POST BY PADDY JOHNSON
Vanity Fair’s Marnie Hanel likes what she’s seen of Bravo’s Reality show Work of Art so far, adding to the “modest praise” given by yours truly. “If you choose to “sample the show,” (network parlance), the Magical Elves will hook you, just as they have before,” Hanel writes. The show, which pits 14 artists against one another for a prize of $100,000 and a solo show at the Brooklyn Museum, debuts next Wednesday. Debate as to whether it will be any good already fills the art world. Hanel interviews a variety of sources about this, though the more interesting portion of the post comes from her identification of character archetypes within the show.
The producers used their traditional casting formula to appeal to a broader audience. Although they said that the cast dynamics are organic, it's difficult not to see the contestants as archetypes. In the first episode, there's the villain (snippy Nao), the misunderstood ingenues (saccharine Jamie Lynn and sex pot Jaclyn), the misfits (veteran Judith and rookie Erik), and the likable front-runners (quirky Miles and earnest Abdi). Without much effort, one can connect the dots from these characters to their counterparts on past Bravo shows. The conventions extend to the stacked judges' panel as well.
Looks like artists can be typecast after all!
{ 57 comments }
I just repeatedly threw-up in my mouth. A lot.
It’s significant that the “modest praise” you link to is broken, yes?
I just repeatedly threw-up in my mouth. A lot.
It’s significant that the “modest praise” you link to is broken, yes?
It looks like the cast of “Lost.” (Minus Bernard and Lapidus.)
It looks like the cast of “Lost.” (Minus Bernard and Lapidus.)
Yeah, even though we’ve all been focused on issues of “credibility” here, it is T.V. after all, and the success or failure of the show will depend entirely on how well the audience identifies with various “types” portrayed therein. And whatever else you want to say about Jerry’s participation, the truth is, he will be a “character” on the show even though he’s playing himself.
Yeah, even though we’ve all been focused on issues of “credibility” here, it is T.V. after all, and the success or failure of the show will depend entirely on how well the audience identifies with various “types” portrayed therein. And whatever else you want to say about Jerry’s participation, the truth is, he will be a “character” on the show even though he’s playing himself.
Yeah, even though we’ve all been focused on issues of “credibility” here, it is T.V. after all, and the success or failure of the show will depend entirely on how well the audience identifies with various “types” portrayed therein. And whatever else you want to say about Jerry’s participation, the truth is, he will be a “character” on the show even though he’s playing himself.
I saw one of the artist’s work in their Chicago studio a couple of weeks ago… if that’s any way to gauge the show — we can skip this one!
I saw one of the artist’s work in their Chicago studio a couple of weeks ago… if that’s any way to gauge the show — we can skip this one!
I saw one of the artist’s work in their Chicago studio a couple of weeks ago… if that’s any way to gauge the show — we can skip this one!
love how the costumes [Gap for the artists, evening for the judges] make the hierarchy so clear. I’m surprised they didn’t make the artists wear smocks and berets.
love how the costumes [Gap for the artists, evening for the judges] make the hierarchy so clear. I’m surprised they didn’t make the artists wear smocks and berets.
love how the costumes [Gap for the artists, evening for the judges] make the hierarchy so clear. I’m surprised they didn’t make the artists wear smocks and berets.
Actually my intern identified the shoes of one of the contestants in this photo to be worth several hundred dollars. I asked their press person if they used a stylist for the artists and the answer was no. That said, it’s clearly not an accident that the judges are all in evening wear and the artists not.
Actually my intern identified the shoes of one of the contestants in this photo to be worth several hundred dollars. I asked their press person if they used a stylist for the artists and the answer was no. That said, it’s clearly not an accident that the judges are all in evening wear and the artists not.
We contestants wore all our own clothes and whatever we wanted.
We contestants wore all our own clothes and whatever we wanted.
The press person lied, or was not talking about this photo.
But it’s a minor detail–like pointing out that every drill team on ESPN3 has sassy hair and spangles–that supports your and VF’s larger argument: this show is a product that hews strictly to the calcified preconceptions of its genre.
Reality TV producers have unsurprisingly predictable and retrograde notions of drama, creativity, character, and narrative.
The press person lied, or was not talking about this photo.
But it’s a minor detail–like pointing out that every drill team on ESPN3 has sassy hair and spangles–that supports your and VF’s larger argument: this show is a product that hews strictly to the calcified preconceptions of its genre.
Reality TV producers have unsurprisingly predictable and retrograde notions of drama, creativity, character, and narrative.
The press person lied, or was not talking about this photo.
But it’s a minor detail–like pointing out that every drill team on ESPN3 has sassy hair and spangles–that supports your and VF’s larger argument: this show is a product that hews strictly to the calcified preconceptions of its genre.
Reality TV producers have unsurprisingly predictable and retrograde notions of drama, creativity, character, and narrative.
Regarding (visual) typecasting: Compare the “Work o’ Art” gang with other reality show group shots. Note how the central figure (usually a host/judge) always has their hands on their hips:
Project Runway: http://bit.ly/bJuYP8
America’s Next Top Model: http://bit.ly/9vWRms
Project Runway: http://bit.ly/b24e0e
In a similar vein, Paper Magazine has twice imitated the artist group-photo of “The Irascibles” based on a 1950’s Time Magazine shoot:
The Irascibles (1950): http://bit.ly/9ABkfb
The New Irascibles (1985): http://bit.ly/ao9cgT
The Next Irascibles (2009): http://bit.ly/9Cm2SR
Regarding (visual) typecasting: Compare the “Work o’ Art” gang with other reality show group shots. Note how the central figure (usually a host/judge) always has their hands on their hips:
Project Runway: http://bit.ly/bJuYP8
America’s Next Top Model: http://bit.ly/9vWRms
Project Runway: http://bit.ly/b24e0e
In a similar vein, Paper Magazine has twice imitated the artist group-photo of “The Irascibles” based on a 1950’s Time Magazine shoot:
The Irascibles (1950): http://bit.ly/9ABkfb
The New Irascibles (1985): http://bit.ly/ao9cgT
The Next Irascibles (2009): http://bit.ly/9Cm2SR
Regarding (visual) typecasting: Compare the “Work o’ Art” gang with other reality show group shots. Note how the central figure (usually a host/judge) always has their hands on their hips:
Project Runway: http://bit.ly/bJuYP8
America’s Next Top Model: http://bit.ly/9vWRms
Project Runway: http://bit.ly/b24e0e
In a similar vein, Paper Magazine has twice imitated the artist group-photo of “The Irascibles” based on a 1950’s Time Magazine shoot:
The Irascibles (1950): http://bit.ly/9ABkfb
The New Irascibles (1985): http://bit.ly/ao9cgT
The Next Irascibles (2009): http://bit.ly/9Cm2SR
This is their publicity shot….so of course they posed us. But also remember they “cast” us …. so they knew more or less what our clothing styles would be. Personally I never once stood with my hands on my hips. There is such a thing as saying “I don’t like to stand like that….”
This is their publicity shot….so of course they posed us. But also remember they “cast” us …. so they knew more or less what our clothing styles would be. Personally I never once stood with my hands on my hips. There is such a thing as saying “I don’t like to stand like that….”
@Judith: The Free Dictionary (http://bit.ly/VWWsW) shows a long list of definitions for “cast,” though these two seem to fit best for what it meant in regards to “Work of Art”:
1) “To choose actors for the parts in a play, movie, or other theatrical presentation.”
2) “To form (liquid metal, for example) into a particular shape by pouring into a mold.”
@Judith: The Free Dictionary (http://bit.ly/VWWsW) shows a long list of definitions for “cast,” though these two seem to fit best for what it meant in regards to “Work of Art”:
1) “To choose actors for the parts in a play, movie, or other theatrical presentation.”
2) “To form (liquid metal, for example) into a particular shape by pouring into a mold.”
@Judith: The Free Dictionary (http://bit.ly/VWWsW) shows a long list of definitions for “cast,” though these two seem to fit best for what it meant in regards to “Work of Art”:
1) “To choose actors for the parts in a play, movie, or other theatrical presentation.”
2) “To form (liquid metal, for example) into a particular shape by pouring into a mold.”
@ Jesse: Ha! In spite of all the definitions …I have to admit that with long audition lines in 4 major cities, I got a charge out of being the ONLY older artist that they “cast”. Ok…I realize they only wanted/needed ONE…like a bookend I suppose…but I still didn’t feel that I was being chosen to fill a foolish role…if that is read to be some olde artist forever pining away for glory and hoping this would be her big break. I have …and I will continue to have…my story and career…. regardless….and I honestly think they picked me to be me. I got to go on tv and be me! I never thought I had to carry a banner for all reality tv, or for all art or all artists…..just myself. Now…they do have an editing booth, and can I survive that?
@ Jesse: Ha! In spite of all the definitions …I have to admit that with long audition lines in 4 major cities, I got a charge out of being the ONLY older artist that they “cast”. Ok…I realize they only wanted/needed ONE…like a bookend I suppose…but I still didn’t feel that I was being chosen to fill a foolish role…if that is read to be some olde artist forever pining away for glory and hoping this would be her big break. I have …and I will continue to have…my story and career…. regardless….and I honestly think they picked me to be me. I got to go on tv and be me! I never thought I had to carry a banner for all reality tv, or for all art or all artists…..just myself. Now…they do have an editing booth, and can I survive that?
It is interesting to note the average artist’s age in the original “irascibles” photo. Most of those poor bastards didn’t get their first NY solo show till they were 40-ish. The 1985 irascibles set the template that has been followed since: young, attractive, and mildly irascible.
It is interesting to note the average artist’s age in the original “irascibles” photo. Most of those poor bastards didn’t get their first NY solo show till they were 40-ish. The 1985 irascibles set the template that has been followed since: young, attractive, and mildly irascible.
I gotta go now…I’m leaving for Berlin to carry on my emerging international artist career. I’m just saying that cause it’s what it says on the gallery website! And also before I start to make wisecracks about the show or other contestants.
so BYE…and look forward to feedback after the first episode next week! I’m returning just in time!
I gotta go now…I’m leaving for Berlin to carry on my emerging international artist career. I’m just saying that cause it’s what it says on the gallery website! And also before I start to make wisecracks about the show or other contestants.
so BYE…and look forward to feedback after the first episode next week! I’m returning just in time!
I gotta go now…I’m leaving for Berlin to carry on my emerging international artist career. I’m just saying that cause it’s what it says on the gallery website! And also before I start to make wisecracks about the show or other contestants.
so BYE…and look forward to feedback after the first episode next week! I’m returning just in time!
I like Judith. Too bad she threw herself into a meat-grinder…
I like Judith. Too bad she threw herself into a meat-grinder…
I like Judith. Too bad she threw herself into a meat-grinder…
I like Judith. Too bad she threw herself into a meat-grinder…
I think that its interesting that Art is brought to the general public in this way. In the UK artists are regularly featured (glorified and trashed) in the daily rags and evening news- almost like any other regular celebrity which makes the artworks more accessible to the everyday. Its reaching a broader audience, letting the public have an opinion and usurping the elite.
On the other hand “School of Saatchi” was worrisome particularly because the girl who ‘won’ was a 19 year old BA student, which seems too young and career wise potentially destructive.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2009/nov/24/school-of-saatchi-gracie
I think that its interesting that Art is brought to the general public in this way. In the UK artists are regularly featured (glorified and trashed) in the daily rags and evening news- almost like any other regular celebrity which makes the artworks more accessible to the everyday. Its reaching a broader audience, letting the public have an opinion and usurping the elite.
On the other hand “School of Saatchi” was worrisome particularly because the girl who ‘won’ was a 19 year old BA student, which seems too young and career wise potentially destructive.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2009/nov/24/school-of-saatchi-gracie
I think that its interesting that Art is brought to the general public in this way. In the UK artists are regularly featured (glorified and trashed) in the daily rags and evening news- almost like any other regular celebrity which makes the artworks more accessible to the everyday. Its reaching a broader audience, letting the public have an opinion and usurping the elite.
On the other hand “School of Saatchi” was worrisome particularly because the girl who ‘won’ was a 19 year old BA student, which seems too young and career wise potentially destructive.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2009/nov/24/school-of-saatchi-gracie
I think that its interesting that Art is brought to the general public in this way. In the UK artists are regularly featured (glorified and trashed) in the daily rags and evening news- almost like any other regular celebrity which makes the artworks more accessible to the everyday. Its reaching a broader audience, letting the public have an opinion and usurping the elite.
On the other hand “School of Saatchi” was worrisome particularly because the girl who ‘won’ was a 19 year old BA student, which seems too young and career wise potentially destructive.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2009/nov/24/school-of-saatchi-gracie
………. to say this show is about geting art out there is a very stupid thing to say. Art IS out there. they are just running out of ideas for these dumb reality shows. what this show will do is destroy art to someone who knows nothing about it. it will turn art in to something cheap and cheesy. in art no one is wrong. everyone has their own style. yet these judges are going to say who is and who isnt an artist? look at van gogh. no one liked his art and no one bought his art. no one gave a damn about him during his time. now look at him. when you go see his pieces its like seeing a celebrity because so many people are fighting to get a look. i pray to God people will not watch this show. go take a class on art history or go to a gallery or even better learn to paint with oils. this show is not what art is. "get rich" "get famous" <- thats not what art is about!
………. to say this show is about geting art out there is a very stupid thing to say. Art IS out there. they are just running out of ideas for these dumb reality shows. what this show will do is destroy art to someone who knows nothing about it. it will turn art in to something cheap and cheesy. in art no one is wrong. everyone has their own style. yet these judges are going to say who is and who isnt an artist? look at van gogh. no one liked his art and no one bought his art. no one gave a damn about him during his time. now look at him. when you go see his pieces its like seeing a celebrity because so many people are fighting to get a look. i pray to God people will not watch this show. go take a class on art history or go to a gallery or even better learn to paint with oils. this show is not what art is. "get rich" "get famous" <- thats not what art is about!
………. to say this show is about geting art out there is a very stupid thing to say. Art IS out there. they are just running out of ideas for these dumb reality shows. what this show will do is destroy art to someone who knows nothing about it. it will turn art in to something cheap and cheesy. in art no one is wrong. everyone has their own style. yet these judges are going to say who is and who isnt an artist? look at van gogh. no one liked his art and no one bought his art. no one gave a damn about him during his time. now look at him. when you go see his pieces its like seeing a celebrity because so many people are fighting to get a look. i pray to God people will not watch this show. go take a class on art history or go to a gallery or even better learn to paint with oils. this show is not what art is. "get rich" "get famous" <- thats not what art is about!
………. to say this show is about geting art out there is a very stupid thing to say. Art IS out there. they are just running out of ideas for these dumb reality shows. what this show will do is destroy art to someone who knows nothing about it. it will turn art in to something cheap and cheesy. in art no one is wrong. everyone has their own style. yet these judges are going to say who is and who isnt an artist? look at van gogh. no one liked his art and no one bought his art. no one gave a damn about him during his time. now look at him. when you go see his pieces its like seeing a celebrity because so many people are fighting to get a look. i pray to God people will not watch this show. go take a class on art history or go to a gallery or even better learn to paint with oils. this show is not what art is. "get rich" "get famous" <- thats not what art is about!
This is art.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtlglhsRb2I
This is art.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtlglhsRb2I
This is art.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtlglhsRb2I
………. to say this show is about geting art out there is a very stupid thing to say. Art IS out there. they are just running out of ideas for these dumb reality shows. what this show will do is destroy art to someone who knows nothing about it.it will turn art in to something cheap and cheesy. in art no one is wrong. everyone has their own style. yet these judges are going to say who is and who isnt an artist? look at van gogh. no one liked his art and no one bought his art. no one gave a damn about him during his time. now look at him. when you go see his pieces its like seeing a celebrity because so many people are fighting to get a look. i pray to God people will not watch this show. go take a class on art history or go to a gallery or even better learn to paint with oils. this show is not what art is.
“get rich” “get famous” <- thats not what art is about!
………. to say this show is about geting art out there is a very stupid thing to say. Art IS out there. they are just running out of ideas for these dumb reality shows. what this show will do is destroy art to someone who knows nothing about it.it will turn art in to something cheap and cheesy. in art no one is wrong. everyone has their own style. yet these judges are going to say who is and who isnt an artist? look at van gogh. no one liked his art and no one bought his art. no one gave a damn about him during his time. now look at him. when you go see his pieces its like seeing a celebrity because so many people are fighting to get a look. i pray to God people will not watch this show. go take a class on art history or go to a gallery or even better learn to paint with oils. this show is not what art is.
“get rich” “get famous” <- thats not what art is about!
………. to say this show is about geting art out there is a very stupid thing to say. Art IS out there. they are just running out of ideas for these dumb reality shows. what this show will do is destroy art to someone who knows nothing about it.it will turn art in to something cheap and cheesy. in art no one is wrong. everyone has their own style. yet these judges are going to say who is and who isnt an artist? look at van gogh. no one liked his art and no one bought his art. no one gave a damn about him during his time. now look at him. when you go see his pieces its like seeing a celebrity because so many people are fighting to get a look. i pray to God people will not watch this show. go take a class on art history or go to a gallery or even better learn to paint with oils. this show is not what art is.
“get rich” “get famous” <- thats not what art is about!
Who are the critics? Are they TV personalities or are they actual historians and critics with MFAs, MAs, and PHDs? This is the difference between an opinion and an informed point of view.
Who are the critics? Are they TV personalities or are they actual historians and critics with MFAs, MAs, and PHDs? This is the difference between an opinion and an informed point of view.
………. to say this show is about geting art out there is a very stupid thing to say. Art IS out there. they are just running out of ideas for these dumb reality shows. what this show will do is destroy art to someone who knows nothing about it. it will turn art in to something cheap and cheesy. in art no one is wrong. everyone has their own style. yet these judges are going to say who is and who isnt an artist? look at van gogh. no one liked his art and no one bought his art. no one gave a damn about him during his time. now look at him. when you go see his pieces its like seeing a celebrity because so many people are fighting to get a look. i pray to God people will not watch this show. go take a class on art history or go to a gallery or even better learn to paint with oils. this show is not what art is.
“get rich” “get famous” <- thats not what art is about!
………. to say this show is about geting art out there is a very stupid thing to say. Art IS out there. they are just running out of ideas for these dumb reality shows. what this show will do is destroy art to someone who knows nothing about it. it will turn art in to something cheap and cheesy. in art no one is wrong. everyone has their own style. yet these judges are going to say who is and who isnt an artist? look at van gogh. no one liked his art and no one bought his art. no one gave a damn about him during his time. now look at him. when you go see his pieces its like seeing a celebrity because so many people are fighting to get a look. i pray to God people will not watch this show. go take a class on art history or go to a gallery or even better learn to paint with oils. this show is not what art is.
“get rich” “get famous” <- thats not what art is about!
Comments on this entry are closed.