Chapter 145
Elara
The next morning, I woke to my phone buzzing. The room was dark. Yuki was snoring softly on the other side of the partition. Then I saw the pale gray light through the curtains—just after six a.m.
The caller ID showed a number I didn't recognize. I almost let it go to voicemail, but something made me answer.
"Miss Vance?" The voice was brisk, professional, female. "This is Detective Sarah Phillips with the NYPD. I'm calling regarding the incident at the Chelsea Arts Center yesterday. Do you have a moment to talk?"
I sat up so fast my head spun. "Yes. Did you find something?"
"We did." I could hear papers rustling in the background. "We reviewed the security footage from the preparation area. We were able to identify and locate the individual who damaged your materials."
My heart hammered. "Who was it?"
"A man named David Kowalski. He's what we call a professional troublemaker—he takes contract work for various disruption services. Small-scale vandalism, harassment, that sort of thing. Usually stays just under the felony threshold." Detective Phillips's voice carried a note of weary familiarity. "We brought him in for questioning last night. He admitted to damaging your supplies."
"Did he say who hired him?"
There was a pause. "He refused to identify his client. And unfortunately, without that information, we have limited options for prosecution. The damage to your materials amounts to maybe two hundred dollars in replacement value. That puts it in misdemeanor territory. He'll likely pay a fine, maybe spend a few days in lockup, but that's about it."
The disappointment hit hard. "So whoever paid him just gets away with it?"
"We're still investigating," Detective Phillips said, but I could hear the lack of conviction. "If we can find evidence of payment, bank transfers, communications—we might be able to build a case. But people like Kowalski are professionals. They know how to cover their tracks."
I closed my eyes.
"The Praxis Prize has been notified of our findings," the detective continued. "They've indicated they'll be taking their own administrative action—banning Kowalski from any future involvement with their events. And they wanted me to assure you that they're taking the incident very seriously."
"Thank you," I managed.
"One more thing, Miss Vance." Detective Phillips's voice softened. "Off the record? Whoever hired Kowalski went to a lot of trouble to target you specifically. They knew the building layout, your station number, exactly what to damage to cause maximum disruption without making it obvious. That level of planning suggests someone with resources and inside information."
"I know," I said quietly.
"Be careful," she said. "People who go to those lengths once tend to try again."
The call ended. I stared at my phone in the predawn darkness. Someone had hired a professional to sabotage me. Someone who knew exactly where I'd be and how to hurt me. And they were still out there, unpunished, probably already planning their next move.
My phone buzzed again—a notification from Twitter. The Praxis Prize official account had posted something fifteen minutes ago. I opened the app.
The tweet was long, formatted as an image of text. I had to zoom in to read it all.
---
"Official Statement from Praxis Prize International
We are writing to address recent media coverage and social media discussion regarding our preliminary round results.
First and foremost: The Praxis Prize maintains the highest standards of artistic evaluation. Our judging panel consists of five internationally recognized experts in contemporary art, each with decades of experience. Every score is documented, reviewed, and subject to multiple verification processes. There is no possibility of bribery, favoritism, or relationship-based manipulation of results.
We have seen articles and posts questioning whether our evaluation criteria are "too lenient" or whether we award "sympathy points" for contestants' personal circumstances. We want to be absolutely clear: while we respect media freedom and diverse critical perspectives, we must correct a fundamental misunderstanding of our judging standards.
Art is not—and has never been—solely about technical execution. While technical skill is important, it is only one component of artistic merit. Emotional depth, thematic interpretation, conceptual vision, and the ability to communicate human experience through visual language are equally crucial considerations.
This is not a new or controversial position. It is the foundation of how art has been evaluated for centuries.
Regarding the materials sabotage incident: We have filed a police report and are cooperating fully with NYPD's investigation. The individual responsible has been identified and will face legal consequences. Additionally, this person is permanently banned from any Praxis Prize events or affiliated programs.
We are also aware that some parties have been spreading unfounded rumors and accusations on social media. Our legal team is currently gathering evidence of defamatory statements. We strongly advise anyone engaging in such behavior to cease immediately. We will not hesitate to pursue legal action to protect the integrity of our competition and the reputations of our contestants.
Attached to this statement are high-resolution images of all semifinalist works, complete scoring breakdowns, and excerpts from our judges' written evaluations. We believe transparency is the best response to speculation.
We stand by our results. We stand by our judges. And we stand by every artist who had the courage to create and compete.
—The Praxis Prize Selection Committee"
---
Below the statement were the promised attachments—a thread of images showing each semifinalist's work in crisp detail, followed by scoring tables and judge commentary. I scrolled through until I found mine.
The photograph looked better than I remembered—the cracked window, the reaching sprout, the interplay of light and shadow. Seeing it displayed with the same professional presentation as Sloane's work, as Isabella's, made something in my chest loosen.
The scoring breakdown showed five columns of numbers. My scores ranged from 87 to 94, averaging 89.6. Sloane's were higher—92 to 98, averaging 95.2—but the gap wasn't as enormous as Ethan's article had implied.
And then the judge comments:
"Raw emotional honesty that transcends technical limitations. The artist has lived this pain."
"Compelling use of symbolic imagery. The broken window as both barrier and aperture is particularly effective."
"While brushwork could be more refined, the compositional choices demonstrate sophisticated visual thinking."
"This work will stay with viewers long after technically superior pieces are forgotten."
"The artist's willingness to expose vulnerability elevates this from competent to genuinely moving."
I read them three times, four times, until the words blurred. They saw it. They understood what I was trying to say.
My phone buzzed with a text from Raven: "DID YOU SEE THE STATEMENT?! They went OFF. This is amazing."
Then Nora: "Praxis Prize just became my new favorite organization. That legal threat at the end was CHEF'S KISS."