Nao's type of art does not personally interest me, I find it extremely self-indulgent and narcissistic - "Look at MEEEEE! I AM the Art!"

Everything I had seen up to AND including this episode did nothing to change my opinion, and I feel that she was eliminated at the correct moment in time as someone who, despite her very creative imagination, was unable to express it in any type of form other than one of over indulgent "acting out."

That said, I DID notice the Utrecht bags from the show sponsor. I thought it a very forward thinking touch, although again, one NOT complimentary to art, considering the negative connotations of the entire piece.

Nao's "performance art appeared to be premised upon "shock" value, as so many performance artists are, attempting to "shatter" the viewer's perceptions by creating visuals that are outside what people consider "normal." The photo of the "R. Mutt" urinal by Duchamp speaks volumes about her motivations. The photos of her artwork, such as her feet wrapped in plastic with ripe tomatoes under her heels highlighted the extent and limitations of her creative process in this manner. In the end, such "art" is just a very loud cry for attention, rather than an expression of one's inner thoughts and emotions. It is created for an audience, not for the artist.

"I think it is possible to make great art in a reality TV format, but it may not be where we intend it to be."

Nao, this very wise quote from your article may be about art and reality tv, but it also applies to all performance art in general.
Judging from the responses from viewers and people on the show, (artists and judges alike) I have to say what I always say..... No one "gets" that you don't have to "get" performance art. It is an open arena where the experience is the object.

the last lines of this writing are wonderful. another mask indeed.

nao, as a general rule, i loath "reality" shows, particularly because they are anyting but. at least this show, and one or two others such as project runway do require the contestants to have some sort of actual SKILL in order to participate.

i do have to say that throughout the show until your elimination you were probably the most interesting of the competitors. i must admit that i didn't always "get" your work but i loved trying to figure it out or, at least, trying to figure out ME trying to figure it out. like a really good philosophy course, you posed new questions for me to answer which in turn led me to ask myself new questions as a human being, a woman and an artist.

i'm not sure that your work, or that of other performance artists,
can be successfully showcased and evaluated on this type of show. the perspective of most "fine" art does not lend itself to view performance work either objectively or even kindly. sometimes the fact that the viewer dislikes or is offended by one's work is the greater success and, perhaps, the purpose of a given piece.

when it comes to my own work i have a standard blurb; "art is not something holy or mystical that the viewer must work feverishly to understand, it's up to the artist to make their work accessible. >>>for me, art is meant to inspire or evoke a response from the viewer. if my work does that, even part of the time, then i have achieved my objective.<<< every person brings a different history with them when they experience art, no matter the genre or medium, and each takes away something different afterwards.
for me the act of creating is as involuntary as breathing and as necessary for me to live. >>>i don't actually care if someone likes or dislikes my work as long as they feel something.<<< please, don't get me wrong, it's fantastic to hear that someone likes my work and it's even better when they buy something but if someone is moved by it either way then i feel that i have been successful. for me, that's enough."

nao, your process and your creative modality have shown me new things and shown me old things with new perspective. that is what i want from art, any kind of art and for that I THANK YOU.

I thought hers was just lame. She seemed very superior feeling and yet she just tried too hard to make her "homeless person who pooped on herself" piece look artsy.

I much prefer the others. Except for the gal who only wants nude photos of herself.

I thought the show got measurably less interesting when Nao left. It is too bad that the people who went into it for the creative challenge left early. I have said it elsewhere: I wish Nao had her own TV show. I'd sure watch it.

Too many current art cliches!

(The deconstructed stuff, the sexual references, yawn...)

Nao (and many of the other artists) need to research, read, react for or AGAINST art, life OUTSIDE the last chapter of the Art History timeline...! Yes there was art life before Derrida!

They could draw on (and definitely rearrange) more potent, fresh images from past art - and past centuries...and artists should be feeding their inner selves with good "soul" food....

Too many current artists have a starved inner soul...and if they can't portray that starved inner soul in an interesting way, I'm outta here!

While most current artists scorn the Thomas Kinkade book of home life cliches, some (like Nao in this particular work...) are just using a different book of cliches!!!