PDA

View Full Version : Thomas Kincade: Longlasting Prints?



chris jordan
30-Nov-2001, 14:46
I presume everyone knows of the Thomas Kincade phenomenon (there's a great artic le about his marketing scheme in a recent edition of Harpers). One thing I'm cu rious about is the longevity of his prints. He's selling printed "paintings" fo r several thousand dollars apiece, that as far as I know are merely lithographs, i.e., posters, printed with dye-based inks that are guaranteed to fade within a very small number of years. He's holding these prints out as investment-quality art, selling to the Reader's Digest set; so far he's sold more than ten million of these prints. Nowhere have I seen any mention by him of the longevity of hi s prints (or lack thereof). Is this a gargantuan act of artistic fraud? Does a nyone know any details about his printing process?

Wayne_6692
30-Nov-2001, 16:09
What has this got to do with "art". People would be better-off investing in cereal boxes. As far as I know they are just "prints" with daubs of paint splattered on by one of his (many) employees. There was something on a news show over the weekend about him (60 Minutes?), in it there was a couple who had >150 of his prints! Beenie Babies anyone?

Scott Hamming
30-Nov-2001, 17:08
60 Min. stated that they are actually developing Kincaid SUBDIVISIONS, furniture, etc... This seems to be a greatly marketed "industry". As for art, I suppose it started out that way, and could technically be called so, but is much too stereotypical for my taste.

Paul Mongillo
30-Nov-2001, 19:38
I know nothing about this person or his art. I do have a comment on the subject of longevity. There is nothing that I can think of that requires art to be permanent or long-lasting. Color prints are far from permanent. Look at the beautiful mandelas (spelling) done by Buddist monks in sand grains. Weeks can be spent on creating them. They simply let them blow away when complete. I don't think cost has anything to do with it either. People regularly pay around $75,000 (a guess) for a Porche. I don't think they expect it to last forever if they drive it. Whether the stuff this fellow is selling is art or not, I don't know, but unless he is making false claims about any aspect of it, then its just free enterprise. I'm impressed that he is making gobbs of money. I would be happy to break even selling my fine art photographs.

Robert A. Zeichner
30-Nov-2001, 20:31
I'm going to stick my neck way out here and perhaps offend a few people, but if I ever were to own a Kincade anything (and someone would have to sneak it into my house without my knowing), I could only hope the inks used in printing it were as fugitive as possible! His work is overpriced dreck that is one more compelling reason this country needs to invest heavily in providing a good liberal arts education to every single child. If schools did a better job of teaching appreciation for art, music and literature, perhaps such crap would fade away. G_d, I feel better!

mark lindsey
30-Nov-2001, 20:53
Yes Robert, I am offended!! You were way too kind..... :)

Matt_1193
30-Nov-2001, 22:51
Amen to that!!

Lyle Aldridge
1-Dec-2001, 11:30
Sorry folks, but this sorta sounds like jealousy to me. What's mostly "wrong" with Kinkade's works is that "too many" people liked them, so "too many" prints got made and sold, so someone made "too much" money, and we're all jealous because it wasn't us, (and our work is just as "good"). I have some of the same reaction, but the reason the stuff sells is that it somehow evokes feelings in millions of people who buy it. You don't have to like it to realize that means it falls right in the bullseye of the core definition of "ART."

So, now that I've got that off my chest, does anyone know the answer to Chris's original question about the printing process?

Natha Congdon
1-Dec-2001, 12:17
Thought the group would appreciate this biographical info on the renowned artist, downloaded from one of about a thousand web hits with his name: As America's foremost living artist, Thomas Kinkade's reputation continues to grow, and so does the demand for his artwork. Even people who have never had much of an interest in art before find themselves captivated by Thomas Kinkade's wonderfully warm and inviting visions of quaint, cozy cottages and sophisticated, impressionistic cityscapes that are among the artist's signature subjects.

Thomas Kinkade was born in 1958 and grew up in Northern California in the small town of Placerville. Though the family did not have wealth, Kinkade often says they were "rich in the greatest form of wealth: a nurturing and affirming love." His first collector was his mother who would frame his childhood drawings and use them to decorate the family home.

Kinkade studied art at the University of California at Berkeley, where his roommate was the now-renowned artist James Gurney. Kinkade furthered his art education at the Art Center College of Design in Pasadena. Thomas Kinkade has won numerous awards, including the 1995 Artist of the Year and the 1996, 1997 and 1998 Graphic Artist of the Year from the National Association of Limited Edition Dealers (NALED.) Additionally, he has won the 1995 Collector Editions Award of Excellence and was a charter inductee to the Bradford International Hall of Fame. In August of 1997, Kinkade was presented with the Distinguished Service Award from the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the first time this award was presented to an artist.In 1982 he got married Nanette, and has 4 daughters from her.

Sounds like quite a guy! Who needs to hack off their ears to be a great artist, eh?

Nathan

Geoffrey Swenson
1-Dec-2001, 13:06
In relation to the Thomas Kinkade controversy...unmitigated horror!! When I saw the 60 minutes piece it felt like watching a mass-murder taking place. How can anyone even discuss trash like that is beyond me!

I am sure anyone who considering his (art's) merit are the same who are crying foul that LaserJet prints are not photography. Some B&W and also some Ciba printers are doing much more "manipulations" to their prints.

Sorry, Geoffrey

Geoffrey Swenson
1-Dec-2001, 13:22
To the Thomas Kinkade controversy all I can add...unmitigated horror!!! How can anyone even consider his (art's) merit is beyond me. When I was watching the 60 minutes piece I felt I was seeing mass-murder taking place in front of my eyes! Possibly his suporters are the same ones who are crying foul that Lightjet photograps are not real photographs, even though some B&W and Ilfochrome printers use way more "manipulation" in their prints. Just see Michael Fatali's red stones, (remember he does not use filters and waits days for the light for days, "or makes his own"). I think even lipstick is not available in those shades. So the possible solution to duplicate Thomas Kinkade's success...mass- produce some mundane print and do some bleaching on them!! Voila real ART!!

Sorry,

Geoffrey

Kevin M Bourque
1-Dec-2001, 13:24
Kinkade's paintings are way too assembly-line sentimental to be enjoyable, archival or not! I have a co-worker who just loves the stuff. I don't consider it my role to change her mind, but I do keep this year's Edward Hopper calendar displyed so all can see.

On the other hand, I can't fault anyone for making a living. Let's pretend I had a picture of cute little puppy dogs peeking their heads out from under a blanket, and everyone just loved it, and I had a chance to make a killing......hmmmm. Buys a lot of film.

Of course, we can only hope that the civilization comes to a graceful end before a Thomas Kinkade/Kenny G collaboration can occur.

Robert A. Zeichner
1-Dec-2001, 16:41
Kenny G. There's another one you can add to the list! Don't these folks bore themselves? I guess the sweet taste of financial success can act as an anesthetic to creativity and originality.

Wayne_6692
1-Dec-2001, 23:13
It's dreck. Just like the photos of the Weimeraers, just like the paintings of the kids with the saucer-sized eyes that look as if they were just released from Dachau. There's no soul, there's no spirit. It's a money-making enterprise pure and simple. Just because it's popular doesn't make it art. I hate to be the first to state this (and I hope it's not news) but the majority is almost always wrong. Just because the American public wouldn't recognize art it if it bit them in the a**, and goes for sloppy sentimentality over intellectual and emotionalinsight every time, is no reason to brand what is popular as "art". This is a country where poets starve, and professional athletes make more money in a year than the gross national product of all but a few countries. The previous poster who equated Thomas Kincade with Kenny G. was, in my estimation, spot on in his assessment. God help us all if it is archival! Sorry - rant over (gotta cut down on the sugar).

Wayne_6692
1-Dec-2001, 23:35
In case anyone was confused I misspelled "Weimeraners" in my last rant. Add to my list of despised images those of naked infants with butterfly wings. And while I'm at is about the horrid taste of the American public I offer as further evidence the atrocities of "wine in a box" and "aerosol cheese food spread". Also the recent mutilation of the Chrysler Concorde commercial. My glycemic index must be through the roof! I'm going to go run some laps now. Bye.

Kevin M Bourque
2-Dec-2001, 00:48
Good rant, Wayne. At the risk of wandering even farther off topic, I can't help adding a few more abominations:

- Britney Spears

- 98 Degrees of Boyz 'n Sync (same thing, different sex)

- "reality" television

- recycled 60's tv shows as movies

- mens magazines that depict women holding their breasts on the cover (no one should be allowed to take that picture again, ever!)

- Volvos that aren't shaped like bricks

- tv evangelists with bad hair

- photographs whose sole message is, "I AM SCREAMING IN YOUR FACE! I WILL CONTINUE SCREAMING UNTIL YOU REACT AND THEREBY JUSTIFY MY EXISTENCE!"

- and of course, that final Horseman of the Apocalypse, the designated hitter.

Friends, when I get to be King, all this stuff is OUTA HERE. Be prepared.

Now, where's the Paxil........

Peter Brown
2-Dec-2001, 03:38
If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is STILL a foolish thing - Bertrand Russell

Perhaps the same can be said for liking Thomas Kincade prints!

- Peter Brown

Joseph S.
2-Dec-2001, 06:43
The next thing I expect to read is that if its not subsidized by the NEA than its not art. The joke is on all of you. The fact that it brings out deep emotions in the folks that like it. And even deeper emotion in the ones that loath it is proof enough that it is art. I have been selling my work for 55 years and was in art education at the college level for 35. And in those years I have learned that most artists are very selfish at the cost of other artists. By selling art at discount prices like Walmart just to make quick cash. Art is special it sells it self if your work does not strike enough emotion to sell for thousands of dollars than perhaps you are not as talented an artist as Thomas K. or perhaps not an artist at all. These "poster" have a life of about 50 years that's long enough for some. Very good topic of descussion.

Wayne_6692
2-Dec-2001, 13:22
I'm still around. I think that painters are at a disadvantage when it comes to the question of what is "art". Photographers, songwriters, and practioners of other creative disciplines can present their work without the stigmatizing label of "art" having been applied. Unfortunately, that doesn't apply to painters. "Painting" is labeled as art by the masses, regardless as to what's been placed on the canvas. We photographers all have "pretty pictures" lying around - I doubt that any of us would deem them to be "art". There are some magnificent songs that have been written - have any of you ever connected the word "art" with a song? But hang a painting on the wall, and you are now an "artist". I'm well acquainted with Kincade's work. My brother is a painter, sculptor, jeweler, engraver, woodcarver (artist?) and we visit as many gallerys as possible - I've been to one of Kincade's. His prints are "charming" in an overly cute, cloying, sentimental way - but what do they mean? What has the painter invested of himself to allow this work to be called "art". Just saying that it evokes an empotion in a viewer (good or bad) isn't enough. When I view photographs of Nazi Germany, or photographs of poor people suffering by Sabastio Salgado I feel emotions - are they art? If I step into a pile of dog crap I feel an emotion (am I now an "artist" performing a piece of "performance art"?), so what? My definition of what I percieve as art has evolved to the point where I question the validity of the word itself. In the end it's all "craft" - what elevates a certain work above the others to cause it to become art? Anyone who practices a craft is striving to be "artistic" and create "art" - who determines if they've been sucessful? Sorry, but I think that the concept of "art" is a flawed one. We label the things which we appreciate as "good art", those we hate as "bad art", and everything inbetween as "not art". When you reflect upon it, it's just plain silly. Of course the biggest joke is the "art critic". Someone who makes a living determining if others create good or bad art. That's why people buy $28,000 styrofoam coffee cups, and pay >$100,000 for Cindy Sherman photographs - because someone else has declared it art. When you've been around it for a long time you realize just what a joke it really is.

Doremus Scudder
3-Dec-2001, 13:07
"No one ever went broke by underestimating the good taste of the American public." -P.T. Barnum

I looks like the cult of mediocrity has struck again and is growing uncontrolled! Please, send your kids to good private schools with an intelligent liberal arts curriculum. Only education (as opposed to "training") can stop this sort of "dumbing down". I'll keep trying my best to look the other way and ignore such questions as "What's a Mozart?".

Steve Feldman
3-Dec-2001, 17:07
Chris,

Without attempting to comment on the artistic values of his work . . . here goes. Having been, and still am, a commercial lithographer, (an a large format photographer) I can answer your original question. I worked at one of the L. A., CA based printing companies that printed several of Kincade's prints. Yes, these are produced by the standard four color process printing method and use standard, oil based printing inks. Take a look at any poster in any window at any retail store that faces the sun. The print will start to fade almost immediately. Most notably is process magenta, when yellow, then cyan, then black - in that order. Process magenta is called a fugitive color, even by the ink manufacturers. So . . . how long will a print last in direct sun? About a week. It may vanish off of the paper in six months. Inside your home under indirect lighting? . . . several years. Dark storage? . . . the acid in the paper will start to self destruct in a few decades.

Even my old B & W prints that have hung on may walls for years resist fading better than ink on paper.

Now, as for the artistic value of the man . . . that's a completely different matter.

Regards,

S. F.

John H. Henderson
5-Dec-2001, 14:22
Hey, Doremus, I don't care what other people think, I've got a Mozart painting and I love it! ;)

Kaatharine Thayer
8-Dec-2001, 15:50
I didn't think I'd ever heard of this guy, but looking through files for something yesterday I came across an article I'd clipped from the NY Times about one of Kinkade's enterprises, which involves real estate: he has draftsmen and builders make houses that look like the houses in his paintings, and people buy these houses and live in them, and hang the painting that the house was copied from, over the mantel.

Robert A. Zeichner
8-Dec-2001, 19:15
I thought I read somewhere that Kenny G. purchased one of the Kincade homes. I also understand he had some saxaphone shaped streetlamps commissioned to line the walkway. Who said money can't buy taste?

pete oneill
23-Mar-2002, 19:34
what bothers me is the marketing scam of christian beliefs in his paintings, adjusting the lighting up and down up and down over and over again to sell a three thousand dollar print that came out of a large inkjet printer. yes folks thats what a giclee is. ink jet with a little better quality ink but stil a dye ink

Ellis Vener
24-Mar-2002, 14:43
It is always best to say things like this with a song:

I AGREE WITH PAT METHENY (2001) ?2001 Richard Thompson

"I agree with Pat Metheny Kenny's talents are too teeny He deserves the crap he's going to get He overdubbed himself on Louis What a musical chop suey Raised his head above the parapet

Well Louis Armstrong was the king He practically invented swing Hero of the twentieth century He did duets with many a fella "Fatha" Hines, Bing, Hoagy, Ella Strange he never thought of Kenny G

A meeting of great minds, how nice Like Einstein and Sporty Spice Digitally fused in an abortion Kenny fans will doubtless rave While Satchmo turns inside his grave Soprano man's bit off more than his portion

Oh brainless pentatonic riffs Display our Kenny's arcane gifts But we don't care, his charms are so beguiling He does play sharp, but let's be fair He has such lovely crinkly hair We hardly notice, we're too busy smiling

How does he hold those notes so long? He must be a genius. Wrong! He just has the mindlessness to do it He makes Britney sound like scat If this is jazz I'll eat my hat An idle threat, I'll never have to chew it

So next time you're in a rendezvous And Kenny's sound comes wafting through Don't just wince, eliminate the cause Rip the tape right off the muzak Pull the plug, or steal a fuse, Jack The whole room will drown you in applause

Yes, Kenny G has gone too far The gloves are off, it's time to spar Grab your hunting rifle, strap your colt on It's open season on our Ken But I await the moment when We lay off him and start on Michael Bolton

I agree with Pat Metheny Kenny's talents are too teeny."

Michael Chmilar
25-Mar-2002, 13:41
http://www.salon.com has had a couple of articles recently on the Kincade subdivisions (which are just generic tract houses) and the Kincade novel (which was written by the lesser-credited coauthor).

Stu Weinstein
13-May-2002, 02:10
I think that there is some sort of subliminal message in his paintings-something that forces people to buy them. No other explination I can see for his popularity. His crap isn't on par with pictures of Elvis on black velvet. I have family members that spend fortunes on Kincade garbage. Paintings, switchplates, towels, dishes, you name it. Kincade toilet paper if they made it.{probably do by now}. I think if Tom says so, they'll sign over all their assets to him and move to Guyana.

Frank Petronio
5-Nov-2006, 18:59
I'm drinking cocoa from my TK mug. It is very high quality and not likely to fade for many years. I rather like some of his pictures actually, with the multiple light sources and whatnot.

Sheldon N
5-Nov-2006, 19:07
I wonder if Thomas Kincade would be as prolific if he had to stand on the beach/stare at the lighthouse/wait overlooking the rustic small town until the magic light showed up.

I say - No Fair!

How come he gets to create the magic light himself in his little painting studio, while we mortals have to wait for the real thing?

Gordon Moat
5-Nov-2006, 19:22
If Thomas Kinkaid is considered a great artist, then Howard Stern should be proclaimed a great orator. That Scottish restaurant, McDonald's, sells billions of burgers . . . should be proclaimed as a culinary delight on par with the greatest of five star restaurants. All have that certain mob appeal, perfect for short attention spans.
:rolleyes:

It is not professional jelousy when one is not motivated by money. The gentleman considers and takes the path of what is right and just, while the lesser man considers and follows only what pays. The demands that a gentleman makes are upon himself; those that a lesser man makes are upon others.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio (http://www.allgstudio.com)

matthew blais
5-Nov-2006, 20:13
He is a brilliant marketer.
And he needs to be.

'nuff said...

Hugo Zhang
5-Nov-2006, 20:52
His popularity really reflects the taste of the mass. In a way, he is quite successful as an icon of American culture.

Brian Vuillemenot
5-Nov-2006, 23:31
Would you guys please stop dissing Kincade all ready! Jeeze, now I think I'll have to go listen to some Kenny G. just to calm down... ;)

Chuck Pere
6-Nov-2006, 05:51
I have noticed that ink jet prints of paintings seem to be getting popular. And they sell for pretty high prices not $20-30. Also people doing some actual painting on the ink jet surface. But I really don't recall anything in the galleries talking about the lifetime of these ink jets. Must be in the fine print someplace.

paulr
6-Nov-2006, 08:51
Sorry folks, but this sorta sounds like jealousy to me. What's mostly "wrong" with Kinkade's works is that "too many" people liked them ...

but the reason the stuff sells is that it somehow evokes feelings in millions of people who buy it. You don't have to like it to realize that means it falls right in the bullseye of the core definition of "ART."

You could be right, but ultimately I agree with Robert when he blames the failing of education in this country. There are worse problems coming from this failure than horrendous taste in art, but it's still a symptom of something.

What's wrong with Kinkaide's work is its ultimate inauthenticity. It's a highly distilled form of sentimentality, carefully engineered to manipulate the emotions of people don't have the visual sophistication to see the manipulation. He uses old, button-pushing tricks to make people nostalgic for something that they never actually experienced, or perhaps never even exist (in this case, the "good old days" when "everything was simpler" and "people were good"). It's a phenomenon I've heard called Phantom Nostalgia. It's a kind of escapism that denies being escapist. It's at the heart of what we call kitsch.

The problem with millions of people buying his work is that they're doing it at the exclusion of work that might actually enrich their lives, rather than just placate them with sentimentality.

I'd rather see people looking at Kinkaide than looking at nothing. But there are so many other choices that could serve people better, if we could actually get them to look at the work long enough to see it. Work that digs deep into experiences they could actually relate to. Work that illuminates the world they actually live in. Work that connects them more solidly to the rich tradition of other great work.

I think of Kinkaide-style kitsch as sugar water. It will indeed sustain you, and you might even get addicted to it. But you wouldn't want your kids guzzling it in place of green vegetables, meat, and potatoes.

paulr
6-Nov-2006, 09:04
As far as Chris's original question, I don't think it's fraud if Kinkaide isn't guaranteeing a specific lifespan. Maybe a lawyer could tell us if any states have implied warranties on the longevity of artwork. I'd be surprised if they did!

This seems like a 'buyer beware' kind of situation, involving a lot of unaware buyers. mostly an issue if people are buying as longterm investments, or (shudder) heirlooms.

jshanesy
6-Nov-2006, 10:56
"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."

-H.L. Mencken

Brian Sims
6-Nov-2006, 22:04
Whoa! Now I know why I don't watch TV. I didn't even know this guy was out there. I checked his site and his work had that "things-are-really-screwed-up-in-the-world-so-I-need-some-sappy-escapist-art" Norman Rockwell feel. Rockwell was pumping out the pabulum for 2 world wars, some lesser skirmishes, and a big chunk of the cold war. Let's hope Kincade has a shorter run.

Alan Davenport
7-Nov-2006, 01:06
As if the subject matter of this thread isn't depressing enough, think on this:

Most of the people who love Kincaid's "art" are also old enough TO VOTE!

j.e.simmons
7-Nov-2006, 09:41
I find his work amazing in an odd way. My boss has a number of his works, and they are of outside scenes obviously lighted from multiple sources. What planet is he painting?

Is this ignorance of light or an original viewpoint?
juan

tim atherton
8-Nov-2006, 21:11
"Kitsch is mechanical and operates by formulas," wrote art critic Clement Greenberg in his seminal essay, "Avant-Garde and Kitsch," in 1939. "Kitsch is vicarious experience and faked sensations. Kitsch changes according to style, but remains always the same. Kitsch is the epitome of all that is spurious in the life of our times."

Kitsch is imitative, cheap, sentimental, mawkish and incoherent, and derives its appeal by demeaning and degrading genuine standards and values, especially those of modernity. While the proponents of the faux retro style claim to uphold tradition, they are inherently reactive and parasitic, their words and products a tawdry patchwork, hastily assembled as declarations against authentic complexity and ambiguity, which they stigmatize as threats to the sanctity of an imaginary harmonious order of the past that they insist they and their works represent. Kitsch presumes to be based on old rules, but constantly traduces them.

(Actually from a commentary on Bush and the Fall of the House of Kitsch today - but especially suited to a discussion of Kincaid; although Kitsch and sentimentalism have always been closely allied in the rise of fascism and toitalitariansm)

paulr
8-Nov-2006, 23:11
Tim, I don't know what you're talking about. I just looked up one of Kinkade's artist statements, and it mentions nothing about trying to conquer the world ...

"A full moon on Christmas Eve is so very romantic; especially when the surprising radiance of moonlight reflects silver on a snow-filled landscape. In Christmas Moonlight, a brilliant full moon dances on the wispy clouds, paints a silver pathway over the pond, touches the snowy tree limbs with light, illuminates the walk and bridge with a welcoming glow, and bathes the roof of our solid stone retreat in a warm, milky white.

The scene is joyful and welcoming. I've draped the roof and eaves, even the bridge with festive Christmas lights. The graceful arch of the antique stone bridge and the foot path that glistens in the moonlight seem to invite the passer-by to stop by and sample the hospitality of the home. Golden light pours through big windows and smoke curls up from the chimney; the cozy comfort of the family life lived within offers a welcome refuge from the cold, crisp Christmas Eve.

In Christmas Moonlight man and nature work together to confirm the warm, inviting, generous mood of Christmas Eve. Distant barns remind us of God's bounty. The silence is pervasive ... wait, is that Santa's sleigh we hear in the distance?"

-Thomas Kinkade

Struan Gray
9-Nov-2006, 07:55
"One would have to have a heart of stone to read the death of Little Nell without laughing."

chris jordan
11-Nov-2006, 09:19
To me the most strange thing about Kincade is that he is an incredibly skilled painter, obviously possessing a rare level of artistic talent. So what would possess him to paint those kinds of subjects instead of something more fulfilling and exploratory? I suppose it must be greed, but even when you accept that, it still seems bizarre. I guess I have a hard time with the idea that someone could be highly talented and at the same time have no sense of taste whatsoever. But I suppose there are lots of famous "artists" who are examples...

Michael Kadillak
11-Nov-2006, 12:56
To me the most strange thing about Kincade is that he is an incredibly skilled painter, obviously possessing a rare level of artistic talent. So what would possess him to paint those kinds of subjects instead of something more fulfilling and exploratory? I suppose it must be greed, but even when you accept that, it still seems bizarre. I guess I have a hard time with the idea that someone could be highly talented and at the same time have no sense of taste whatsoever. But I suppose there are lots of famous "artists" who are examples...

This theme is rather generic among people that are in the "arts". Movie makers, sculpters, musicians, silversmiths, potters etc. all have to deal sooner or later with the realities of a society that has a monetary based economy. In a perfect world artistic perfection would be the pinnacle of the being successful and one would never have to concern oneself about buying materials or paying the bills. Unfortunately, reality quickly sets in that any artist is in business and it is a cold cruel world out there. Certain people inherently learn early on that the well documented struggles of their predecessors may not be the only viable alternative to continuing to chose this path of their personal passion. Being creative in finding a successful market niche takes a level of skill and understanding of art as a business that is simply wonderful and deserving of praise and emulation.

When I hear the word "greed" in a discussion on such a topic as this I feel that it seriously out of context. Greed should be associated with the likes of Enron (Skilling), Worldcom (Ebbers), Tyco (Koslowski) or post dated executive stock options because nothing Kincade did was either unethical, illegal or immoral. He is simply executing a finely crafted and unique mass marketing strategy that is highly successful. What most folks fail to realize in a post mortum review is that Kincade took considerable risk in going down this road and could have failed miserably.

I firmly believe that in this arena there are plenty of shades of grey between the white and the black. IMO most artists would opt to live to the highest standard they can attain as opposed to damn the torpedos I am not going to cave in to conventionality because I am an artist. Add a wife and some children to the mix and the pressure mounts to unbelievable levels. Nobody wants to be evicted from home, get divorced or go through personal bankrupcy trying to hold on to their dream of being an artist. As a result I respect the person that needs to make a life decision weighing all of the variables that are on their plate. When I see someone succeed to levels of success that boggle the mind, I applaud with enthusiasm cognizant of the reality that in the material world that we live in - beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Cheers!

Jim Rice
11-Nov-2006, 20:05
Forgive me:

There's this saxophone player between gigs, so he checks into a hotel. Once settled in he begins to practice. During a particularly soulful riff, he leans back and falls three stories out of the window to the street below. After a moment he gets up, picks up his axe and begins playing again.
A guy on the street has seen all of this. Unable to resist, he walks up to the sax player and says, "Man, you just fell three stories onto pavement, and not only are you okay, but your sax is okay and you're standing here playing. You have got to be the luckiest saxophone player on earth!"
The sax player ponders this for a moment and says, "Nah, man. That's still got to be Kenny G."

Robert A. Zeichner
12-Nov-2006, 07:19
I'm sorry. IMO this is just Beanie Baby bulls--t taken to an extreme that only could be realized in a country where schools have failed to provide a good education in the arts. It's the "collect 'em all" mentality that have made so many now-forgotten fads huge financial successes for their marketeers. What any of that has to do with art is a mystery to me.

chris jordan
12-Nov-2006, 08:47
Michael, there are just as many artists with taste who are making a good living from their work, as there are tasteless ones. For every Kenny G, there is a Pat Metheny; for every Thomas Kincade there is an Andreas Gursky. So I don't see the need to make a living as really being a legit reason to do tasteless work.

Brian Vuillemenot
12-Nov-2006, 11:45
Michael, there are just as many artists with taste who are making a good living from their work, as there are tasteless ones. For every Kenny G, there is a Pat Metheny; for every Thomas Kincade there is an Andreas Gursky. So I don't see the need to make a living as really being a legit reason to do tasteless work.

Chris, is this really true? First off, Kenny G. is hardly a legitimate jazz musician. The fact that so many people think he is just goes to show how little most know about jazz. I would argue that there are far more successful "tasteless" artists out there, simply because it requires a lot less mental energy to "appreciate" their "art". Culture is on a serious decline in this country. For many, their only outlet to "culture" is pop culture- watching football on the weekend, cheesy reality shows, the latest formulaic sequels at the theatre, cardboard-cutout formulaic novels like Chrichton and Grisham, and Kincade and G. as "art" and "jazz". Hey, everyone else is doing it, so it's got to be good, right?

Michael Kadillak
12-Nov-2006, 12:12
All I am saying Chris is that life is a cyclical event and one has to experience one side of an event to appreciate the opposite.

We could argue for a month of Sunday's on the subject of tastful or tastless art but the point that I want to make relative to this original post about longevity of prints is that it does not matter.

The people that purchase these pieces are doing so because it makes them feel good and probably could not accurately define "art" if you put a gun to their head. That does not make them wrong nor does it make those people right that feel that only idiots would make these Kincade purchases. Prognostications concerning the decline of modern civilization based upon this as a sample of the reasoning for this condition are highly over rated IMHO. But it makes for a very heated discussion that goes nowhere rather fast.

Cheers!

paulr
12-Nov-2006, 17:21
Michael, there are just as many artists with taste who are making a good living from their work, as there are tasteless ones. For every Kenny G, there is a Pat Metheny; for every Thomas Kincade there is an Andreas Gursky. So I don't see the need to make a living as really being a legit reason to do tasteless work.

In some cases it's not just the need to make a living, but the need to be huge. It seems that given the choice, a lot of artists would be happy to be living well, and to be held in high regard by a community of their peers. Others are restless unless they become rock stars.

A couple of other jazz musicians who are self-professed sellouts: David Sanborn and Herbie Hancock. I was friends with a percussionist who went on annual world tours with both musicians. They're both known in this country, but mostly to a small community of disappointed jazz fans. In Europe an Japan they're superstars. They sell out huge stadiums and have groupies, including hot little Japanese schoolgirls lined up to go back to the hotel with these 60 year old men.

To hang onto this huge audience, they play easy, shallow, accessible pap. Both musicians admitted to my friend that they sold out a long time ago. They laugh about it all the way to the bank.

Somehow I doubt Mr. Kinkaid has teen groupies (though I might respect him more if he did!). But he might well have a rockstar-size bank account. Unless he blew his fortune with some rockstar-size bad judgement.

chris jordan
12-Nov-2006, 17:39
Yeh, I hear what you guys are saying. I guess I just don't believe that you HAVE to sell out to be successful, so I wonder why anyone would do it to the extent that Kincade does? I mean, just think of the work that guy has the talent to produce, and yet it will never be made because he's to busy painting schlock and signing people's new condos. More than anything else, it's just sad.

Sheldon N
12-Nov-2006, 17:42
Somehow I doubt Mr. Kinkaid has teen groupies (though I might respect him more if he did!). But he might well have a rockstar-size bank account. Unless he blew his fortune with some rockstar-size bad judgement.

I agree. I'd probably follow My Kincaid's work a lot more closely if I read in the tabloids that he was getting drunk on international flights and trashing hotel rooms wherever he stayed.

paulr
12-Nov-2006, 17:58
Yeh, I hear what you guys are saying. I guess I just don't believe that you HAVE to sell out to be successful, so I wonder why anyone would do it to the extent that Kincade does? I mean, just think of the work that guy has the talent to produce, and yet it will never be made because he's to busy painting schlock and signing people's new condos. More than anything else, it's just sad.

It's also possible that he hasn't sold out, at least consciously. He might actually believe his own cheese. The kitsch sensibility might really be his sensibility.

Technical skill and talent have nothing to do with the quality of someone's vision.

paulr
13-Nov-2006, 13:02
Some interesting comments on these issues in "a tale of 2 artists" ...

http://edwardwinkleman.blogspot.com/

j.e.simmons
13-Nov-2006, 13:21
In Europe an Japan they're superstars. They sell out huge stadiums and have groupies, including hot little Japanese schoolgirls lined up to go back to the hotel with these 60 year old men.

I'm getting my soprano sax out of the closet and hitting the woodshed.
juan

CXC
14-Nov-2006, 14:19
Dang, this group feels quite a bit of rancor for a poster-painting billionaire. I can think of LOTS more deserving public figures...

People like crap, get used to it.

Alan Davenport
14-Nov-2006, 14:35
While I don't personally like T.K.'s paintings, I'm aghast that so many of you refer to his efforts as "dreck."

You have insulted dreck everywhere.

chris jordan
14-Nov-2006, 14:44
The thing that irks me about Kincade's practice is not his cheesy art; that's a matter of personal taste that is visible for the world to choose. What is questionable is the sly use of terms that to the unsophisticated would suggest longevity, such as "museum quality". And this, from his website, referring to his prints: "... carefully reproduced on cotton fibre convas using the methods and materials used by the artist on his original paintings."

These are prints that were offered just a few years ago in his galleries for thousands of dollars, and yet the prints are made using the same dye-based inks as cheap posters, likely to fade radically within 5-10 years. The term "same methods and materials" is misleading-- it suggests that the prints are made with paint, not ink. I think that the people who bought $12,000 posters 10 years ago would be pretty bummed to find out that it wasn't the "same materials" at all, and that their "museum quality" painting is now a sickly cyan color because the yellow ink has all faded away.

I just went to his current website and noted that his prints are selling for far less nowadays-- $250, and that includes "mahogany-finished wood frame with burnished detailing" (particle board with a plastic decal, eh?). Well at least the market seems to have caught up with him to some extent...

I do remember going into one of his galleries about 12 years ago in Carmel, and receiving the whole sales pitch. They dimmed the lights to show "the glowing feeling" of the print, and can you guess what music was playing at the time? I swear on my grandmother's grave, it was Kenny G.

paulr
14-Nov-2006, 14:58
Kinkade and Kenny G? In Hand-Burnished(tm) particle board? That sounds almost irresistable.

But before you act, here's an exclusive offer so special, it's already kept its haunting fascination forever:

http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/docs/humor/fionavar/new_yorker

Jorge Gasteazoro
15-Nov-2006, 08:07
People like crap, get used to it.

Then I must be doing work of amazing beauty since none of my prints have sold lately... :D

paul stimac
15-Nov-2006, 09:50
I do remember going into one of his galleries about 12 years ago in Carmel, and receiving the whole sales pitch. They dimmed the lights to show "the glowing feeling" of the print, and can you guess what music was playing at the time? I swear on my grandmother's grave, it was Kenny G.

This must be a popular sales technique. I was in Fatali's gallery in Henderson and they did the same thing with the sales pitch and the lights. I'm not sure if Kenny G was playing but the words "glow" and "glowing" were used many times.

paulr
15-Nov-2006, 10:08
Then I must be doing work of amazing beauty since none of my prints have sold lately... :D

that's my reasoning too.

QT Luong
15-Nov-2006, 10:37
I do not believe that Kincade compromised his artistic vision in order to become successful. His vision of the world is informed by some deeply held religious beliefs that I think he expressed quite well in his art. They do seem to resonate quite well with certain audiences in the US, such as evangelical christians.

On the other hand, it is well documented that his business practices are sometimes questionable, as he had to defend several lawsuits. I'd lump into this category the archival quality (or lack thereof) of prints.

Al Seyle
15-Nov-2006, 11:54
I'm relieved to see that his "deeply held religious beliefs" don't get in the way of his questionable business practices.

CXC
15-Nov-2006, 14:38
I can't prove it, but I believe TK did what most of us would consider some more "serious" work early in his career (right out of some real art college?), and consciously opted to change to his later religio-populist style. Actually Bob "Joy Of Painting" Ross followed a similar path, from serious to populist technique, though in his case as a teacher rather than a producer.

As an amateur painter I can afford to be deadly serious (by my own standards) and never repeat myself; yet I don't begrudge these professionals for making a good living and connecting with a large audience by pursuing a different path. Granted it is a path paved with crap...

kilmer
30-Nov-2006, 09:31
I don't know about the process he uses, however I recieved one of his prints as a gift in 1991. The colors have not faded to date and the "painting" is still in pristine condition.

Kevin Crisp
30-Nov-2006, 09:50
You opened it?

David_Senesac
30-Nov-2006, 14:46
Kincade delivered a unique painting product that appealed to ordinary people and his marketing success has made a lot of people very jealous including it seems a lot of other painters and photographers haha. I have no problem whatsoever understanding why ordinary people enjoy his street scene art. As to the longevity of lithographs and other like processes that reproduce relatively inexpensive images of traditional paintings, there are cheap inks with short lifetimes and those that can last over a century. I would guess without knowing any stats that the market for lithographs, seriographs , posters and like processes that reproduce paintings or images is far larger than the fine art photography market. Certainly not because that art is more enjoyable or aesthetic or desirable by the average person but rather because the overwhelming dominance of galleries, mall outlets, museums, interior decoration businesses etc that sell traditional fine art or reproductions. ...David

CP Goerz
4-Feb-2007, 23:37
The buyers of these types of pieces, I feel, want to 'believe' that these places exist and that they can go there in their minds, away from reality....to go to a 'happy place' that has never existed except in the Chicken Soup for the Soul type books amongst others. Just look at how well those books do! Escapism is a full time pursuit for many people.

Lazybones
5-Feb-2007, 00:30
Escapism is a full time pursuit for many people.

Drink wine and smoke trees.

Aggie
5-Feb-2007, 10:16
I lost it for Kincade the first time I saw his work. He claimed to be the painter of light, and they did the little demo of turning up and down the lights to show the warm glow. That painting technique has been used for centuries. It is not new, nor orginal by any stretch. What was brilliant was the marketing and the hype. People bought the BS. I live right by Fatalli, and know him and his employees. His hype is that he does everything the old fashioned way with film, and no digital steps. He also claims he uses no filters. Well in actuality he is lying. He makes digital negatives after he adjusts the scanned image. Lately he has been taking straight digital shots, and making the digital negs. Then he prints them in the darkroom. A lot lately have been farmed out to labs where they are being ink jet printed. I was in his gallery a couple weeks ago in Springdale Utah. The salesperson was going on about his techniques. I came up to one print that showed pixelation and other artifacts, and asked, "Why the digital poster print selling for thousands as a real darkroom printed photo?" They guy argued with me, and said it was a straight print. I got outside and one of the other employees came out and laughed telling me I was the first person to catch one of their digital prints.

I don't mind smart marketing. We all would love to make that kind of money. What I detest is the misleading the public about the truth behind the hype. PT Barnum had it right, There is a sucker born every minute.

tim atherton
5-Feb-2007, 10:50
photo proto-kincaid:

http://memory.loc.gov/pnp/ppmsc/08800/08873v.jpg

roteague
5-Feb-2007, 11:38
photo proto-kincaid:



Sorry Tim, but I'm not familiar with Kincade or his work. Is this a photograph by him?

tim atherton
5-Feb-2007, 11:53
Sorry Tim, but I'm not familiar with Kincade or his work. Is this a photograph by him?

here's Kincaid


http://www.thomaskinkade.com/magi/servlet/com.asucon.ebiz.home.web.tk.HomeServlet

the picture is a Photochrom from about 1900 ish

Struan Gray
5-Feb-2007, 12:20
You've got to admire a man who can inspire a thread that lasts this long.

Lazybones
5-Feb-2007, 13:01
You've got to admire a man who can inspire a thread that lasts this long.

No you don't.

naturephoto1
5-Feb-2007, 13:34
Thomas Kincade does not have a good name according to people that paricipate in Art Shows, Museums, or critics. But, unless things have changed, he or his company is the only artist traded on the NY Stock Exchange. :eek: :rolleyes: :( I have never liked his work, and has been mentioned he touts himself as the "Painter of Light". As far as I am concerned if you want to see work by the "Painter of Light" look at work by Johannes Vermeer.

Rich

Vaughn
5-Feb-2007, 14:20
Is this guy related in any way to the woman who photographed babies dressed up as bees, in flowerpots, etc. ?

Vaughn

Kirk Gittings
5-Feb-2007, 14:27
In Kincaids case, it is the only time that I hope that Gicle prints fade quickly.

Scott Davis
5-Feb-2007, 14:41
Is this guy related in any way to the woman who photographed babies dressed up as bees, in flowerpots, etc. ?

Vaughn

That's Anne Geddes (now I need to go wash my mouth for even mentioning her name). Abomination on the name of photography! Give me a dozen photos by that guy who shoots the insides of non-frost-free refridgerators over anything by that polluter of film!

QT Luong
5-Feb-2007, 15:06
What's wrong with Anne Geddes work, besides the fact that she is very successful ?

David Louis
5-Feb-2007, 18:54
Geddes is a financial success, but not a critical success….at least among the critics within the High Art community, where her work is considered to be vacuous and formulaic. Pretty pictures. Form without content. The parallel here with Kinkade is apt. The cynical retort (not without truth) from the popular culture front is that her work would be more palatable to museums, galleries and art critics if the babies shown in her photographs were dead babies.

Vaughn
5-Feb-2007, 19:30
What's wrong with Anne Geddes work, besides the fact that she is very successful ?

Actually, I brought it up a bit tougue-in-cheek. The two really are not the same. Anne never claimed to be high art...she was just a commercial success based on the cuteness and technical competence of her images. Excellent greeting card images and I suppose a successful child portrait business.

I will even say that her images were a source of some of the inspiration for my SX-70 images of my triplets when they were in the pre-crawling stage of their life (it was great -- you could stick them anywhere and they could not crawl away!) I did not try to make Anne Geddes images, but they served as good "points of departure".

And since I am a bit of a New Zealand-phile, anyone from NZ can't be too bad!

Vaughn

roteague
5-Feb-2007, 22:11
here's Kincaid


http://www.thomaskinkade.com/magi/servlet/com.asucon.ebiz.home.web.tk.HomeServlet

the picture is a Photochrom from about 1900 ish

Thanks Tim. I recognize his work, in fact I have a book of his work. Although I like his work quite a bit, it isn't the type I would hang on my wall.

Scott Davis
6-Feb-2007, 07:51
What's wrong with Anne Geddes work, besides the fact that she is very successful ?

It's nauseating kitsch of the worst order. William Wegman with babies.

roteague
6-Feb-2007, 10:18
And since I am a bit of a New Zealand-phile, anyone from NZ can't be too bad!

Vaughn

Actually, she is Australian.

Vaughn
6-Feb-2007, 10:21
Actually, she is Australian.

Damn...well, that's okay, too (after all, I married an Aussie!)

Bruce Watson
6-Feb-2007, 10:32
In Kincaids case, it is the only time that I hope that Gicle prints fade quickly.
I'll settle for just this thread fading. It doesn't seem to want to die.

chris jordan
6-Feb-2007, 11:34
This thread is lasting longer that Thomas Kinkade's prints.

Tim Hyde
7-Feb-2007, 14:38
You know: it's okay for practitioners of an art to be indifferent to popular taste but it's sometimes dangerous to be contemptuous of it. Some of the eye-rolling, in-the know, elbow-jabbing snobishness here is nothing short of supercilious. It doesn't matter to Thomas Kincade, I'm sure, but it sure makes us look like so many impotent middlebrows. Frankly I'm a little embarrassed.

Alan Davenport
7-Feb-2007, 18:41
I'm just bored.

Brian C. Miller
10-Feb-2007, 23:09
Come on, enough whining! :)

Everybody here has a camera, and therefore has the potential of making something that is better than TK's paintings. If you aren't working at doing that, what's the point of having the camera in the first place? Darkroom, darkroom, wherefore art thou, darkroom?

And if you can't make a photograph that's better than TK's paintings, why not paint a picture that's better than his? All it takes is effort and practice.

big_ben_blue
13-Feb-2008, 13:08
That's Anne Geddes (now I need to go wash my mouth for even mentioning her name). Abomination on the name of photography! Give me a dozen photos by that guy who shoots the insides of non-frost-free refridgerators over anything by that polluter of film!


It's nauseating kitsch of the worst order. William Wegman with babies.

I guess then you don't want to hear what I just saw at a local used books store - A HUGE Anne Geddes coffeetable book WITH a included Celine Dione CD :eek: !!! Watching babies to the tune of 'My heart will go on' :D . Oh and NO, I didn't buy it.



As for this Kinkade fellow; sure, his stuff is making my breakfast wanting to have a comeback of sorts, but I could happily retire with an income like that and don't give a $%#! what everyone else thinks :cool: :

Kinkade is reported to have earned $53 million for his artistic work in the period 1997 to May 2005.

paulr
13-Feb-2008, 13:50
...his stuff is making my breakfast wanting to have a comeback of sorts...

a comeback just like this thread!

big_ben_blue
13-Feb-2008, 13:53
a comeback just like this thread!

Well, we are all guilty of a little bit of indiscretion once in a while or is it indigestion? :D

Cheers

srbphoto
13-Feb-2008, 14:49
Remember, what a lot of you have said about TK'S work, populist appeal, and marketing has also been said about...



WAIT FOR IT...




Ansel Adams:eek:

paulr
13-Feb-2008, 15:18
Sure, but a lot of good has been said about AA's work, too, by actual critics and curators and historians.

Has someone like Szarkowski ever said a good thing (or anything at all) about Mr. K.?

tim atherton
13-Feb-2008, 18:12
You don't have to like it to realize that means it falls right in the bullseye of the core definition of "ART."



actually, it falls into the core defintion of Kitsch with its attendant emotion of sentimentality - neither of which has much to do with "art" at all

Greg Lockrey
13-Feb-2008, 18:30
actually, it falls into the core defintion of Kitsch with its attendant emotion of sentimentality - neither of which has much to do with "art" at all

What! :eek: 34,000 buyers of an edition all can't all be wrong. :rolleyes:

Gordon Moat
13-Feb-2008, 19:40
What! :eek: 34,000 buyers of an edition all can't all be wrong. :rolleyes:

. . . . and that Scottish restaurant . . . McDonald's, has over 1 Billion served . . . Must be something all those people know that I don't . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NAH!!!
:D

thetooth
13-Feb-2008, 19:55
kincade and witkin are going to work on a series of limited edition prints . supposed to be a smash !!!

paulr
13-Feb-2008, 20:36
kincade and witkin are going to work on a series of limited edition prints . supposed to be a smash !!!

will somebody please create this series in photoshop, so i don't have to?

Struan Gray
14-Feb-2008, 00:48
It's been done:

http://www.joeorton.org/Pages/Joe_Orton_Gallery15.html

domenico Foschi
14-Feb-2008, 01:05
kincade and witkin are going to work on a series of limited edition prints . supposed to be a smash !!!

On a related Story Witkin in an interview has expressed vague concerns describing Kinkade as a troubled man.
The project will be entitled Witkinkade.

jetcode
14-Feb-2008, 04:12
actually, it falls into the core defintion of Kitsch with its attendant emotion of sentimentality - neither of which has much to do with "art" at all

are you a central authority figure in art with enough clout to make the call on "what is" and "what isn't" art? - there is plenty of art in Kinkade's work - the impressionists were rejected by their peers but again who has the authority to make the call on "what is art"?

Greg Lockrey
14-Feb-2008, 06:08
. . . . and that Scottish restaurant . . . McDonald's, has over 1 Billion served . . . Must be something all those people know that I don't . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NAH!!!
:D

Surely you jest....that's FINE cusine don't you know?:rolleyes:

tim atherton
14-Feb-2008, 07:49
are you a central authority figure in art with enough clout to make the call on "what is" and "what isn't" art? - there is plenty of art in Kinkade's work - the impressionists were rejected by their peers but again who has the authority to make the call on "what is art"?

No, but I have studied Kitsch and his work fits perfectly any of its many definitions - in many ways he is a textbook example

Just a few examples:


“‘Kitsch’ is a German word born in the middle of the sentimental nineteenth century.... Kitsch is the absolute denial of shit, in both the literal and the figurative senses of the word; kitsch excludes everything from its purview which is essentially unacceptable in human existence.” “...the need for kitsch [is] the need to gaze into the mirror of the beautifying lie and to be moved to tears of gratification at one’s own reflection.”... “Kitsch causes two tears to flow in quick succession. The first tear says: How nice to see children running on the grass! The second tear says: How nice to be moved, together with all mankind, by children running on the grass. It is the second tear that makes kitsch kitsch.”

kitsch is "the absolute denial of shit". Kitsch is that vision of the world in which nothing unwholesome or indecent is allowed to come into view. It's the aesthetics of wanting to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony. Kitsch excludes shit in order to paint a picture of perfection, a world of purity and moral decency.

.....

But kitsch is also the abolition of creativity and it repulses every artist’s effort to make any original, provocative masterpiece. Kundera wrote: “The feeling induced by kitsch must be a kind the multitudes can share. Kitsch may not, therefore, depend on an unusual situation; it must derive from the basic images people have engraved in their memories”.

Once again we notice the contrast between the individuality of the artist, who is supposed to produce new and stimulating works, and the common taste requested by totalitarian kitsch.

For this reason, “everything that infringes on kitsch must be banished for life: every display of individualism … every doubt … all irony (because in the realm of kitsch everything must be taken quite seriously)”.

All of this fits perfectly with the current state of mind of a huge swath of the population - their fears and uncertainties, their dread etc. Kitsch always prospers in such circumstances and Kincaide has successfully tapped into that and as a result has a runaway success.

There is also a potential dark undercurrent to all this which exists independently of the object itself

jetcode
14-Feb-2008, 08:21
does it matter? - his work is still art regardless of the labels and critical viewpoints - I likewise consider the work in pocket watches and gun handles art and by all definitions they would considered kitsch too

my main question is why the need to bury the man in criticism, to project on him a fraud of art, to condemn his very existence?

the basis of all resentment is the perceived lack of balance between one or more entities, in this case if Kinkade had never existed then likely someone else would become the beacon of inequality regarding art

why do artists waste so much time punching holes in other peoples work?

Alan Davenport
14-Feb-2008, 08:53
I don't like his paintings, but I wish I had his business acumen.

nathanm
14-Feb-2008, 10:14
Kincaid paints extremely pretty eye candy that appeals to a lot of people. So naturally he's going to make some bucks at it. Just like anything else, there's certain content which is going to have a broad appeal in the mainstream. People producing art which doesn't have that instant gratification, which may be more complex or vague, expresses darker emotions, is not as pretty etc. is going to have a more limited market. Too much energy can be expended by the more underground taste people getting all bitter about this fact instead of just accepting it and continuing with their one's own ideas about what is good art and let popularity fall where it may.

paulr
14-Feb-2008, 10:59
does it matter? - his work is still art regardless of the labels and critical viewpoints - I likewise consider the work in pocket watches and gun handles art and by all definitions they would considered kitsch too

I certainly consider it art, but art of the shallowest kitschiest sort.

And I don't see pocket watches and gun handles in the same light. The decorative arts are their own tradition and aren't necessarily kitsch (though they can be).

jetcode
14-Feb-2008, 11:27
I certainly consider it art, but art of the shallowest kitschiest sort.

And I don't see pocket watches and gun handles in the same light. The decorative arts are their own tradition and aren't necessarily kitsch (though they can be).

isn't it odd that the shallowest kitschiest art feeds a population that has made Mr Kinkade quite wealthy while serious artists struggle to gain recognition let alone enough income to make rent each month?

are we talking the difference between the monkees and miles davis?

paulr
14-Feb-2008, 11:34
Well, the monkeys had some great songs (even if they didn't write them), and Miles made good money, so I don't know if that's the best comparison.

Maybe more like the difference between Jessica Simpson and all the talented, hard working musicians and composers we've probably never heard of.

jetcode
14-Feb-2008, 11:42
Well, the monkeys had some great songs (even if they didn't write them), and Miles made good money, so I don't know if that's the best comparison.

Maybe more like the difference between Jessica Simpson and all the talented, hard working musicians and composers we've probably never heard of.

I think that the majority of people in the world are not trained in art appreciation much like the majority listen to music that moves them without much consideration to how that is achieved.

domenico Foschi
14-Feb-2008, 11:46
isn't it odd that the shallowest kitschiest art feeds a population that has made Mr Kinkade quite wealthy while serious artists struggle to gain recognition let alone enough income to make rent each month?

are we talking the difference between the monkees and miles davis?

People, generally speaking, don't care to come back home and look at some deep work of Art that reminds them of the true nature of Human Existence.
I find a parallel when people go back home from work and have a drink to "just wind down and relax", instead of dealing with issues that run their lives.

jetcode
14-Feb-2008, 11:56
People, generally speaking, don't care to come back home and look at some deep work of Art that reminds them of the true nature of Human Existence.
I find a parallel when people go back home from work and have a drink to "just wind down and relax", instead of dealing with issues that run their lives.

exactly - escape - mood music soft lights dinner - fantasy is a part of our constitution (imagination) yet physical reality often overides the imagination - energetic overload

paulr
14-Feb-2008, 12:00
Are you suggesting that the only art that can soothe or give a sense of escape is kitsch?

I wouldn't go along with that. Muzak and Kinkaid don't sooth me; they make me want to jump out the window! I think part of it is that I sense the manipulation. I feel that someone is lying to me to make the stress go away.

domenico Foschi
14-Feb-2008, 12:06
exactly - escape - mood music soft lights dinner - fantasy is a part of our constitution (imagination) yet physical reality often overides the imagination - energetic overload

Well, actually my statement wasn't intended as a positive one toward this attitude.
When I was talking about people choosing to ignore those issues that run their life, I was implying that those are the inner issues that will influence them to make wrong choices.

jetcode
14-Feb-2008, 12:45
Well, actually my statement wasn't intended as a positive one toward this attitude.
When I was talking about people choosing to ignore those issues that run their life, I was implying that those are the inner issues that will influence them to make wrong choices.

How can you say that someone made a wrong choice without being in their shoes with their exact outlook to know that for a fact?

Let me see, the kid who buys a poster of an Indy car made the wrong choice because he didn't pick a Monet poster? The woman who fell in love with a Kinkade made the wrong choice because she should have purchased a B/W print of a dilapidated bridge?

Whatever happened to letting people make the choices they do and supporting that choice? Does everyone need to see the world of art as you or I do?

jetcode
14-Feb-2008, 12:59
Are you suggesting that the only art that can soothe or give a sense of escape is kitsch?

I wouldn't go along with that. Muzak and Kinkaid don't sooth me; they make me want to jump out the window! I think part of it is that I sense the manipulation. I feel that someone is lying to me to make the stress go away.

Not everyone feels that way yet what I hear and please entertain this with much respect and admiration:

"I am the reference for what is valuable in art and those who don't see like me don't get it"

I think this is a very common perspective and one that lays a trap within setting up false expectations when others don't get it because they are not you

roteague
14-Feb-2008, 13:10
Personally, I love Kincade's work. I find it relaxing.

jetcode
14-Feb-2008, 13:15
Thomas Kinkade

http://www.thomaskinkade.com/magi/servlet/com.asucon.ebiz.home.web.tk.HomeServlet

domenico Foschi
14-Feb-2008, 13:17
How can you say that someone made a wrong choice without being in their shoes with their exact outlook to know that for a fact?

Let me see, the kid who buys a poster of an Indy car made the wrong choice because he didn't pick a Monet poster? The woman who fell in love with a Kinkade made the wrong choice because she should have purchased a B/W print of a dilapidated bridge?

Whatever happened to letting people make the choices they do and supporting that choice? Does everyone need to see the world of art as you or I do?

Jetcode, mine was an evaluation, I am not condemning them.

Everybody is free to make their decisions in life, and everybody deals with life in their own unique manner.
I am only saying that the Art on a person's house wall, the clothes he/she wears, the food eaten, the habits and the behavior is telling of the personality.
When I was talking about wrong choices I wasn't referring about the choices in Art. More importantly for example, come back from home have a drink to wind down instead of taking steps toward getting rid of those issues in life that want to make you have a drink to wind down.
If you read criticism, or you misunderstood me or I expressed myself improperly.

jetcode
14-Feb-2008, 13:23
domenico - I agree that people tend to ignore the pain they are trying to escape and likewise I think there is psychological motivation for those who appreciate the arts

I most likely misunderstood you because that is something that takes place quite often when information changes hands (so to speak)

paulr
14-Feb-2008, 13:52
Sometimes a can of malt liquor, or a morphine pill, will hit the spot more than a mozart piece or a weston landscape.

I don't think that makes them comparable artistic achievements.

CG
14-Feb-2008, 14:06
To me the most strange thing about Kincade is that he is an incredibly skilled painter, obviously possessing a rare level of artistic talent.

I disagree. At a mechanical level ... if one ignores aesthetics ... he's a modestly talented painter, very modestly, who makes a lot of clumsy decisions or outright errors in drawing / perspective. He's found a formula that sells.

His product is formulaic, trite, and kitschy. But it does sell.

I guess I don't care if one calls it art or not since art is in the eye of the beholder. But his production gets oversold to a largely innocent audience who have no idea how very poorly Kincade's products will survive as "investments". Kincade's stuff gets pumped out in staggering quantity, and any pretense of scarcity is tantamount to fraud. If my recall is correct, his print pricing has collapsed on Ebay through a massive oversupply.

His franchise galleries have evidently had a very tough time of it, and some have successfully taken him to court. I can't imagine being a gallery owner stuck with representing a single "artist" who's selling the same stuff at the next shopping mall, and the next, and the next.

Read more here: www.wetcanvas.com/forums/showthread.php?t=86505


My boss has a number of his works, and they are of outside scenes obviously lighted from multiple sources. What planet is he painting?

Is this ignorance of light or an original viewpoint?
juan

Maybe yes. And no, not at all. Look at fantasy illustration, sci fi illustration and children's book illustration, and you will see he's just the latest in a long line of illustrators who have taken representational liberties in the name of creating a visual image of wish fulfillment. Look at enough and you'll see some of his his forbears were vastly more talented.

His only real distinction (beside serious self inflicted legal troubles) is a more aggressive business presence.

I don't see his work as representation of deep belief, but as I said above, wish fulfillment. He portrays a simple elvish world. It's kind of a Disney fantasy land where poverty, hunger and disease don't exist, just glowing little romantic huts. It's like children's food, simple and sweet, not nuanced, not subtle, not challenging - ultimately textureless and bland.

jetcode
14-Feb-2008, 14:10
does an investment matter if your enjoyment is derived in the moment?

CG
14-Feb-2008, 14:15
... nothing Kincade did was either unethical, illegal or immoral..
I'd urge you investigate both his treatment of his dealers, and the pretense his company promotes that his work has "collectable" value. On both counts he looks pretty bad.

Best,

C

CG
14-Feb-2008, 14:21
does an investment matter if your enjoyment is derived in the moment?

I am uncomfortable with the prices and their justification. The market is saying that supply is overwhelming the demand, so as an investment, a Kincade is a stinker.

Owners of Kincades will do best to really, really enjoy their prints "in the moment".

C

roteague
14-Feb-2008, 15:08
I don't see his work as representation of deep belief, but as I said above, wish fulfillment. He portrays a simple elvish world. It's kind of a Disney fantasy land where poverty, hunger and disease don't exist, just glowing little romantic huts.

Having read his book "The Art of Creative Living" I have no doubt that his paintings are based upon his beliefs and faith. I like his work, I find it soothing and relaxing. Like TK, I too prefer to concentrate on the good in this world, rather than the bad. Not portraying the bad doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it can simply be a desire to have good in ones life.


It's like children's food, simple and sweet, not nuanced, not subtle, not challenging - ultimately textureless and bland.

The same way I feel about Meyerowitz. We all have our own opinions.

jetcode
14-Feb-2008, 15:17
Having read his book "The Art of Creative Living" I have no doubt that his paintings are based upon his beliefs and faith. I like his work, I find it soothing and relaxing. Like TK, I too prefer to concentrate on the good in this world, rather than the bad. Not portraying the bad doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it can simply be a desire to have good in ones life.



The same way I feel about Meyerowitz. We all have our own opinions.

Most certainly I have found a significant impact on my psychological well being based on what I subject my senses to - it that regard I prefer light over dark any day

CG
23-Feb-2008, 15:42
- it that regard I prefer light over dark any day

I don't think light has much meaning or impact without it's opposite, nor dark without light. Light with no counterpoint is wonderful briefly, then fades do monotony - monotone. Complexity and difficulty keep art and life alive. Doesn't make it easy, but I would argue, more enduringly beautiful.

C

john borrelli
25-Feb-2008, 16:19
OK so after speedreading through 13 pages of Kincade threads I'd have to say Kaatherine's thread back on page 3 is the funniest...and scariest!

srbphoto
26-Feb-2008, 14:40
LOOK WHAT I FOUND!!!!!

There is a TK movie coming out this year.:eek: I can hear the cheers:D

Check out the link below:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0999872/