed. Erik was the only one not fooled by Miles and his crap. The judges need to catch on. Be proud Erik you showed that in the elitist art world that the emperor has no clothes.
I think the concept from blue team was not defined well but anyways, even if its define Erik would not understand it because though he is talented, he did not have a good background about art (looking from his educational attainment. Judges made a good call!
I agree with everything that Pauline Hudel-Smith said.
This show is failing. I hoped for it would do for visual art, what PR did for fashion design. Instead, it confirms every stereotype. Dismissing those who know little about art, without offering educational experience to them. Confirming to the general public, that art's primary mission is articulating extreme privilege. I'm so disappointed.
I feel some sympathy for the artists, as they are trying hard within this game show veneer, but no serious art can be made in ultra short and silly challenges. More thought also needs to be given to explaining the context of a challenge instead of just saying "shock us," or "make public art." This could be interesting for viewers, with a bit of recent art history, a context for the challenge - and more time to make the work.
Sorry to say this, Bill, because you do seem to care, but the judging so far feels shallow, conservative, and non-constructive. The prevailing sentiment seems to be the chic and a narrow art marketing mentality, rather than resonant and expansive substance. The guest judges have been better, perhaps because they are artists. The panel is so over-weighted with people who sell art. They ought to put you with an artist, an art educator, and an art critic who is more avant-garde.
I know that the show is already taped and finished, but I would hope for more next season, if there is one. Maybe you can help make it worthy of the art it purports to represent, if that is even possible in a game show format.
Daniella, you probably like most people, value honesty. Erik was honest, Peregrine was not. I do not believe Peregrine "looked forward" to seeing Erik ever again. Since when is art a team sport where sportsmanship matters? If you want to judge it that way, Miles as team captain, is truly a poor sport in not allowing input from all players. Since the red team won and they chose their leader to be the winner because it was her idea, then Miles should have gone home for the blue team since he was obviously the team leader.
I don't understand why people are upset with Erik's teammates rather than holding him accountable for his own behavior. From the very first episode, Erik made it clear that he has no art education and little art experience. Considering his belligerent attitude every single time someone (including the judges) criticized him or tried to offer advice, I was more than happy to see him go. It doesn't matter to me whether Miles is truly afflicted with OCD or is just putting on an act. To this total art novice, his pieces are the most visually appealing and intriguing. Erik's art could have easily been created by my son who, incidentally, is eleven.
A lot of the comments here say things like "I'm not an artist, but" or "I'm no expert, but..." and then go on to talk about how pretentious and exclusionary the judges have been.
Unfortunately this his how MOST people approach contemporary art. Everyone has an opinion, and more often than not people have a negative reaction. This is simply a side-effect of not really understanding what they're seeing. When it comes to art people think that they know best - "I don't know art but I know what I like" - but the truth is that an informed opinion on art is generally simply wrong.
The truth of the matter is that Art is a professional endeavor, informed by thousands of years of accumulated cultural history. The uninformed and uninitiated can't very well expect that he will understand everything that is said by the experts. In that same way that when I watch TopChef I don't understand all the techniques and the terminology. At the end of it, however, I don't run off shouting about how pretentious and high-brow Tom Colicchio is. I understand that he is a professional and as such has a level of understanding about cuisine that someone like me simply doesn't have.
Similarly, put me in a room with a bunch of engineers discussing engineering, or in a room full of mechanics discussing different kinds of carburetors, and likely I would walk out of there feeling really dumb.
Yet when people see a room full of art experts discuss art, somehow they expect that they should be able to understand why one thing is praised and another is dismissed as amateurish. For those of us who ARE artists, we actually wish that we could see MORE of the experts talking. I'd love the chance to see the full, unedited critiques and the discussions amongst the judges as they see the work for the first time.
Being an expert on a subject and being able to discuss it intelligently doesn't make you "pretentious" - it makes you an expert. The fact that Eric was unable to create meaningful and intelligent work during his time on the show just shows his inexperience and lack of knowledge of the art world. I wouldn't try to rebuild the transmission on my car or make a souffle without some help, yet for some reason the viewers seem to be personally insulted that Eric the novice wasn't able to compete with the experienced professionals.
It says it all - I'm not at artist, but like anyone else, I know what I like. Like Pauline - I think you're blowing away the opportunity to introduce us to art and the way artists work, etc. All I'm seeing are what I've called before - the "oh I'm an artist and you just couldn't possible understand my pain/art" attitude. Give us artists who are likeable or seem approachable, like Abdi. Show us they're normal people and what they go through. So many of these artists have been artsy/fartsy types. And to me - I could identify w/ Erik if not his art. Miles the Tortured & Jaclyn the Misunderstood must go. Bravo to Ryan's portrayal of Miles - highlight of the entire show!
For the first time last night I watched the show on Bravo: “Work of Art.” As a retired art educator at both the college and high-school level, I was somewhat surprised just how misleading the show was to the public. I grant you I have not been to New York for decades but I have my doubts that a community work of art is decided the way that show suggested.
1st.: I may be wrong in today’s art market but I have never see a work of art created by a committee. Yes a committee decides on the final design but I do not know very many artists (other than commercial designers) that would create as a committee member. Normally the 4 artist would have submitted a design of their own choice created by him/herself and then the committee would select from those entries the one they liked. Then each of the other artists could choose to work with the designer or not -- realizing the designer is in charge. Again most artist do not build the art piece since most young and older artist don’t have the knowledge to construct the work safely and strong enough to hold weight. Which again makes me wonder if these designs were art or playground pieces?
2nd.: The design that won was a very safe design. In fact, you could open most art history books and find similar designs as art, not a yard pieces.
3rd.: The design that did not win was much more creative and contemporary. Yes, it needed to be polished. It appeared as a mock up of a future work that would take engineering, plus skilled metal and wood craftsman, to make the final piece. Even the best monumental sculptors call the pros for help.
4th.: And what was the reference to the Twin Towers? As I stated I have not been to New York since 1962 but I assure you that if you stood me in the middle of the city, and ask me where the Twin Towers were located, I would not know. The design was to see SKY and it did. IT was not to make a statement about the 911 tragedy.
5th.: The young man that left might have been the most dedicated artist there.
Will I watch the program again? Sure it was a little entertaining. Why? I don’t know.
I agree with most of what folks have said so far. One problem I had with "Scales" was that it reminded me too much of an IKEA chair. One problem I had with "Stonehedge" and what the Viewer from the Midwest pointed out was the trip/impalement smaller pieces. The problem I had with both is that they were not "organic". I thought Erik was going in the right direction when he suggested having a flowering vine be a part of the design.
Miles won on the first day because he fits the bill that is comfortable with art dealers. Smart, Attractive, talented enough, trendy, passive aggressive in a cute sleepy way and is clever enough to back off to authority, but he will cut a throat when he senses the way the wind is blowing in a popularity contest. He’s attractive to dealers because he somehow he feels like a rich kid who has already made it. The art world likes a sense of entitlement if it’s somehow quietly innate. I really admire him. A heart on his sleeve tough looking rebel like Erik doesn’t stand a chance in that world, unless he can change and learn to play the game by becoming an “Art Pussy” himself. In the end I can understand that Miles makes sense to a salesman as having the most potential. Thus is the rub of the show’s biased judging this week. He’s my favorite, but Miles was the leader, he needed to take the fall. He overworked his basic idea loosing its simple elegance of the sketch and was a selfish team leader. Thus a strong argument to have prizes each week, but to keep everyone until the end and judge his or her overall work for a final winner. I don't have a problem with any of the judges; it's just there needs to be a curator, an art critic and an artist and finally one dealer for a fair balance. Also as others said more time, often the judge’s comments about the tasks are unreasonable in not taking that reality into account.
I must wonder how the show's editing shaped my (and everyone else's ) response, but I thought Erik behaved abominably. He didn't offer plausible defenses of his own ideas, or reasoned critiques of other people's ideas. He just whined and pouted. My respect for Jacquie grew a lot this week--her note said it all--too bad Miles couldn't respond.
Erik dug his own grave. So he's insecure about his own ability - we all are, it's a fact of life. All he did this entire show was play the victim of the "cruel elitist art world". Did he listen to suggestions from other people? No. Did he ever try to learn from people who have more experience? No. He just insulted them and complained about how phony they were. He wants to be a professional artist, yet he had no desire to even attempt to approach what that means in a mature way.Being a professional artist means dealing with critics, and collaborators, and ego-filled art "celebrities", and fussy buyers, all of it. Grow up and face reality. He was a crybaby, and an idiot. Good riddance. Now he has plenty of time alone with his violin.
You lost me as a viewer. I love the idea of competing artists, but booting Eric was not based on art, but politics and personality. The idea that caused the team to lose belonged to Miles. He persuaded the group to back it and rejected any input from Eric. The decision should have been based on who the idea can from, not the personal dynamics of the group. The show not only lost Eric, it lost its integrity.
As a former copywriter and creative director, I have been in numerous deadline situations with very talented, well trained artists, often with big egos. This episode did come quite close to the reality of creating advertising art. You are given an objective. You often have very little time to concept, in which you pitch your ideas to the group and sometimes bat them back and forth. You often work to execute the selected idea(s) up until the moment it needs to be in a presentable format. Arguments, the occasional tantrum, even sulking by bruised egos were all regular features of the process.
Erik might have a future as a fine artist, who knows, but he seemed terribly ill-equipped to be an advertising artist. The show’s format with its temporal and conceptual restraints clearly favors someone of such training and talent. He survived as long as he did (and I would have shown him the door after the clown piece), only because several of his fellow contestants also lacked such commercial skills.
I could not have said it better 'Avid viewer no longer'
Erik showed an emotional response to his dislike of another 'homeless shelter'. Although, his emotion used was not the publically accepted, it was still an emotional response like; crying, sleeping, or getting naked. (We are all different for a reason!!! This is how art is made!)
If Erik continues to make art he will be remembered as a defining artist of his time. The others; Reality TV Show Stars.
Eric was always doomed. After nearly dying or fighting back from a terrible disease or injury, your first response is to see all the horror, stupidity and uselessness in the world. You want to make it better, so you really work to make things better, and you tell people the truth about what you have learned. But very few people want to here the truth. And while they mostly just hurt themselves by not seeking excellence and sincerity, they are still just children because very few gain the experiences needed to mature. Also unfortunately, no matter how much good advice you give people, they never really listen. Luckily, its OK if you can always remember they are really just children.
On the other hand, you can forget this crap, and remember few people want to hear the truth, especially people who are making up stories to justify their worth.
Hi, I'm an artist and art critic from South Louisiana and a fan of "Work of Art" and many of the other programs on Bravo, but I have some serious concerns about the show. Art is a fundamentally different process than cooking (as in Top Chef) or design (as in Project Runway) which is why "Work of Art" should have a different format/approach than these other shows. In art, you're dealing with layers of meaning, history and issues along with time constraints, that don't necessarily fit into the glib formula of the typical Bravo contest format. Much like art, I'd say the show has to evolve if there is a next season and do something different. My main beef is that there's not enough time given to the artists to complete worthy pieces of art for the show and there's not enough screen time given to the crits. If you're looking for real drama focus on the crits. I've been in the middle of some heated ones and know whereof I speak. This past episode of "Work of Art" focusing on public art was a complete letdown in terms of the art that was produced and made your show pretty laughable. As a viewer, I'd rather be totally wowed by everything I see on the show and have a difficult time picking the best pieces and ideas than have to pick through a sea of shit. My point is there is inherent drama in art itself. It doesn't need to be built in by imposing crazy contest formats and crushing time restraints that weaken the art products being made. Open up this show this show to a higher road, and you'll keep artists like myself watching the show and still maintain a high level of drama for the casual viewer. To reinforce this point, the drama over Mapplethorpe and Serrano in the 80's ignited debate and drama all over the country, and there wasn't any crazy contest involved to create it. Art is inherently dramatic.
The show is nothing more the sham. This has nothing to do with art. Erik was a team player, who did you think did all the lifting, holding, and hulling. The losing piece lost because it was bad design. Who took credit for the design? Who appointed himself team leader? Just b/c someone disagrees and has other ideas doesn't automatically rule him out as not being a team player. So once again the show is not about art, but about personal drama. To bad great concept for a show, but what a lost to art and culture this has turn out to be.
I liked Erik and his previous work, but he didn't produce anything interesting on the show. He was a fun personalty to watch but then so was Nao. All but one of them has to go at some point. I guess more people wanted Miles to go this episode, but as you say, their piece could have just as easily been the winner. So why get rid of the guy who worked the hardest and has produced interesting work on the show? It was just as hard for Miles to work with other people as it was for Erik.
I get that Erik wasn't a team player, but did they lose because of him? All his ideas were rejected. How many times does he have to put it out there and get shot down by the others? If the piece fail, shouldn't the mastermind behind the piece go home? What are they judging this challenge on? How to get along in art school? Explain yourselves judges.
The disappointing thing for me in BWOA is the absence of a "mentor" component. The judges are gallerists, auctioneers, collectors, etc. whose interest mainly lies in buying, or in pleasing buyers and developing artists who will do so. The winning artist is going to exhibit in a museum, which should have somewhat different concerns than sales alone; those could be addressed by an artist, curator, art educator, or historian working with the artists, asking them questions, making suggestions, identifying contemporary themes and issues etc. It would give some much-needed background to viewers as well.
Also, this really isn't the way art is made, even in art school. Art requires time and thought and what has been called "psychic repose." It's why artists go on retreats and residencies. Imagine a group of poets given an assignment to each produce a poem about an Audi in 24 hours and then stuffed into a room together with a lot of running and pounding going on. It might work for chefs who do what they do under pressure, but the art produced under these circumstances is necessarily weak.
As it is, the show has been a rat race with very uninteresting results. A shame - it has the potential to be informative as well as entertaining.
You should have never cut Erik. Miles never let him have his voice. Miles is a mess. You made a mistake!!!
I'm astonished by some of the posts, here. My family (including 2 artists) picked Miles as the most talented contestant from the first 2 shows. We also thought the beautiful 'Scales' sculpture would win this week.
Erik may be 'authentic' [whatever that means] to some, but he is not particularly talented, and his attitude has been ugly throughout.