9/12/10 CONGRATULATIONS, ABDI! Just back from the finale party in Brooklyn and will be commenting more about this soon!

8/6/10 Into the Wild. Episode 9 Reaction

To save time and help to condense my thoughts about this episode, I’m going to list my favorite components bullet-point-style and expound thereafter...Ready? Aim...(everyone duck)...Fire!

1) The artists’ rooftop breakfast getting interrupted by Bill Powers’ puffy plaid bomber jacket and silly oversized green-rimmed sunglasses

2) Getting to see these hip, urban, emo (in only a few cases) artists against a NON-urban backdrop (FINALLY! No more weird Photoshop-doctored edgy black and white shots of NYC with preciously colored and highlighted window panes or street lights, for example). Compared to the previous settings, that forest looked dark, foreboding, and nothing short of magical...

3) China’s Little Red Riding Hood manifestation in the middle of the forest clearing...her rendition swaps the original red hooded coat for a camel-colored cape and what were no doubt little black Mary Janes atop white frilled socks with BLACK LEATHER LEGWARMERS! (Let’s all give China’s stylist a respectable nod of acknowledgment since we ALL know that, according to the fashion magazines’ Fall predictions for this upcoming season, “capes are in.” How did she know so many months ago? Astounding.) By the way- Patrick and I, again, had a little fashion disagreement over China’s outer wear: I thought she looked great, HE thought she looked like a beetle or a tick- a tick who had perhaps spent the entire day feasting on the hide of a wildebeest. He then asked, “what happens if she falls over? She won’t be able to get back up!”

4) Abdi’s confession that he no longer knows what he even likes to make as an artist. Perfect! He’s now in the best spot to make himself extremely uncomfortable and most likely make something genuinely “his.” He’s in the perfect spot to try and “undo” what the show, thus far, has “done.” People always seem to confuse this sort of befuddlement as weakness and lack of artistic vision when it really is as integral a part of the development of an artist’s career as is the expansion and perfection of his or her technique. Finding this wall and ramming one’s self into it (and then doing it several more times- usually at LEAST once a year like a religious ritual) seems to me to be the point of art grad school. The tried and true, “Yes I KNOW you’re really INTO “exploring the complex relationship between space and time and life and death and politics and religion and materiality and surface and howitzers and pinballs and carrottops and training bras.....but...WHY?” I found that the majority of the things I SAID I really “cared about” in my earlier art were really just used as masks for OTHER things I REALLY wanted to dabble in but didn’t have the confidence to admit (my big lie was masquerading my gut-level obsession with girly-ness, trying to make myself prettier, and glitzy, vapid, fame n’ fortune which, at the time, manifested itself as me doing pseudo photo-realistic images of models from fashion magazines, as “talking about the objectification of women in the media”...Yeah...that was totally fake. It just gave me the license to make pretty paintings of women. I had to fully admit I was the one who desperately wanted to look like these girls and envision my life as theirs and THEN I started having more fun! PS- I bet in one year I’ll totally be making fun of what I think I’m doing now...)

5) Jerry’s criticism of Jaclyn’s cold installation that it displayed no record of her learning anything along the way or any “accidental discovery.” PS- maybe it was “cold” because she HAD a cold...;) Blame the WoA studio germs... better yet, blame Miles’ MUSTARD GAS! Anyway- while this comment speaks more to the type of work JERRY likes than to an overall rule of thumb for all artists in all situations, it resonated with me being another person who, as Jerry has mentioned numerous times in his writings, likes work that “tells a story.” It pushed to the forefront of my mind the goal of setting up a situation in the studio in which I am ALLOWED to have an accident or make a discovery or make a decision and then have to react with another one; to not have everything planned out. This is what Miles was trying to get at by making that crazy mark-making machine. He thought that, by making a machine that could make his marks FOR him, he would be unable to control the final outcome and thus free his work from seeming too regimented...this worked for Dadaists but in Miles’ case, the work seemed MORE regimented than before! I kind of liked it. In his quest to remove control, though, he really only removed himself one step away from the final outcome; placing between himself and his final product only one variable (the way the bleach passed through the pre-positioned holes and splattered on the paper below). The work seemed MUCH more “control freak,” actually, than everything he’d done up to this point. I was just so glad he included his crazy medieval “torture device” in the final installation. I have not yet decided, however, if I like some of Miles’ work because it’s thought provoking and “good” or because I’m just impressed with the building techniques he has which I do not. This is similar to the occasional problem I have with very tech-savvy art work. I have to ask myself, “am I impressed because I’m looking at 6 flatscreens and you happen to know HOW to make your movie run from one to the next seemlessly and I don’t or because what you’ve actually put ON the screen is interesting?” In any event, it really doesn’t matter- if I like what I’m looking at it shouldn’t matter whether I like it because I happen to LOVE cotton candy and you just so happened to use it OR because I love what you’ve done with it...PS- Nicole’s obsession with materials reigned in and confined by her desire to do something meaningful and family-oriented ran her into this same problem this week as well: lots of materials but...lacking either too much or not enough to really express anything more in and of themselves...

Hmm..I seem to have lost my bullet-point strategy...

What are we on..6? I don’t have any more “favorites” (other than the fact that I can’t believe Bravo stooped so low as to include a bare rump shot of Miles sashaying across the screen clutching his bedspread...whatev...let the freshman art girls get their kicks...) I’m just going to make all of 6 my brief (yeah right) feelings about the final work and selection of the finalists.

1) (bullet-pointing is back!) ABDI: I don’t care how academic it was, that piece was beautiful. Frame or no frame, it was ethereal, well-executed, and somehow “fit” with Abdi in a much more intimate way than his super hero fixation has. I’m just so glad he was able to showcase academic figuration and garner the judges’ respect. When it’s done well, people, you CAN still get away with it. There is something about Abdi that, in my “Jaime the non-MFA-artist” loves him yet in my “Jaime-the-MFA-artist” wants to make fun of him for- I think it’s his optimistic naivete. Maybe when I want to criticize him for it, I’m REALLY shifting into thinking in the way I think my MFA peers would surely think instead of how I really feel. I am conflicted about it sometimes when I watch him but I THINK I feel excited for him. I THINK I feel that there is nothing wrong with his naive, seemingly “young” pizzaz and bright-eyed desire to tackle the tricky subject of black make identity through his sort-of street-art style. I THINK I feel that his integrity toward his work is strong and his desire to improve is equally strong. I think his TECHNICAL abilities will, perhaps, propel him as he learns and grows conceptually into a version of himself who makes really poignant and impacting work. I think. All I know is I LIKE HIM!!! And he IS as nice if not NICER than he is on the show—ALL THE TIME!

2) PEREGRINE: Her piece reminded me of a Nick Cave sculpture for one thing. Secondly, I agree very much with the judges that there is something about her- an “artistic spirit”- that is intriguing and deserves more free reign. I think it’s her magical elfin powers. There IS something extremely enchanting and peculiar about her that you just want to know more about. I don’t think she’s really showcased it yet, but her skill with intimate water-based media produces the strangest and creepiest little creatures with a powerful psychosis. I was TOTALLY so pumped to see what she’d wear to the finale—keepin’ my fingers crossed for a rabbit tail or deer antlers...

3) JACLYN: Bless her heart (which in Oklahoma/Texas terms means someone is about to say something critical), I think she gave up. I think she’d had enough of not being able to make her photorealistic self-portraits. Can’t fault her for that- she needed to get back to her studio and her daily regimen. She said at that point she’d never had a solo show- well she just had one in NYC about two weeks ago so everything worked out!

4) MILES: duh. (And my fingers are getting tired and I already talked about him earlier)

5) NICOLE: Have to admit I was surprised she wasn’t headed to the finale. I swear Jerry has a crush on her. I think Peregrine has one too...AND Miles! Geeze! Halloween wigs 2010: The Nicole Tousled Top Knot! It was a toss-up between her and Peregrine, clearly. Perhaps the judges already knew what they’d see from her if she had several rooms to fill: tons and tons of material construction. With Peregrine’s recent jump into sculpture, however, perhaps they had no CLUE what she’d come up with using her tried-and-true works on paper approach AND her new 3D discoveries and wanted to find out. Nicole is awesome and will be perfectly fine. She and her design collective are continuing to make really interesting art objects, namely new jewelry based off topographical maps...SO cool!

Be sure to watch NEXT WEEK AS THE WINNER IS REVEALED! EEK! Patrick and I are headed to NY for a watch party at the Brooklyn Museum–so excited. Thanks to everyone who has kept up with this, by the way–I really appreciate it!!! Until NEXT WEEK....;)

7/29/10 Double Your Pleasure: Teams of Two to Tackle Duality. Episode 8 Reaction

I got a text message from a loved one about halfway through last night’s show saying, “This episode sure is boring.” I’d venture to bet that a vast majority of Bravo viewers might agree. I have to say, though, that her reason for thinking it lackluster is my reason for finding it more interesting. WoA is (kind of) losing its fluff…slowly but surely. As the competition is whittled down and the hour-long time slot is divvied up to allow for longer segments devoted to each artist, we’re allowed more time to peer voyeuristically and judgementally into the nervous, self-conscious, unsure-of-itself, contradictory, masquerading, second-guessing, usually-a-misfire-but-sometimes-genius artistic studio practice (and for the record: it only takes one “good” moment in the studio amidst weeks of “bad” to keep us coming back for more…It’s much like hitting a great shot in golf…according to my Dad whose bad golf game is evident to all for up to twenty-four hours thereafter). While the tried and true catty reality TV world comments were still apparent, this episode seemed to rely significantly less on them for filler. This is a good sign. It might not be as entertaining in the way that, say, Mad Men is entertaining (PS I could not BELIEVE Don was actually attracted to that bright young thing on Sunday’s premiere), BUT it IS doing a somewhat better job of revealing the very complicated, frustrating, and complex ways the six remaining artists hash out each challenge.

The thing that I’m finding the most interesting, and the part of artmaking that is very truthful no matter how much we’d like to pretend it isn’t, is that artists are SO SO easily swayed by opinion. Guest judge Ryan McGinness got onto Abdi for this saying that asking for advice in and of itself is the wrong answer and that he should be simply asking himself (when Jerry expressed his strong distaste for Abdi’s “amateurish” painting, Abdi replied with what I have to admit I wanted to ask the judges during MY negative crits, “What would you like to see?” While getting to the point of complete self-confidence and assurance as an artist is ABSOLUTELY a goal for which to reach, it’s next to impossible to fully reach it! The very fact that artists work, work, work in their studios supposedly doing their own things independently only to reach the ultimate goal of hanging them up on pristine white walls expecting people to come see them because it IS, after all, worth seeing implies that we are deeply entangled with the mess of approval addiction! You’ve done it before as I know I do ALL THE TIME: you make something that you think is totally awful and all it takes is ONE PERSON (here comes that golf analogy of the ONE good shot) to come in and say, “I really like what you’re doing in this one” and ALL OF A SUDDEN you’re willing to give it a second chance and not do what you’ve been wanting to do with it all along: trash it. I’m fascinated watching the artists vacillate between ideas desperately trying to find the right combination of 1) something that feels like “THEIR work” and 2) something they can sweet talk into fitting the challenge. We saw this in Mark’s willingness to go along with Peregrine’s idea to use him as the subject even though it made him uncomfortable. We saw it in Abdi’s struggle to find meaning in his piece and then taking up as his own Nicole’s abstract “allegory of Socrates’ cave” idea. We also saw it in Jackie and Miles’ discussions as they tried to come up with a logical way to combine their aesthetics while offering up and then later rejecting certain ideas (Jackie liked the idea of the mirror; Miles went along with it; Miles changed his mind later and at the last minute wanted to paint the entire structure with black tar and had to convince Jackie the mirror wasn’t the way to go). At times, the artists seem so self-conscious and so easily swayed by anyone’s opinion that it’s frustrating for me to watch. Then I realize, though, just how transparent they’re being and how I deal with the problem of going along with whatever people like or putting on the back burner those things they don’t on a REGULAR basis. If you’re an artist, you know exactly what I mean. I’d say if you’re HUMAN you know exactly what I mean.

Abdi, unfortunately, did create a painting that looked amateurish and didn’t resonate his subjectmatter at all, BUT, just as I liked Ryan the most last week for really showing the vulnerable and genuine side of his practice and the risks he IS, apparently, willing to take if need be, I liked Abdi the most in THIS episode. I believe him when he says he wants to be known as someone who takes his work very seriously and as someone who takes very seriously the desire to get better. Yes, he got backed into a corner and got stuck putting forth a piece he didn’t have a connection with because he was never able to construct a unique vision that was his OWN. Nicole had one right from the get-go about depicting social order and used it to fuel HER work and tried, being the great team player that she is, to offer a bit of it up to Abdi who didn’t make the connection. That’s because it wasn’t his connection. It became, as so many of the challenges have or had for all of us: an assignment.

I enjoyed certain aspects of Jaclyn and Miles’ piece but had trouble with others. I have to say that at first thought, Jaclyn’s overtly feminine image seemed too charged and yet not charged enough all at once. The image didn’t immediately confirm what her action was and the posing was so stereotypically lustful that I thought exactly what Jerry mentioned about the assignments of male and female being REVERSED: the nude painting of the splayed ecstatic woman being MALE (or male desire) and the impenetrable shielded walls being shattered in one spot and revealing soft, vulnerable drywall within representing some female shell. I WILL say that the pairing was the most intriguing and it DID seem like the two didn’t really “get along” because they were both so different formally. I smirked a little to myself when Jerry said this was a reason he liked the piece; hitting on that whole Men are from Mars/Women are from Venus thing…If Jaclyn’s piece were alone, though, I wouldn’t have been a fan. Work with that much sensual charge REALLY needs to be OVER THE TOP in my opinion and can’t stop short. I deal with this problem in my own work of making sure my interests are plastered over every square inch of the piece so there is no question about my intentions or sincerity…Of course I understand, though, that it is next to impossible to make ANYTHING over the top in the time constraints everyone in this situation is given…

Concluding with Mark and Peregrine’s Heaven and Hell…I have to really hand it to Mark for his willingness to put himself out there…What he did really took guts…(pun not intended=). You could tell by the tears in China’s eyes as she delivered his verdict that everyone, no doubt, respected the leap of faith he took. I understand what Peregrine was wanting to do with Mark and, while it ultimately didn’t work out and accidentally backfired, I think it was a generous idea to have for him. She thought this would be a great opportunity for Mark to really play to his strengths in Photoshop and digital manipulation and really let loose with them and, by turning the camera on himself, create a work infused with more of MARK than perhaps his past work had exhibited. Perhaps using himself as the subject would unlock a new way of representation that would allow him the freedom to change the way he used his skills in a new and exciting way. Unfortunately, despite his very commendable attempt, he applied the same formal strategies of straightforward representation in his image of himself (in his professional photography practice, though, his methods work extremely well). Peregrine’s work was a mess but she was well aware of it, I think, and tried to do the best with what she had. Miles was right in his analysis of the work in that she took what she had and applied her method to it…what came out in the end wasn’t pretty but it WAS hers…

Wanna know what my favorite part of this entire episode was? The montage of crazy artspeak mumbo jumbo! It’s a language that won’t get you ANYTHING or ANYWHERE in any other country except the “art world”- and even THEY’RE like the French! Even in France you might not get anything you want if you don’t say it properly (won’t get you a coffee, your check please, a hamburger, or directions to the nearest hospital or hotel…you’re on your own and you’d better pray you have a translation book)!

I can’t believe there is only one more episode until the announcement of the finalists!! This whole thing has BLOWN by! All I know is it looks like they choppered China and her YSL pumps into a forest…I cannot WAIT!

7/21/10 For TATE or Tots? Episode 7 Reaction

Tonight's Erik-less (and thus joke-less) WoA episode really tugged at my heart strings...I know, I know.. IT WAS SUPPOSED TO...All these seemingly impenetrable artists opening up about their less-than-idyllic childhoods? You'd have to have a heart of coal to not have felt some pang of empathy while watching the seven remaining artists struggle through the "childhood challenge" (I should mention, though, that I am such a softy I cry at Olympics commercials...Yup. And remember that recent Youtube video during the World Cup showing all the US fans across the globe celebrating when that game-winning goal was kicked? I cried then too....)

I have to admit my sensors were on pleasure overload just watching the first half of this episode...all the bright colors, dwarfed furniture, and neatly compartmentalized collections of neon, fluffy pom-pons (yes, people, "pom poms" IS technically "pom PONS"...don't argue with this retired dance squad captain) and rounded, shiny baubles? I was jealous they were even HANGING OUT in that space!! Seeing this episode makes me plan on trekking downtown to our own Chicago Children's Museum as soon as humanly possible (by the way, some of the lights on their neon sign are out so the museum currently advertises itself as the "Chic Children's Museum" after 8pm...) With all that visually stimulating, brimming-with-childlike-optimism-and-purity MAGIC all over the place, how could one possibly NOT dive right in and start reveling in all that creativity?

Well, unfortunately, this may be because few of the artists had such flowery and pouffy memories to fall back on when presented with the challenge to create a work that showcased their "first experience (s) that shaped them into the artists they are now". What seemed to happen in this case is exactly what happened in the shock challenge case: when given an "assignment" that wasn't necessarily all THAT narrow and specific, we panicked and reduced every imaginative direction down to the most literal, obvious, simplistic, and...well...juvenile approach. With the exception of Nicole and, to some degree, Miles (who sort of does his own thing anyway; sometimes to his credit; sometimes not), the artists translated the challenge into needing to make something that either a) looked like a child made it or b) looked like something a child would LIKE...all while funneling each artist's past history into the subjectmatter of the childlike-or-looking finished product. Peregrine did this extremely successfully and we all painfully watched the rest of the artists, Nicole excluded, struggle with it to varrying degrees.

Ryan is the person for whom I had the most sympathy this challenge. What Ryan ultimately came up with seemed like the very beginning of an exercise that would lead one TO creating a great work that draws upon childhood experience. It was, as one of my awesome SAIC painting advisors, Candida Alvarez,, calls, "a first vomit" (gross...I know...but useful as a visual aid with this sort of thing). It was as if Ryan needed to put himself through that exercise of 1) calling back memories he hadn't thought about in years and 2) trying to make art as if he were a child a couple more times through and THEN, when the lessons learned and floodgates burst through that process combined with his adult sense of self and artistic technical arsenal, he'd arrive at a work far better than anyone else's!

I really felt for Jaclyn watching her do what all of us would have done in her situation: try desperately to pin-point a couple meaningful memories and then from THOSE, pick the BEST one that could be squeezed into a relatively understandable and sucessful "Art Work." Sure, I could come up with a lot of really poignant and impactful childhood memories- perhaps the MOST pivotal, but if I'm unable to think of a way to translate them into a physical THING to put in a GALLERY that I could describe "artfully" if I HAD to, I'll pass them by for other potentially less meaningful memories that do happen to translate more easily visually. After discussing numerous elements of isolation and eating lunch in the bathroom stall (which really gave all of us such a transparent and TRULY vulnerable moment with her), she decided upon the tree theme. Formally, she could communicate it and it would enable her to work in the pipe cleaners Simon suggested she use. Unfortunately, it did feel "cold" as everyone mentioned. Jaclyn is a fascinating girl and I know she is capable of coming up with a work that really whollops you with its intensity of emotion, I just think she got stuck and ran out of time and, like I know I would have been, was swayed by Simon's suggestion of changing her approach and using the pipe cleaners and pom pons..

Lastly, Abdi ran into trouble the minute he asked everyone else what people had THEM draw a lot growing up. I totally understand where he was going with that (people always had me write their names in cursive bubble letters or try to draw Disney characters like Simba and Pumba...), but the minute he took their suggestions and incorporated them into HIS expression of HIS childhood, the work lost its intimate touch and wasn't infused with ingenuity. The judges were able to detect that absence instantly. It was very telling and an excellent inclusion in the episode that when asked which particular icons Abdi connected with the most, he pointed to all the super heroes. He should have just run with that! He started to do so with his initial drawing/painting on paper, but the forms felt too juveline and he was made self-conscious by Simon's criticism...If he had landed somewhere in between the two, he would have been spot-on! (by the way---while I am criticizing these artists' works, let's all pause for a moment and think of the likely train wreck I would have come up with in this situation...well wait...actually, I could have just used the piece I got kicked off with for this one! It practically would have fit right in! Hah!)

A few brief words about Peregrine and Nicole's work. Nicole really impressed me with her stubborn commitment to her aesthetic (this is a good thing). She was in no way phased by the fear of having to work outside her comfort zone and instead did exactly what Miles very rightly stated was the goal of these challenges: to make them work for your art instead of making your art work for them. I loved what Will Cotton said about Nicole's piece not revealing too much of itself; how it still maintained its mystery. I'm going to have to start examining my work in terms of a classy vs promiscious girl! The boys don't stick around if she gives it up too easily! Peregrine played to her strengths also in this challenge. I knew from the moment I found out what it was that she'd most likely hit it outta the park! While the My Little Pony was cute (when my parents thought I had an unhealthy number of Barbies and wouldn't let me have any more, they switched to those...I had TONS piled up under my bed...all with ratted hair!), it was the tiny chalk cigarettes, paper candies, and tiny delicious-looking drugs that sold me. Those cigarettes were just perfect...and right up Will Cotton's alley too, by the way. The portion of her childhood that she chose to reference, too, was extremely moving in a genuine and NOT gimmicky or disrespectful way. Peregrine is excellent when it comes to "petite, charming, bright" and then "eerie, oh wait, what IS that" work. I was so happy she won! She and Nicole did a great job!

I'm so glad you're getting a little more face time with each artist to get a little bit more of an idea how complex and unique each is..I have no idea exactly what next week's challenge is...but with Mark looking like a genie with pierced nipples, I am NOT gonna miss it and neither should you!

7/15/10 Public [Sculpture] Enemies: Episode 6 Reaction

Last night’s sixth episode challenged the remaining eight artists to team up in groups of four and create an engaging public sculpture for a grassless, gravel-filled “park” (as “park-y” as you can get in Manhattan if you aren’t CENTRAL Park, I suppose...THAT park has the monopoly on all the trees..THIS “park” had...well...a chain link fence and some surrounding construction from what I could tell...). This challenge was certainly one that I enjoyed watching but, per usual, had pretty much no bearing on whether an artist is a good one or not AND was one that I was thanking my lucky stars I was not around to have to live through! Numerous times during the episode (namely, all the parts having to do with sawing, cutting, measuring, sanding, and having to make one’s self look occupied and participatory) I said to myself, “ I left at the PERFECT time...” (By the way, I thought that only until I found out what NEXT week’s challenge was...THEN I thought AH! If I could’ve just lasted TWO MORE “WEEKS” (aka about four more days!)

I’ve got to admit, and perhaps this is just because I am not, shall we say, “lumber-inclined,” that I was pretty impressed with what both teams were able to come up with in less than two days’ time. The pit-fall of this challenge as it pertains to embarking on the task of identifying (instead of “THE NEXT” several of us liked to call it:) ANOTHER Great Artist is that if you did not happen to have a lumber-inclined individual on your team, you were pretty much screwed. Sorry, folks, I don’t think “mural” would’ve qualified as “public sculpture.” Any individual who most likely would have risen to the top of this situation would have proven his or herself to be a diverse and multi-skilled artist...not necessarily a great artist. By the way, I am not implying last night’s winner, Nicole, is NOT a great artist because she won this challenge...PS- how freaking adorable is she when she gets excited and jumps around like a free-spirited little Earth-fairy? Someone should tell Natalie Portman if she doesn’t watch her back and make sure Nicole has no more public reasons to get excited, she’s gonna be out of a job FAST!

Anyway, I was extremely impressed by the curve of the Blue team’s sculpture. I thought the form was interesting and definitely stood out in its lyricism and organic shape compared to the rigid buildings surrounding it. While I of all people definitely understand the need to “decorate,” I didn’t think the piece needed any of the charring, any of the tacked on wood scraps, or any of the metal scales on the back. It seems to me that, with public sculpture, the only reason to add additional aesthetic elements beyond the simple form is because they ENHANCE the public’s relationship TO it. For example, Chicago’s “Cloud Gate” (aka “giant bean” sculpture) features a highly polished reflective surface. Yes, it’s beautiful and “reflects the Chicago skyline and the colors of the seasons” blah, blah, blah..but its beauty is NOT what makes it a popular sculpture. It’s a must-see on every Millennium Park visitor’s list because it allows them to snap distorted photos of THEMSELVES when crowded under and around it (photos that inevitably wind up as Facebook profile pics for about one day until they get swapped for the cooler version of the group of tourists with martinis atop the Hancock with the blurry lights of the city below). Chicago’s nearby Crown Fountain isn’t popular because of its strong, monolithic towers that loom above the park but because each features giant changing images of peoples’ faces spitting water into a shallow pool below. This provides visitors the perfect place to let the little ones splash through the water while they digest their fried chicken salad from Bennigan’s and rest their aching shoulders weighed down with bags of souvenirs from the Art Institute (if you’re a young, angsty art student, however, it also provides the perfect place for you to kick off your shoes, lay in the grass, and try to convince people you’re really enjoying that novel while you’re really just staring at the free spirited 21-year-old with her Urban Outfitters layers, bare knees, and funky camera trying to shoot pictures of her friends frolicking in the water…) In short, the best public art gives people a space in which to watch themselves or watch each other…without looking like stalkers. No extra bells or whistles required. Oh, and if you can make it look pretty, bonus points for you. While I have a feeling the Red team’s structure might have looked a bit messy and unprofessional up close (hand-painting plywood and trying to create straight edges with your brush on angles is always tricky…it’s a lot like what happens when you tell yourself you don’t need painter’s tape to paint the trim along the floorboards of your living room…), their work seemed to garner the most effortless interaction. It welcomed the possibility of multiple strangers being able to comfortably sit on or around it without feeling too awkward. The Blue team’s classy tree house, however, seems perfect only for loners who happen to nab the spot first during lunch hour or for doting snuggling couples who don’t want to be bothered…This is not a bad thing- I know I would like to hop up there and kick back and take a nap if I could- it just made the Red team’s more inclusive design seem more like the fitting winner…I was impressed all the way around, though, with what both teams created and really enjoyed trying to imagine what my suggestions might’ve been were I there and what I would do if asked the question, “Who do you think should be the winner?” or “Who do you think should be sent home?”

There really isn’t much point in devoting too much time to the fantastic drama that unfolded within the Blue team…It really DID start to feel like a reality show, though, didn’t it (as if it hadn’t already)? It’s easy to point fingers and pronounce certain individuals as protagonists and others as instigators, but at the end of the day, none of us were there and none of us know exactly what went down, how much sleep everyone had, what they’d eaten that day, or whether or not they were fighting a headache…I will say, though, that it is a shame Erik was sent home SEEMINGLY because he didn’t get along with the rest of his team. I understand SOMEONE had to go home but it just doesn’t seem right to be sent home for not playing well with others when the intent of the show is to find a great artist. While Erik IS, I can personally say, an extremely nice teddy-bear-of-a-tough-guy (Patrick and I hung out with him and his lovely girlfriend, Susie, after an opening John had at Western Exhibitions a few months ago), you technically do not NEED to be a nice person to be a phenomenal artist. Sure, it is best in life to go about one’s business WITHOUT being a cactus BUT this is not a prerequisite for artistic greatness. Erik and Miles didn’t get along. Big deal. Nothing wrong with either of them in my opinion, although I can see the distinct differences that might cause friction. It is a shame Erik felt so insecure about his lack of artistic training because it ALSO is not a prerequisite for artistic greatness (hello….Darger? ‘Nuff said). I can sympathize with his insecurities, though, as I merely scan through my Artforum seeing how many names I recognize in any given number of pages and then proceed to rack myself with guilt for feeling like I should know many, many more especially since, I am certain, everyone I went to grad school with probably knows ALL of them…You know the drill…

I am definitely going to miss Erik’s hilarious commentary, although I am happy Ryan is looking like he’ll be able to step in and help with the comedic void that was left when John first left, and I sincerely hope Erik continues to pursue his artmaking career and doesn’t give a flip about not having formal training..As for the other contestants, Peregrine really showed her gentle, level-headed, and compassionate charm last night and I love that about her—I got the chance to see that while we lived in our upscale cracker jack box for several weeks, and kudos to Nicole for really using her design sensibility to propel herself forward in the competition! I’m looking forward to next week and let me tell you, when I found out what the challenge was I actually yelled because I would have loved to be a part of it so badly…Will Cotton is guest judging….I’ll leave it at that!

7/13/10 Wheel of Fortune: Episode 5 Reaction

Hey guys! I've pasted below my blog response on bravotv.com's Work of Art page about last week's piece. There is just SO much to say and quite frankly, I don't feel like rehashing it all again- for more comments, though, please check out my interviews with New York Magazine and Artinfo about my experience! Thanks Rachel and Emma for great interviews! I do plan to continue blogging about the remaining episodes here so keep coming back to check in!

After receiving numerous questions from many of you, I feel we must get one order of business out of the way immediately: "car dancing" IS simply dancing in your car! Come on people, you've done it before! I've probably made fun of you for it at a stoplight somewhere because while it is EXTREMELY fun it A) NEVER looks nearly as cool as you think it does and B) is slightly distracting to the snickering people around you...But then again the joke is on THEM because while they are groggily lamenting their 9 AM commute downtown, YOU have decided to make the best of the unfortunately traffic-jammed situation so TEN POINTS FOR YOU!

If only my misinterpreted car-wreck of a piece, "Turn It Up" could have garnered a few more points with the judges last week! While I sarcastically call this piece awful, let me be perfectly clear in saying that if I were able to keep any of the work I made during the competition, it would be THIS ONE! Yes...I said it and I'll proclaim my love for its ridiculous, literal hilarity from the top of the highest mountain in Chicago (which would be the recently renamed Sears Tower I suppose)! While the work WAS devastatingly literal (Guest Judge Richard Phillips was spot-on) and perhaps did not succeed in meeting the judges' standards for the challenge, it DID meet MY goal for this particular challenge which was to make the most ridiculous thing I could POSSIBLY make. Now we're all in agreement, right? Good...

At this point in the competition, I was beginning to wonder whether or not I'd ever meet eye to eye with the judges over my work. It had become very clear to me what whey were wanting from me: a work infused with a sophisticated and complex surface and use of materials. At the end of the day, if you have these elements, your subject matter doesn't really matter so much. Because I was unable to provide them with a visually stunning image, I left them with nothing to work with EXCEPT my naive, sunny, cheesy, girly-world narratives (something that, when revealed through an enticing mash-up of swirling, layered formal elements is legitimized and reinforced instead of laid bare as juvenile). As I've mentioned in other exit interviews since last week, the strength of my studio practice lies in my ability to build a story through building up the painting's surface; in approaching it like a PAINTING instead of a PROJECT. This takes time. It takes time for me to sit and stare at the thing, to completely wipe things out, to start over half-way through...When an artist has time to do this, the viewer is presented with a complicated and multi-layered record of his or her THOUGHT PROCESS. While I absolutely should have been able to come up with visually interesting work in the time provided, I was not able to do so while using my current studio practice methods. I would have been better off abandoning my "style" right off the bat and trying to work in an entirely new and unfamiliar way than being so concerned about trying to maintain my "artistic aesthetic" (whatever THAT means) and squeeze it into the time allotted for each challenge.

In the end, "Turn It Up" was all about me. I made it for no one BUT me. After realizing that I was either going to have to COMPLETELY revolutionize my approach to artmaking for the remainder of the competition OR go down in a burst of hot pink flames and sequins and head happily back to my kitchen, cocker spaniel, cheesy exercise dvds, boyfriend, and several episodes left of Mad Men, I went with the latter and wouldn't change it for anything! How truly grateful I am for this amazing experience, for the criticism from our judging panel and the fuel it has given me, and for the opportunity to meet thirteen seriously hip cats---ENJOY THE REST OF THE SEASON and God bless!

7/1/10 Shock and Awe SHUCKS! AGAIN?! Episode 4 Reaction

Wow..this episode was bananas, right?!! You have to admit, you WERE shocked a little- most assuredly NOT by the work itself but perhaps moreso with 1) how so many of us strangely turned into freshmen with a homework assignment and wound up defaulting to the same similar idea of "shocking" 2) how awkward it was to hear Simon mention where his first erection came from or 3) just how freaking hilarious the episode was and how many wacky and stupid and not-for-the-kiddies things you saw in any snippet of five seconds! I know Patrick and I laughed throughout the entire thing and if I counted the number of times I hung my head in embarrassment for whomever was on screen trying to take him or herself seriously, I'd still be counting by the time the apocalyspe arrives....I sincerely hope my grandparents' cable temporarily died up in Tacoma, WA last night...

In all truthfulness, the most interesting thing to me about this challenge was seeing Andres Serrano's alligator boots and pink satin-lined pirate coat at Phillips de Pury. I sounded excited when China revealed the challenge, but on the inside I knew we were ALL in for trouble...(On a side note- while watching the episode last night over pasta with pine nuts, spinach, and turkey sausage and upon seeing China come teetering around the corner in that hoop skirt, Patrick quipped, "WHAT is she wearing?! She looks ridiculous! Seriously...WHAT IS SHE HIDING UNDER THERE and why can't the rest of us have some?!?" I thought she looked cute..especially with that cat eyeliner...) A challenge as specific and charged as this one forces artists to most likely attempt something they wouldn't normally do. Let me be clear, though: being forced outside your comfort zone to take on a subject in a NEW WAY; with a conceptual or formal approach perhaps never before taken, can sometimes birth ground-breaking discoveries and is an excellent exercise for artists to undertake when things are seeming a bit stale and dry, THAT BEING SAID, however, forcing artists to create work that generates a response unlike any response they passionately care about pigeon-holes them into creating something they aren't naturally connected to...In short, it delivers work in which the artist is significantly less genuinely "present."

In all fairness, however, the judges never told us "make a shocking piece of art ABOUT something that is shocking." Why we all ran in that direction, I have NO idea...We all hopped on our soap boxes for the most part and felt the need to make public service announcements when we could have run with the idea in an entirely different direction that could have provided us MUCH more creative room to breathe. For example, when you see one of Koons' blow-up pool toy sculptures and you discover that, despite its immaculate disguise, it is NOT inflated plastic and light as air but is in fact polychromed aluminum STEEL, it IS shocking! When you recognize Joe Zucker's pixelated image of a face is really cotton balls dipped in paint, it's shocking! Things can be delightfully shocking not necessarily disturbingly so...I wish I had approached the challenge in this manner. I think the judges wished we all had. I think the producers were thanking their lucky stars, however, that we had NOT! We gave them GOLD this episode, people!

Regarding my piece, I never should have defaulted to an image with which I have already familiarized myself in previous work...I've already done one large-scale Last Supper drawing on pink paper before and, when paralyzed by the thought of having to make something shocking and never really having cared about doing such a thing, I fell back on an idea in my arsenal that seemed the most controversial FOR ME and that, I THOUGHT, could work in my current situation. It IS true that at times, narratives pop up in my playful paintings that poke fun at the fake, gaudy, plastic Christian "religion with a capital R" that we have all witnessed or have perhaps perpetuated without meaning to..I know I have. Living in Chicago far away from my hometown in Oklahoma (where it's just politically EASIER to align one's self with Christianity) and maintaining my spiritual approach to life has been difficult at times and sometimes I wish we could come up with a whole new name for it... "Wait...you mean you DON'T hate gay people? You AREN'T a dumb wanna-be suburban housewife who HATES people from other countries and wants to BOMB the living daylights out of them?!" What I've realized, though, is that this "different" approach to Christianity that I have (a lot of others feel the same way, by the way) and this genuine struggle I feel wtithin myself to NOT screw up Christ's image any more than I already have is something that is perfectly fine to just come out of me as a person..I don't have to force it into my work to try and hammer home a point. When I do, the work seems like I'm finger-pointing which is the EXACT thing I'm getting onto Bible-Belters for doing! I KNOW the imagery was NOT shocking to anyone...I didn't really expect it to be. More than anything, I just wanted to make something that a) sort of looked like what I'd make in my studio if there weren't cameras over my shoulder and a clock nipping at my heels and b) was thought-provoking...something that wasn't initially so dark and disturbing in terms of its formal presence but that, upon closer inspection, might make one question what was running through my head as I was making it. There is enough work in the world that smashes you over the head with a hammer and makes you feel awful for all the charities you aren't donating to and there is an important place in art for those works...I just don't want to take that approach. Serrano's comment to me implying I didn't possess the character needed to produce shocking art sat perfectly fine with me (as long as we're talking about the kind of shock that makes you feel creepy and icky and horrified). Just as I felt last week, though, I wish I had let go a lot more and hadn't been so fixated on the "assignment." This is the big problem with these specific types of challenges...

A few comments on my colleagues' work: I have a lot of respect for both John and Nao as artists. I was really sad to see them go even though it meant I got to stay...(to be honest, the fact that the judges seemed so displeased with something that FORMALLY seemed sort of close to my regular work made me begin to think there might not ever be a piece of mine upon which we would all agree approvingly...)I have to hand it to Nao for going through with that voodoo/swamp-woman/mystic/Huck Finn performance. While we may not ever understand what's running through her head, she consistantly maintained her sense of self and artistic identiy throughout her presence in the competition...I remember vividly her telling us the night before this challenge, "Let's all make the piece we'd want to go home on..." That's exactly what she did and I really took her advice into the next challenge...I thought it was the best idea I'd heard yet. I couldn't believe John was sent home after having just WON a challenge!! I really felt for him this week because I think he and I were in the same freaked out boat...."Quick...we have to make people FEEL SOMETHING.....what do we do!?!?!?" I've seen John's work in exhibitions in Chicago and it really is a joy to see in person. It looks nothing like what he made last night. Such a shame. Our comic relief left us that evening...

BE SURE TO TUNE IN NEXT WEDNESDAY FOR MORE TWISTS AND TURNS!!!!!! I make my FAVORITE piece next week!

6/24/10 Work of Art Episode 3 Reaction

I have to say right off the bat: I should have done a lot better on this week’s challenge. I mean COME ON a book cover for a classic novel???! Most of them FAIRY TALES? This challenge, BY FAR, was the most up-my-alley so far….While my cover for Dracula wasn’t terrible and WAS much closer to my normal work than last week’s electronics challenge, I got too distracted by the excitement of a PAINTING about my subject and lost sight of what John truly understood: book covers need to be clear and concise not brushy and swirly and grandiose…Honestly, my work on paper didn’t really even succeed as a great PAINTING either. It seemed to me to exist in a strange in-between place between not-so-bad book cover and not-so-bad painting…Thus, I wasn’t in either the top or bottom three.

 

The truth is, I was so concerned after my critique last week that I had made a work that didn’t really feel like “me” that I was determined to FORCE my “style” into whatever challenge came around the bend this week. I wanted so badly to showcase the scale and expressive, sweeping, airy quality of the water media of my regular work that I didn’t even consider for a moment taking a different, more simple approach. Since the judges had seemed responsive to the size of Abdi’s first portrait of Ryan and Ryan’s large-ish piece of Abdi didn’t do badly either, I thought I really needed to go BIG (Texas IS right next to Oklahoma so the whole “higher the hair, closer to God” mantra migrated over to us Okies and somehow backpacked its way all the way to Chelsea and into our studio). I realize I’m being hard on myself here since I wasn’t in the bottom three, but the truth is, given a challenge like this one, I really should have come up with a way to win…or at least with a piece that was up to par with my standards for my large paper works. Had I more time, I would have incorporated many more layers and created a more sophisticated color scheme showcasing much more than just tried and true red, white, and black (in my defense, though, it’s DRACULA- and Dracula for a commercial audience for that matter…you HAVE to have red, black, and white…).As I stepped back from the piece, though, I remembered that Susanna Coffey, a NY and Chicago-based painter for whom I assistant-taught an observational painting course at SAIC during grad school, always told students never to use black because it just looks ashy and chalky in the end…(she always hated Prussian blue too and Viridian because if you gave it even an inch on your canvas, it would take a mile…) I did think SO much watery black looked weak and diluted and, well…ashy. Mark’s flat, opaque use of black in HIS Dracula piece was the better choice, though, because it was used as a GRAPHIC element…Anyway, this week’s piece was at least a step in the right “Jaimelike” direction…but I really hate that it was just “safe.” I’d rather be in the bottom constantly for making something that at least makes the judges feel SOMETHING strongly than to just be “safe.” Although I will say, that particular non-elimination round night WAS awesome because I actually got to work out and got to sleep before 2 am (immediately after ravaging our kitchen’s stash of sugary “so-modified-it’s-not-POSSIBLY-natural-trail mix” TRAIL MIX)!

Quickly, a few thoughts on some of the other work: John’s winning piece was BY FAR leaps and bounds beyond the rest of ours in meeting the challenge… I mean come on- how many people that use hand-written text in their paintings make it look anything other than junior high chicken scrawl, let alone GOOD!? It was pristine, precise, deliberate, smartly-edited perfection! I can’t wait to buy it! It was sad to say goodbye to the vibrant and brimming-with-life Judith whose combinations of brightly-colored skinny tank tops and opaque leggings never ceased to amaze me (and make me WANT THEM!) and whose charming eccentricity and tendency to ramble (HEY! Me too!!!) leave a gaping dim hole in their absence! While it probably was not the wisest choice to spell her novel's title backwards on her piece, a part of me really cheered her on in that and cheered her on as she left us because she was headed back to the NY art scene to operate on HER OWN TERMS! You go, Judith (PS- is anyone else amazed by her Madonna-esque yoga arms? Forget Michelle Obama's guns, JUDITH needs an entire website dedicated to hers)! I definitely didn’t think Peregrine deserved to be in the bottom three unless it was solely because the content of her piece didn’t communicate in any way the content of her book (which I, admittedly, have not read, so I would not know). That “burn it” line at the end of the critique wrap-up?! Ludicrous! I remember it was about this time after this challenge that Peregrine and I really looked each other squarely in the face and said, “Seriously…what are we doing? We are good artists. We are good women artists. The boys have won THREE in a row…Let’s up the estrogen and quit playing around with these silly little “assignments” and show these people what we REALLY do.” (Sounds valiant and rallying doesn’t it? Makes you want to grab some flag and hoist it up and march forward to….SOMEWHERE! Yeah…we thought so too…We didn’t really know what it MEANT exactly but it felt good to say it!) Be sure to watch NEXT week to see if we actually DO IT!

6/17/20  Work of Art Episode 2 Reaction

Oi vey, people. Things really started to get interesting for me with this episode. First of all, let me say, you all KNEW a challenge like this was coming. This classic Project Runway assignment came almost exactly at the point in our lineup as I imagined it would. Early enough to use the pure entertainment value to keep new viewers coming back for more and not too late in the series when the show actually has to start providing its artists with the opportunity to make work they'd actually be PROUD of. The purpose of challenges like this one is, of course, NOT to make anything earth shattering or, in our case, really remotely successful as art pieces, but to provide the audience with a healthy dose of plain-and-simple entertainment. Period (one could argue that's the sole purpose of EVERY challenge in this type of situation). I used to think to myself all the time while watching PR, "what in the world would I make out of toilet paper? (the answer is probably a homecoming queen sash and be done with it...) What I think we wound up with this week was a small handful of art works that were "good"....."given the circumstances." I know I felt this way. I was actually quite proud of my piece...(but here it comes) given what I had to work with...This is NOT a good feeling to have when putting two days' worth of work and about 6 hours of sleep in front of a gallery full of people!

What I chose to work with were two objects full of domestic implications: vacuum and lamp (that lamp, by the way, certainly had a hole burning into its shaft since I'd been eyeing it the entire time John Kessler was talking..it also suffered a serious injury right after Simon delivered the now iconic, "Your time starts...NOW"----someone at the front of our thundering buffalo heard trampled it to the ground and put a massive dent in the globe...Amidst trying desperately to come up with a concept while Kessler and Simon addressed us in front of the junk pile, I did manage to hang onto one particular line from our guest judge that directed my entire endeavor henceforth: remember these "objects have a life...they may have been under a Christmas tree...they may have belonged to a dead man..." I immediately began thinking of the house in which my two objects had lived and wanted to highlight that environment and feeling and memory instead of the particular objects themselves. For the record, I also grabbed three blow dryers, two coffee pots, and one other vacuum cleaner with a different colored handle...in case the first one didn't work with my eventual color scheme (here I go- thinking like a painter...something Kessler very smartly mentions as problematic later in my critique).

What I wound up with was much more of an installation than a sculpture....the only "scupltural" aspect to it, I suppose, was that it was three dimensional. I also planned it with ONE ideal viewing point: dead center (a view that the camera, unfortunately, never really got). If you stood directly in front of the piece, you'd see that the lamp, having most likely shown brightly in the same spot in the house for decades, had "faded" the color from the decorative painting behind it and the vacuum below, having most likely vacuumed the same floor for years on end, had "eaten up" the cheesy decorative tiled pattern. I thought that through this I could communicate the feeling I often have when looking at the inanimate objects in my parents' home that have begun to show their ages and have left their mark on their surroundings and that often make me think when I'm bored and waiting for my family to finish getting ready so we can go eat at Chili's, "man...if you could talk..."

The judges, of course, didn't buy it. Part of me wonders if this was purely because the piece really was devastatingly boring or because it didn't feel like something "Jaime Lynn Henderson, the girly head-in-the-clouds painter" would make. From the discussion we had in front of the work, I think it was a combination of both with a higher percentage of the latter. I'll flesh this particular commentary out later this afternoon! What I had originally written in this paragraph I was asked to remove...

One last defense and I'll move on: Jeannie got onto me because she couldn't hear the whirr of the vacuum or the buzz of the lamp...This was particularly frustrating because part of the challenge was that we were not allowed to plug anything in (Peregrine's tv sets mysteriously worked because of a) batteries or b) her magical elfin powers)! ...In any event, their critique actually encouraged me to hit the ground running for the next round by freeing myself up to do something that felt "more like me" because, to be honest, would I ever make a work of art out of a lamp and a vacuum? Absolutely not. As I looked over my shoulder at it as we dragged ourselves over to begin critiquing Abdi's piece, I did have to admit to myself that, while I was grateful I came up with SOMETHING that I'd put a lot of time and effort into, it didn't feel like me and looked like someone else's.

Which leads me to Miles whose work I will only touch on briefly because I've been rambling on for quite a while already...What I found most interesting and praiseworthy about Miles in this challenge (and really as a competitor as a whole) has hardly anything to do with what he actually makes. It has to do with the relationship between what he wants to make ANYWAY and how it fits into a challenge. Do I think Miles really wanted to make a piece about lack of sleep? No. I think Miles wanted to make a piece that let him screenprint something, that let him do what he does really well which is build random wooden structures out of the most basic materials, and that, for some unknown reason, let him make two anuses (wow that word looks weird in the plural form..) out of concrete. He wanted to do those things FIRST...and possibly for weeks the ideas were rolling around in his non-OCD head (I don't know how seriously I take the OCD thing, by the way...but I have no right to make that assumption...) but then he found a way to MAKE that desire FIT into the constraints of the challenge. This is why the electonic component of his piece consisted of him simply piling all the leftover pieces we all didn't use UNDER his bed structure...as an afterthought...NOT as the foundation for his whole piece. What you wind up with is an artwork that naturally FEELS more genuine, "quirky," and idiosyncratic because it is basically an artwork the artist might have made in his own studio ANYWAY even WITHOUT the challenge. For many of the rest of us, certainly myself included, we got so stuck on the challenge side of things that we made items that lacked our natural fingerprint. I didn't think Miles' piece was that great...but his attitude toward taking on challenges was brilliant..almost irritatingly so. I think he should have won simply for outsmarting the rest of us...the little brat...(joking). I do NOT think Trong should have been eliminated and, honestly, I don't think Judith or I should have been in the bottom three. My least favorite work of the night was Ryan's vacuum piece. He has amazing skill as a representational painter but this piece looked like a Pollock blanket got thrown over a vacuum cleaner. I will add, though, that he seemed to really have a BLAST making it...which does count for something in my book.

In any event- things are definitely getting interesting! I truly feel so fortunate to even be able to have these sorts of conversations about the whole thing! Hope you can all keep watching!!

6/14/10 So"They" Say:

My darling mother, who has already appeared once in this blog, has been oh-so-kindly keeping me up to date regarding the latest descriptive adjectives bloggers and critics have been using to describe me after viewing the W.O.A. premiere last week...Ready for the colorful list? Here we go: fluffy competitor, Stepford wife, glossy-haired, southern belle, sacharrine (I DO adore desserts), misunderstood ingenue, not just a ditzy blonde barbie-wanna-be Christian, the boyfriend-obsessed Christian, a girl who dresses like she's going to a ladies' luncheon, fussily done-up (that was Vogue , by the way..does that mean they're going to cancel my cover shoot? Dang it!). Actually, my Mom will keep you posted through me...she yells up from the living room "Honey! Someone called you _____!" (then cackles). I'm curious to see how much more of that I can take between now and when I head back to Chicago on the 21st...Get excited for the next blog entry after the airing of EPISODE 2 (watch 2 previews here and here) airing this Wednesday, June 16 at 9pm CST!

6/10/10 Work of Art Episode 1 Reaction

After driving sixteen hours in pounding rain with one awesome boyfriend and one well-behaved (but unfortunately gassy) cocker spaniel, I made it to my parents' house in Lawton, OK just in time for the premiere! My adorable Mom had decked out the whole house with balloons tied to clusters of my old craft paint bottles, a splatter-painted table cloth (which she made HERSELF), a poster board with taped-on enlarged W.O.A images of me she'd pulled off the web, AND my favorite dessert: angel food cake trifle with strawberries, banana, and cool whip. This retired military wife party-planner-extraordinaire didn't stop there either...she had everyone in my family use crayons to draw a portrait of me in honor of the big event. I'll be posting those images soon. Let me tell you what, I was in the presence of an entire Henderson house-full of prime Work of Art contestants last night and felt like the luckiest girl on the planet..

...UNTIL nausea set in. As the unbelievably cheesy yet oddly charming opening credits began to roll, I suddenly realized two things: 1) Shoulda' gone to see Vesna and get a root touch-up before this was filmed and 2) holy crap...I have ZERO control over how I am about to be portrayed. I can kick and scream and shout from the top of the tallest mountain that "I swear I'm NOT that ditzy" or that "that was only one TENTH of my sentence" or "Nao is actually extremely NICE" and it won't amount to a hill of beans...And with that, I took a deep breath, plugged my nose, closed my eyes, and stepped off the plank...and OMG...that water was COLD!

After watching the surprisingly hilarious first episode and seeing myself reduced to being "more than just a blonde, ditzy, wanna-be-Barbie Christian" but an "artist, "in fact, I immediately tipped my hat to the genius that is Bravo's reality show structure. I was grimmacing a little while tipping it, but I tipped it nonetheless. All fourteen of us fit perfectly into nice, neat little packages and exhibit personalities that naturally mix like oil and water. It's not that the editing brings out sides of us that aren't SORT OF there already (I mean come on...they can't MAKE us say something that never technically exited our mouths), it's just that it makes it so crystal clear the types of stories we're each "supposed" to be telling about ourselves; stories that, in real life, are so much more complex and unique than could ever be reduced to a few sound bites.

This great-for-tv but bad-for-artmaking fact brings to the forefront the obvious and unavoidable: Work of Art:The Next Great Artist is a reality tv show first and foremost. It is funny, witty, sexy, provocative, utterly baffling, frustrating and does all the things reality tv shows are supposed to do (like make you and your friends raise your fists, wine glasses, cheap beers, or bags of popcorn and scream "WHAT?! I CAN'T BELIEVE that!! I COMPLETELY disagree and NOW, I'm going to hop on my computer and tell everyone as such! So THERE)! That aside, I truly do believe the skeptical art community will find things in the weeks ahead that seem more familiar and feel more legitimate to them (and by that I suppose I merely mean they will hear the crit-speak words they crave, occasionally see the more intellectually stimulating work they champion, and basically experience something kind of like whatever art school they either just dropped out of or graduated from). The people who will enjoy this show the most, however, are people who champion CREATIVITY and who watch this show with a bag of popcorn instead of pen, paper, and an Artforum. Work of Art really does provide a little something for everyone. It will NOT, however, provide EVERYTHING to ANY someone. I think it's fantastic that this show is giving people at least SOME insight into the ways in which artists make work and interact with each other and the world. Let's face it, people...we're an interesting group of cats.

A few thoughts on the judging, as many of you have expressed disappointment with how it was completed this first time around. I can tell you that what you see, unfortunately, is a mere snippet of the somewhat lengthy, somewhat genuine, and somewhat legit DIALOGUE that took place between artists and judges before each piece. You think about how YOU'D condense a twenty minute critique with legitimate critics and earnest artists into twenty seconds MAX that 1) makes enough sense to the general revenue-generating public to keep them from saying, "what the heck is POST-feminism" and changing the channel AND 2) includes enough honest artistic critique to keep your art audience satisfied...that's a tall order right there. I do applaud Bravo's attempt. I will also say that the judging in the first episode seemed to fall very much on the traditional, conservative, "what-you'd expect-if-you-heard-"portrait"-and-had-never-studied-contemporary-art" line. This was surprising to me given the credentials of our truly fantastic panel of judges. That being said, however, I do feel Miles' portrait of Nao was by far the most visually stunning of our group. Genius? No. Infused with an appropriate balance of art-world-loving-tension and general-public-easily-recognizable-portrait-features? Yes. And bingo...Not SO plain Jane straight-up portraiture that the well-informed artists out there would stick their noses up at it, but also not SO "weird" that it would repel the general reality tv audience. In all honesty, I actually quite liked Nao's portrait of Miles (minus the tiny photo of him she tacked up in the background. It'd been perfect, though, if Urban Outfitters used it to sell emo artist goggles) If you'd been in the room with him and watched him ricochet all over the studio, you'd realize that mapping his behavior and portraying THAT instead of his facial form might be the most fitting way to go. I was very surpised the judges had such an issue with it not fitting neatly into the "portraiture" category. Her now iconic closing line, "I'm not responsible for your experience of my work" registers with me too, by the way...sort of. If you're going to stick your art out there on a white wall where people are supposed to come look at it and think it's important, I feel you are obliged to CONSIDER your viewer's experience. However, because our feelings about a work of art are ALWAYS colored by a combination of our unique past experiences, I do not feel the artist is to be held entirely RESPONSIBLE for the experience of the viewer...I want one of those t-shirts, by the way...

Lastly, regarding our saying goodbye to the elegant and chic, Amanda. I was very sad she left us so soon. I don't think she deserved to leave first. While I will admit that upon looking at her portrait of me I did not see what I expected, it was very unclear whether our portraits were to exhibit our PERSONAL style or take on that of our sitters'. I fully supported her taking an abstract approach to my depiction because, after all, she's an ABSTRACT PAINTER! Like my surprise with the judges' trouble swallowing Nao's non-representational pill as "portraiture," I was equally surpised in this case that the issue never revolved around whether it was a good or bad abstract painting of me, but that it did not "read" as a portrait...

I hope you all can watch next week...I can tell you...things will get much more interesting. Remember: POPCORN and friends, people! No Artforum!