Yetti

Hey all,
I'm currently enrolled in an MFA program. I was on this site last year. I thought it would be helpful to address the issues of anxiety and doubt that artists encounter when going through the application process. I can look back on this time with clarity, and felt compelled to provide a bit of insight to potentially bolster confidence within current applicants and to provide a few personal truths to guide their thinking. I'm providing a summary of my experiences of admission. 
I don't have a BFA, I have a BS. I had taught myself visual art and was eventually inducted into a community of recent MFA graduates in San Francisco.  I was exhibiting as a conceptual artist without an arts degree. As such, many galleries didn't know what to do with me. It proved difficult to move beyond my immediate arts community. I had also dreamed of indulging myself in an arts degree so I could experience crits, learn from talented professors, and advance my career in terms of creativity, merit, and general success.
I had done my research on schools. I applied to the three "Most Influential MFA's in the World"; Yale, Columbia, and Goldsmiths. I hadn't expected anything on account of my lack of a BFA. I did obsess over my personal statements, got letters of recommendation from artists and curators with which I developed meaningful relationships with, and I made certain to put forward a strong portfolio of new work. 
To my great surprise, I was invited to interview at Yale, Columbia, and Goldsmiths! I was ecstatic. I prepared for my interviews, and flew out to New York and Connecticut for Columbia and Yale. I had this unwavering vision as to what these schools were; half informed by a sincere idealism and also the "prestige" that these schools marketed. 
I had arrived in New York and spoke with an acquaintance currently enrolled in Columbia's MFA. The student informed me that the studios were uninhabitable and were bordering on condemnation. Pieces of the ceiling were falling from the ceiling and there was a lot of tension about the limited physical resources provided in relation to the unreasonable tuition (60K per year). The student regretted attending and highly recommended I find a cheaper smaller public school. Students felt anxious about wagering 120k of student loan debt on the slim chance of becoming an acclaimed "art star". I had my interview, it was quick and neutral. My idealism was already crushed. 
I had then went to Connecticut to interview at Yale. I was told that they were tough on applicants during their presentations to see how they react under pressure. I presented my work. I spoke confidently and had decided to discuss my more experimental projects and philosophies. These ideas being critical of elitism, capitalism, and the limited agency artists are granted within contemporary art, result in a critique of exclusive institutions. I wanted to demonstrate the ideas that were more contentious within my practice to depict my sincere intentions in art and to be certain that I find a school that is supportive of my perspective.
I expected Yale, being an "Influential MFA", to be open to ideas that were political and I also expected them to be aware of concerns of their exclusivity. I hadn't expected the faculty to be offended by my comments, and I hadn't expected them to consider my work too conceptual to critique, I didn't think that was even possible. My idealism, again, was crushed. I had expected so much from them and I was completely shocked by the poor response and conservative ideologies that they were adamant to protect. Their comments alluded to a definition of merit as financial success. Their comments on art alluded to an object that is a manifestation of an aesthetic to function as an asset, rather than an artefact of an idea , confession, or philosophy. 
It felt hopeless. After these interviews, I had felt defeated. I spiraled emotionally and starting doubting myself. These schools were marketed to me as some grand answer, an escape perhaps from the uncertainty and physical toil of being an emerging artist. I was labeled as some rabble-rouser, some "other", someone who felt certain about what they wanted but unsure of where to find it. I had saw Oz behind the curtain and I had lost my faith.
I had my interview at Goldsmiths. I gave the same presentation as I had at Yale. I expected the same sentiments and braced myself for the same offense Yale had shown me. They gave me immediate acceptance because of my philosophies.................................................
I'm sharing this story because I thinks important to look beyond the "prestige" of schools. I'd recommend that artists find a school that they identify with, to not attempt to change their practice to appease a school, and to never feel lesser if they do not align with a school's agenda. A Masters in Fine Art is not about a degree, its about an education. As such, we must maintain a criticism of institutions that are not providing adequate education, relevant political inquiry, and encouragement for experimentalism. We must acknowledge the institutional art systems that are inherently exclusive of artists of lower socio-economic class, race, and otherness. We must also acknowledge our desire to attend these institutions as a form of complicity with the creation of fictitious merit and acclaim. 
Your art is a depiction of your individual perspective. Your merit is not dependent on your credentials. Do not spend 120k on a degree. You cannot purchase talent. Do not conform to institutional standards if by any account you attempt to be subversive in your art. Find a school you fall for intuitively and maintain a skepticism of prestige perpetuated by exclusivity. Make efforts to support yourself and others through community. Exhibit without a degree if you don't find the right school. Do not ever see a degree as a form of permission to practice as an artist. 
I never expected to end up in London at Goldsmiths. I am beyond grateful that I found a school that I identify with, one that encourages criticism of injustices, and one that I feel truly provides an education about what it means to be an artist.
Find yourself before you find your school.
 
 
P.S. education is way cheaper in Europe 
 
 

Hey all,
I'm currently enrolled in an MFA program. I was on this site last year. I thought it would be helpful to address the issues of anxiety and doubt that artists encounter when going through the application process. I can look back on this time with clarity, and felt compelled to provide a bit of insight to potentially bolster confidence within current applicants and to provide a few personal truths to guide their thinking. I'm providing a summary of my experiences of admission. 
I don't have a BFA, I have a BS. I had taught myself visual art and was eventually inducted into a community of recent MFA graduates in San Francisco.  I was exhibiting as a conceptual artist without an arts degree. As such, many galleries didn't know what to do with me. It proved difficult to move beyond my immediate arts community. I had also dreamed of indulging myself in an arts degree so I could experience crits, learn from talented professors, and advance my career in terms of creativity, merit, and general success.
I had done my research on schools. I applied to the three "Most Influential MFA's in the World"; Yale, Columbia, and Goldsmiths. I hadn't expected anything on account of my lack of a BFA. I did obsess over my personal statements, got letters of recommendation from artists and curators with which I developed meaningful relationships with, and I made certain to put forward a strong portfolio of new work. 
To my great surprise, I was invited to interview at Yale, Columbia, and Goldsmiths! I was ecstatic. I prepared for my interviews, and flew out to New York and Connecticut for Columbia and Yale. I had this unwavering vision as to what these schools were; half informed by a sincere idealism and also the "prestige" that these schools marketed. 
I had arrived in New York and spoke with an acquaintance currently enrolled in Columbia's MFA. The student informed me that the studios were uninhabitable and were bordering on condemnation. Pieces of the ceiling were falling from the ceiling and there was a lot of tension about the limited physical resources provided in relation to the unreasonable tuition (60K per year). The student regretted attending and highly recommended I find a cheaper smaller public school. Students felt anxious about wagering 120k of student loan debt on the slim chance of becoming an acclaimed "art star". I had my interview, it was quick and neutral. My idealism was already crushed. 
I had then went to Connecticut to interview at Yale. I was told that they were tough on applicants during their presentations to see how they react under pressure. I presented my work. I spoke confidently and had decided to discuss my more experimental projects and philosophies. These ideas being critical of elitism, capitalism, and the limited agency artists are granted within contemporary art, result in a critique of exclusive institutions. I wanted to demonstrate the ideas that were more contentious within my practice to depict my sincere intentions in art and to be certain that I find a school that is supportive of my perspective.
I expected Yale, being an "Influential MFA", to be open to ideas that were political and I also expected them to be aware of concerns of their exclusivity. I hadn't expected the faculty to be offended by my comments, and I hadn't expected them to consider my work too conceptual to critique, I didn't think that was even possible. My idealism, again, was crushed. I had expected so much from them and I was completely shocked by the poor response and conservative ideologies that they were adamant to protect. Their comments alluded to a definition of merit as financial success. Their comments on art alluded to an object that is a manifestation of an aesthetic to function as an asset, rather than an artefact of an idea , confession, or philosophy. 
It felt hopeless. After these interviews, I had felt defeated. I spiraled emotionally and starting doubting myself. These schools were marketed to me as some grand answer, an escape perhaps from the uncertainty and physical toil of being an emerging artist. I was labeled as some rabble-rouser, some "other", someone who felt certain about what they wanted but unsure of where to find it. I had saw Oz behind the curtain and I had lost my faith.
I had my interview at Goldsmiths. I gave the same presentation as I had at Yale. I expected the same sentiments and braced myself for the same offense Yale had shown me. They gave me immediate acceptance because of my philosophies.................................................
I'm sharing this story because I thinks important to look beyond the "prestige" of schools. I'd recommend that artists find a school that they identify with, to not attempt to change their practice to appease a school, and to never feel lesser if they do not align with a school's agenda. A Masters in Fine Art is not about a degree, its about an education. As such, we must maintain a criticism of institutions that are not providing adequate education, relevant political inquiry, and encouragement for experimentalism. We must acknowledge the institutional art systems that are inherently exclusive of artists of lower socio-economic class, race, and otherness. We must also acknowledge our desire to attend these institutions as a form of complicity with the creation of fictitious merit and acclaim. 
Your art is a depiction of your individual perspective. Your merit is not dependent on your credentials. Do not spend 120k on a degree. You cannot purchase talent. Do not conform to institutional standards if by any account you attempt to be subversive in your art. Find a school you fall for intuitively and maintain a skepticism of prestige perpetuated by exclusivity. Make efforts to support yourself and others through community. Exhibit without a degree if you don't find the right school. Do not ever see a degree as a form of permission to practice as an artist. 
I never expected to end up in London at Goldsmiths. I am beyond grateful that I found a school that I identify with, one that encourages criticism of injustices, and one that I feel truly provides an education about what it means to be an artist.
Find yourself before you find your school.
 
 
P.S. education is way cheaper in Europe 
 
 

Hey all,
I'm currently enrolled in an MFA program. I was on this site last year. I thought it would be helpful to address the issues of anxiety and doubt that artists encounter when going through the application process. I can look back on this time with clarity, and felt compelled to provide a bit of insight to potentially bolster confidence within current applicants and to provide a few personal truths to guide their thinking. I'm providing a summary of my experiences of admission. 
I don't have a BFA, I have a BS. I had taught myself visual art and was eventually inducted into a community of recent MFA graduates in San Francisco.  I was exhibiting as a conceptual artist without an arts degree. As such, many galleries didn't know what to do with me. It proved difficult to move beyond my immediate arts community. I had also dreamed of indulging myself in an arts degree so I could experience crits, learn from talented professors, and advance my career in terms of creativity, merit, and general success.
I had done my research on schools. I applied to the three "Most Influential MFA's in the World"; Yale, Columbia, and Goldsmiths. I hadn't expected anything on account of my lack of a BFA. I did obsess over my personal statements, got letters of recommendation from artists and curators with which I developed meaningful relationships with, and I made certain to put forward a strong portfolio of new work. 
To my great surprise, I was invited to interview at Yale, Columbia, and Goldsmiths! I was ecstatic. I prepared for my interviews, and flew out to New York and Connecticut for Columbia and Yale. I had this unwavering vision as to what these schools were; half informed by a sincere idealism and also the "prestige" that these schools marketed. 
I had arrived in New York and spoke with an acquaintance currently enrolled in Columbia's MFA. The student informed me that the studios were uninhabitable and were bordering on condemnation. Pieces of the ceiling were falling from the ceiling and there was a lot of tension about the limited physical resources provided in relation to the unreasonable tuition (60K per year). The student regretted attending and highly recommended I find a cheaper smaller public school. Students felt anxious about wagering 120k of student loan debt on the slim chance of becoming an acclaimed "art star". I had my interview, it was quick and neutral. My idealism was already crushed. 
I had then went to Connecticut to interview at Yale. I was told that they were tough on applicants during their presentations to see how they react under pressure. I presented my work. I spoke confidently and had decided to discuss my more experimental projects and philosophies. These ideas being critical of elitism, capitalism, and the limited agency artists are granted within contemporary art, result in a critique of exclusive institutions. I wanted to demonstrate the ideas that were more contentious within my practice to depict my sincere intentions in art and to be certain that I find a school that is supportive of my perspective.
I expected Yale, being an "Influential MFA", to be open to ideas that were political and I also expected them to be aware of concerns of their exclusivity. I hadn't expected the faculty to be offended by my comments, and I hadn't expected them to consider my work too conceptual to critique, I didn't think that was even possible. My idealism, again, was crushed. I had expected so much from them and I was completely shocked by the poor response and conservative ideologies that they were adamant to protect. Their comments alluded to a definition of merit as financial success. Their comments on art alluded to an object that is a manifestation of an aesthetic to function as an asset, rather than an artefact of an idea , confession, or philosophy. 
It felt hopeless. After these interviews, I had felt defeated. I spiraled emotionally and starting doubting myself. These schools were marketed to me as some grand answer, an escape perhaps from the uncertainty and physical toil of being an emerging artist. I was labeled as some rabble-rouser, some "other", someone who felt certain about what they wanted but unsure of where to find it. I had saw Oz behind the curtain and I had lost my faith.
I had my interview at Goldsmiths. I gave the same presentation as I had at Yale. I expected the same sentiments and braced myself for the same offense Yale had shown me. They gave me immediate acceptance because of my philosophies.................................................
I'm sharing this story because I thinks important to look beyond the "prestige" of schools. I'd recommend that artists find a school that they identify with, to not attempt to change their practice to appease a school, and to never feel lesser if they do not align with a school's agenda. A Masters in Fine Art is not about a degree, its about an education. As such, we must maintain a criticism of institutions that are not providing adequate education, relevant political inquiry, and encouragement for experimentalism. We must acknowledge the institutional art systems that are inherently exclusive of artists of lower socio-economic class, race, and otherness. We must also acknowledge our desire to attend these institutions as a form of complicity with the creation of fictitious merit and acclaim. 
Your art is a depiction of your individual perspective. Your merit is not dependent on your credentials. Do not spend 120k on a degree. You cannot purchase talent. Do not conform to institutional standards if by any account you attempt to be subversive in your art. Find a school you fall for intuitively and maintain a skepticism of prestige perpetuated by exclusivity. Make efforts to support yourself and others through community. Exhibit without a degree if you don't find the right school. Do not ever see a degree as a form of permission to practice as an artist. 
I never expected to end up in London at Goldsmiths. I am beyond grateful that I found a school that I identify with, one that encourages criticism of injustices, and one that I feel truly provides an education about what it means to be an artist.
Find yourself before you find your school.
 
 
P.S. education is way cheaper in Europe 
 
 

I had a Bachelor of Science degree and though my portfolio got me into some really great interviews (Columbia, Yale, Goldsmiths) some interviewers verbalized their issues with my undergrad degree.
I went the route of exhibiting heavily with recent MFA grads and learning by doing. There is a bias against applicants without a BFA at some schools. I feel like not having a BFA opens your work to a degree of skepticism and requires a stronger portfolio or perhaps just more 'flexing' of your ability to understand art intellectually. 
I dont believe that you'd need a BFA, but you should be aware that  some schools take issue. I strongly recommend against getting a BFA if you think it would be a step backwards in developing your work. If you think you might benefit from the education (not the degree) I'd consider a few short "Post-Bac" or summer programs. 
Best of luck

I had a Bachelor of Science degree and though my portfolio got me into some really great interviews (Columbia, Yale, Goldsmiths) some interviewers verbalized their issues with my undergrad degree.
I went the route of exhibiting heavily with recent MFA grads and learning by doing. There is a bias against applicants without a BFA at some schools. I feel like not having a BFA opens your work to a degree of skepticism and requires a stronger portfolio or perhaps just more 'flexing' of your ability to understand art intellectually. 
I dont believe that you'd need a BFA, but you should be aware that  some schools take issue. I strongly recommend against getting a BFA if you think it would be a step backwards in developing your work. If you think you might benefit from the education (not the degree) I'd consider a few short "Post-Bac" or summer programs. 
Best of luck

I got into Goldsmiths as well and I've done a lot of research on the program. The school is really radical and very much in the realm of conceptual art. They respond to the research you propose, so it's good for self directed artists but frustrating if you need more guidance. The MFA doesn't maintain any specificity to your claimed medium but rather teaches more about content and concept, so it produces very conceptual interdisciplinary artists. You are also in a community with a lot of arts writers (MA) and curators (MFA) so the conversations are very brainy. I don't know anything about Slade, but I've heard very good things.
overall London seems like a really exciting place to be right now.

I got into Goldsmiths as well and I've done a lot of research on the program. The school is really radical and very much in the realm of conceptual art. They respond to the research you propose, so it's good for self directed artists but frustrating if you need more guidance. The MFA doesn't maintain any specificity to your claimed medium but rather teaches more about content and concept, so it produces very conceptual interdisciplinary artists. You are also in a community with a lot of arts writers (MA) and curators (MFA) so the conversations are very brainy. I don't know anything about Slade, but I've heard very good things.
overall London seems like a really exciting place to be right now.

I thought this BBC feature was really helpful. There are painters, but all the classes are mixed and people tend to switch media often.
This was made in 2009 and features a painter as well. Best of luck with your decisions and the Visa process.
 

UCLA 100% the students there are very happy with the program. 

LA is the place to be. There's so much space for artists to make work and rents are more affordable so the art scene is definitely growing. UCLA will likely offer significantly more funding than Columbia. The program is very self directed and "chill". 
I just think overall the quality of life will be better in LA. You can focus on your work in a relaxed environment and not be distracted by the high cost of being alive in NY.

LA is the place to be. There's so much space for artists to make work and rents are more affordable so the art scene is definitely growing. UCLA will likely offer significantly more funding than Columbia. The program is very self directed and "chill". 
I just think overall the quality of life will be better in LA. You can focus on your work in a relaxed environment and not be distracted by the high cost of being alive in NY.

LA is the place to be. There's so much space for artists to make work and rents are more affordable so the art scene is definitely growing. UCLA will likely offer significantly more funding than Columbia. The program is very self directed and "chill". 
I just think overall the quality of life will be better in LA. You can focus on your work in a relaxed environment and not be distracted by the high cost of being alive in NY.

Go to Calarts. Its got a better reputation than CCA and LA has so more of a dynamic art scene than SF. Also, the average 1 bedroom in SF is $3500 a month............its rough.

Go to Calarts. Its got a better reputation than CCA and LA has so more of a dynamic art scene than SF. Also, the average 1 bedroom in SF is $3500 a month............its rough.

So,
I interviewed at Yale for sculpture. They ask you to do a formal presentation of your work to the students and faculty. I was not flustered, I spoke from the heart and hip about my practice. However, they took issue with me not having an arts degree. A faculty member had stated that my work was too emotional to critique, and that the work I presented containing my brother's ashes (though absolutely relevant to my research about "performative objects", and the feature of an entire conceptual exhibition) was a faux pas. I had gotten rejected from Yale.
I interviewed at Columbia. I have not heard anything, and I realize that if I were to gain acceptance, I'd likely be a second or third choice after other artists have passed due to their high tuition.
I had been conversing with faculty at UCLA and I had current grad students advocating on my behalf. I had gotten a rejection without even an interview.
I know we all understand this sentiment; of feeling yourself and your practice under repetitive scrutiny and valuation, only to be confronted with the hard realization that some people have the ability to prevent you from moving forward. I had expected nothing as a self taught artist, then my morale was so high from the offer of interviews at these schools. I had thought, "finally, my god, thank you." Visions of vast studios and dynamic conversation of art critiques quickly populated my mind. I am an idealist, and as such I am consistently let down. The rejection had me reeling in self doubt, without any touchstone to regain my faith in the art world. How am I to function if my work is too emotional to critique? How am I to move forward from this?
Truthfully, I have always done my best by proving people wrong. I realize that you should never ask permission for what others do not own. Your art is your's, your intention should be sincerely your own. If your work is not compatible with a program, that does not make it irrelevant, it simply means its different.
I had an interview at Goldsmiths this morning, a radical mfa program that had seemed like a wildcard in my applications. I had spoke from the heart and the hip about my work. I was immediately granted admission. Every thing that these ivy leagues took issue with, they appreciated.
Grad school is dating and you should find someone who loves you back.
 
 

So,
I interviewed at Yale for sculpture. They ask you to do a formal presentation of your work to the students and faculty. I was not flustered, I spoke from the heart and hip about my practice. However, they took issue with me not having an arts degree. A faculty member had stated that my work was too emotional to critique, and that the work I presented containing my brother's ashes (though absolutely relevant to my research about "performative objects", and the feature of an entire conceptual exhibition) was a faux pas. I had gotten rejected from Yale.
I interviewed at Columbia. I have not heard anything, and I realize that if I were to gain acceptance, I'd likely be a second or third choice after other artists have passed due to their high tuition.
I had been conversing with faculty at UCLA and I had current grad students advocating on my behalf. I had gotten a rejection without even an interview.
I know we all understand this sentiment; of feeling yourself and your practice under repetitive scrutiny and valuation, only to be confronted with the hard realization that some people have the ability to prevent you from moving forward. I had expected nothing as a self taught artist, then my morale was so high from the offer of interviews at these schools. I had thought, "finally, my god, thank you." Visions of vast studios and dynamic conversation of art critiques quickly populated my mind. I am an idealist, and as such I am consistently let down. The rejection had me reeling in self doubt, without any touchstone to regain my faith in the art world. How am I to function if my work is too emotional to critique? How am I to move forward from this?
Truthfully, I have always done my best by proving people wrong. I realize that you should never ask permission for what others do not own. Your art is your's, your intention should be sincerely your own. If your work is not compatible with a program, that does not make it irrelevant, it simply means its different.
I had an interview at Goldsmiths this morning, a radical mfa program that had seemed like a wildcard in my applications. I had spoke from the heart and the hip about my work. I was immediately granted admission. Every thing that these ivy leagues took issue with, they appreciated.
Grad school is dating and you should find someone who loves you back.
 
 

So,
I interviewed at Yale for sculpture. They ask you to do a formal presentation of your work to the students and faculty. I was not flustered, I spoke from the heart and hip about my practice. However, they took issue with me not having an arts degree. A faculty member had stated that my work was too emotional to critique, and that the work I presented containing my brother's ashes (though absolutely relevant to my research about "performative objects", and the feature of an entire conceptual exhibition) was a faux pas. I had gotten rejected from Yale.
I interviewed at Columbia. I have not heard anything, and I realize that if I were to gain acceptance, I'd likely be a second or third choice after other artists have passed due to their high tuition.
I had been conversing with faculty at UCLA and I had current grad students advocating on my behalf. I had gotten a rejection without even an interview.
I know we all understand this sentiment; of feeling yourself and your practice under repetitive scrutiny and valuation, only to be confronted with the hard realization that some people have the ability to prevent you from moving forward. I had expected nothing as a self taught artist, then my morale was so high from the offer of interviews at these schools. I had thought, "finally, my god, thank you." Visions of vast studios and dynamic conversation of art critiques quickly populated my mind. I am an idealist, and as such I am consistently let down. The rejection had me reeling in self doubt, without any touchstone to regain my faith in the art world. How am I to function if my work is too emotional to critique? How am I to move forward from this?
Truthfully, I have always done my best by proving people wrong. I realize that you should never ask permission for what others do not own. Your art is your's, your intention should be sincerely your own. If your work is not compatible with a program, that does not make it irrelevant, it simply means its different.
I had an interview at Goldsmiths this morning, a radical mfa program that had seemed like a wildcard in my applications. I had spoke from the heart and the hip about my work. I was immediately granted admission. Every thing that these ivy leagues took issue with, they appreciated.
Grad school is dating and you should find someone who loves you back.
 
 

So,
I interviewed at Yale for sculpture. They ask you to do a formal presentation of your work to the students and faculty. I was not flustered, I spoke from the heart and hip about my practice. However, they took issue with me not having an arts degree. A faculty member had stated that my work was too emotional to critique, and that the work I presented containing my brother's ashes (though absolutely relevant to my research about "performative objects", and the feature of an entire conceptual exhibition) was a faux pas. I had gotten rejected from Yale.
I interviewed at Columbia. I have not heard anything, and I realize that if I were to gain acceptance, I'd likely be a second or third choice after other artists have passed due to their high tuition.
I had been conversing with faculty at UCLA and I had current grad students advocating on my behalf. I had gotten a rejection without even an interview.
I know we all understand this sentiment; of feeling yourself and your practice under repetitive scrutiny and valuation, only to be confronted with the hard realization that some people have the ability to prevent you from moving forward. I had expected nothing as a self taught artist, then my morale was so high from the offer of interviews at these schools. I had thought, "finally, my god, thank you." Visions of vast studios and dynamic conversation of art critiques quickly populated my mind. I am an idealist, and as such I am consistently let down. The rejection had me reeling in self doubt, without any touchstone to regain my faith in the art world. How am I to function if my work is too emotional to critique? How am I to move forward from this?
Truthfully, I have always done my best by proving people wrong. I realize that you should never ask permission for what others do not own. Your art is your's, your intention should be sincerely your own. If your work is not compatible with a program, that does not make it irrelevant, it simply means its different.
I had an interview at Goldsmiths this morning, a radical mfa program that had seemed like a wildcard in my applications. I had spoke from the heart and the hip about my work. I was immediately granted admission. Every thing that these ivy leagues took issue with, they appreciated.
Grad school is dating and you should find someone who loves you back.
 
 

So,
I interviewed at Yale for sculpture. They ask you to do a formal presentation of your work to the students and faculty. I was not flustered, I spoke from the heart and hip about my practice. However, they took issue with me not having an arts degree. A faculty member had stated that my work was too emotional to critique, and that the work I presented containing my brother's ashes (though absolutely relevant to my research about "performative objects", and the feature of an entire conceptual exhibition) was a faux pas. I had gotten rejected from Yale.
I interviewed at Columbia. I have not heard anything, and I realize that if I were to gain acceptance, I'd likely be a second or third choice after other artists have passed due to their high tuition.
I had been conversing with faculty at UCLA and I had current grad students advocating on my behalf. I had gotten a rejection without even an interview.
I know we all understand this sentiment; of feeling yourself and your practice under repetitive scrutiny and valuation, only to be confronted with the hard realization that some people have the ability to prevent you from moving forward. I had expected nothing as a self taught artist, then my morale was so high from the offer of interviews at these schools. I had thought, "finally, my god, thank you." Visions of vast studios and dynamic conversation of art critiques quickly populated my mind. I am an idealist, and as such I am consistently let down. The rejection had me reeling in self doubt, without any touchstone to regain my faith in the art world. How am I to function if my work is too emotional to critique? How am I to move forward from this?
Truthfully, I have always done my best by proving people wrong. I realize that you should never ask permission for what others do not own. Your art is your's, your intention should be sincerely your own. If your work is not compatible with a program, that does not make it irrelevant, it simply means its different.
I had an interview at Goldsmiths this morning, a radical mfa program that had seemed like a wildcard in my applications. I had spoke from the heart and the hip about my work. I was immediately granted admission. Every thing that these ivy leagues took issue with, they appreciated.
Grad school is dating and you should find someone who loves you back.
 
 

So,
I interviewed at Yale for sculpture. They ask you to do a formal presentation of your work to the students and faculty. I was not flustered, I spoke from the heart and hip about my practice. However, they took issue with me not having an arts degree. A faculty member had stated that my work was too emotional to critique, and that the work I presented containing my brother's ashes (though absolutely relevant to my research about "performative objects", and the feature of an entire conceptual exhibition) was a faux pas. I had gotten rejected from Yale.
I interviewed at Columbia. I have not heard anything, and I realize that if I were to gain acceptance, I'd likely be a second or third choice after other artists have passed due to their high tuition.
I had been conversing with faculty at UCLA and I had current grad students advocating on my behalf. I had gotten a rejection without even an interview.
I know we all understand this sentiment; of feeling yourself and your practice under repetitive scrutiny and valuation, only to be confronted with the hard realization that some people have the ability to prevent you from moving forward. I had expected nothing as a self taught artist, then my morale was so high from the offer of interviews at these schools. I had thought, "finally, my god, thank you." Visions of vast studios and dynamic conversation of art critiques quickly populated my mind. I am an idealist, and as such I am consistently let down. The rejection had me reeling in self doubt, without any touchstone to regain my faith in the art world. How am I to function if my work is too emotional to critique? How am I to move forward from this?
Truthfully, I have always done my best by proving people wrong. I realize that you should never ask permission for what others do not own. Your art is your's, your intention should be sincerely your own. If your work is not compatible with a program, that does not make it irrelevant, it simply means its different.
I had an interview at Goldsmiths this morning, a radical mfa program that had seemed like a wildcard in my applications. I had spoke from the heart and the hip about my work. I was immediately granted admission. Every thing that these ivy leagues took issue with, they appreciated.
Grad school is dating and you should find someone who loves you back.
 
 

So,
I interviewed at Yale for sculpture. They ask you to do a formal presentation of your work to the students and faculty. I was not flustered, I spoke from the heart and hip about my practice. However, they took issue with me not having an arts degree. A faculty member had stated that my work was too emotional to critique, and that the work I presented containing my brother's ashes (though absolutely relevant to my research about "performative objects", and the feature of an entire conceptual exhibition) was a faux pas. I had gotten rejected from Yale.
I interviewed at Columbia. I have not heard anything, and I realize that if I were to gain acceptance, I'd likely be a second or third choice after other artists have passed due to their high tuition.
I had been conversing with faculty at UCLA and I had current grad students advocating on my behalf. I had gotten a rejection without even an interview.
I know we all understand this sentiment; of feeling yourself and your practice under repetitive scrutiny and valuation, only to be confronted with the hard realization that some people have the ability to prevent you from moving forward. I had expected nothing as a self taught artist, then my morale was so high from the offer of interviews at these schools. I had thought, "finally, my god, thank you." Visions of vast studios and dynamic conversation of art critiques quickly populated my mind. I am an idealist, and as such I am consistently let down. The rejection had me reeling in self doubt, without any touchstone to regain my faith in the art world. How am I to function if my work is too emotional to critique? How am I to move forward from this?
Truthfully, I have always done my best by proving people wrong. I realize that you should never ask permission for what others do not own. Your art is your's, your intention should be sincerely your own. If your work is not compatible with a program, that does not make it irrelevant, it simply means its different.
I had an interview at Goldsmiths this morning, a radical mfa program that had seemed like a wildcard in my applications. I had spoke from the heart and the hip about my work. I was immediately granted admission. Every thing that these ivy leagues took issue with, they appreciated.
Grad school is dating and you should find someone who loves you back.
 
 

So,
I interviewed at Yale for sculpture. They ask you to do a formal presentation of your work to the students and faculty. I was not flustered, I spoke from the heart and hip about my practice. However, they took issue with me not having an arts degree. A faculty member had stated that my work was too emotional to critique, and that the work I presented containing my brother's ashes (though absolutely relevant to my research about "performative objects", and the feature of an entire conceptual exhibition) was a faux pas. I had gotten rejected from Yale.
I interviewed at Columbia. I have not heard anything, and I realize that if I were to gain acceptance, I'd likely be a second or third choice after other artists have passed due to their high tuition.
I had been conversing with faculty at UCLA and I had current grad students advocating on my behalf. I had gotten a rejection without even an interview.
I know we all understand this sentiment; of feeling yourself and your practice under repetitive scrutiny and valuation, only to be confronted with the hard realization that some people have the ability to prevent you from moving forward. I had expected nothing as a self taught artist, then my morale was so high from the offer of interviews at these schools. I had thought, "finally, my god, thank you." Visions of vast studios and dynamic conversation of art critiques quickly populated my mind. I am an idealist, and as such I am consistently let down. The rejection had me reeling in self doubt, without any touchstone to regain my faith in the art world. How am I to function if my work is too emotional to critique? How am I to move forward from this?
Truthfully, I have always done my best by proving people wrong. I realize that you should never ask permission for what others do not own. Your art is your's, your intention should be sincerely your own. If your work is not compatible with a program, that does not make it irrelevant, it simply means its different.
I had an interview at Goldsmiths this morning, a radical mfa program that had seemed like a wildcard in my applications. I had spoke from the heart and the hip about my work. I was immediately granted admission. Every thing that these ivy leagues took issue with, they appreciated.
Grad school is dating and you should find someone who loves you back.
 
 

So,
I interviewed at Yale for sculpture. They ask you to do a formal presentation of your work to the students and faculty. I was not flustered, I spoke from the heart and hip about my practice. However, they took issue with me not having an arts degree. A faculty member had stated that my work was too emotional to critique, and that the work I presented containing my brother's ashes (though absolutely relevant to my research about "performative objects", and the feature of an entire conceptual exhibition) was a faux pas. I had gotten rejected from Yale.
I interviewed at Columbia. I have not heard anything, and I realize that if I were to gain acceptance, I'd likely be a second or third choice after other artists have passed due to their high tuition.
I had been conversing with faculty at UCLA and I had current grad students advocating on my behalf. I had gotten a rejection without even an interview.
I know we all understand this sentiment; of feeling yourself and your practice under repetitive scrutiny and valuation, only to be confronted with the hard realization that some people have the ability to prevent you from moving forward. I had expected nothing as a self taught artist, then my morale was so high from the offer of interviews at these schools. I had thought, "finally, my god, thank you." Visions of vast studios and dynamic conversation of art critiques quickly populated my mind. I am an idealist, and as such I am consistently let down. The rejection had me reeling in self doubt, without any touchstone to regain my faith in the art world. How am I to function if my work is too emotional to critique? How am I to move forward from this?
Truthfully, I have always done my best by proving people wrong. I realize that you should never ask permission for what others do not own. Your art is your's, your intention should be sincerely your own. If your work is not compatible with a program, that does not make it irrelevant, it simply means its different.
I had an interview at Goldsmiths this morning, a radical mfa program that had seemed like a wildcard in my applications. I had spoke from the heart and the hip about my work. I was immediately granted admission. Every thing that these ivy leagues took issue with, they appreciated.
Grad school is dating and you should find someone who loves you back.
 
 

So,
I interviewed at Yale for sculpture. They ask you to do a formal presentation of your work to the students and faculty. I was not flustered, I spoke from the heart and hip about my practice. However, they took issue with me not having an arts degree. A faculty member had stated that my work was too emotional to critique, and that the work I presented containing my brother's ashes (though absolutely relevant to my research about "performative objects", and the feature of an entire conceptual exhibition) was a faux pas. I had gotten rejected from Yale.
I interviewed at Columbia. I have not heard anything, and I realize that if I were to gain acceptance, I'd likely be a second or third choice after other artists have passed due to their high tuition.
I had been conversing with faculty at UCLA and I had current grad students advocating on my behalf. I had gotten a rejection without even an interview.
I know we all understand this sentiment; of feeling yourself and your practice under repetitive scrutiny and valuation, only to be confronted with the hard realization that some people have the ability to prevent you from moving forward. I had expected nothing as a self taught artist, then my morale was so high from the offer of interviews at these schools. I had thought, "finally, my god, thank you." Visions of vast studios and dynamic conversation of art critiques quickly populated my mind. I am an idealist, and as such I am consistently let down. The rejection had me reeling in self doubt, without any touchstone to regain my faith in the art world. How am I to function if my work is too emotional to critique? How am I to move forward from this?
Truthfully, I have always done my best by proving people wrong. I realize that you should never ask permission for what others do not own. Your art is your's, your intention should be sincerely your own. If your work is not compatible with a program, that does not make it irrelevant, it simply means its different.
I had an interview at Goldsmiths this morning, a radical mfa program that had seemed like a wildcard in my applications. I had spoke from the heart and the hip about my work. I was immediately granted admission. Every thing that these ivy leagues took issue with, they appreciated.
Grad school is dating and you should find someone who loves you back.
 
 

So,
I interviewed at Yale for sculpture. They ask you to do a formal presentation of your work to the students and faculty. I was not flustered, I spoke from the heart and hip about my practice. However, they took issue with me not having an arts degree. A faculty member had stated that my work was too emotional to critique, and that the work I presented containing my brother's ashes (though absolutely relevant to my research about "performative objects", and the feature of an entire conceptual exhibition) was a faux pas. I had gotten rejected from Yale.
I interviewed at Columbia. I have not heard anything, and I realize that if I were to gain acceptance, I'd likely be a second or third choice after other artists have passed due to their high tuition.
I had been conversing with faculty at UCLA and I had current grad students advocating on my behalf. I had gotten a rejection without even an interview.
I know we all understand this sentiment; of feeling yourself and your practice under repetitive scrutiny and valuation, only to be confronted with the hard realization that some people have the ability to prevent you from moving forward. I had expected nothing as a self taught artist, then my morale was so high from the offer of interviews at these schools. I had thought, "finally, my god, thank you." Visions of vast studios and dynamic conversation of art critiques quickly populated my mind. I am an idealist, and as such I am consistently let down. The rejection had me reeling in self doubt, without any touchstone to regain my faith in the art world. How am I to function if my work is too emotional to critique? How am I to move forward from this?
Truthfully, I have always done my best by proving people wrong. I realize that you should never ask permission for what others do not own. Your art is your's, your intention should be sincerely your own. If your work is not compatible with a program, that does not make it irrelevant, it simply means its different.
I had an interview at Goldsmiths this morning, a radical mfa program that had seemed like a wildcard in my applications. I had spoke from the heart and the hip about my work. I was immediately granted admission. Every thing that these ivy leagues took issue with, they appreciated.
Grad school is dating and you should find someone who loves you back.