You think so? I suppose it's possible but I didn't read it that way at all. I think the fact that we're dealing with "Artists", people prone to dramatics to begin with, combined with being on TV, results in a "natural" exaggeration of conflict and melodramatic behavior. I see no need for producers to actively create it. I have no doubt they select for volatile personality types, and perhaps even encourage them to err on the side of drama and conflict, but I can't imagine it takes much more than that to produce this result.

So given that I was already assuming these people to be drama-queens, I saw nothing "phony" about the conflict. He pretty vocally set himself up as an outsider by insisting on having a "signature component" in a group project. Of course you're going to be treated like an outsider and have your ideas ignored after you've made it clear that you don't want to contribute to the whole but that you're more concerned about making yourself stand out. All of course to an exaggerated and melodramatic degree, but isn't that what we all hope to see from tortured artists?

I truly felt bad for Eric since I identified with him somewhat. At first it seemed all he wanted was to make sure he took some substantial part in the project so he could point to something in front of the judges. But it became apparent that he just hated the others so much that it was impossible for him to compromise and work with them. The big irony being that he himself was being an artist diva while calling them on their artiness.

Looking past the drama...

I really loved the form of the losing piece. Like Simon said, the space that the curve created was really attractive. And I liked the aesthetic of the shingles on the side. But the support structure was just some 2x4's bolted together, left it looking really unfinished. And I wish Eric had been able to work with them better and get them to listen, because the "patchwork" sheeting just looked sloppy.

The other team's piece was almost great. Like Simon, I really dug the geometry of the big element, and the paint job, which did a perfect job of mimicking natural shading, put it over the top. And I liked the little individual pieces as well, I just wish they had done something to give those outlying pieces more dimension and connection to the whole. Just plopping them on the ground was lazy.

I feel as though there is a detectable difference between real off-the-cuff conversation and unscripted but prompted improvisational acting. The drama in this episode seemed very prompted to me. ("Oh my gosh, did you see Jaclyn give me this note" Eric says to Ryan quite a bit louder than anyone would in actual confidentiality. Of course, there is a camera there, but really ...) Nothing in the main story seemed organic or spontaneous. I can't prove it at all - but my BS meter spiked at things like:

- Eric worries out loud that the judges will ask him what his contribution was. Simon de Pury walks in the door and doesn't miss a beat - "So, Eric, what did you contribute to this?" He's barely even looked at the piece. Very stagey, and this kind of "perfect timing" of events and reactions happened throughout.

- The whole drama from a few episodes back when Jaclyn didn't give Eric credit for his idea about writing on her photos - that felt awfully "do it for the cameras" - and her weird apology to Eric at the start of this challenge just clinched its phoniness for me. And that whole "Jaclyn wrote me a note" sub-plot - and the very Theater 101 improv feel of the dialog as he confided in Ryan about it had me rolling my eyes, even while I was enjoying it on a narrative level. There are genuinely spontaneous moments on this show, and every reality/ elimination show - and they always contrast with the manufactured drama moments. Again, can't prove it ...

- Eric is so worried that he will be sent home, then goes well out of his way to completely throw himself under the bus, in ways that just look stupid and melodramatically petulant. ("No, I won't help you carry it, I'm going to go sulk and chain smoke.") Yes, that could happen with these temperamental people, but I honestly feel I can tell the difference between real flare-ups and cosmetic ones, and Eric wasn't a very good actor. I would be willing to put a small amount of cash down that he was informed long ago that he would be playing the outsider, and that he would be instructed to throw his game in a later episode, making sure to say derisive things about "art school pussies" along the way.(He was never this vituperative before, was he?) A "teamwork" themed episode provides the perfect opportunity, because no one is creating individual works - and no matter which project might have won, his out-of-the-blue poutiness gets him ousted as planned.

- In every episode, you see the participants sitting in an indoor neutral space and talking to the camera about events that are going on in the main narrative. These talking head moments are scattered throughout the show. They are pretty obviously all filmed at the same time, presumably after everything has gone down, but the people talk as though they are still in the middle of the situation. So, we see footage of them arguing out in the public park, then cut to Eric in a chair back at home base saying "I'm not going to let them boss me around" as though he is still "in the moment" out at that park. This is common to every one of these shows, and is a good textual clue that everybody engages knowingly in creating an illusion. (I'm being generous in guessing that these interviews are made after the fact. If this episode is really as contrived as I'm accusing it of being, they could well have done it all before they filmed the drama.) Anyway, pay attention to this quirk whenever you watch reality TV. Artist splashes paint - cut to artist in chair saying "I really feel like this is going to be my best work - cut to continuation of same shot of artist splashing paint. Artist makes terrible error. Cut to artist in same chair saying "I ruined the painting. I'm going to have to start all over again." The apparent continuity of the footage belies the artist having taken two separate trips to the talky couch. I hope I'm making this clear, and I hope I don't look too silly blathering on about it so much. (This textual mistake even happens on The Office, where it certainly doesn't matter, but it is a kind of narrative impossibility.)

My gut feeling right now is that the show is going to keep building on the "no one wants to say out loud that Miles is a douchebag" theme - Miles is clearly just too good an instigator not to build conflict around. (I'm no expert, but Miles' OCD disorder seems to change in very plot-convenient ways. iThe assertive, aggressive type A fellow he played in this episode seems very different from the diffident afraid-of-sunlight, super sensitive gotta-sleep-can't-talk-to-anyone dude of earlier episodes. Seems like he can turn it off and on at will, and I'm guessing that's exactly what he's been asked to do.) Anyway, I say look for a Miles-Ryan standoff real soon, and look for a Miles vs.Jaclyn denouement. That's my guess, and I'm sticking to it for now.

So, I may be totally off base in my suspicions, but I do feel them strongly. This doesn't in any way prevent me from enjoying the show and wanting to see the next one right away.

OH, and the whole dramatic "Do you know what that skyline used to be?" revelation. I don't believe it was genuine!

sorry - being a pesky crank.

Yes, GD. The patchwork looked terrible. I do wonder what the snake scale look would have been like.

I liked the winning piece quite a bit, and worry that I'm almost certainly a philistine for liking it.

Surely you've known people in your own reality who self-diagnose as [insert vague social disorder here] whose "symptoms" manifest only at the most dramatically convenient times.

I too detect a lot of fakery and setupitude. I guess I just accept it as part of the conceit of these shows.

Flippy, this is an honest question - how much reality TV have you watched? Most of the questions you pose can be answered with "that's the deal with these shows."

First - any time there's a group project on these shows, there's always someone who didn't contribute enough and they're kicked off. For Eric to bring it up immediately is expected, and for Simon to ask is expected.

Second - the shows are highly edited and designed around beats and story arcs. You really don't need a script to manipulate what we see into a storyline.

Third - people know they are on camera and act up. They want their plot points to be heard so they speak obviously and complain pointedly.

Fourth - the "confessional" shots are always done later, after the show was filmed, and are responses to prodding from someone off-camera.

All of this stuff is as old as the Survivor hills, and much of it dates older, from the Real World. Noticing it is like watching Seinfeld and complaining because the actors pause when the audience laughs.

We caught up tonight with the "Eric" show.

First of all, I liked the losing piece on a conceptual level much more than I like the winning piece, which I compared to Stonehenge from Spinal Tap. I thought the scale was all wrong and the piece was in no way interactive or compelling. But the team did "play nice" with each other.

Eric acting like a child did not surprise me one bit. He's always felt like an outsider and played that card a little too often - to his detriment. Come on - a clown on a pallet? You don't have to go to art school to know what a cliche that is! He's a talented individual, but his own lack of self-esteem, and the excuses he makes for himself got old for me by the 3rd episode. When I learned it was to be a group project I just KNEW Eric would be the one to go. He's too insecure to play well with others.

I've only watched one other reality show - Project Runway - but it is similar by the fact that there are creative people working together and, sometimes creative people CAN be quite the prima donna. I'm not sure I have a good handle on what a "normal" reality show looks like.

I've been picking Eric to leave for awhile now, so no surprise on tis one.

I thought the comment about the Blue Teams piece not looking safe was lame - it's art, not playground equipment, let it be a little dangerous. That said I liked it more before they "finished" it.

As for the scripting, I think I expect a lot of that coming out of the editing, you're always being presented with some manufactured drama so I always wonder about what's not being shown for being to boring or not fitting into the selected "storyline."

You've diagnosed the disease quite accurately. I avoid this genre and always have, probably because the contrivances and tropes interest me so little. (Reality, hah!) I abjured Survivor and its ilk from day one. For whatever reason, I got sucked into the first season of Top Chef, and now this show, but yeah, your Seinfeld analogy has the sting of truth. I'm allergic to the very fabric of reality TV, and still sputtering with disbelief about it. But Work of Art is engaging enough to keep my attention. Thanks for putting up with me.