Assessing what I've heard

[savantarde]

I interviewed at SAIC and I toured the campus a few weeks ago. The facilities are unbelievable. An art school literally attached to the art museum where ferris beulers day off was filmed, a floor of sewing machines, a movie theater on campus with siskels name on it, and a whole bunch of other crap i cant remember right now. I have heard negative things from the undergrad program, it sounds awful to go to a huge undergrad art school where the profs are all nationally/internationally know artists, of course they only care about the mfa candidates. They have very few options for funding, once I actually saw the numbers on paper, $70,000 for saic tuition compared to $30,00 state school tuition, I'm considering maybe not going to saic. I was at a lunch with the fiber department (not my department I aplied to) the current students went around the table and stated what they were working on. They all said almost the same thing, "i'm exploring concepts of self, place, and otherness". That gives me no clue as to what their art looks like. Using large or artsy sounding words does not, in anyway, make you seem smart or more artsy. I was very diappointed with what they said, but it made me realize that saic is looking for one specific type of artist to go to their school.

SAIC makes it very clear that they are interested in admitting "conceptual" artists for their graduate studio programs. So, that would account for the responses you received from students. I'm curious as to how far along in the program they all were, and to what disciplines they belonged, respectively. It is possible that they have yet to develop an eloquent spoken synopsis of their own work.

If that's not what you're looking for, by all means--don't go!

Look for what *you* need. But also, don't draw blanket conclusions based on your encounters with a small group.

And to answer a previous question--yes. I was admitted to SAIC for the Visual Communications MFA. So, perhaps I'm on this weird-assed crusade, championing the idea of subjectivity and "cultural relativism" when viewing other schools/programs???

[alizarin]

I visited SAIC a couple of years ago and I agree, their facilities are top-notch. I went to a painting grad tour. I don't recall seeing anything fantastic. Honestly, I can't even remember any of their work. Must have been not too memorable..

Edited March 17, 2010 by alizarin

[savantarde]

I visited SAIC a couple of years ago and I agree, their facilities are top-notch. I went to a painting grad tour. I don't recall seeing anything fantastic. Honestly, I can't even remember any of their work. Must have been not too memorable..

Why did you apply there, then?

Sorry, don't mean to sound like a dick with that question. Just honestly curious!

[alizarin]

Why did you apply there, then?

Sorry, don't mean to sound like a dick with that question. Just honestly curious!

I applied there because I liked their facilities, reputation, and I spoke with a professor from printmedia a couple of times last year and the year before and he was very positive about my work. I also went to a couple of SAIC event days and had positive experiences. The only thing I realize now is my work does not fit in with the painting department. I do representational work (that is full of ideas and concept I developed over a few years) and I get the feeling they're not into that. They seem to be only into conceptual art (I would like conceptual art if the aesthetics is also there, not just the concept itself). I was not informed this at all from all those times I talked to SAIC people. Every time I asked if they promoted or favored a specific style in art, they always denied it, stating that they don't sway a student's individual style.

So that's why I applied. I overlooked the fact that I don't recall seeing anything interesting from the grad painting studios. Now it all makes sense to me. If I could undo my application, I would. Would've saved the money and all the time I spent with my application there. But it's done. So whatever. I learned my lesson. I will never apply there again.

[WvOvMutilation]

I was at a lunch with the fiber department (not my department I applied to) the current students went around the table and stated what they were working on. They all said almost the same thing, "I'm exploring concepts of self, place, and otherness". That gives me no clue as to what their art looks like. Using large or artsy sounding words does not, in anyway, make you seem smart or more artsy. I was very disappointed with what they said, but it made me realize that saic is looking for one specific type of artist to go to their school.

I am one of the students at the lunch you discussed. How could we have been more specific about the work we're making? Were you looking for physical descriptions of our studio work? I'm interested to know so that I can be sure to suggest a different approach next spring.

[Artist1]

SAIC may have great facilities but the PAINTING STUDIOS are really small with low ceilings. They have very little storage space, if at all. It's great they have the sewing, foundry, and everything but I won't be using it. I need a decent sized space to work in.

I do narrative figurative work (large scale). I was told during a review that my "work doesn't fit in with what everyone is doing here", that noone is doing figurative work there, but that I'd "make a good fit". That doesn't make any sense to me.

The guy was also defensive when I mentioned that the studios were small. He said they were large enough. I had mentioned the size of my current studio and he asked why I didn't just stay there and go to _______ University in my hometown.

But then he said my work was the best he had seen all day. And he encouraged me to apply.

wtf?

So no. I won't be applying to SAIC. Goodbye Midwest.

I am applying to Yale and it seems everything is conceptual coming out of there. I don't know if my work fits? At least the narrative figure is making a come back!