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)

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.

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.

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.

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.