C/D: The Visual Arts MFA

It increasingly seems like this degree is some kind of prerequisite for NYC gallery representation. I almost never see artist bios that don't include one. What's the deal with this? Isn't it kind of a shitty system to require a degree that usually costs $80,000 non-subsidized just to consider someone show-worthy? Doesn't this automatically eliminate a lot of worthy artists? Does the degree really confer anything other than time and space to work and contacts?

Since I always wind up being the one stanning for MFAs, I'll offer this:

- I don't know anything about the world of visual art, but how sure are you that there's a system that "requires" a degree, or excludes worthy artists without them? I'm sure that, with visual art, there's a level of legitimacy and a wealth of contacts an MFA program can offer that's a definite help -- but in the end, any sensible/responsible person in any field will sooner take a good piece by someone without a degree than a bad one from someone with one.

- "Time and space to work" -- and some level of feedback, interaction with other artists, physical space and tools to work, etc. -- aren't exactly negligible perks: if your goal is to become a visual artist, spending two years in this sort of place is pretty good way of focusing on it.

- People are, ideally, not paying $80k for MFAs (and you're including living expenses here, yes?) -- ideally, you want to do them someplace that funds you, or you want to collect grants or scholarpships from elsewhere. I should probably also mention that, in my experience, some people play this as a sort of gamble: if you come out of a program like this $40k in debt but having spent two straight years working on your art, you have kind of just gotten government-subsidized loans to live on while you learn about art. And if you're the sort of person who was previously waiting tables all week and complaining that you didn't have the time, energy, space, or attention left over to focus on your art -- and you have confidence that your art can be great -- this is not exactly an irrational shot to take.

I don't know anything about the world of visual art, but how sure are you that there's a system that "requires" a degree, or excludes worthy artists without them? I'm sure that, with visual art, there's a level of legitimacy and a wealth of contacts an MFA program can offer that's a definite help -- but in the end, any sensible/responsible person in any field will sooner take a good piece by someone without a degree than a bad one from someone with one.

This would have been my thought too but I'm increasingly getting the sense that it is in fact true in the Visual Arts world -- not literally a "requirement" but you don't see bios that don't list MFAs.

People are, ideally, not paying $80k for MFAs (and you're including living expenses here, yes?) -- ideally, you want to do them someplace that funds you, or you want to collect grants or scholarpships from elsewhere.

Thing is, I don't get the impression that visual arts MFAs usually offer funding. Maybe because it's too easy to find working artists who need the extra income and are willing to teach undergrad?

Visual arts are kind of tough for me to gauge, really, because I'm not sure when they haven't privileged some level of education, or at least some insider "educated" relationship with the art world.

I don't think I ever much talked to visual-arts students about money, so I don't want to talk too much out of my ass about it, apart from bumping down the figure a bit -- $80k would be up-front unfunded tuition and living at a particularly expensive school, which makes me wonder how many of the degrees you see in people's bios are from much less expensive places. I mean, the last time I saw a bunch of work by young artist was at an MFA exhibition for the program at Hunter, which costs New Yorkers around eight thousand a year (plus gives you the chance to borrow your rent from the government for a while).

Hunter is well known as an exception, fwiw, in being a cheap/public MFA that actually has artworld cred.

It increasingly seems like this degree is some kind of prerequisite for NYC gallery representation. I almost never see artist bios that don't include one. What's the deal with this?

an mfa grad has certain amount of credibility plus the cliquish and tbh pretty incestuous nature of the art world means that mfa grads have a lot better chance of being seen by ppl that are going to give them a gallery showing. not gonna front like a know a ton about this stuff but my ex had some gallery showings and it was all through contacts developed at school.

i mean i think its flatly untrue that you have to have an MFA to show in nyc but if i were a young painter i'd probably do one. fwiw my ex was given full tuition support so its not like you HAVE to go into debt to do one of these

Off the top of my head, there are only a few working artists I know who've managed to get a gallerist, profile and shows with only a BA, and one of them was famous already for something else. The others are a married pair of Goldsmith's grads who had the fine luck of being immersed in London art world when the rest of the world was waking up to it mid-'90s.

You might have a look at a British MA at RCA, Goldsmith's or Saint Martin's, which is about £14k a year for international students exclusive of living expenses and has the advantage of a more engaging art community and proximity to other countries. The networking is also much better and if you are in any way serious about being a practicing contemporary artist, you'll have to be good at that or at least pretend you don't hate it. You may be able to get some scholarships, grants or bursaries. For an example check gold.ac.uk, where there are fee schedules and grant information which are probably par for the courses you'd be considering. Hope that helps!

Ok so I am done! Thesis still incomplete but had my had my last class and I am no longer a student. Talk about weird and anticlimactic, but somehow that feels right.

Congrats adam.

Thanks xyzzzz__

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/rampage/wp/2014/03/28/the-most-expensive-colleges-in-the-country-are-art-schools-not-ivies/

Yeah, I saw that. And the school where I got my MFA is in the top five. You can draw any number of conclusions from that article, some of them ridiculous, but I actually have a great job that requires an MFA degree, so I suppose I think it was worth it (for me).

http://www.artandeducation.net/school_watch/entire-usc-mfa-1st-year-class-is-dropping-out/