I’ve just learned of some troubling news. It involves art, Bravo, and Sarah Jessica Parker. Apparently her production company is producing a show similar to Project Runway and Top Chef called “The Untitled Art Project” that is going to be for “artists trying to make it big.” What of what will the tagline be this time? “Make me believe that this works”? “You are America’s next Biennale representative”?
Let me begin to explain all the reasons this is a terrible idea. First of all, for full disclosure, I am a huge Project Runway fan, I won’t deny it. I am hooked. I will shamelessly watch 8 hour marathons when I have more important things to do. I’ve only watched Top Chef once but it doesn’t seem that bad. From what I have gathered, this show intends to be a PR, but for contemporary artists working in “painting, sculpture, installation, video, photography, [and/or] mixed-media.” I imagine there will be immunity challenges, stiff competition to create the next great Koons, and the personality clashes, oh the personalities! The most glaring difference (of many) between art and fashion/cooking is that these industries works on a basis that mirrors the contrived challenges of PR and TC. There is always a client and always a clientele. I fear this show will merely emphasize the idea that artists are making products for sale, setting up a consumerist and capitalistic art culture that will inevitably devalue it (as it has recently with the free-falling prices and the Rose Museum scandal). Furthermore, this will reinforce all the negative stereotypes of artists. I know this is easy to say, but I’m talking about both the superficial stereotypes of effeminate metrosexuals and queers as well as show them as power-hungry attention seekers who will inevitably sign up for this show. Which is really the problem in the first place, those who are signing up for an audition (I don’t want to know) are the artists who think that they just need their big break and everything will go all nice and dandy for them for the rest of their career. These shows proffer this image of creatives that are trying to circumvent the entire system of hard work, dedication, and responsibility for a shot at instant stardom. They will probably all get shows as a result of this and then quickly fade into obscurity right about the time season 2 rolls around. (For a great look into the lives of former PR stars, have a read of this: http://nymag.com/news/features/35538/ )
There was a show similar to this in the UK a couple years ago on Channel 4 called “Picture This” (http://picturethis.channel4.com/). It was the same setup: challenges, judges, a show and a book deal at the end of it. The work was miserable and they chose the girl with no talent. I really cant get over how utterly depressing it was watching that show. I cant imagine Bravo’s new venture being any less unwatchable. Art is at its basest a personal venture, an intimate relationship between an artist and an object, an object and a viewer. To turn art into a competition where you are judged on an arbitrary rubric at every stage, is unfair to all those artists out there who work for months and years on projects, giving themselves to pieces without any notion of its worth or value. They do it because they love it, because this is what invigorates them, not because they could get their big break and become an overnight sensation. If you want the publicity, go rob a bank. This show will give the viewers exactly what they want to see: their own preconceived notions of artists, like that stupid movie Art School Confidential. Except I fear that people may actually watch this show. In my honest opinion, this could wreck art was we know it and for a generation or more down the road, it will be known only as a stupid game to be won and lost. Auf Wiedersehen.
I think the viability of The Untitled Art Project depends on a number of factors, and we don’t yet know how it’s going to pan out.
Among these factors:
- Who sits on the panel for selecting participants (their taste, experience, and inclination towards good work, not just personality).
- On the plus side – depending upon who the evaluators are, their reputations are on the line as well.
- The “casting” process itself, i.e. the selection of quality participants, and by that I mean more than an interesting (or cliché “character,” but an interesting creative talent).
- The show’s format – clearly. I’m concerned about the possibility of having a sculptor evaluated on painting, or a painter evaluated on installation, and so on.
- In some ways, I hope the format is closer to Top Chef. While the challenges can be pretty out there, particularly what are called “quick fires,” the audience certainly can see from week to week how skilled most of the competitors are. They each have areas of expertise, and the quality of critique seems rigorous and balanced. (Just one viewer’s opinion.)
- Should this program be structured similarly, it could be an opportunity – in an entertaining way – to make a lot of American viewers aware of how to look at and appreciate contemporary art. For example, it COULD include some museum settings, gallery venues, or travel (as some of the reality shows provide), that would inform as well as entertain.
So – to me – it’s a matter of wait-and-see. Let’s hope the producers genuinely want to UP the support for the arts in this country, and not just make another buck for Bravo.
while I understand the opportunity for this show to expand the scope of contemporary art to a larger audience, what I am afraid they will see is a simplified, homogenized, tv-ready art that simply isn’t a representation of the greater community in general.
furthermore, the idea that art fits into the Top Chef/Project Runway mold is insane. Art is not suited to immunity challenges and immediate feedback by a panel of strangers. I want to know with what criteria are these people to be judged? I am afraid that an inevitably simplistic view of art and art criticism will permeate the show and set a horrible example for future, budding artists.
Bravo is looking for good TV (see personalities). They don’t give a shit about the quality of the art, just like fox news doesn’t give a shit about the accuracy of their “journalism”
p.s. for a better perspective, read the entire application:
http://www.bravotv.com/media/UNTITLED%20ART%20PROJECT%20APPLICATION.pdf
this is ridiculous.
I have seen the application, but thank you for the opportunity to see it again.
Look – of COURSE they want entertainment. That’s what Bravo does. That’s what commercial television does. And it’s clear from the application that they are looking for opinions or traits that they can exploit to their advantage, for purposes of “entertainment.”
But they’re also looking at work, professional background, connections to the mainstream art world, and so on.
You are much more likely to be correct than I am (it isn’t about that). Do they give a shit about art? Of course not – no more than I would assume they give a shit about fashion or cooking or any of the other “reality” fields of endeavor, but SOME of the participants (as judges, for example) do have reputations they care about – ongoing commercial establishments (as the art world has ongoing commercial establishments) – and so some amount of legitimacy seems reasonable to expect.
Will the art be any “good?”
Who knows.
Will the contestants be put in awkward scenarios?
Most likely.
Will it hurt them or help them, as individuals, as artists?
I still think that depends on who they are, how smart they art, and the format of the show.
Is the art world like these other creative fields? It may have some elements, but I agree – if we’re talking (visual) fine art (not commercial art) – it’s not the same animal at all.
Nonetheless, this country does so little to make anyone aware of anything other than Grant Wood (on a Wheaties box, was it?) or possibly (thanks to the media) the latest Damian Hirst “production.”
If there’s even a slim chance that something positive could come out of this, I’m willing to adopt a wait-and-see.
I will wait and see as well. I will wait to see what kind of judgement can be had in a bubble of bright lights and big-boobed hosts. And against what contexts these judgements will be placed.
I see this show as merely furthering this idea that art is about entertainment and spectacle, marketability and commodification, and that quiet understatement or intelligent quirkyness has no place in our world any longer.
I’d like to believe, nay–I know, that there are ways out or at least alternative pathways through the great forest.
You make a good point that any attempt to enlighten the public’s consciousness (aside from cereal boxes and diamond encrusted skulls) is worthwhile; we can only hope.
I went to the casting of the show, and have been pushed to the second round. I too have the same reservations you two do. I hope that if I make it on the show, I am able to express similar sentiments about what art really is, without those statements winding up on the editing room floor. And if I don’t make it, but serious legitimate artists do, I hope they express any ambivalence they feel as well. I hope that this show can be as edifying as PR, SYTYCD, and other shows that are based on creativity. Because they are, and because art is so misunderstood, I think this show will very likely be well worth watching.
In the end art making is an experiment as is choosing the lifestyle and career of the artist. This show is an experiment as well. I have no illusions about being the next Koons or some such, but to be sure, there is an opportunity in this. And frankly I’ve been working hard for 20 years and I can use all the help I can get.
I should also mention that the panel that reviewed my portfolio and accepted me to the next level of the casting process, were important individuals in the art community. (I’m not allowed to go into detail)
Good luck with the application process.