stopped watching after this episode.brutal!

If art is the body, a reality tv show about art is the body's reproductive system: it's gotta turn us on, thrill us, satisfy us, it's gotta keep us coming....back to watch it. It's gotta give birth; it's gotta deliver.

I would have liked for this show to portray art in its purest form, much like I wanted Queer Eye For The Straight Guy to provide a realistic look at gay culture or for The Real World to be real! As Victor Newman would say, "ain't gonna happen."

The "reality tv" aspects of this show are typical: the shallow critiques, the bad acting, the instant romances, and the bitchery are all mainstays, but it speaks to the power of art that the art speaks to us anyway.

The show succeeds at what it should fail to do because of the art. This episode with all the drama was a turn off, but if this show was a public broadcast with no flash at all and none of the comforts of popular television, "we" probably wouldn't watch it (breaks my heart to say). Maybe Sarah Jessica Parker and the other art lovers behind this show know that too. I bet it made them wince too when Erik insulted Miles, Miles threatened him, the girls got all indignant, and the other team stopped creating so they could take sides.....(uuuugghhh).

Regardless, "Scales" made me think of a tree house that through ailment or deliberate choice has twisted and warped its body to become more than a normal tree house, but a jagged imperfect anomaly. The winning piece (I can't remember the name, I wonder why) told me it was a futuristic dining table and I did pick up on the Kryptonian influences, no doubt Abdi's contribution. :D

My favorite Bravo reality show. I am not a professional nor trained artist, but creating art makese feel alive. Seeing a piece I connect with excites and comfortse. Through the show, no matter how staged, I get to see se process others experience and the vulnerability we all have to deal with. I don't think too much about the production aspect of the show because in reality, everyone has their own reality, no? I just sit back and enjoy the contestants' dilemmas, struggles, disappointments, courage, and joys.

I am glad that Erick shared his thoughts after being elinated, and I sympathize. However, I'm sorry, but, throwing your hands up and saying you give up is pathetic. Be a fighter, do your thing and forget the others... Yes, it was unfair, but leave that behind and use it to reach deeper to produce something incredible that you stand back in wondeemt that you did it! G

You guys seriously screwed up: should've booted Miles or Jacqueline (sp?), NOT Eric. GET RID OF MILES. Period, end of story. The world does NOT need his type of artist.

i just think if they would of listen more to erik they would of won miles to me lost it for the time with is lame design. I am not a a carreer artist but i could of made something that looked better then that . I do think they sent the wrong person home. there was no creativity in mile design just a big c in a with a fram around it. An if you like that design you dont have good taste in art then.

Here is what is great about this show...

Erik gets thrown off the show for..gasp...dissenting. A quality you never want in an artist. Am I right?

However, Miles is playing the Art game. He throws something together, and because he is established himself as the tortured outsider artist, he gets a pass time and again. He comes up with BS explanations because he knows what to say in front of a crit or the artworld. Priceless. This show reminds me of college.

I was wondering why you spared Miles considering that most if not all of the stuff he does on the show is recycled from his previous works - the plastic wrap, the curvy raised chair, etc. This is easily discovered through a quick internet search. Or perhaps you admire his con game - pretending to pensively ponder each task, leading to an epiphany - of recycling work already produced years ago.

It is understandable to succeed in the art world as you have one must learn to.. neglect the truth at times. But lets be truthful here.

Miles was selected from the start to be the "pretty tortured artist" and.. well sell lots of soap. Unfortunately um.. he isnt very nice, is truely untalented, and.. not a lot of teenage girls watch Bravo art shows. Jacklyn was selected for her looks. Im sure its shocking shes amazingly talented. But she doesnt click with Miles so.. time to send in here standin (the bland artist miles is flirting with per producer orders).

So we have a "competition" where the person who objected to the Losing piece.. who thought it was awful.. and wasnt allowed any input into its design.. is kicked off the show. While the 'pretty young boy' who designed and ordered its construction.. is kept.

Dont make a joke of yourself. You "critics" never had a say. This was a really incompetant attempt at manipulation and ratings. And sadly for what could be a great show, and artists like yourself, isng going to last explicitly due to its manipulation and lack of artistic integrity.

Bill Powers' blog for this episode basically explained nothing in regarding to the judges' decision-making process. It is clear that Erik was tossed for being the dissenter and malcontent of the team. Funny, I thought the contestants were judging the art and not the person's personality. "Scales" was the losing piece, therefore, the person most responsible for the losing piece should be the one leaving. Jaclyn had immunity and it seems the judges have obviously deemed Miles as their darling of the group, so he was certainly not going home. Erik got the shaft.

Erik worked hard at being dismissed. During his sulking he should have worked a spin for the judges on how his conribution meant something more. Better yet, he could have worked the spin on himself such that his contribution would have been enthused enough to sway better support from Jaclyn and Peregrine.

That said, he was working on borrowed time, anyway. He's got an interesting story, but his art has been substandard in conception and skill.

Skill is the bigger thing. Like natural selection, the artists who are weaker in conventional aesthetic skills are getting chopped.

It sounds like Benzo is talking about playing the game. Another words become likable and learn to love and respect the elite, so you one day you might be allowed into that rarefied world. I see art history mentioned, but don’t bother learning to paint like a master, just find out cool stuff like Caravaggio liked to stab guys in bars. A superior school will explain how good drawing is a waste of time. Become a great artist seminally, go light on Academicism. Getting a BFA at a good school, style and confident talking points is way more important than becoming a good artist.

Having just delineated my shock on her blog that JGR through Koons' "Puppy" was a simply superior piece of public art, I can only sit speechless that you feel the same.

Do you really believe that "interactivity" and "appreciation" are correctly limited to the simple fact of recognition and the impulsive squeal, "oh how cute!"? If you and JGR are typical of the powers that decide our public art, heaven help us all and most of all, heaven help real artists.

To Mike BB...You prove my point! And this 'non-expert' can only say..yada yada yada yada

Forget about whether or not Miles if faking. Erik has no regard for anyone who has taken an art class or has become knowledgeable about art history. Sure he has natural talent, but his lack of training lack and knowledge about the arts puts him in the position of feeling like an outsider when he's around other artists. Seeking training and knowledge of the arts is in itself and expression of the passion that one feels for the craft.

I was taught that as an artist, is was important to become as intellectual as possible because of the circles of people that artists commune with. People that are ahead of the curve of society...trendsetters (other artists, doctors, mathematicians, etc.). Erik is unaware of this and has become and outsider in his own world. Artist are rebels. He's trying to rebel against the rebels in society and will never win.

Have a little respect for the craft Erik and pick up a freakin' art history book then you won't feel so stupid around other artists. I can't even wish this guy any success.

"A Jealous Artist = A Broke Artist"

Miles' vision was judged inferior.
Erik had no part in piece.
Erik was sent home.

If Miles' piece had won, would Erik have been declared the overall winner?

This is reality television, not an art. In fact it's as far away from art as you can get. Embrace the hypocrisy, and enjoy your paycheck.

this show is frustrating. as a working artist (formally trained, ill admit) half of these people would not put together an art show worth seeing, in my opinion. miles is a pretentious snobby art school brat. i dont think i could stand to be near him, honestly.
but id probably go to his show, because although his works on here have been somewhat repetitive for challenges, real art shows are supposed to have some form of continuity and i think he could pull that off in an interesting way. (that being said, im not sure I'd ENJOY his show)

Both projects were bad examples of public art. I was disappointed at how quickly both teams came up with a design based on the ideas of the person with the most dominate personality. Beyond that I thought the judging this episode was a complete sham. Miles owned the idea and the leadership role. If this was Top Chef, he would be out. Maybe you should incorporate the judging standards used by Top Chef and you might have a better show. It is clear that the judges are infatuated with Miles. I find him to be pretentious. I hope Abdi wins.

Also, regarding the format of the show. I think each challenge should give the artists more time to develop a concept and more time for execution. And I hate group challenges for this show.

I had high hopes for the show, but it hasn't turned out at all to be what I had hoped. I know this season is already filmed and finished. I do hope you will bring it back next year with a new approach. Know your audience. We don't want to watch catty fights (there's more than enough of that trash on tv already), and most of us aren't part of the art world. Your audience are the average folks sitting at home on a work night watching a little tv before we go to bed. We know we like to look at nice art that is pleasing. So please keep the challenges and the critical judging in a realm we can somewhat understand - or at least educate us on why pieces are judged in certain ways. The overall concept is good and it's fairly entertaining now, but definately needs work. And I have to say I'm disappointed Eric went home. He wasn't sent home for not producing work that meet the challenge. There was much more going on than what the viewer was shown. I would hope he can be given another chance...but that does seem unlikely. Oh, and Ryan's impersonation of Miles - the most entertaining thing so far!

I really don't know why people are defending Erik. Yes, I understand that its an art challenge, not a popularity contest, but he dug his own grave. He chose to not be involved, the group wanted his help. He made personal insults against Miles, stomped his feet on the ground like a child, and cried victim. He should have offered up a good idea, maybe that wouldn't have been shot down. Perhaps he could have contributed to the success of others ideas, ANYTHING. But, no, he'd rather be intimidated by Miles (for some reason) to the point that he stops working all together. That just doesn't make sense to me. And why is he SO against people who have specialized training. How dare you insult people personally, who've done no such thing to you, who have the same love for freedom of creativity as you claim to have.
Erik was never concerned about the group project. He was concerned about Erik. That would have been fine, except that it was a group challenge. He was rude, immature, and let his bitterness overpower his talent. I did not feel sorry for him at all. Had he learned to play nice, he would have stayed here and the Blue team would have won. So I'm sure he's learning a lesson.
As an artist, you have to take rejection, criticism, and suggestion. Take it and do whatever you want with it, but just take it! What he did is blame everyone else around him for being kicked off. Even the judges admitted that if they could have let Blue team win and still kick Erik off they would have. He didn't participate... What did he expect?

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.

You should have never cut Erik. Miles never let him have his voice. Miles is a mess. You made a mistake!!!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

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 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.

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 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!

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.

"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.

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.

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.

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.

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)!

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.

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.