Weegee (Arthur Fellig), The Critic, November 22, 1943
Trying to explain why and how this particular type of reality show is morally reprehensible and a sign that we're devolving into and "Idiocracy" would require a doctoral thesis, not a mere blog post. It can be said that art is not food or fashion, and an artist is not a horse meant to run a race. Unfortunately the ethical implications of presenting art as something that can be measured in inches, pounds or speed seem to have gone unnoticed by the good folks at Bravo TV. I hope the artists who've signed on to appear on this travesty of a show know what they've gotten themselves into. If they think they're using the show to their advantage they need to make a thorough reassessment of their own intelligence, and check their self respect at the door. Andy Warhol and Salvador Dali knew how to use the media and make it a part of their art. But Warhols and Dalis happen only a few times in a century.
It's taken centuries for artists to shed the role of picture painting slaves. One TV show, in one fell swoop will undo all of that work. It's an unnecessary setback, and very sad.
My view on the matter might seem a little convoluted or trite, so take a look at what a real journalist, Linda Holmes at NPR, has to say about it:
Bravo's 'Work Of Art': Can You Explain The Thing About The Judges Again?
From Holmes' Article:
"How do you get a panel of judges to judge pieces of art competitively?"
"And while getting too "it's all subjective" about evaluation of art tends to downplay the importance of technique that can be learned and taught, when a panel of judges and the people backstage agree "99 percent of the time" about what was good and what was bad, it raises the question of whether the art is very interesting"
"the confidence the judges have in the infallibility and ease of their judgments suggest that they're not giving the art a whole lot of thought"
Posts
