MFA 2021 Freak Out Forum

[geeeeebie]

16 hours ago, rmwphoto said:

Can't speak for top programs but I'm waitlisted for GSU and tbh trying not to hold my breath. It's a program I'd really love but they're only accepting two students in my area. They have said they're trying to get more funding and they can move people off the wait-list as late as summer, which is mind boggling to me! 

When did you hear about waitlist? I got a cryptic email from them saying that basically all hope is not lost, and they are waiting on funding after sending out the first round of acceptances before they reach out to more folks. I applied for painting. 

But i do already have an offer and if the waiting goes into the summer.... how do you decide!? 

[TokenToken]

12 hours ago, Hphphphp said:

Funny you say that, a good friend of mine worked as his assistant for 6 months after college and she hated every single second of it. She says he was incredibly exploitative, inconsiderate, mean and overall a terrible terrible boss. I met him once and he seemed *very* performative, not a very  authentic person

Hm. I worked for him organizing his library when I was an undergrad at UChicago. He was great, it was a really positive experience. 

[ruralpaintin]

Hey Y'all!

Just wanted to hop back in and offer some midwestern advice. To the individuals on this forum supporting the idea that only elite schools get you places, I'm sorry to tell ya' but you just ain't correct. Sweetheart, it's okay to admit you're wrong. ? Those individuals teaching at all those "elite" programs didn't come from those places—they came from other programs in their own time. Higher education changes and with that, so does its rankings. The "art world" is bigger than the few blocks of NYC outdated galleries sittin' pretty in Chelsea. And it sure is hell ain't no prestigious papers saying your MFA is from top-tier institute. Art is more than that, so if you're plannin' for a career swimmin' in money then move outta the way cuz you ain't here for the right reasons.

A lot of state school programs are really great with what they can offer students: great facilities, full funding, TA/GA positions, etc. The reality is that these elite programs can't offer that because they know students will "pay to play" and eventually compete against other students for resources. If y'all would do some real research and contact current students from varying kinds of programs, you would know that. Yale ain't given millions to everyone who walks through those doors and SVA ain't got the greatest studios (I know because I used to paint in one, ain't got nothin' but a closet and a curtain). And get this, those state programs have professors from these "elite" programs! I know, who knew?! 

The reality of this post is that some of those on here are spreading misinformation when they haven't even applied to an MFA program yet. You can go ahead and stop because its uncalled for, inaccurate, and irresponsible. Do not affect people's lives and futures like that. 

I go to a small college in the middle of the country. This ain't no flyover state and there's a lot this region is offering. Y'all have no clue what's beyond those blue-chip, ivory towers. I'll give you a hint: people who invest into what art means rather than the money y'all wanna play with. 

Don't be classist and do not put down individuals for going to state programs. You ain't got no right and no business to be spittin' trash.

?

 

 

[NoraEllie]

23 minutes ago, ruralpaintin said:

Hey Y'all!

Just wanted to hop back in and offer some midwestern advice. To the individuals on this forum supporting the idea that only elite schools get you places, I'm sorry to tell ya' but you just ain't correct. Sweetheart, it's okay to admit you're wrong. ? Those individuals teaching at all those "elite" programs didn't come from those places—they came from other programs in their own time. Higher education changes and with that, so does its rankings. The "art world" is bigger than the few blocks of NYC outdated galleries sittin' pretty in Chelsea. And it sure is hell ain't no prestigious papers saying your MFA is from top-tier institute. Art is more than that, so if you're plannin' for a career swimmin' in money then move outta the way cuz you ain't here for the right reasons.

A lot of state school programs are really great with what they can offer students: great facilities, full funding, TA/GA positions, etc. The reality is that these elite programs can't offer that because they know students will "pay to play" and eventually compete against other students for resources. If y'all would do some real research and contact current students from varying kinds of programs, you would know that. Yale ain't given millions to everyone who walks through those doors and SVA ain't got the greatest studios (I know because I used to paint in one, ain't got nothin' but a closet and a curtain). And get this, those state programs have professors from these "elite" programs! I know, who knew?! 

The reality of this post is that some of those on here are spreading misinformation when they haven't even applied to an MFA program yet. You can go ahead and stop because its uncalled for, inaccurate, and irresponsible. Do not affect people's lives and futures like that. 

I go to a small college in the middle of the country. This ain't no flyover state and there's a lot this region is offering. Y'all have no clue what's beyond those blue-chip, ivory towers. I'll give you a hint: people who invest into what art means rather than the money y'all wanna play with. 

Don't be classist and do not put down individuals for going to state programs. You ain't got no right and no business to be spittin' trash.

?

 

 

If you’re gifted you’re gifted. Talent comes in all forms. Nothing will help you succeed rather than your own works and ideas but a school with a name is a helping hand. 
 

Also, just because an individual hasn’t applied for MFA programs doesn’t mean that they’re illiterate in the field. We’re all learning. Nobody is perfect. Everyone makes mistakes but rather we should be the bigger person and allow them to better themselves when approaching others in a proper manner. We’re all here for a reason and not everyone’s reason has to be because they want to ONLY just create art. Some here dream of being big, some dream of making others happy through their art, some dream of teaching, etc. There are absolutely NO wrong reasons for pursuing an MFA degree- we all have dreams and goals and it’s okay if they don’t align with one another. From what I’ve seen, if you want to get excessive recognition then NYC/LA are the hotspots (it sucks because I’m in Atl but I’m making it work) for artists as almost all successful artists reside there because it gives them a better opportunity to keep in contact with connections. These top tier schools are top for a reason but doesn’t mean that small schools can’t offer the same. I’m a strong believer that a persons success should come from their work and not where they graduated from but that’s not the stance in all cases as most will almost always want to look at the school, which sucks. 
Everyone on here deserves to be where they want to be- it’s not going to be easy but the motivation and determination I’ve seen within each individual shows me that I’m not alone. 

[ruralpaintin]

5 minutes ago, NoraEllie said:

If you’re gifted you’re gifted. Talent comes in all forms. Nothing will help you succeed rather than your own works and ideas but a school with a name is a helping hand. 
 

Also, just because an individual hasn’t applied for MFA programs doesn’t mean that they’re illiterate in the field. We’re all learning. Nobody is perfect. Everyone makes mistakes but rather we should be the bigger person and allow them to better themselves when approaching others in a proper manner. We’re all here for a reason and not everyone’s reason has to be because they want to ONLY just create art. Some here dream of being big, some dream of making others happy through their art, some dream of teaching, etc. There are absolutely NO wrong reasons for pursuing an MFA degree- we all have dreams and goals and it’s okay if they don’t align with one another. From what I’ve seen, if you want to get excessive recognition then NYC/LA are the hotspots (it sucks because I’m in Atl but I’m making it work) for artists as almost all successful artists reside there because it gives them a better opportunity to keep in contact with connections. These top tier schools are top for a reason but doesn’t mean that small schools can’t offer the same. I’m a strong believer that a persons success should come from their work and not where they graduated from but that’s not the stance in all cases as most will almost always want to look at the school, which sucks. 
Everyone on here deserves to be where they want to be- it’s not going to be easy but the motivation and determination I’ve seen within each individual shows me that I’m not alone. 

It's classist to tell others that only NYC, LA, and Chicago institutions will get you places. If you really want to be there, then that's a different story but don't let your deciding factors be solely based on capitalist rankings and the school "getting you somewhere." Those programs are expensive and not everyone can afford to be without funding. Don't support individuals who shit on programs that actually offer resources to their students. 

[NoraEllie]

17 minutes ago, ruralpaintin said:

It's classist to tell others that only NYC, LA, and Chicago institutions will get you places. If you really want to be there, then that's a different story but don't let your deciding factors be solely based on capitalist rankings and the school "getting you somewhere." Those programs are expensive and not everyone can afford to be without funding. Don't support individuals who shit on programs that actually offer resources to their students. 

1. I never said big institutions help you get somewhere. I said the complete opposite. Your portfolio should matter more than anything. But a top tier school is top for a reason. (Also, I’m definitely not only talking about institutions but rather where artists choose to reside AFTER completing an MFA degree)
2. So are non top tier schools. Many MFA programs are expensive and I in no means am in favor of going in over 100K debt but some have no choice so you have to look at both sides. 
3. Again, I’m not going to demean an individual based on how they have interacted with others. We’re all adults here and if someone does something wrong then they will by time be fully aware of it. Nobody is supporting any sort of wrong behavior and if you think I am then you clearly haven’t seen my last few posts. But I’m not going to stoop low. Sorry, I’m not. They’ll by time realize they were wrong and will do better- if not, then you can’t force a human being to change or see things your way. If it were that easy we’d have all good in this world. 
In the end every individual will move up in the program in which they felt comfortable and attached to, doesn’t matter if it’s a top tier or not. Our success and happiness come within our own works. 

Edited March 8, 2021 by NoraEllie

[rmwphoto]

4 hours ago, geeeeebie said:

When did you hear about waitlist? I got a cryptic email from them saying that basically all hope is not lost, and they are waiting on funding after sending out the first round of acceptances before they reach out to more folks. I applied for painting. 

But i do already have an offer and if the waiting goes into the summer.... how do you decide!? 

Apologies, I worded it badly! I didn't get a first offer, so I'm assuming waitlist for now. The head of photo did send an email before interviews that talked about their funding and how students could be moved from waitlist to acceptance through the summer. Fingers crossed for both of us (and everyone else also waiting) !! 

[theundoing]

6 hours ago, ruralpaintin said:

Hey Y'all!

Just wanted to hop back in and offer some midwestern advice. To the individuals on this forum supporting the idea that only elite schools get you places, I'm sorry to tell ya' but you just ain't correct. Sweetheart, it's okay to admit you're wrong. ? Those individuals teaching at all those "elite" programs didn't come from those places—they came from other programs in their own time. Higher education changes and with that, so does its rankings. The "art world" is bigger than the few blocks of NYC outdated galleries sittin' pretty in Chelsea. And it sure is hell ain't no prestigious papers saying your MFA is from top-tier institute. Art is more than that, so if you're plannin' for a career swimmin' in money then move outta the way cuz you ain't here for the right reasons.

A lot of state school programs are really great with what they can offer students: great facilities, full funding, TA/GA positions, etc. The reality is that these elite programs can't offer that because they know students will "pay to play" and eventually compete against other students for resources. If y'all would do some real research and contact current students from varying kinds of programs, you would know that. Yale ain't given millions to everyone who walks through those doors and SVA ain't got the greatest studios (I know because I used to paint in one, ain't got nothin' but a closet and a curtain). And get this, those state programs have professors from these "elite" programs! I know, who knew?! 

The reality of this post is that some of those on here are spreading misinformation when they haven't even applied to an MFA program yet. You can go ahead and stop because its uncalled for, inaccurate, and irresponsible. Do not affect people's lives and futures like that. 

I go to a small college in the middle of the country. This ain't no flyover state and there's a lot this region is offering. Y'all have no clue what's beyond those blue-chip, ivory towers. I'll give you a hint: people who invest into what art means rather than the money y'all wanna play with. 

Don't be classist and do not put down individuals for going to state programs. You ain't got no right and no business to be spittin' trash.

?

 

 

They came from other programs because in the 1970s you didn't need an MFA to teach at an elite institution. I would personally be most interested in attending a fully funded program but I don't want to leave my home in Brooklyn and Rutgers wasn't accepting applicants this year. It is classist because the gallery scene in new york city and LA (and most museums in NYC) are extremely classist and elitist. Not everyone wants to have a LA or NYC gallery career but if you want to pay off a lot of debt you might be forced to (if you can even have one).

Of course you can do lots of things with an MFA but some people do want big gallery careers or want to eventually be in the Whitney Biennial and an overwhelming number of young artists in that part of the "art world" come out of big name schools. Just look up the current artists at Company Gallery, Miguel Abreu, White Columns those that have MFAs from schools in the US attended Columbia, Bard, PAFA, UCLA, Yale.

In the 2019 Whitney Biennial the artists who have MFAs ...someone else already did the research: "Of those who earned an MFA, eight got one from Yale, six from UCLA, four from Columbia, and three from Bard. Other schools include NYU, Hunter, and Stanford. Again, it seems that most of the artists elected to go to schools on the East or West Coast, with a few going to the School of the Art Institute of Chicago" AND "I think it is fair to say that there are no artists in the 2019 Whitney Biennial who live and work in Middle America or what some call the flyover states." This isn't because the work is better at those schools this is because these schools have curators rotating through students' studios on a regular basis.

If someone wants a big gallery career this bootstrap idea is a problem because galleries are incredibly elitist. Some schools that charge big bucks but don't have all the connections are predatory because people think that having an MFA means that it will be possible to show in galleries but how do you compete with a school like Columbia where faculty are on a first name basis with the director of PACE gallery or a curator at the Whitney?

Edited March 8, 2021 by theundoing

[theundoing]

7 hours ago, lizavetar96 said:

Edit: I am a blind idiot, problem resolved. 
 

Can I someone give me some HELP

I have my USC interview tomorrow morning and I just realized that I don’t remember which rendition of my portfolio I sent them (I have two slightly different versions)

i submitted it through Slideroom but I think after you submit a Slideroom application you can not log into that profile, it is just gone. Does anyone have ideas? 

good luck on your interview!

[Ann123]

Hey anyone heard back from MICA?

[slickjaketheruler]

8 hours ago, geeeeebie said:

Yes, I got in! I heard this weekend. 

If you don’t mind me asking, did you receive a call or an email in regards to your decision? I had my interview with Faye on Monday. So I’m sure she hasn’t made much decision in regards to printmakers.

[SocialKonstruct]

1 hour ago, theundoing said:

They came from other programs because in the 1970s you didn't need an MFA to teach at an elite institution. I would personally be most interested in attending a fully funded program but I don't want to leave my home in Brooklyn and Rutgers wasn't accepting applicants this year. It is classist because the gallery scene in new york city and LA (and most museums in NYC) are extremely classist and elitist. Not everyone wants to have a LA or NYC gallery career but if you want to pay off a lot of debt you might be forced to (if you can even have one).

Of course you can do lots of things with an MFA but some people do want big gallery careers or want to eventually be in the Whitney Biennial and an overwhelming number of young artists in that part of the "art world" come out of big name schools. Just look up the current artists at Company Gallery, Miguel Abreu, White Columns those that have MFAs from schools in the US attended Columbia, Bard, PAFA, UCLA, Yale.

In the 2019 Whitney Biennial the artists who have MFAs ...someone else already did the research: "Of those who earned an MFA, eight got one from Yale, six from UCLA, four from Columbia, and three from Bard. Other schools include NYU, Hunter, and Stanford. Again, it seems that most of the artists elected to go to schools on the East or West Coast, with a few going to the School of the Art Institute of Chicago" AND "I think it is fair to say that there are no artists in the 2019 Whitney Biennial who live and work in Middle America or what some call the flyover states." This isn't because the work is better at those schools this is because these schools have curators rotating through students' studios on a regular basis.

If someone wants a big gallery career this bootstrap idea is a problem because galleries are incredibly elitist. Some schools that charge big bucks but don't have all the connections are predatory because people think that having an MFA means that it will be possible to show in galleries but how do you compete with a school like Columbia where faculty are on a first name basis with the director of PACE gallery or a curator at the Whitney?

Indeed. You said this very brilliantly and accurately. A lot of the MFA programs in the LA/NYC are able to get the curators, other artists, and critics through the studios physically. It is geography there. Two of the prime exceptions are RISD and Yale which are not in big cities but close by.

Another factor is the level of challenge and incorporation of critical theory into the program. The very top schools are going to have very tough readings and I meant you have to be at the top of your game to know what the hell (or fuck) you are reading. Want an example of readings for a top notch MFA? Here is a sample at Calarts of what you are required to read:

Walter Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”. In: Illuminations.

Hito Steyerl, “In Defense of the Poor Image”. In: The Wretched of the Screen.

Rosalind Krauss, “The Originality of the Avant-Garde: A Postmodernist Repetition”. In: The Originality of the Avant-Garde and Other Modernist Myths.

or

Richard Shusterman, Self-styling after the end of Art and Self as Art

Luciano Floridi, The Informational Nature of Personal Identity

These are not just easy texts to gloss over or skim. You will have to be at the top of your game to understand these oft difficult critical texts as well. And these so-called elitist MFA programs are teaching artists to be critical problem solvers and not just folks who pump out artworks without any context.

Plus you are going to be networking consistently with those who are tied to the NYC/LA museum systems as well.

The point is as an incoming MFA student you have choices. You can do whatever you wish whether teach, enter a huge gallery, or just work in a studio at a local gallery. But consistently a lot of folks want to apply to the top ranked programs and there is a huge reason for that. This pattern is not accidental.

Edited March 8, 2021 by SocialKonstruct

[everyonelikesbubbles]

As prospective MFA students and/or recent BFA grads, we represent the next generation of artists. It’s our responsibility then to reconsider existing hierarchies and ideas of merit—and stay with me—imagine an art world without the need for MFAs. The discourse here about alleged top schools is oppressive, disheartening and frankly boring. It’s also very American to give value to rankings of dubious quality.

Some of us here will be spending $100,000+ on programs like Columbia—which is great—but we should be careful about enforcing the logic of our choices to others. The sunk cost principle would dictate that those who get a prestigious MFA would naturally re-enforce the system on others to justify the cost and labor, but I think we should be able to see past that.

I’ll be going to a “top school” this Fall but its value is really about my practice and how I can utilize the school’s resources. I mean, look at any good mid-tier gallery (which feed into the blue chip galleries once sales are proven) in NY and LA and you will see plenty of people from schools outside of the top 10 (US News has no idea about the art world) and lots of people without MFAs, too. 

Art schools don’t make their artists hot, artists make their art schools hot. So don’t put so much pressure on yourself or others about this myth of a top school.

I think we’re all trying to navigate our interests, faculty, price, where we’d like to live, and perceived prestige as we look at our next steps, but instead of using received wisdom, imagine your own path instead of relying on what has worked for others. Get in where you fit in, et al.

[yesterday100]

Anyone hear from UCSD post interview? 

[PlzTakeME]

Has anyone been rejected from SAIC painting?

[slickjaketheruler]

For everyone that did get anywhere in the process (whether you are going or deciding not to or even just interviewed), just remember to be kind and proud to yourself for making it that far. Treat yourself to some pizza, you deserve it!

[NoraEllie]

3 hours ago, theundoing said:

They came from other programs because in the 1970s you didn't need an MFA to teach at an elite institution. I would personally be most interested in attending a fully funded program but I don't want to leave my home in Brooklyn and Rutgers wasn't accepting applicants this year. It is classist because the gallery scene in new york city and LA (and most museums in NYC) are extremely classist and elitist. Not everyone wants to have a LA or NYC gallery career but if you want to pay off a lot of debt you might be forced to (if you can even have one).

Of course you can do lots of things with an MFA but some people do want big gallery careers or want to eventually be in the Whitney Biennial and an overwhelming number of young artists in that part of the "art world" come out of big name schools. Just look up the current artists at Company Gallery, Miguel Abreu, White Columns those that have MFAs from schools in the US attended Columbia, Bard, PAFA, UCLA, Yale.

In the 2019 Whitney Biennial the artists who have MFAs ...someone else already did the research: "Of those who earned an MFA, eight got one from Yale, six from UCLA, four from Columbia, and three from Bard. Other schools include NYU, Hunter, and Stanford. Again, it seems that most of the artists elected to go to schools on the East or West Coast, with a few going to the School of the Art Institute of Chicago" AND "I think it is fair to say that there are no artists in the 2019 Whitney Biennial who live and work in Middle America or what some call the flyover states." This isn't because the work is better at those schools this is because these schools have curators rotating through students' studios on a regular basis.

If someone wants a big gallery career this bootstrap idea is a problem because galleries are incredibly elitist. Some schools that charge big bucks but don't have all the connections are predatory because people think that having an MFA means that it will be possible to show in galleries but how do you compete with a school like Columbia where faculty are on a first name basis with the director of PACE gallery or a curator at the Whitney?

??

[geeeeebie]

1 hour ago, slickjaketheruler said:

If you don’t mind me asking, did you receive a call or an email in regards to your decision? I had my interview with Faye on Monday. So I’m sure she hasn’t made much decision in regards to printmakers.

I got a call first, and after we spoke I got the email. Where you in the facilities meeting on zoom this past week?? 

[Paintyface]

1 hour ago, SocialKonstruct said:

Indeed. You said this very brilliantly and accurately. A lot of the MFA programs in the LA/NYC are able to get the curators, other artists, and critics through the studios physically. It is geography there. Two of the prime exceptions are RISD and Yale which are not in big cities but close by.

Another factor is the level of challenge and incorporation of critical theory into the program. The very top schools are going to have very tough readings and I meant you have to be at the top of your game to know what the hell (or fuck) you are reading. Want an example of readings for a top notch MFA? Here is a sample at Calarts of what you are required to read:

Walter Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”. In: Illuminations.

Hito Steyerl, “In Defense of the Poor Image”. In: The Wretched of the Screen.

Rosalind Krauss, “The Originality of the Avant-Garde: A Postmodernist Repetition”. In: The Originality of the Avant-Garde and Other Modernist Myths.

or

Richard Shusterman, Self-styling after the end of Art and Self as Art

Luciano Floridi, The Informational Nature of Personal Identity

These are not just easy texts to gloss over or skim. You will have to be at the top of your game to understand these oft difficult critical texts as well. And these so-called elitist MFA programs are teaching artists to be critical problem solvers and not just folks who pump out artworks without any context.

Plus you are going to be networking consistently with those who are tied to the NYC/LA museum systems as well.

The point is as an incoming MFA student you have choices. You can do whatever you wish whether teach, enter a huge gallery, or just work in a studio at a local gallery. But consistently a lot of folks want to apply to the top ranked programs and there is a huge reason for that. This pattern is not accidental.

This is an example of opinion clouding facts. Are you aware that the EXACT SAME "Top notch MFA reading list" is required in the Cal State MFA, in addition to Bell Hooks, Donna Haraway, Kimberly Crenshaw, J Munoz, Rachel Haidu, Kaulingfrecks, T.J. Demos, Teju Cole, etc etc....

You're right in that they are not easy texts to gloss over -- but perhaps you should do some more research before manipulating information in favor of your opinion and the very minimal information that it is based upon. Have you actually researched reading lists in the state funded programs? Did you think no one else on here is aware of the critical theory other programs offer...?

[slickjaketheruler]

3 minutes ago, geeeeebie said:

I got a call first, and after we spoke I got the email. Where you in the facilities meeting on zoom this past week?? 

No, I have a zoom interview with print tech and previous alum of Purchase tomorrow. So I’m gonna ask and see what’s up tomorrow. But we’ll see if I get an email or not.

[SocialKonstruct]

4 minutes ago, slickjaketheruler said:

No, I have a zoom interview with print tech and previous alum of Purchase tomorrow. So I’m gonna ask and see what’s up tomorrow. But we’ll see if I get an email or not.

Good luck with your Zoom interviews!

[geeeeebie]

5 minutes ago, slickjaketheruler said:

No, I have a zoom interview with print tech and previous alum of Purchase tomorrow. So I’m gonna ask and see what’s up tomorrow. But we’ll see if I get an email or not.

amazing! Yeah you'll prob here after those meetings! good luck!

[slickjaketheruler]

13 minutes ago, geeeeebie said:

amazing! Yeah you'll prob here after those meetings! good luck!

Thank you!

[katfude]

Boston University sculpture just sent out acceptances  They reduce their graduate tuition for art students by half already, and I received a 50% merit scholarship on top of that. 

 

[lizavetar96]

Just now, katfude said:

Boston University sculpture just sent out acceptances  They reduce their graduate tuition for art students by half already, and I received a 50% merit scholarship on top of that. 

 

This is fantabulous!!!! Gosh, you should be so so proud. And I think Boston is a beautiful city too. 
do you think you will accept ?