national
Bravo’s Work of Art has local connection
By roberta
June 11, 2010 · 9 Comments
Did you watch the silliness in the first episode of Work of Art the other night? I watched it on Hulu last night. Abdi Farah from Dover, PA, is a 2009 graduate of Penn Design. Here’s a photo of one of his paintings from his senior thesis show. When they flashed this painting on the screen I said–yo, I know that work.
Abdi, painting from his senior thesis exhibition at Penn in 2009
I feel sorry for these artists having to perform like trained dogs. Actually the critics are performing like trained dogs too. It’s just silly. Art is slow. How can you produce anything of significance in a competition with 13 hours to do it?
The whole episode feels edited down to the bone, with none of the juice or meat or interestingness left in it. I’ll probably keep watching if Hulu keeps serving it up but I have to say it’s just classic 2010 programming — flashy entertainment, no content — which might be said about the art that comes out of it as well. Not that I had great expectations, just saying.
Tags: abdi, bravo, hulu, tv, work of art
More national
Readers Comments (9)
Abdi Farah
thanks Sid!! did you watch? any comments?
Poor Mark Rothko is turning over in his grave.
I watched WOA and didn’t expect much more from the show than how it turned out. WOA is competition entertainment and that’s it-the same formulaa as “Project Runwauy”, only it feels like more of a train wreck. I feel bad for the artists/contestants on the show but I’m looking forward to more of Jerry Saltz’s comments.
I think it’s a shame how the critics segment is cut down to one quip per artist and a reaction shot. But really, in the world of entertainment, outside of Bill Moyers, everything is quips and reaction shots.
I like Jerry Saltz’s writing a lot but you’d never know he was a great writer from this show. You wouldn’t want to check out his writing at all based on what he says here. Ah well.
Somebody out there should make a low budget parody of this and at least have a little fun with it.
The biggest thought I’ve picked up is that abstract art is too much for the masses. They completely stacked the deck against abstract art. Having the first assignment be a portrait for example. They set up that abstract artist for failure — there was no way her abstract portrait (even if it had been good, which it wasn’t) would have made it. It was an easy out for the first episode. All the works were ridiculous but at least tv could deal with the representational works.
TV can’t handle abstract….hell, great radio can’t either. I heard Terry Gross struggle through an interview with Frank Stella. She didn’t know what to do with him, what to ask, what to answer when he said anything. It was chilling because this is two smart folks who can’t deliver a conversation about abstract art to a public audience. Studio 360–I don’t think they cover much abstract art either, although Kurt Anderson did really well with Tino Seghal’s conceptual performance at the Guggenheim. Sid, Mark Rothko is rolling over but Jackson Pollock, he’s getting it. Pollock could make it on this show. Paint drips–lots of quips and great reaction shots!
Here’s the parody–already! Sharon Butler of Two Coats of Paint blog is running a contest on a facebook page she set up. She wants you to comment on her blog postings, and then she will select a winner who will get their own work written about on her very popular and well-respected blog. Fun! Read more:
http://www.twocoatsofpaint.com/2010/06/work-of-art-contest-two-coats-of-paint.html
Thanks for the shout, Roberta!
hey, Sharon–it’s such a fun idea! I can’t wait to see who’s the winner! : )
I don’t like reality shows but I watched the first episode of this one because it was about art. I’m not interested in the group dynamic or the drama and manufactured tension. Who cares if the guy’s bulb broke just hours before the deadline? We’ve all been there. The producers probably broke it deliberately
I think it would be much more interesting if at least two thirds of the show was the critics discussing the works — and not just a slam-fest but genuinely trying to help the artists develop to a level worthy of a show at the Brooklyn Museum. I’ll give it one more try but having them create works on assignment seems very art-school-ish, and I couldn’t take the show very serious because of that. How can anyone do a portrait of someone they don’t know and have it NOT be just a reflection of the exterior?