Thoughts on Art Critiques

Welcome to the latest long-ish entry of the Art Talk and Other Stuff blog!

    If you have any questions or suggestions about this entry, previous entries, future entries, feel free to leave them in the comment section or inbox me on Instagram.

    With this entry I will follow up the dick line "If you don't like what somebody tells you during a critique, cry me a fucking river, bro" from the previous entry.

    Or maybe not necessarily dick line, but I'm aware it might come off as harsh or "insensitive".
I'd like to address the general negative emotion associated with art critiques, rather than thoroughly talk about the history of art criticism or go thoroughly into what an art critique even is.

    Let's start by defining what "critique" means, and also the word "criticism", because as I also mentioned "criticism" is what "critique" sounds like to me. They share the first five letters, after all, so I'm surely not making relationships out of my ass.

    Also, words are cool.

    And also, it really seems for a while now people ascribe whatever definition they want to a word to better conveniently accommodate their motives just because it sounds good or impactful, and I AM NOT FOR THAT.

    Talking/conversing through words is how we communicate and, at the very least, the definition of words must be somewhat standardized (or agreed upon at some point), precisely so we can understand each other and continue communicating. I'm sure you can make your point with the standard definition of words, and if you can't, whatever you're trying to make a point about perhaps needs to be revised, or just find other words.

    Surely, you can immediately think of at least one example. I sure as bears shit in the woods can: any variation of "silence is violence". gtfo bro.

    Moreover, I am up to my left fucking tit of slogans. You know who else used contradicting, manipulative slogans with deliberately misleading terminology? Big Brother, from George Orwell's book "1984".
    "Freedom is slavery"
    "War is peace"
    "Ignorance is strength".
    Hard pass.

    And one more thing: the word "slogan" is made up by "sluagh"  and "ghairm".
    - "Sluagh" is Scottish Gaelic for "horde, crowd".
    - "Ghairm" is Old Irish for "shout or cry".

    "Cry of the horde"? No, thanks.
    I learned this from an old as hell Jordan B. Peterson lecture (here is the entire lecture series linked, because it's really quite interesting and worth listening to he says it in the last episode) and then confirmed it by looking it up, I linked each segment of the word to its definition in case you are skeptical, which you goddamn right should be about everything.

    Now that I rode that tangent like Lady Godiva on a horse through the streets of Coventry, let's get to the definition of some words, and ramble on to how they might pertain to art critiques.

    Definition for "critique" from dictionary.com:

"- an article or essay criticizing a literary or other work; detailed evaluation; review."

    Definition for "criticism" from dictionary.com:

"- the act of passing judgment as to the merits of anything.

- the act of passing severe judgment; censure; faultfinding.

- the act or art of analyzing and evaluating or judging the quality of a literary or artistic work, musical performance, art exhibit, dramatic production, etc."

    From these definitions, it seems as though both are rather a thorough analysis of something, and through analysis, it makes sense one would find faults, if there are any. It also seems some background knowledge is necessary or at the very least helpful.
    If you're going to write a whole ass essay, or if you're going to break something down in order to study it, one first would have to already carry some foundational information to compare with or do some research to have a reference point.
    As far as a standard of quality, I would say it forms for the person based on the foundational information and enough research on a subject.

    So just like anything can be art (thanks for that, Marcel Duchamp), it seems fair anyone can give an art critique and anything can be art criticism. Although here might be where the threshold of art conversation versus art criticism is, because I am of the opinion anyone can appreciate art and talk about it, no need for any sort of art study or art history knowledge; however, the person who knows about art history, teaches art, makes art themselves, or all of those together, has all that additional information pertaining to the subject. Depending on the situation, the latter's opinion on an artwork might be considered more valuable.

    From here on out, this will be mostly based on my opinion and personal experience, so you know.

1. Whatever you think or feel during an art critique, remember the person giving the critique is biased, and so are you

During an art critique what generally happens is one person (teacher, art critic, fellow artist, gallery owner, art dealer) tells an artist what they think about their work, a single artwork or a body of work, and why.
    An art critique can also come in the form of an essay published somewhere and not necessarily directed to the artist, even if they are effectively talking about a specific artist's artwork, but it's rather for a reading public.
    This art criticism can range from philosophical questions of what even is art to begin with, to a thoughtful description of the work, or an analysis of techniques used to make the artwork (colors used or marks made with brush/pencil), composition and the like, or all of the above.

    So far it sounds like art criticism is straightforward enough and has a semblance of objectivity, the way a scientific claim can be filtered through being tested by different scientists and different types of tests to see if they all result in the same thing.
    This is but a fantasy in the context of art and art criticism, because art is basically synonym with "subjective", and I personally consider all art criticism to be heavily influenced by the biases and personal taste of the person giving the critique. I'm gonna mention biases a lot, because they're important.

    Art criticism is in large part influenced by personal taste (again, this is based on my own very strong impression), this must always be kept in mind by the person giving the critique and the person receiving it, who also has their own personal taste and biases.
    I remember a comment by Professor Kurt Kauper during the critique of a collage, in which he mentions his own bias towards collage, because he has a very specific impression of why a collage comes to be. I'm not paraphrasing or quoting, it's just what I vaguely remember of the comment, not trying to put words in the guy's mouth, but his awareness really stuck with me as very sincere and important.
    I personally find the awareness of biases extremely valuable, because if you are the one giving a critique, you can choose to try to view the artwork without said bias or mention it to the person receiving the critique of it and permeate the atmosphere with this self-cognition.
    It might also help soften the absolute feeling and intimidation which may come with the authority insinuated by receiving a critique from someone with more experience, or a teacher, or someone whose work one likes a lot.
    And listen, I'm not necessarily about making an art critique as soft as possible or less intimidating or scary or uncomfortable or even awareness or removal of biases; what I want is try to remove the negativity associated with critiques and just have all parties involved remember they are all regular humans.

    (Awareness of biases is still important, as they form how one thinks about something, one's opinions on things, etc.. I know in my case, it has made my life much easier when I keep whatever biases in mind, it doesn't matter if they're physical, like being female, or some childhood thing.
    One big example for me, is not liking a person whatever the reason vs not liking what they do. Being aware of the bias against them is extremely helpful for trying to view their actions minus my bias.
Not liking a person =/= them being wrong, for example.
    And of course, once one catches these biases, they can be worked on, modified, and removed depending if they're a dumb and potentially intrusive bias, like a bias against a country or a group of people.)

    I have big doubts art can be seen with an objective lens, precisely because of the influence of one's own tastes and biases, but this is also exactly what seasons every person's thoughts on art with their own flavor and makes their critique interesting.

    Even if a person is judging the quality of an artwork based on a type of composition, they still might personally prefer a specific sort of composition. Or if they're judging based on color palettes, they might favor a specific selection of colors.
    Or if they're talking about an art movement, they might seriously like one specific artist of the time and the one artist is their measure against which they compare artworks.

    Some examples where one might be able to argue for objectivity in analyzing art are perhaps accuracy of representation (I'd say this is more or less what the atelier and maybe hyper-realist types aim for), and perspective (which seems to have actual rules in terms of making the illusion of depth on a flat surface).
    If you happen to find yourself receiving a critique from a person who knows about this stuff, probably pick the hell outta their brain if possible and listen super hard.

2. Why have art critiques? Why deliberately subject oneself to discomfort?

Sometime in my second year at New York Academy of Art I scheduled a critique with a teacher I don't like ("don't" is in the present tense, because I continue to not like them, but if you remember from the previous entry, I had critiques with everyone I could both years), and the person's feedback helped steer my work into the drawings I ended up making for my thesis, basically because they "didn't see" whatever it was I explained about the work at the time.

    Listening to art critiques of people who like and dislike one's work in the microcosm of art school tempers one for navigating the difficulties of the art world.
    From "micro" to "macro", in art school something like "I don't see the themes you explain conveyed in this drawing", in the art world becomes a rejection letter to the application for a grant or just no reply at all from a gallery you sent work to even though you followed the submission guidelines on their website and you personally think your work would be a lovely fit in their space.
    (btw galleries or anything one applies for have no reason to reply unless they accept one's application. Let's not pretend to care for the reason of rejection, this has always sounded to me like butthurtedness at the rejection itself.)

    A critique doesn't lend itself to be like a conversation basically by definition, meaning it's more like a monologue where the person giving the critique will do all or most of the talking and you may or may not agree, you may not have time to reply or ask more questions because they have to move on to the next student/artist (this is based on how critique day is at NYAA, where professors give each student about a quarter of an hour and they have a list of several students to visit and give critiques to) or it might be an article about your work, where the back and forth of a conversation is physically impossible.

    A critique in any form doesn't immediately have to be taken to heart in any capacity or, frankly, it needn't ever be taken seriously to the point where one changes the work to what whomever has said. I would suggest to let the critique simmer and do other things, think about what you were told.
    When one receives critiques, I would say one must evaluate what exactly is the value of the critique as it pertains to one's work and artistic goals and determine the importance/relevance of the critique based on them.
    How does one value the person who gave the critique? Does one value their work? Does one even value their opinion? Does one find what they said relevant to one's goals? Did one even understand everything they said and what they meant, or most of it or some of it? Does one dislike the person but their critique actually resounded as interesting and valuable?
    Picture all of these questions as a board of knobs and buttons, like an airplane's dashboard, and the answer to each question is what calibrates the importance of the critique.
    This is oversimplified, of course.

    All the variables and biases brought by the person giving the critique crash into the variables and biases of the person receiving the critique, this merge is infinitely more complex and nuanced than an airplane's dashboard.

    However, if you hate what a professor or anyone told you, sit with their words and figure out why you've become upset before even thinking about the contents of the critique. The point of this being to not let anger pollute what could actually be very helpful feedback.
    Trying to understand why you got upset will be extremely helpful for this specific instance and future ones, and try to do so being VERY aware of your biases.
    Try to view the words without the tone, for example, which is perhaps what actually irritated you, try doing it even without the person, who you simply may not like because you perceive them as uppity.
Did they come off as inconsiderate? Inconsiderate insinuates intention, and it might be you who is ascribing this intention, rather than discerning it's probably your own perception.
    Make an effort to wait for when you're not irate anymore to think about the critique again.

    Trying to see from the point of view of someone you dislike or disagree with doesn't mean liking them or agreeing with them, and neither does trying to understand the point of view itself (those are all  different things), but doing the mental exercise of playing devil's advocate is a very productive and fulfilling practice.
    In the context of art, it's extremely helpful, not to mention extremely interesting, to understand why different viewers see what they see.

    An art critique is a learning experience, an exercise in thinking about something for a while, and we need as many different learning experiences as possible along with focused thinking; as opposed to being constantly coddled with safety and not having to focus on anything for longer than a few seconds (for example, cuts in videos or the amount of time it takes to scroll to the next post.)
    Unlike currently implied by our tense atmosphere, we must have uncomfortable conversations, feel uncomfortable things, and be willing to listen to another person and mull over their point of view.

    Receiving an art critique is also part of "things are happening in your brain when you input information and do stuff". The "input" is the critique and the "do stuff" is sitting and thinking about it.

    I've had a handful of colleagues tell me a specific line from a critique which stuck with them throughout the years, this line really stung and it tarnishes their overall view of the person who said the line and it sort of becomes everything the person is.
    I sure as shit did not tell them "cry me a fucking river, bro", but they clearly were unable to let it go, because sometimes things just hurt.
    One isn't supposed to like or enjoy rejection or negative criticism, one must rather become better at handling it.

    However, let's talk a little about bad critiques, because such a thing also exists.
    I personally consider things along the line of "this is bad and you shouldn't be painting/drawing" to be an embarrassingly lazy critique. As in, I'm embarrassed a fellow human is *that* lazy.
    These sound to me like a cop-out instead of making the effort of thinking and explaining why the work is lacking in the person's opinion.

    Even if I don't think critiques should be softened, one should make an effort to back up one's statements.
    This type of shitty critique is kind of like going to the doctor and one is in a very vulnerable position as a patient, because of incontinence and one is scared and the doctor is supposed to know a ton, and the doctor says something  like "you have a weak pelvic floor" or some shit and it's like great, I will just have incontinence for the rest of my life.
    There is a whole school of thought which says using certain terminology causes a chain reaction in how the patient will heal and see themselves. It's called a nocebo effect, and "nocebo" is probably the dumbest word on earth, but look it up for kicks.
    Also for kicks, here is an article from Harvard Health Publishing about it - Link
    Similarly to "you shouldn't be drawing/painting", "you have a weak pelvic floor" is a lazy cop-out instead of trying to figure out why the person has incontinence (incontinence is a symptom of something, so is the allegedly "weak" pelvic floor.)

    Giving/receiving an art critique is obviously different from going to the doctor, this sort of critique has no reason to become a terrible chain reaction in which the student/artist effectively stops making art, I mean have a backbone for crying out loud.
    If it was me receiving a critique like this, I would discard it as just not worth thinking about, because the person giving the critique gave me zero reasons to even consider.

    If you ever find yourself giving a critique, try at the very least to do be helpful and constructive.

    EVEN THEN, FURTHERMORE, STILL, AND MORE SO.
    Receiving a critique one feels like shit about is perfectly within the densely rich spectrum of experience, which as a whole is still edifying.
    To reiterate, I am only interested in removing the foreboding negativity associated with critiques. Even if one perceives them as scary and intimidating, one can still be excited and curious.

    Willingly subjecting oneself to discomfort has very positive outcomes, for one, getting through it is already an achievement.
    Second, now one knows how it feels, this is more information and more information is good.

    Why receive art critiques and deliberately subject oneself to discomfort? Because the art world and life in general are difficult, and they shouldn't suddenly become easy for any one individual or even a handful of individuals.
    We must all try to rather be equipped to deal with all ranges of experiences, and we do so by experiencing as much as we can at least once.

3. How did this whole thing start and why do critiques feel like such a big deal? Is there an actual reason in this day and age for a critique to feel  like it can make or break an artist's career?

I feel as though the perceived importance and weight of a critique comes in large part from the long history of art critics influencing an artist's career (not actually *long* in the context of history, but go with it). This public consciousness drags on from the 1700s, the French Salon even though many contemporary artists probably give zero shits about the French Salon and many others don't even know it existed.
    At the time, however, the art world and artists were very different.

    Before art as we know it now and the French Salon, and take this bit as a very informal and neglectfully told historical interlude, artists made "personal" work so other people could see it and then commission work. If the artist scored a commission with a rich or popular person, it had the potential of fueling the rest of their career. This is of course still applicable for artists in a way, but it is entirely optional to strictly stick to commissioned work.
    For the French Salon, a popular art critic loving an artist's work them being vocal about it could make their art career. Conversely, collectors were people who could afford the luxury of purchasing works of art. Said collectors would buy art and they would have their status fed, but if an art critic thought an artist's work was shit and was also vocal about it, nobody would buy said artist's work and the people who already got some of their work would be like "wtf bro my status".
    This very thing happened with John Ruskin and Whistler who weren't necessarily in the French Salon scene but it's an example of a critique being vital to an artist's career. It seems sort of comical now, but it was a huge deal at the time. Read about it here.

     Lately, I can think of maybe one art critic, two at most, and I personally have little interest in any art work they talk about or even their thoughts in general about art, although I might have read some of their articles.
    I have big doubts whether any art publication or an article by any art critic currently would have the capability of making or breaking any artist's career, specially with social media and online platforms for selling one's work directly out of the studio.

    The rules are different, and with the existence of the internet, lots of new things simply have no regulation yet. The art world is a chaotic, fetid, unregulated cesspool and that's exactly how I like it.

    Back to critiques: I feel as though what matters to me during a critique is first curated by my personal goals with a body of work or a single drawing. What the person giving the critique says may be completely unrelated to what I'm trying to achieve with the work, in which case their critique may go on to a second plane.

    Critiques are also something one must practice at receiving in order to polish how one deals with them, so what is that? Yet another reason to receive critiques of all sorts? Fuck, yes.

    For some generalized information on what is art criticism and its history which I barely got into, here are two articles I enjoyed reading:
    1. Britannica. I liked this one a lot.
    2. Wikipedia

    Thank you so very much for reading! Do not hesitate to tell me your thoughts or questions regarding this entry, also if you have suggestions for future entries, let me know, in the comment section or inbox me on instagram. See you next time! 

New York Academy of Art: Before, during and after

This will be a long, meandering blog entry. I AM NOT JOKING OR KIDDING.
I intend to walk you through finding the New York Academy of Art (sort of, I don't remember really that well), my experience taking their MFA, and more or less what has happened since graduating in 2015.

If you have any further questions, feel free to leave them in the comments of this entry.
If you have suggestions about future entries, please also leave them in the comments of this entry or inbox me on instagram.

1. Finding the New York Academy of Art

Before finding this school, all I knew was I wanted a Master's degree pertaining to art, and my first internet searches were really just "master of fine arts" and other simple shit I don't remember.
I do remember, however, finding a lot of things I had zero interest in, which is also important when you're looking for something.

So based on what I found at first, I discovered I didn't want schools where the art programs were just about art criticism, art theory, stritcly conceptual art.

Afterwards, I somehow stumbled upon degrees in scientific illustration. I'm not sure if I specifically narrowed down my searches or if just came upon them with the same "master of fine arts" search.
I remember finding John Hopkins had a degree in scientific illustration that was extremely tempting and interesting, and was actually kind of decided on this school for a bit, but I realized I didn't want scientific illustration to be my career.
This find was too in favor of medical anatomy in the pendulum, not enough "art".

I don't actually remember how I stumbled upon NYAA, but I remember finding it after the John Hopkins candidate, and that was it for me.
So for me personally, I really just wanted to draw more, study the body and anatomy, and was very ok with the hands on/theory ratio I got from their curriculum.

It's important when you are looking for where to study in any capacity, for you to figure out what you want. However you discover it, make an effort to figure this out.

Schools have a lot of information available on their websites. They have the degrees offered, classes, costs and fees, class descriptions, scholarships, financial aid, who are their teachers, links to the teachers' websites, description of the school's mission, application information.
If you're too good to futz around with a website, or if you're not convinced by the website, or can't seem to find something, write them an email with your questions.
Just fiddle around on their website and read. This is part of your research.

I had classmates who clearly had no interest in figure drawing or anatomy or really anything NYAA has to offer and I never could figure out why the fuck they were paying so much money to be somewhere they didn't want to. Not only were they paying a lot of money, they were also openly complaining about all the defects the curriculum had, as if they went into it not knowing what they were going to get and the surprise was spaghetti with shit on it (This is a Pablo Francisco reference from his Bits and Pieces stand up).
Even if it was just for the name or reputation of the school, Yale and Harvard are much bigger names with much stronger reputations where they could have gone for an art degree.
Maybe you can tell me your own hypothesis in the comments.

Anyway, it seems every class has this sort of people, and I will absolutely whine about them every chance I get.

NYAA has Open Houses, which also offer portfolio reviews (in these portfolio reviews, a faculty member looks at your portfolio and lets you know if applying to the school is a good idea), there's Open Studios which are open to the public (will talk a bit about this in the following section), and you can always schedule a tour for yourself. This can also be part of your research, specially if you want to see things with your own eyes, if you're close, if you can afford to visit.

tl;dr Figure out what you want and then do a lot of research.


2. My own experience with NYAA's MFA
Be ready, this part is extra long and meandering af.

- The exploratory and changing process/first and second year/critiques
For me, NYAA was an absolute oasis.
Drawing from life, studying the human body (the ecorche classes and anatomy classes are you freaking kidding me), and some art history. That was exactly what I figured out I wanted from my research.

I wanted to draw, study the body more, learn artistic anatomy, and at this point basically whatever else this school wanted to throw at me, I fucking wanted it. I felt incredibly grateful I'd been admitted, so I wanted to take advantage and enjoy everything.

Even the classes I disliked, and there was one every semester because that's how life is, taught me something I still remember five years after graduating.

NYAA offers a studio for their students both years of the MFA.
The first year, you share your studio with fellow first years, and in the second year, you get your own studio.
And the building itself, the ecosystem within the building, is bustling with an atmosphere of just making shit.
Being there, with new classmates making their stuff, the second years making their stuff, everybody decorating their studios with whatever work they want to show off, everyone accumulating assignments, ongoing ecorches, ongoign projects, seeing the work change in a period of two years, it is straight up creative FUEL being thrown at the voracious, demanding fire within all the participants.

When I first started at NYAA, I was still quite scattered. The entire first year, really, I was still painting on and off, doing collages, trying to recycle/reuse all paper. Also applicable to subject matter: all I had were these women with neutral facial expressions, kinda gothy dark stuff, parts of faces (isolated, floating eyes and mouths).
Unbeknownst to me, however, during the first year I was slowly being tempered by assignments and reading material.
And not in any bad way at all, lots of times people think you go to a school to be told what to do, and this might be applicable to very many schools and teachers, but I didn't feel it in any way. I never felt like my personal work had to be molded to what I was being taught in classes.

And if you need to be told, ***********your personal work doesn't have to be molded to what you are being taught in any class************ Class work and assignments =/= personal work.
What we learn in a class or workshop becomes a tool in our toolbox of skill.
I suppose what I mean with "being tempered" is I was being helped to find my way and just learn what I wanted to learn.
For example, the Cast Drawing class (which is mandatory for Drawing majors and damn well should) during the first semester, all things about relationships and measuring went right over my head. Only months later when I noticed my internal dialogue going on about "this is below this, etc", did I realize I finally understood what the teacher (Roberto Osti, a human marshmallow who draws like an angel) was talking about.

I'm just saying with this digressing wall of text: things are happening in your brain when you input information and do stuff.

I don't want to go into a whole ass stream of consciousness to specifically recount how my work changed and rather will stick to my experience during the MFA, but if you're curious about the work itself changing, I suggest scrolling back on my instagram feed. Link to my instagram account.

The second year is where students form and present their thesis work, and wow that still sounds scary, ominous, and overwhelming. HOWEVER, the first year I more or less learned to talk about my work and art in general and explored different themes, played with new materials, so I felt ready to start focusing on specific subject matter and talk about it.

Midterm critiques are for the purpose of showing what one is working on, generally. These happen towards the end of the third semester.
During final critiques, one shows the conclusion. These happen at the end of the fourth and last semester.
And listen, these are very lose terms, specially the midterms. There's nothing in particular you're *supposed* to do, except show you are putting in work, are interested, and talk about it.
I personally have mixed feelings about the word "critique", because it sounds so much like "criticism", and "criticism" is inaccurate and makes the situation seem unnecessarily intimidating.
It's a conversation about what you've been working on, where people who know a lot about art with A LOT of artistic experience tell you what they think about your presentation.

Each critique is 10 minutes (I don't actually remember how long they are) and the student gets to open with their own *short* introduction to the work, or you can start with a question, you can say what you are trying to do with the work and directly ask the faculty if your intention is coming through, you can just ask what do they see without providing your own intention/explanation if you'd rather they are unbiased by your explanation.
These are just some examples of many, many possibilities.
My own midterm critique was just terrible, I was extremely nervous and I cried when it was over because I was so nervous and had the impression the critique itself was negative, and just now looking for the video, it seems as though I actually had tiny paintings up there. I haven't watched my critique and it's unlikely I will, but this is just one example of how a midterm critique can go: Link to my own midterm critique
You can also watch many other critiques and lectures in NYAA's Vimeo page. Link to NYAA's Vimeo page.

For the second year, students get a faculty member as an advisor. Students say who they want in a form and then assignments are in a first come first serve basis.
You can get a different advisor each semester, or keep the same one for the fourth semester, depending on the first come first serve basis thing.

My advisor was Wade Schuman, who I didn't have classes with and sort of "ended up" with as an advisor because the teacher I originally wanted had reached his cap of students.
Wade, however, so pleasantly surprised me repeatedly in the third semester, I kept him as an advisor for the last semester.
Effectively, with our group and private critiques, my thesis work is something I am extremely proud of, it was fulfilling in very many levels, not just the resulting drawings.
I most definitely could not have done it without my advisor. Thank you so very much, Wade <3

Both years, I had private studio critiques with all the teachers. Even the first semester.
I made it a point to have a critique with all teachers, because I wanted them to see me and so I could also see them, talk to them and interact with them. This also worked really well as information to help me pick teachers for future classes, and also just to talk with people of differing points of view.
Don't use the excuse of "I have nothing to show", because it isn't entirely the point of a critique. Again, the point is to have a conversation with somebody who knows more than you and/or knows different stuff from you.
Also, if you don't like what somebody tells you during a critique, cry me a fucking river, bro.

- School art events and shows
There are art events constantly going on at NYAA. A few of them are organized by students (there was a student committee which put together student art shows when I was doing the MFA, I don't know if it still exists), others are organized by the faculty and staff.
There's shows going on in the Cast Hall/Wilkinson Hall and shows going on in the studio floors.
The work hanging in the building is by students the great majority of the time, and occasionally it's by "outside" people, alumni, and faculty.

(And a parenthesis here to mention if you attend NYAA in any capacity, MFA, CFA or SURP, you are part of/immersed in an ongoing art exhibition, because that is also what the studios are.)

For a few of the NYAA organized art shows, open call email blasts are sent (like Take Home A Nude and Tribeca Ball), other times faculty will go around the studios picking work to show.

For the student organized shows, they might just ask their classmates.
When that committee I mentioned was in the middle of mounting an exhibition, I approached them and asked what they were doing, they told me they were putting up a show, and I asked how could I be in one of those. Afterwards, I was effectively in a couple of shows they organized and I helped with mounting the shows.

In both cases, you should most definitely apply for things, apply for all the things you're interested in (whether an MFA, art exhibit, scholarship, grant, residency), and follow the application instructions for the love of Christ.
Also in all cases, if you missed an email blast, whatever it is, just ask.

I'm insisting on asking, talking and communicating (and it's almost the point of everything, maybe? >_>) because you can't sit around in your studio with a closed curtain, not talking to anyone, and then whine about how you're not in any Academy shows and act like it's the school's fault.
We are part of a community.
Perhaps, I am extra mega grateful, because I'd come form Panama and didn't know *ANYONE* in New York, except the people of this school, so a community formed around me all by itself. I made a concerted effort to interact with people, participate in things, and be supportive.
I particularly enjoyed walking around the studios during my breaks to look at my classmates' work and if they were there, chit chat with them about what they were up to. Support comes in different forms.

Back to being part of an ongoing art exhibition.
NYAA has Tribeca Ball and Open Studios, which are different versions of the same thing, and their purpose is to highlight the students currently doing the MFA.

Tribeca Ball is a super fancy, fun, dress up sort of open studio for which attendants buy tickets. There is a theme around which the building is decorated inside and out, and students spruce up their own studios however they want.
I remember the build up to this event in my first year to have been extremely stressful, I became very emotionally sensitive and got diarrhea ok.
I do wonder where the perception of pressure came from, because NYAA staff was very supportive and I was never told I absolutely *had* to do anything in particular. Rather I was told I could dress up if I wanted to, but plenty of times students just dressed with their studio clothes and made work during Tribeca Ball and others just set up their studio however they wanted and didn't show up, or didn't even set up their studio and also didn't show up.
Either way, like everything else, there is a lot of flexibility and wiggle room.

Open Studios is open to the public, and it's a "casual" version of open studio, it happens about a week after Tribeca Ball.
The same thing applies in terms of dressing yourself and your studio decoration, it's entirely up to you. In my case, I left my studio mostly the same for Open Studios after Tribeca Ball both years, because it looked so orderly and pretty.

- Residencies and awards
When my turn for residencies came at the end of the first year, my class was sent an email asking if we wanted to be considered for any residency in particular. I don't know if this is how it's done still, but I replied to this email by saying I didn't want anything that required paying, because I couldn't afford plane tickets or any sort of food and board, besides that in NYC (and of course, if I was going to travel, I would still have NYC rent to pay).
As a result, I didn't get any residencies. Or maybe I wouldn't have gotten one regardless. Who knows?
At the end of the second year, second years are also considered for a few residencies, we didn't get an email asking if we wanted to be considered for anything, but I also didn't get shit because that is how life is.

To be frank, however, that first summer I also kind of didn't want to go anywhere. I'd never lived anywhere except Panama, least of all freaking New York City, are you kidding me? So I sort of wanted to be in the city for summer and experience it.
This is very amusing now, because I actually just spent the summer at NYAA making stuff (I took this time to explore two subjects I was interested in as possible thesis themes) and only stopped going in August when the building was closed and I finally had no choice.

In the second year, and I don't remember if this is exclusive to the second year, partial scholarships open up for which one applies. This type of information is also on the website. Link to scholarships and grants page.
Things seem to be a little different now in terms of requirements, what one does as a scholar, and amounts of the scholarships, but the one I got was to give tours of the school to any and all interested parties. I did this gladly because I am a huge cheerleader for NYAA <3

During my class' graduation ceremony I was awarded the Hudson Valley Art Association "Anatomy and Excellence Award".
Dean then and now Provost Peter Drake announced it and what an amazingly lovely way of closing off my MFA.

- Lectures
NYAA offers lectures which are basically open to the public (Link to NYAA's vimeo). I had to attend all of these as a student, and they are meant to supplement, more or less, the classes. Some of the subjects addressed in these lectures were how to approach a gallery, how to price work, artist lectures where they'd talk about their career.

I didn't care for any of the lectures, but they also without a doubt, helped me learn to talk about art.
Actually, I did care about the Anne Harris lecture a lot. It was sort of the only lecture that happened in my mind.
Also, there was another lecture about pricing work, with Peter Drake interviewing a guy, who said "pricing of art has no logic" several times during the lecture, and goddammit guy, you are right.
I don't remember anything else he said.

This is an aspect which was criticized by that same handful of whining classmates: there not being enough "art business" type instruction, and I suppose if I wanted to play devil's advocate I could agree with them to a certain extent. Like ok, I want to study fine art, is it really the duty of the school teaching you fine art to also teach you the business of art?
I don't know, I suppose you could argue it is, but if this is what you want, back to part 1 of this entry: make sure art business or something like it is in the curriculum of the degree you pick.

tl;dr Basically a continuation of part 1. After I did my own research, I did the MFA, loved the shit out of it. Excellent service, would absolutely recommend, would do it again, five stars *****, 10/10


3. Relationship with NYAA after graduating

After graduating, I felt lost and aimless, depressed I wouldn't be attending the NYAA building anymore, seeing my classmates, and being in its super stimulating atmosphere. I kept going to the print shop to do lithography, like a stray puppy. Stray puppies do lithography.
I caught the behavior soon enough and realized I had to make something in my own home studio (I haven't had a "formal" art studio since NYAA, but a home studio) to break the feeling.
Once I did, I was able to start moving on and think of what I should be doing in the present, make money for rent, and my work.

I've been able to consistently show my work in NYAA shows and unrelated galleries, and it's basically because I apply for things often.

NYAA has shows for which alumni can apply, like the Summer Show, Deck the Walls, and Take Home A Nude. Other times an email will be sent to alumni to invite them to submit work for an art fair, other times an alumni I made acquaintance/friends with is curating a show and they will invite me.

Also, I've kept a line of communication with NYAA in the past by being a Teaching Assistant, and it may or may not help directly or indirectly to get into shows, but for me it's rather about staying in touch with the community.

A while after graduating, I decided I wanted to expand my artistic circle a bit more and make it go a little beyond NYAA. I've more or less done this by just going to openings, submitting work to group shows, and Instagram.

There's also the Alumni Association of New York Academy of Art, which occasionally sends out an open call, but it's also great to make contact with all sorts of NYAA alumn.
AANYAA also does crit nights occasionally, and it's awesome to be able to see what everyone is working on so long after having graduated. Or maybe not that long, it doesn't matter.
This also goes with being part of a community. You nurture your relationship with it by following up and sticking around.

I would say, however, one is responsible for one's art career and life after graduating. You already got what you paid for: the degree. And now you have an actual reason to get other people to call you "Master".
Similarly to "stuff is happening in your brain when you input information and do stuff", what you do with everything you've learned is entirely in your hands.

tl;dr You've broken out of the MFA egg. Go on out there and be a big, independent bird.

Mentorships

Welcome to the fourth entry of this blog and sincerest thank you for your patience!

I have never been super good at keeping a journal or blog, but if you come to read this whenever I do write something, I very sincerely appreciate it.

If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions for future entries, feel free to leave a comment here or send me a DM to my instagram (@gabrielahandal).

So today's entry is about art mentorships. I know fuckall about any sort of mentorship, but my colleague art friend Kristy Gordon is an art mentor, and art mentorship is part of the art services she offers, besides teaching, writing articles, and making her own work.

Here are the questions I asked and her answers, if you have any more questions, feel free to look at the Online Courses section of her website and her website in general. 
Just her website is really quite helpful in general, providing a super good example of how to present yourself to the world through your website, and how we can branch out as artists.

At the bottom I also added a few other websites that offer mentoring, for kicks.

1. What even is mentoring? 

I see an artist's mentorship as working with a person closely over a period of time where they can advise the mentee on all aspects of your their career.  The mentor can give technical guidance as well as support with the mentee's professional development. One would want this mentor to be someone who has already achieved the things you want to achieve, so they have already leapt the hurdles that one is trying to navigate.

2. How long have you been mentoring? 

I first started mentoring artists through the Portrait Society of America’s Cecilia Beaux Forum’s Mentorship Program in 2015.  Then in 2016 I founded my online art mentoring program and I’ve been working with artist in that platform ever since.

3. What made you want to be an art mentor to begin with?

I really believe in the mentee/mentor relationship since I benefited so much when in 2013 I got selected to be mentored by Alexandra Tyng, through the Portrait Society of America’s Cecilia Beaux Forum’s Mentorship Program.  

I gained so much from that, as well as from the more informal mentors I’ve had over the years – artists who became my friends, who were able to guide me through the critical stages of my journey. From these experiences I wanted to give back. It’s like it came full circle and everyone benefits. I’m able to feel very satisfied and fulfilled as I support budding artists navigate the art world, so I benefit from being able to support them and they benefit from my support.

4. How do you decide in what order to address the issues an artist might have in their career? Is it a standardized specific set of steps or does it depend? What does it depend on? 

I have a general order in mind that makes sense to me, but the structure of the program allows people to design it to fit their needs and to address issues in whatever order they like.  Essentially, there's a wide variety of online videos that people get access to as soon as they sign up.  These videos cover the full range of topics: from developing foundational technical skills, to painting from the imagination, as well as all the art business stuff - like artists’ statement writing, copyright issues, varnishing, framing and shipping considerations; how to get and complete commissions and how to submit to galleries.  So artists choose which videos to watch and when.   
Also once a month we have a group conference call, so I can address any questions people have. This way I also develop the curriculum based on each artists’ current needs, in addition to working on basic stuff, such as regular workshops on writing the artists’ bio, statement and CV, etc.

5. How is the bullet point from your website "receive a steady flow of inspiration to keep you growing towards your technical and artistic career goals" addressed in your program? 

This is addressed in two ways:

First because of the video tutorials people gain access to online, they watch those and gain inspiration to take their work to the next level.   

Second, the monthly accountability that the monthly video critiques and conference calls provide keep artists moving and making consistent progress in their studios.  

Of course, each person gets what they put into it as well.

6. Have you ever received mentorship yourself? 

Yes! I benefited greatly from the mentorship I received from Alexandra Tyng in 2013 through the Portrait Society of America’s Cecilia Beaux Forum’s Mentorship Program, as well as what I would consider to be informal mentorships with very talented and successful artists who became my friends and were available to guide me along the way.

7. What do you recommend to people looking for a mentorship program or mentor? What do you suggest they look for? 

I suggest finding someone who has done the things you want to do, who already knows how to overcome the obstacles you might need to navigate. I would also recommend something to help you stay accountable and make well paced, steady, consistent progress, where there is a set date and time you check in each month, and addresses both your technical concerns and as your professional development questions.

Here are some additional links to other websites offering mentoring for artists:
1. Artist Mentoring with Laureen Marchand
2. Mentorly - This one looks extremely interesting in that it matches people offering mentoring in different fields and people looking to be mentored.
3. Artist Coaching and Mentoring by David Limrite

Thank you very much for reading!
If you have any questions, comments, and blog entry suggestions feel free to leave them in the comment section of this very blog entry or send me a Direct Message to my instagram (@gabrielahandal). 
Have a lovely day and please drink water and don't be a dick to your fellow humans.