On Artist Stereotypes

by Art Fag City on June 3, 2010 · 156 comments Events

POST BY MICHELLE HALABURA

Jaclyn Santos, a Bravo Work of Art contestant.

“I think it’s a common misperception that artists aren’t intelligent and couldn’t do anything else,” says [Jaclyn Santos] the 26-year-old Pittsburgh native and Maryland Institute College of Art graduate, one of three people with Baltimore ties who will be fighting to become the next big art thing when “Work of Art” premieres June 9. “I could have done anything I wanted. I was very smart. I could have studied law if I wanted to.”

That’s right Jaclyn Santos, keep talking. I guess every show needs someone who’s easy to hate!

The full article from the Baltimore Sun here.

{ 155 comments… read them below or add one }

I'moffended(tha June 3, 2010 at 4:31 pm

I especially like the way she includes a clip of a trailer to 'my show' on her blog.

Reply

I'moffended(tha June 3, 2010 at 12:31 pm

I especially like the way she includes a clip of a trailer to 'my show' on her blog.

Reply

J June 3, 2010 at 5:13 pm

I think the keyword there is “was.”

Reply

J June 3, 2010 at 5:13 pm

I think the keyword there is “was.”

Reply

J June 3, 2010 at 5:13 pm

I think the keyword there is “was.”

Reply

J June 3, 2010 at 1:13 pm

I think the keyword there is “was.”

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 3, 2010 at 5:29 pm

Oh goody: entitled art bitch #43023. Or, arrogant-careerist-reality-show-dangersloot #345 (i.e., Amarosa). And with her hand on her hip, no less, in a standard institutional raw studio space.

I love how she “was very smart,” as if to admit that she no longer is (or that she can’t really claim being “very smart” after choosing to study art).

This show is too easy to despise! I’m beginning to think that’s the point.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 3, 2010 at 1:29 pm

Oh goody: entitled art bitch #43023. Or, arrogant-careerist-reality-show-dangersloot #345 (i.e., Amarosa). And with her hand on her hip, no less, in a standard institutional raw studio space.

I love how she “was very smart,” as if to admit that she no longer is (or that she can’t really claim being “very smart” after choosing to study art).

This show is too easy to despise! I’m beginning to think that’s the point.

Reply

Michael Bilsborough June 3, 2010 at 6:12 pm

“I was very smart.”
“My tit is perfectly round.”

Reply

Michael Bilsborough June 3, 2010 at 6:12 pm

“I was very smart.”
“My tit is perfectly round.”

Reply

Michael Bilsborough June 3, 2010 at 6:12 pm

“I was very smart.”
“My tit is perfectly round.”

Reply

Michael Bilsborough June 3, 2010 at 2:12 pm

“I was very smart.”
“My tit is perfectly round.”

Reply

joe June 3, 2010 at 6:54 pm
joe June 3, 2010 at 6:54 pm
joe June 3, 2010 at 2:54 pm
Patrick June 3, 2010 at 7:11 pm

Thanks for the link, Joe. Clears it up a bit.

Reply

Patrick June 3, 2010 at 3:11 pm

Thanks for the link, Joe. Clears it up a bit.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 3, 2010 at 7:21 pm

I meant "acronym," not "anagram." I was smart before I went to art school, too.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 3, 2010 at 7:21 pm

I meant "acronym," not "anagram." I was smart before I went to art school, too.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 3, 2010 at 3:21 pm

I meant "acronym," not "anagram." I was smart before I went to art school, too.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 3, 2010 at 7:23 pm

Can you *PLEASE* call it WANGA from here on in? This really needs to become the buzzword for the show. I won't rest until I hear Martha Stewart, Tim Gunn, and possibly Barack Obama say "WANGA." It's like saying "JENGA," but much more suggestive of a peen.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 3, 2010 at 7:23 pm

Can you *PLEASE* call it WANGA from here on in? This really needs to become the buzzword for the show. I won't rest until I hear Martha Stewart, Tim Gunn, and possibly Barack Obama say "WANGA." It's like saying "JENGA," but much more suggestive of a peen.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 3, 2010 at 3:23 pm

Can you *PLEASE* call it WANGA from here on in? This really needs to become the buzzword for the show. I won't rest until I hear Martha Stewart, Tim Gunn, and possibly Barack Obama say "WANGA." It's like saying "JENGA," but much more suggestive of a peen.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 3, 2010 at 7:34 pm

Luridly colored, cliche, pseudo-feminist, stilted academic tripe. She’s one of the reasons that first-wave feminists will spontaneously-combust after ingesting poison and hurling themselves off of a cliff.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 3, 2010 at 3:34 pm

Luridly colored, cliche, pseudo-feminist, stilted academic tripe. She’s one of the reasons that first-wave feminists will spontaneously-combust after ingesting poison and hurling themselves off of a cliff.

Reply

Howard Halle June 3, 2010 at 8:15 pm

Um, how is she different from the scores of artists, male and female who rely on their looks to get ahead in the art world?

Reply

Howard Halle June 3, 2010 at 8:15 pm

Um, how is she different from the scores of artists, male and female who rely on their looks to get ahead in the art world?

Reply

Howard Halle June 3, 2010 at 8:15 pm

Um, how is she different from the scores of artists, male and female who rely on their looks to get ahead in the art world?

Reply

Howard Halle June 3, 2010 at 4:15 pm

Um, how is she different from the scores of artists, male and female who rely on their looks to get ahead in the art world?

Reply

arely villegas June 3, 2010 at 8:24 pm

The picture looks so fake. She is not an artist!!. I visited her web page and was not impressed.

Reply

arely villegas June 3, 2010 at 4:24 pm

The picture looks so fake. She is not an artist!!. I visited her web page and was not impressed.

Reply

Art Fag City June 3, 2010 at 8:33 pm

Just a reminder that anonymous comments will not be approved. I need either your first and last name or a link to your work.

Reply

Art Fag City June 3, 2010 at 4:33 pm

Just a reminder that anonymous comments will not be approved. I need either your first and last name or a link to your work.

Reply

bluesky June 3, 2010 at 10:19 pm

thank you bravo for every real housewives of "who gives a fuck shithole of commercial inertia" as an "artist" asked me today — studying graphic arts — code word for "i'm a fucking lame ass sucking the teat of a program that has survived far too longer in the midst of creating stepford like morons wh wouldn't stand much against anything" hence groun zero is still a giant sculpture of united states inertia as an open pit cum open sore that has received little credit in the face of said artist as others maintaining silence for their "star of shame" in vanity press. code word for you suck, as i don't find much art in the united states at present yet there was plenty of silence when far more voices should have been heard, as some will speak of the united states vs. john lennon — and the artists were very silent and disney can kiss my ass along with their new venezuelan conductor.

Reply

bluesky June 3, 2010 at 6:19 pm

thank you bravo for every real housewives of "who gives a fuck shithole of commercial inertia" as an "artist" asked me today — studying graphic arts — code word for "i'm a fucking lame ass sucking the teat of a program that has survived far too longer in the midst of creating stepford like morons wh wouldn't stand much against anything" hence groun zero is still a giant sculpture of united states inertia as an open pit cum open sore that has received little credit in the face of said artist as others maintaining silence for their "star of shame" in vanity press. code word for you suck, as i don't find much art in the united states at present yet there was plenty of silence when far more voices should have been heard, as some will speak of the united states vs. john lennon — and the artists were very silent and disney can kiss my ass along with their new venezuelan conductor.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 3, 2010 at 11:14 pm

@AFC: I’m going to refer to “Work of Art: The Next Great Artist” from here on in by the following acronym: WANGA.

So far, it looks like you’ve had one WANGA judge comment here (J. Saltz), and one WANGA competitor(J. Braun). Though I see that J. Santos and E. Johnson have commented on your Facebook posts that link to AFC posts that refer/link to articles about WANGA. Will this trend continue? And why does it already seem like AFC is becoming the go-to art-blog as an extension of the horrendous WANGA circle-jerk?

Oh: And to Saltz’s credit, he has commented here pre-WANGA, but I still think it was only when your posting was about something that involved him.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 3, 2010 at 7:14 pm

@AFC: I’m going to refer to “Work of Art: The Next Great Artist” from here on in by the following acronym: WANGA.

So far, it looks like you’ve had one WANGA judge comment here (J. Saltz), and one WANGA competitor(J. Braun). Though I see that J. Santos and E. Johnson have commented on your Facebook posts that link to AFC posts that refer/link to articles about WANGA. Will this trend continue? And why does it already seem like AFC is becoming the go-to art-blog as an extension of the horrendous WANGA circle-jerk?

Oh: And to Saltz’s credit, he has commented here pre-WANGA, but I still think it was only when your posting was about something that involved him.

Reply

Art Fag City June 3, 2010 at 11:21 pm

Sorry Jesse, but there’s going to be more, not less WANGA related content on the blog for the next couple of days (plus weekly show round-ups). I love reality television, especially Bravo’s line of shows. That said, I’m not sure anything will ever top the first season of America’s Next Top Model. Elyse Sewell, you are my hero.

Reply

Art Fag City June 3, 2010 at 7:21 pm

Sorry Jesse, but there’s going to be more, not less WANGA related content on the blog for the next couple of days (plus weekly show round-ups). I love reality television, especially Bravo’s line of shows. That said, I’m not sure anything will ever top the first season of America’s Next Top Model. Elyse Sewell, you are my hero.

Reply

Art Fag City June 3, 2010 at 11:58 pm

Also, I suppose this is what you get for posting something like “everyone needs someone who’s easy to hate”, but the comments here are much meaner than this artist deserves. I certainly don’t think she needs to throw herself off a cliff.

My problem with her statement is that it does more to perpetuate a myth she identifies than it does to disprove it. She doesn’t do this by saying something stupid (although her words weren’t particularly well thought out), but by failing to change the conversation. She would have been much better off had she said something to the effect of “artist express themselves differently” and gone on to talk about that, than labeling that expression as stupid, and then explaining why she’s an exception. Law requires more intelligence than art just isn’t an argument that’s going to get artists anywhere.

Reply

Art Fag City June 3, 2010 at 7:58 pm

Also, I suppose this is what you get for posting something like “everyone needs someone who’s easy to hate”, but the comments here are much meaner than this artist deserves. I certainly don’t think she needs to throw herself off a cliff.

My problem with her statement is that it does more to perpetuate a myth she identifies than it does to disprove it. She doesn’t do this by saying something stupid (although her words weren’t particularly well thought out), but by failing to change the conversation. She would have been much better off had she said something to the effect of “artist express themselves differently” and gone on to talk about that, than labeling that expression as stupid, and then explaining why she’s an exception. Law requires more intelligence than art just isn’t an argument that’s going to get artists anywhere.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 12:27 am

To clarify: I didn’t suggest that Ms. Santos should throw herself off of a cliff, only that the combination of her lousy quotes (maybe the Baltimore Sun is to blame), artwork, and the above manicured artista-femme-bot photo might incline a first-wave feminist to do so.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 3, 2010 at 8:27 pm

To clarify: I didn’t suggest that Ms. Santos should throw herself off of a cliff, only that the combination of her lousy quotes (maybe the Baltimore Sun is to blame), artwork, and the above manicured artista-femme-bot photo might incline a first-wave feminist to do so.

Reply

Art Fag City June 4, 2010 at 12:30 am

I stand corrected. I still feel like that’s a bit rough though.

Reply

Art Fag City June 3, 2010 at 8:30 pm

I stand corrected. I still feel like that’s a bit rough though.

Reply

Lacy June 4, 2010 at 12:43 am

For a supposed feminist she has some really fake looking boobs! Yeah, I don't understand how someone can say they are a feminist and dress like a barbie doll.

With that aside, she's not even that great of a painter. Her work looks like mediocre undergrad work. I think they picked her because of the boob-job and her proclivity for arrogant remarks.

The other realist, Ryan Shultz, makes far better paintings. Just look at this one – http://ryanshultz.com/slideshow/1.html.

Reply

Lacy June 3, 2010 at 8:43 pm

For a supposed feminist she has some really fake looking boobs! Yeah, I don't understand how someone can say they are a feminist and dress like a barbie doll.

With that aside, she's not even that great of a painter. Her work looks like mediocre undergrad work. I think they picked her because of the boob-job and her proclivity for arrogant remarks.

The other realist, Ryan Shultz, makes far better paintings. Just look at this one – http://ryanshultz.com/slideshow/1.html.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 2:35 am

She worked for Jeff Koons. I take back all of my snark: she is destined for greatness.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 2:35 am

She worked for Jeff Koons. I take back all of my snark: she is destined for greatness.

Reply

Art Fag City June 4, 2010 at 3:19 am

Hey – I like Jeff Koons.

Reply

Art Fag City June 4, 2010 at 3:19 am

Hey – I like Jeff Koons.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 2:35 am

She worked for Jeff Koons. I take back all of my snark: she is destined for greatness.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 3, 2010 at 10:35 pm

She worked for Jeff Koons. I take back all of my snark: she is destined for greatness.

Reply

Art Fag City June 3, 2010 at 11:19 pm

Hey – I like Jeff Koons.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 4:32 am

Me too.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 4:32 am

Me too.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 12:32 am

Me too.

Reply

Ian Aleksander Adams June 4, 2010 at 4:41 am

I don’t get it. I haven’t seen the show at all, which I guess is the problem, but the quote above doesn’t seem out of line. My favorite artists are all one minor career choice from being nuclear physicists…

I guess the comment above by paddy explains it a little more. But I feel like we’re nitpicking on this one.

Probably because her art is terrible.

Reply

Ian Aleksander Adams June 4, 2010 at 4:41 am

I don’t get it. I haven’t seen the show at all, which I guess is the problem, but the quote above doesn’t seem out of line. My favorite artists are all one minor career choice from being nuclear physicists…

I guess the comment above by paddy explains it a little more. But I feel like we’re nitpicking on this one.

Probably because her art is terrible.

Reply

Ian Aleksander Adams June 4, 2010 at 12:41 am

I don’t get it. I haven’t seen the show at all, which I guess is the problem, but the quote above doesn’t seem out of line. My favorite artists are all one minor career choice from being nuclear physicists…

I guess the comment above by paddy explains it a little more. But I feel like we’re nitpicking on this one.

Probably because her art is terrible.

Reply

Sarah Baker June 4, 2010 at 6:39 am

Dear Jaclyn Santos, I disagree. I think its a common misconception that artists ARE intelligent! Anyway it is clear that your statement was used out of context as a sound bite.

p.s. Don’t listen to the haters they are just jealous because your beautiful.

Reply

Sarah Baker June 4, 2010 at 6:39 am

Dear Jaclyn Santos, I disagree. I think its a common misconception that artists ARE intelligent! Anyway it is clear that your statement was used out of context as a sound bite.

p.s. Don’t listen to the haters they are just jealous because your beautiful.

Reply

Sarah Baker June 4, 2010 at 6:39 am

Dear Jaclyn Santos, I disagree. I think its a common misconception that artists ARE intelligent! Anyway it is clear that your statement was used out of context as a sound bite.

p.s. Don’t listen to the haters they are just jealous because your beautiful.

Reply

Sarah Baker June 4, 2010 at 6:39 am

Dear Jaclyn Santos, I disagree. I think its a common misconception that artists ARE intelligent! Anyway it is clear that your statement was used out of context as a sound bite.

p.s. Don’t listen to the haters they are just jealous because your beautiful.

Reply

Sarah Baker June 4, 2010 at 2:39 am

Dear Jaclyn Santos, I disagree. I think its a common misconception that artists ARE intelligent! Anyway it is clear that your statement was used out of context as a sound bite.

p.s. Don’t listen to the haters they are just jealous because your beautiful.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 1:48 pm

I meant "evoke," not "invoke." Oy.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 1:48 pm

I meant "evoke," not "invoke." Oy.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 1:48 pm

I meant "evoke," not "invoke." Oy.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 9:48 am

I meant "evoke," not "invoke." Oy.

Reply

Nic Nadeau June 4, 2010 at 2:15 pm

@ arely villegas,
“The picture looks so fake. She is not an artist!!. I visited her web page and was not impressed.”

I am curious, what makes her not an artist in your opinion? specifically. The way she looks? Thats a big accusation to throw around without gracing us with an elaboration. Ok so you don’t like her work, but that does not make her any less of an artist. It just means you don’t like her work. My opinion: your comment is a bit banal and ignorant especially for someone who writes about art.

Reply

Nic Nadeau June 4, 2010 at 2:15 pm

@ arely villegas,
“The picture looks so fake. She is not an artist!!. I visited her web page and was not impressed.”

I am curious, what makes her not an artist in your opinion? specifically. The way she looks? Thats a big accusation to throw around without gracing us with an elaboration. Ok so you don’t like her work, but that does not make her any less of an artist. It just means you don’t like her work. My opinion: your comment is a bit banal and ignorant especially for someone who writes about art.

Reply

Nic Nadeau June 4, 2010 at 2:15 pm

@ arely villegas,
“The picture looks so fake. She is not an artist!!. I visited her web page and was not impressed.”

I am curious, what makes her not an artist in your opinion? specifically. The way she looks? Thats a big accusation to throw around without gracing us with an elaboration. Ok so you don’t like her work, but that does not make her any less of an artist. It just means you don’t like her work. My opinion: your comment is a bit banal and ignorant especially for someone who writes about art.

Reply

Nic Nadeau June 4, 2010 at 10:15 am

@ arely villegas,
“The picture looks so fake. She is not an artist!!. I visited her web page and was not impressed.”

I am curious, what makes her not an artist in your opinion? specifically. The way she looks? Thats a big accusation to throw around without gracing us with an elaboration. Ok so you don’t like her work, but that does not make her any less of an artist. It just means you don’t like her work. My opinion: your comment is a bit banal and ignorant especially for someone who writes about art.

Reply

greg,org June 4, 2010 at 3:13 pm

Can’t wait for the show to actually start so the conversation can get down into much more substantive art issues.

Reply

greg,org June 4, 2010 at 3:13 pm

Can’t wait for the show to actually start so the conversation can get down into much more substantive art issues.

Reply

greg,org June 4, 2010 at 3:13 pm

Can’t wait for the show to actually start so the conversation can get down into much more substantive art issues.

Reply

greg,org June 4, 2010 at 3:13 pm

Can’t wait for the show to actually start so the conversation can get down into much more substantive art issues.

Reply

greg,org June 4, 2010 at 11:13 am

Can’t wait for the show to actually start so the conversation can get down into much more substantive art issues.

Reply

Phillip Niemeyer June 4, 2010 at 3:22 pm

Kandinsky studied law before dropping out to be an artist, as did Roger Excoffon, a great French graphic designer. Gauguin was a successful stock broker before ditching everything to paint — he went from owning a Parisian mansion to living in his in-laws’ attic.

It’s not about being smart enough. Art is a spiritual compulsion: a cross between a drug habit and knitting.

No one in their right mind would be an artist if they could do anything else. I wish I could be a lawyer. Lawyers make money, wear nice suits and have popular t.v. shows made about them. Lawyers can buy art. Artists walk into oceans or hang in coffee shops with mystery stains on their pants.

Reply

Phillip Niemeyer June 4, 2010 at 3:22 pm

Kandinsky studied law before dropping out to be an artist, as did Roger Excoffon, a great French graphic designer. Gauguin was a successful stock broker before ditching everything to paint — he went from owning a Parisian mansion to living in his in-laws’ attic.

It’s not about being smart enough. Art is a spiritual compulsion: a cross between a drug habit and knitting.

No one in their right mind would be an artist if they could do anything else. I wish I could be a lawyer. Lawyers make money, wear nice suits and have popular t.v. shows made about them. Lawyers can buy art. Artists walk into oceans or hang in coffee shops with mystery stains on their pants.

Reply

Phillip Niemeyer June 4, 2010 at 3:22 pm

Kandinsky studied law before dropping out to be an artist, as did Roger Excoffon, a great French graphic designer. Gauguin was a successful stock broker before ditching everything to paint — he went from owning a Parisian mansion to living in his in-laws’ attic.

It’s not about being smart enough. Art is a spiritual compulsion: a cross between a drug habit and knitting.

No one in their right mind would be an artist if they could do anything else. I wish I could be a lawyer. Lawyers make money, wear nice suits and have popular t.v. shows made about them. Lawyers can buy art. Artists walk into oceans or hang in coffee shops with mystery stains on their pants.

Reply

Phillip Niemeyer June 4, 2010 at 3:22 pm

Kandinsky studied law before dropping out to be an artist, as did Roger Excoffon, a great French graphic designer. Gauguin was a successful stock broker before ditching everything to paint — he went from owning a Parisian mansion to living in his in-laws’ attic.

It’s not about being smart enough. Art is a spiritual compulsion: a cross between a drug habit and knitting.

No one in their right mind would be an artist if they could do anything else. I wish I could be a lawyer. Lawyers make money, wear nice suits and have popular t.v. shows made about them. Lawyers can buy art. Artists walk into oceans or hang in coffee shops with mystery stains on their pants.

Reply

Phillip Niemeyer June 4, 2010 at 11:22 am

Kandinsky studied law before dropping out to be an artist, as did Roger Excoffon, a great French graphic designer. Gauguin was a successful stock broker before ditching everything to paint — he went from owning a Parisian mansion to living in his in-laws’ attic.

It’s not about being smart enough. Art is a spiritual compulsion: a cross between a drug habit and knitting.

No one in their right mind would be an artist if they could do anything else. I wish I could be a lawyer. Lawyers make money, wear nice suits and have popular t.v. shows made about them. Lawyers can buy art. Artists walk into oceans or hang in coffee shops with mystery stains on their pants.

Reply

dan June 4, 2010 at 3:58 pm

I want in on this! “The pose makes here look pregnant”………….dan

Reply

dan June 4, 2010 at 3:58 pm

I want in on this! “The pose makes here look pregnant”………….dan

Reply

dan June 4, 2010 at 3:58 pm

I want in on this! “The pose makes here look pregnant”………….dan

Reply

dan June 4, 2010 at 3:58 pm

I want in on this! “The pose makes here look pregnant”………….dan

Reply

dan June 4, 2010 at 11:58 am

I want in on this! “The pose makes here look pregnant”………….dan

Reply

pbd June 4, 2010 at 4:44 pm

racks ok but i dunno, face is a bit horsey.

Reply

pbd June 4, 2010 at 4:44 pm

racks ok but i dunno, face is a bit horsey.

Reply

pbd June 4, 2010 at 12:44 pm

racks ok but i dunno, face is a bit horsey.

Reply

Charles Lutz June 4, 2010 at 4:48 pm

Mediocrity at its worst. Very much the look of what I like to call “art school feminism”, that I experienced while at Pratt. Very little substance, heavily relying on “shock”, yet they’re actually very banal images at this point.

Reply

Charles Lutz June 4, 2010 at 4:48 pm

Mediocrity at its worst. Very much the look of what I like to call “art school feminism”, that I experienced while at Pratt. Very little substance, heavily relying on “shock”, yet they’re actually very banal images at this point.

Reply

Charles Lutz June 4, 2010 at 4:48 pm

Mediocrity at its worst. Very much the look of what I like to call “art school feminism”, that I experienced while at Pratt. Very little substance, heavily relying on “shock”, yet they’re actually very banal images at this point.

Reply

Charles Lutz June 4, 2010 at 4:48 pm

Mediocrity at its worst. Very much the look of what I like to call “art school feminism”, that I experienced while at Pratt. Very little substance, heavily relying on “shock”, yet they’re actually very banal images at this point.

Reply

Charles Lutz June 4, 2010 at 12:48 pm

Mediocrity at its worst. Very much the look of what I like to call “art school feminism”, that I experienced while at Pratt. Very little substance, heavily relying on “shock”, yet they’re actually very banal images at this point.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 5:43 pm

In all seriousness, these shows are expertly formulated to generate this kind of “nitpicking,” “hating,”and all other types of uninformed, snarky, predominantly ad hominem attacks. Those who don’t “player hate” will engage in giddy “you go, girl” fandom. The producers of WANGA — like the producers of every other reality show in the universe — have choreographed the show to invoke these one-dimensional, polemical “debates.” It’s sheer marketing/sensationalist-entertainment grandstanding as an art/culture/sociological documentary.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 5:43 pm

In all seriousness, these shows are expertly formulated to generate this kind of “nitpicking,” “hating,”and all other types of uninformed, snarky, predominantly ad hominem attacks. Those who don’t “player hate” will engage in giddy “you go, girl” fandom. The producers of WANGA — like the producers of every other reality show in the universe — have choreographed the show to invoke these one-dimensional, polemical “debates.” It’s sheer marketing/sensationalist-entertainment grandstanding as an art/culture/sociological documentary.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 5:43 pm

In all seriousness, these shows are expertly formulated to generate this kind of “nitpicking,” “hating,”and all other types of uninformed, snarky, predominantly ad hominem attacks. Those who don’t “player hate” will engage in giddy “you go, girl” fandom. The producers of WANGA — like the producers of every other reality show in the universe — have choreographed the show to invoke these one-dimensional, polemical “debates.” It’s sheer marketing/sensationalist-entertainment grandstanding as an art/culture/sociological documentary.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 1:43 pm

In all seriousness, these shows are expertly formulated to generate this kind of “nitpicking,” “hating,”and all other types of uninformed, snarky, predominantly ad hominem attacks. Those who don’t “player hate” will engage in giddy “you go, girl” fandom. The producers of WANGA — like the producers of every other reality show in the universe — have choreographed the show to invoke these one-dimensional, polemical “debates.” It’s sheer marketing/sensationalist-entertainment grandstanding as an art/culture/sociological documentary.

Reply

Sophie Larrimore June 4, 2010 at 5:58 pm

Who puts their BFA GPA score on their CV? She obviously has some insecurity issues regarding her intelligence. Too bad her work isn’t helping.

Reply

Sophie Larrimore June 4, 2010 at 5:58 pm

Who puts their BFA GPA score on their CV? She obviously has some insecurity issues regarding her intelligence. Too bad her work isn’t helping.

Reply

Sophie Larrimore June 4, 2010 at 5:58 pm

Who puts their BFA GPA score on their CV? She obviously has some insecurity issues regarding her intelligence. Too bad her work isn’t helping.

Reply

Sophie Larrimore June 4, 2010 at 1:58 pm

Who puts their BFA GPA score on their CV? She obviously has some insecurity issues regarding her intelligence. Too bad her work isn’t helping.

Reply

Boris June 4, 2010 at 6:08 pm

All these hate commenters are secretly jealous and just looking for something to hate. beauty is easy to hate. You can only go so far in assuming things about a photograph of an artist who she may not even have composed…although i guess the photograph inevitably signifies an archetype we have concerns and frustrations about that serves as the object of you delusive expression.
It’s not a show about established artists, its a show about the exact opposite, who are going to attempt to become great artists, although possibly wont.

Reply

Boris June 4, 2010 at 6:08 pm

All these hate commenters are secretly jealous and just looking for something to hate. beauty is easy to hate. You can only go so far in assuming things about a photograph of an artist who she may not even have composed…although i guess the photograph inevitably signifies an archetype we have concerns and frustrations about that serves as the object of you delusive expression.
It’s not a show about established artists, its a show about the exact opposite, who are going to attempt to become great artists, although possibly wont.

Reply

Boris June 4, 2010 at 6:08 pm

All these hate commenters are secretly jealous and just looking for something to hate. beauty is easy to hate. You can only go so far in assuming things about a photograph of an artist who she may not even have composed…although i guess the photograph inevitably signifies an archetype we have concerns and frustrations about that serves as the object of you delusive expression.
It’s not a show about established artists, its a show about the exact opposite, who are going to attempt to become great artists, although possibly wont.

Reply

Boris June 4, 2010 at 2:08 pm

All these hate commenters are secretly jealous and just looking for something to hate. beauty is easy to hate. You can only go so far in assuming things about a photograph of an artist who she may not even have composed…although i guess the photograph inevitably signifies an archetype we have concerns and frustrations about that serves as the object of you delusive expression.
It’s not a show about established artists, its a show about the exact opposite, who are going to attempt to become great artists, although possibly wont.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 6:57 pm

@Boris: I’m not sure of how you’re defining “established,” but several of the contestants have gallery representation and notable, productive art careers (Trong Nguyen, for example: http://bit.ly/dA1A0E).

“Great” is hyperbolic, and was probably meant to engender the aforementioned hate-baiting and superlative-gushing that the WANGA producers are going for.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 6:57 pm

@Boris: I’m not sure of how you’re defining “established,” but several of the contestants have gallery representation and notable, productive art careers (Trong Nguyen, for example: http://bit.ly/dA1A0E).

“Great” is hyperbolic, and was probably meant to engender the aforementioned hate-baiting and superlative-gushing that the WANGA producers are going for.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 6:57 pm

@Boris: I’m not sure of how you’re defining “established,” but several of the contestants have gallery representation and notable, productive art careers (Trong Nguyen, for example: http://bit.ly/dA1A0E).

“Great” is hyperbolic, and was probably meant to engender the aforementioned hate-baiting and superlative-gushing that the WANGA producers are going for.

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 4, 2010 at 2:57 pm

@Boris: I’m not sure of how you’re defining “established,” but several of the contestants have gallery representation and notable, productive art careers (Trong Nguyen, for example: http://bit.ly/dA1A0E).

“Great” is hyperbolic, and was probably meant to engender the aforementioned hate-baiting and superlative-gushing that the WANGA producers are going for.

Reply

Piper June 4, 2010 at 7:40 pm

I really want to hate this show. I really, really do. Mostly because I feel art should transcend the mainstream and therefore a formulaic reality television show that is going to/should get people talking about art more kinda makes me want to vomit. It says to me that art on its own isn’t enough in this country; that art plus, drama, plus celebrity is the new art and that’s sad. AND, normally, I would look at a “character” such as this and want to hate on her also, but I feel like it’s necessary to defend a few points.
1: I think it’s safe to say artists who work for Koons are well vetted. As in, while you might not like her work or subject matter, the girl can paint (socialite tendencies that also make me want to gag a little notwithstanding).
2: A good GPA on a resume, while not typical for artists, is not unheard of. Especially if your fresh out of college and competing with 100’s of other MFA grads vying for a $15/hr artist asst position. It shows commitment, astuteness, intelligence, etc…I mean good for anyone who can graduate cum laude. Intelligence and education is not something to hate on.
3: Artists come in all shapes and sizes and while there are many things one can find annoying about them (and I am sure this show will make it easy for us) got to admit she has a nice rack.

Reply

Piper June 4, 2010 at 3:40 pm

I really want to hate this show. I really, really do. Mostly because I feel art should transcend the mainstream and therefore a formulaic reality television show that is going to/should get people talking about art more kinda makes me want to vomit. It says to me that art on its own isn’t enough in this country; that art plus, drama, plus celebrity is the new art and that’s sad. AND, normally, I would look at a “character” such as this and want to hate on her also, but I feel like it’s necessary to defend a few points.
1: I think it’s safe to say artists who work for Koons are well vetted. As in, while you might not like her work or subject matter, the girl can paint (socialite tendencies that also make me want to gag a little notwithstanding).
2: A good GPA on a resume, while not typical for artists, is not unheard of. Especially if your fresh out of college and competing with 100’s of other MFA grads vying for a $15/hr artist asst position. It shows commitment, astuteness, intelligence, etc…I mean good for anyone who can graduate cum laude. Intelligence and education is not something to hate on.
3: Artists come in all shapes and sizes and while there are many things one can find annoying about them (and I am sure this show will make it easy for us) got to admit she has a nice rack.

Reply

Jessie June 5, 2010 at 3:15 am

@Jesse: I’m not sure how you’re defining first-wave feminist but I’m pretty sure all of them are already dead–no cliff necessary.

I don’t care what an artist looks like, I care what the art looks like. She probably doesn’t get that at all with her enlightened sexism/post-feminism. It’s all there in her statement: real women can’t ever possibly be like the women in Hollywood. Of course the solution is reality TV.

Maybe she WAS smart? Or maybe she’s just sick and twisted.

If the art was worth talking about people probably wouldn’t keep mentioning her rack. “The girl can paint” depends on what you mean. As a skill, sure, anyone can learn that. As a talent, with substance…. well, there’s probably a reason she’s wearing what seems to be a bra in one photo. I mean, don’t you know TONS of women artists who wear a bra to paint. It’s just so… messy.

It’s not about her painting, but it is about image–hers.

If only Brooklyn could figure out a way to have donations made every time she uses the word post-feminist. The Sackler Center for Feminist Art needs money and she needs a swear jar.

Reply

Jessie June 5, 2010 at 3:15 am

@Jesse: I’m not sure how you’re defining first-wave feminist but I’m pretty sure all of them are already dead–no cliff necessary.

I don’t care what an artist looks like, I care what the art looks like. She probably doesn’t get that at all with her enlightened sexism/post-feminism. It’s all there in her statement: real women can’t ever possibly be like the women in Hollywood. Of course the solution is reality TV.

Maybe she WAS smart? Or maybe she’s just sick and twisted.

If the art was worth talking about people probably wouldn’t keep mentioning her rack. “The girl can paint” depends on what you mean. As a skill, sure, anyone can learn that. As a talent, with substance…. well, there’s probably a reason she’s wearing what seems to be a bra in one photo. I mean, don’t you know TONS of women artists who wear a bra to paint. It’s just so… messy.

It’s not about her painting, but it is about image–hers.

If only Brooklyn could figure out a way to have donations made every time she uses the word post-feminist. The Sackler Center for Feminist Art needs money and she needs a swear jar.

Reply

Jessie June 5, 2010 at 3:15 am

@Jesse: I’m not sure how you’re defining first-wave feminist but I’m pretty sure all of them are already dead–no cliff necessary.

I don’t care what an artist looks like, I care what the art looks like. She probably doesn’t get that at all with her enlightened sexism/post-feminism. It’s all there in her statement: real women can’t ever possibly be like the women in Hollywood. Of course the solution is reality TV.

Maybe she WAS smart? Or maybe she’s just sick and twisted.

If the art was worth talking about people probably wouldn’t keep mentioning her rack. “The girl can paint” depends on what you mean. As a skill, sure, anyone can learn that. As a talent, with substance…. well, there’s probably a reason she’s wearing what seems to be a bra in one photo. I mean, don’t you know TONS of women artists who wear a bra to paint. It’s just so… messy.

It’s not about her painting, but it is about image–hers.

If only Brooklyn could figure out a way to have donations made every time she uses the word post-feminist. The Sackler Center for Feminist Art needs money and she needs a swear jar.

Reply

Jessie June 5, 2010 at 3:15 am

@Jesse: I’m not sure how you’re defining first-wave feminist but I’m pretty sure all of them are already dead–no cliff necessary.

I don’t care what an artist looks like, I care what the art looks like. She probably doesn’t get that at all with her enlightened sexism/post-feminism. It’s all there in her statement: real women can’t ever possibly be like the women in Hollywood. Of course the solution is reality TV.

Maybe she WAS smart? Or maybe she’s just sick and twisted.

If the art was worth talking about people probably wouldn’t keep mentioning her rack. “The girl can paint” depends on what you mean. As a skill, sure, anyone can learn that. As a talent, with substance…. well, there’s probably a reason she’s wearing what seems to be a bra in one photo. I mean, don’t you know TONS of women artists who wear a bra to paint. It’s just so… messy.

It’s not about her painting, but it is about image–hers.

If only Brooklyn could figure out a way to have donations made every time she uses the word post-feminist. The Sackler Center for Feminist Art needs money and she needs a swear jar.

Reply

Jane July 8, 2010 at 3:12 am

Well said.

Reply

Jane July 8, 2010 at 3:12 am

Well said.

Reply

Jane July 8, 2010 at 3:12 am

Well said.

Reply

Jane July 8, 2010 at 3:12 am

Well said.

Reply

Jessie June 4, 2010 at 11:15 pm

@Jesse: I’m not sure how you’re defining first-wave feminist but I’m pretty sure all of them are already dead–no cliff necessary.

I don’t care what an artist looks like, I care what the art looks like. She probably doesn’t get that at all with her enlightened sexism/post-feminism. It’s all there in her statement: real women can’t ever possibly be like the women in Hollywood. Of course the solution is reality TV.

Maybe she WAS smart? Or maybe she’s just sick and twisted.

If the art was worth talking about people probably wouldn’t keep mentioning her rack. “The girl can paint” depends on what you mean. As a skill, sure, anyone can learn that. As a talent, with substance…. well, there’s probably a reason she’s wearing what seems to be a bra in one photo. I mean, don’t you know TONS of women artists who wear a bra to paint. It’s just so… messy.

It’s not about her painting, but it is about image–hers.

If only Brooklyn could figure out a way to have donations made every time she uses the word post-feminist. The Sackler Center for Feminist Art needs money and she needs a swear jar.

Reply

Jane July 7, 2010 at 11:12 pm

Well said.

Reply

Abdi June 5, 2010 at 6:40 am

I love reality tv because it takes ordinary people and pushes and squeezes them until they gush all the ugliness they hide on the daily

The hatred for Ms Santos says a lot more about the writers than her (ooooo in your face!)

Her point is simple and well said: art is legitamate- just as legitimate as law, medicine, whatever. All of us who are artists have fought this battle for equality with skeptical parents, ibankers at bars, exchange students from communist countries etc. ” So, you’re an artist…” And we all secretly look down on other “artists”. “theyre just in art school cause their mom wouldn’t let them crash on the couch anymore smoking weed and watching the Price is Right”. In our world an artist doesnt have legitimacy until he/she is famous. Everyone else is a wannabe. While every doctor in the world has complete credibility as soon as they get the “DR” in front of their name on graduation day . We’ve all internalized this hegemonic belittling of the arts. Santos’ point is well taken.

This is going to be a fun experiment!

Reply

Abdi June 5, 2010 at 6:40 am

I love reality tv because it takes ordinary people and pushes and squeezes them until they gush all the ugliness they hide on the daily

The hatred for Ms Santos says a lot more about the writers than her (ooooo in your face!)

Her point is simple and well said: art is legitamate- just as legitimate as law, medicine, whatever. All of us who are artists have fought this battle for equality with skeptical parents, ibankers at bars, exchange students from communist countries etc. ” So, you’re an artist…” And we all secretly look down on other “artists”. “theyre just in art school cause their mom wouldn’t let them crash on the couch anymore smoking weed and watching the Price is Right”. In our world an artist doesnt have legitimacy until he/she is famous. Everyone else is a wannabe. While every doctor in the world has complete credibility as soon as they get the “DR” in front of their name on graduation day . We’ve all internalized this hegemonic belittling of the arts. Santos’ point is well taken.

This is going to be a fun experiment!

Reply

Abdi June 5, 2010 at 6:40 am

I love reality tv because it takes ordinary people and pushes and squeezes them until they gush all the ugliness they hide on the daily

The hatred for Ms Santos says a lot more about the writers than her (ooooo in your face!)

Her point is simple and well said: art is legitamate- just as legitimate as law, medicine, whatever. All of us who are artists have fought this battle for equality with skeptical parents, ibankers at bars, exchange students from communist countries etc. ” So, you’re an artist…” And we all secretly look down on other “artists”. “theyre just in art school cause their mom wouldn’t let them crash on the couch anymore smoking weed and watching the Price is Right”. In our world an artist doesnt have legitimacy until he/she is famous. Everyone else is a wannabe. While every doctor in the world has complete credibility as soon as they get the “DR” in front of their name on graduation day . We’ve all internalized this hegemonic belittling of the arts. Santos’ point is well taken.

This is going to be a fun experiment!

Reply

Abdi June 5, 2010 at 6:40 am

I love reality tv because it takes ordinary people and pushes and squeezes them until they gush all the ugliness they hide on the daily

The hatred for Ms Santos says a lot more about the writers than her (ooooo in your face!)

Her point is simple and well said: art is legitamate- just as legitimate as law, medicine, whatever. All of us who are artists have fought this battle for equality with skeptical parents, ibankers at bars, exchange students from communist countries etc. ” So, you’re an artist…” And we all secretly look down on other “artists”. “theyre just in art school cause their mom wouldn’t let them crash on the couch anymore smoking weed and watching the Price is Right”. In our world an artist doesnt have legitimacy until he/she is famous. Everyone else is a wannabe. While every doctor in the world has complete credibility as soon as they get the “DR” in front of their name on graduation day . We’ve all internalized this hegemonic belittling of the arts. Santos’ point is well taken.

This is going to be a fun experiment!

Reply

Abdi June 5, 2010 at 2:40 am

I love reality tv because it takes ordinary people and pushes and squeezes them until they gush all the ugliness they hide on the daily

The hatred for Ms Santos says a lot more about the writers than her (ooooo in your face!)

Her point is simple and well said: art is legitamate- just as legitimate as law, medicine, whatever. All of us who are artists have fought this battle for equality with skeptical parents, ibankers at bars, exchange students from communist countries etc. ” So, you’re an artist…” And we all secretly look down on other “artists”. “theyre just in art school cause their mom wouldn’t let them crash on the couch anymore smoking weed and watching the Price is Right”. In our world an artist doesnt have legitimacy until he/she is famous. Everyone else is a wannabe. While every doctor in the world has complete credibility as soon as they get the “DR” in front of their name on graduation day . We’ve all internalized this hegemonic belittling of the arts. Santos’ point is well taken.

This is going to be a fun experiment!

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 5, 2010 at 4:32 pm

@Jessie: You’re right. I should’ve said “rolling in their graves.”

And it appears that most (if not all) of the painters on WANGA work exclusively in some version of figurative photorealism, each with an identity-specific “theme” (i.e. race, drug-culture, gender, sexuality). The fact that their paintings are so (overly) rendered — and that the show will present them with time-based “challenges” — should make their actual work all the less relevant, and focus viewers on them as characters instead. So, actual “painting” and “identity” will probably go right out the window (or off the cliff).

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 5, 2010 at 4:32 pm

@Jessie: You’re right. I should’ve said “rolling in their graves.”

And it appears that most (if not all) of the painters on WANGA work exclusively in some version of figurative photorealism, each with an identity-specific “theme” (i.e. race, drug-culture, gender, sexuality). The fact that their paintings are so (overly) rendered — and that the show will present them with time-based “challenges” — should make their actual work all the less relevant, and focus viewers on them as characters instead. So, actual “painting” and “identity” will probably go right out the window (or off the cliff).

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 5, 2010 at 4:32 pm

@Jessie: You’re right. I should’ve said “rolling in their graves.”

And it appears that most (if not all) of the painters on WANGA work exclusively in some version of figurative photorealism, each with an identity-specific “theme” (i.e. race, drug-culture, gender, sexuality). The fact that their paintings are so (overly) rendered — and that the show will present them with time-based “challenges” — should make their actual work all the less relevant, and focus viewers on them as characters instead. So, actual “painting” and “identity” will probably go right out the window (or off the cliff).

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 5, 2010 at 12:32 pm

@Jessie: You’re right. I should’ve said “rolling in their graves.”

And it appears that most (if not all) of the painters on WANGA work exclusively in some version of figurative photorealism, each with an identity-specific “theme” (i.e. race, drug-culture, gender, sexuality). The fact that their paintings are so (overly) rendered — and that the show will present them with time-based “challenges” — should make their actual work all the less relevant, and focus viewers on them as characters instead. So, actual “painting” and “identity” will probably go right out the window (or off the cliff).

Reply

marshall June 7, 2010 at 10:27 pm

“Can’t wait for the show to actually start so the conversation can get down into much more substantive art issues.”

– greg,org

Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha! You have just made my week.

Reply

marshall June 7, 2010 at 6:27 pm

“Can’t wait for the show to actually start so the conversation can get down into much more substantive art issues.”

– greg,org

Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha! You have just made my week.

Reply

Piper June 8, 2010 at 4:55 pm

@Abdi
“The girl can paint” depends on what you mean. As a skill, sure, anyone can learn that. As a talent, with substance….
I mean she can mix color and apply it. She can paint. That is not as easy as you think. There are plenty of people who think they can do it and really can’t.

Reply

Piper June 8, 2010 at 4:55 pm

@Abdi
“The girl can paint” depends on what you mean. As a skill, sure, anyone can learn that. As a talent, with substance….
I mean she can mix color and apply it. She can paint. That is not as easy as you think. There are plenty of people who think they can do it and really can’t.

Reply

Piper June 8, 2010 at 4:55 pm

@Abdi
“The girl can paint” depends on what you mean. As a skill, sure, anyone can learn that. As a talent, with substance….
I mean she can mix color and apply it. She can paint. That is not as easy as you think. There are plenty of people who think they can do it and really can’t.

Reply

Piper June 8, 2010 at 4:55 pm

@Abdi
“The girl can paint” depends on what you mean. As a skill, sure, anyone can learn that. As a talent, with substance….
I mean she can mix color and apply it. She can paint. That is not as easy as you think. There are plenty of people who think they can do it and really can’t.

Reply

Piper June 8, 2010 at 12:55 pm

@Abdi
“The girl can paint” depends on what you mean. As a skill, sure, anyone can learn that. As a talent, with substance….
I mean she can mix color and apply it. She can paint. That is not as easy as you think. There are plenty of people who think they can do it and really can’t.

Reply

nunya June 9, 2010 at 2:56 pm

All of the people HATING on here verses giving REAL criticism on her ART, are just people who are jealous or probably auditioned for the show and didn’t make it–yeah, I said it.

Why are you people offended by her comment? It’s like you are mad that finally there is an artist that is NORMAL in the worlds eyes/doesn’t look like the stereotypical, hippie artist? She is clearly saying the Artists are intelligent and can be lawyers and doctors too but decided to pursue their passion instead…what can be better than working for yourself?

Whether you like it or not, this woman, has it all: Looks, talent AND BRAINS…(her GPA is posted because her website probably served as a RESUME before she got on the show…)

I’m sure she’ll be sitting back laughing when she can sell one painting a year and make more than you do having to work your 9-5’s everyday of the year.

check out her website http://www.jaclynsantos.com and see for yourselves. Check out the one with the rainbow…it reflects on the black painting…its amazing!!

Reply

nunya June 9, 2010 at 2:56 pm

All of the people HATING on here verses giving REAL criticism on her ART, are just people who are jealous or probably auditioned for the show and didn’t make it–yeah, I said it.

Why are you people offended by her comment? It’s like you are mad that finally there is an artist that is NORMAL in the worlds eyes/doesn’t look like the stereotypical, hippie artist? She is clearly saying the Artists are intelligent and can be lawyers and doctors too but decided to pursue their passion instead…what can be better than working for yourself?

Whether you like it or not, this woman, has it all: Looks, talent AND BRAINS…(her GPA is posted because her website probably served as a RESUME before she got on the show…)

I’m sure she’ll be sitting back laughing when she can sell one painting a year and make more than you do having to work your 9-5’s everyday of the year.

check out her website http://www.jaclynsantos.com and see for yourselves. Check out the one with the rainbow…it reflects on the black painting…its amazing!!

Reply

nunya June 9, 2010 at 2:56 pm

All of the people HATING on here verses giving REAL criticism on her ART, are just people who are jealous or probably auditioned for the show and didn’t make it–yeah, I said it.

Why are you people offended by her comment? It’s like you are mad that finally there is an artist that is NORMAL in the worlds eyes/doesn’t look like the stereotypical, hippie artist? She is clearly saying the Artists are intelligent and can be lawyers and doctors too but decided to pursue their passion instead…what can be better than working for yourself?

Whether you like it or not, this woman, has it all: Looks, talent AND BRAINS…(her GPA is posted because her website probably served as a RESUME before she got on the show…)

I’m sure she’ll be sitting back laughing when she can sell one painting a year and make more than you do having to work your 9-5’s everyday of the year.

check out her website http://www.jaclynsantos.com and see for yourselves. Check out the one with the rainbow…it reflects on the black painting…its amazing!!

Reply

nunya June 9, 2010 at 10:56 am

All of the people HATING on here verses giving REAL criticism on her ART, are just people who are jealous or probably auditioned for the show and didn’t make it–yeah, I said it.

Why are you people offended by her comment? It’s like you are mad that finally there is an artist that is NORMAL in the worlds eyes/doesn’t look like the stereotypical, hippie artist? She is clearly saying the Artists are intelligent and can be lawyers and doctors too but decided to pursue their passion instead…what can be better than working for yourself?

Whether you like it or not, this woman, has it all: Looks, talent AND BRAINS…(her GPA is posted because her website probably served as a RESUME before she got on the show…)

I’m sure she’ll be sitting back laughing when she can sell one painting a year and make more than you do having to work your 9-5’s everyday of the year.

check out her website http://www.jaclynsantos.com and see for yourselves. Check out the one with the rainbow…it reflects on the black painting…its amazing!!

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 9, 2010 at 3:43 pm

@AFC: Wow. It’s like AFC & perezhilton.com had a terrible love-child in your comment-threads…

“HATE THE GAME, NOT THE PLAYER!!!” -Socrates

Reply

Jesse P. Martin June 9, 2010 at 11:43 am

@AFC: Wow. It’s like AFC & perezhilton.com had a terrible love-child in your comment-threads…

“HATE THE GAME, NOT THE PLAYER!!!” -Socrates

Reply

Randy Bill June 12, 2010 at 4:08 am

Everyone here is so weird. I want to school with this chick. Its just a Jersey Shore chick that can paint. Enough is said. I took a class with here and believe me her tits were better looking than the models. But I would throw up in my mouth every time I would see her.

Reply

Randy Bill June 12, 2010 at 4:08 am

Everyone here is so weird. I want to school with this chick. Its just a Jersey Shore chick that can paint. Enough is said. I took a class with here and believe me her tits were better looking than the models. But I would throw up in my mouth every time I would see her.

Reply

Randy Bill June 12, 2010 at 4:08 am

Everyone here is so weird. I want to school with this chick. Its just a Jersey Shore chick that can paint. Enough is said. I took a class with here and believe me her tits were better looking than the models. But I would throw up in my mouth every time I would see her.

Reply

Randy Bill June 12, 2010 at 4:08 am

Everyone here is so weird. I want to school with this chick. Its just a Jersey Shore chick that can paint. Enough is said. I took a class with here and believe me her tits were better looking than the models. But I would throw up in my mouth every time I would see her.

Reply

Randy Bill June 12, 2010 at 12:08 am

Everyone here is so weird. I want to school with this chick. Its just a Jersey Shore chick that can paint. Enough is said. I took a class with here and believe me her tits were better looking than the models. But I would throw up in my mouth every time I would see her.

Reply

Jane July 8, 2010 at 3:11 am

@nunya,
I don’t think anyone has a problem with the idea that she is trying to communicate; that artists can be very intelligent (honestly, I think artist’s are like people in any profession, some are geniuses, some have the IQ of a brick.) The problem is that she’s saying it. I’ve seen nothing from what she’s said on the show or her work that makes me think she has anything but a subpar intellect. And I do have real criticism of her work, that just happens to reflect on the personality I’ve seen portrayed on the show. To me, her work seems to be generic self-portraits that have a polluted vision of feminism plastered on to fulfill this woman’s obvious narcissistic tendencies. Now, I know that sounds vindictive, to personally attack her, but from what I’ve seen of her process, her thoughts always go back to how men view her (which from the way she grooms herself, she’s very conscious of). Every piece she’s made has used this “male gaze” theme which is soooooo played out, not really empowering, and really doesn’t seem honest. I’ve met this type of girl a million times at art school, and believe me, they don’t make it very far.

Reply

Jane July 7, 2010 at 11:11 pm

@nunya,
I don’t think anyone has a problem with the idea that she is trying to communicate; that artists can be very intelligent (honestly, I think artist’s are like people in any profession, some are geniuses, some have the IQ of a brick.) The problem is that she’s saying it. I’ve seen nothing from what she’s said on the show or her work that makes me think she has anything but a subpar intellect. And I do have real criticism of her work, that just happens to reflect on the personality I’ve seen portrayed on the show. To me, her work seems to be generic self-portraits that have a polluted vision of feminism plastered on to fulfill this woman’s obvious narcissistic tendencies. Now, I know that sounds vindictive, to personally attack her, but from what I’ve seen of her process, her thoughts always go back to how men view her (which from the way she grooms herself, she’s very conscious of). Every piece she’s made has used this “male gaze” theme which is soooooo played out, not really empowering, and really doesn’t seem honest. I’ve met this type of girl a million times at art school, and believe me, they don’t make it very far.

Reply

Anthony Neilly October 12, 2011 at 7:57 pm

America TV sucks, as does the entire American Culture and economy that is failing at a record rate, perhaps faster than  many of the great empires that have existed before it. So much for the great experiment. 

Reply

Will Brand October 12, 2011 at 10:48 pm

She wasn’t THAT bad!

Reply

Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: