My friend's mother used to work at a Thomas Kinkade art gallery in Napa when he was growing up. He would tell me all sorts of sordid stories about the guy. Unfortunately my friend passed away and...
My friend's mother used to work at a Thomas Kinkade art gallery in Napa when he was growing up. He would tell me all sorts of sordid stories about the guy. Unfortunately my friend passed away and my memory is hazy. Some of it was adultery related, maybe some abuse, I can't really remember. He would also mention the stuff in this article -- that it was just mass-produced crap that people ate up for some reason. I wish I could remember the darker stuff...
I can only laugh. I worked for an art vendor in 2000s and remember when we launched our Thomas Kinkade offering. It was a big event for us and led to a ton of orders. I remember being drawn in by...
I can only laugh. I worked for an art vendor in 2000s and remember when we launched our Thomas Kinkade offering. It was a big event for us and led to a ton of orders.
I remember being drawn in by the warmth of his paintings. I used to imagine being inside those houses. But I also recognized that they were thematically basic and repetitious. Back then I didn't think to Google people, so I just assumed he was this old grandfatherly type recluse who just liked to paint. I guess I imagined him living in one of those little winter hamlets.
Then I read about him peeing on Winnie the Pooh and heckling other artists and I can only laugh. If I were a fan I'd be disappointed, and I'm certainly surprised, but at the same time not. The disconnect between his product and his persona seems to be consistent with someone who was just marketing and hustling for cash.
Dawg what. I kind of like the mans art but this just makes me feel weird. I don't know though, artists are a bit weird like that.
The Times wrote that he openly fondled a woman's breasts at a sales event in South Bend, Indiana and alleged his proclivity for ritual territory marking by urination, once relieving himself on a Winnie the Pooh figure at the Disneyland Hotel in Anaheim while saying, "This one's for you, Walt."
Dawg what.
I kind of like the mans art but this just makes me feel weird. I don't know though, artists are a bit weird like that.
We don't need to excuse sexual assault as "a bit weird". I know what you meant - artists do weird shit, as does everyone - but it's right there. The sexual assault.
We don't need to excuse sexual assault as "a bit weird".
I know what you meant - artists do weird shit, as does everyone - but it's right there. The sexual assault.
This article goes over what his critics said, then talks about his childhood. The article is about a documentary about the artist coming out. I'd never heard these critiques before and have to say...
This article goes over what his critics said, then talks about his childhood. The article is about a documentary about the artist coming out.
I'd never heard these critiques before and have to say that as someone who is not a professional artist or at critique, they're a great example of why outsiders sometimes think the art world is pretentious. I associate Kinkade with puzzles.
I usually buy puzzles from the thrift store and have picked up a few Kinkades that way. I didn't realize he produced work outside of puzzles, so it's kind of bizarre to hear all this. His art...
I usually buy puzzles from the thrift store and have picked up a few Kinkades that way. I didn't realize he produced work outside of puzzles, so it's kind of bizarre to hear all this. His art style seems especially suited to puzzles, since the images are loaded with somewhat surreal details and lighting that make an otherwise plain object more discernible.
Although maybe I'm only seeing his works that are suitable for puzzles, because I only see his works that have become puzzles.
In terms of the critical reaction to Kinkade’s work, it feels like an echo of the current hubbub over AI, which one of the article interviewees noted as well And to be frank, I don’t really like...
In terms of the critical reaction to Kinkade’s work, it feels like an echo of the current hubbub over AI, which one of the article interviewees noted as well
Today we would think they had been produced by AI, designed as if by algorithm to a certain formula – Charlotte Mullins
And to be frank, I don’t really like Kinkade’s painting. His composition is often weak, and there is little explorative use of edges or shapes.
That painting with the rotunda next to a river and a path is like particularly atrocious in its shape design and composition. It’s exactly the kind of thing AI would get wrong.
As an example of something different, here’s a landscape by Krenz Cushart that really plays with the shapes much more, in a way that goes beyond reality but not into postmodern abstraction:
All that being said, I would never begrudge someone who liked one of Kinkade’s paintings. Is what it is. What looks good to you looks good to you. There is a degree of huffing your own paint that came with the critical reaction to Kinkade’s work at the time.
Thanks for linking those other paintings! My composition knowledge is limited to the "Someone once told me about the rule of thirds" level, so it's helpful to see examples to contrast it against....
Thanks for linking those other paintings! My composition knowledge is limited to the "Someone once told me about the rule of thirds" level, so it's helpful to see examples to contrast it against. I can't fully articulate what's wrong with the rotunda—maybe it's too close to the river?—but I can feel the difference.
it feels like an echo of the current hubbub over AI
This analogy makes a lot of sense to me. Kincade optimized for selling his art to the mass market, to the detriment of qualities that artists and art critics care about. He mass-produced his art. And his art took over culturally because he optimized it for that. From the BBC article:
"There were actually other people who were painting cottages and Christmas scenes and putting them on plates and all that stuff," [Miranda Yousef] notes, "and the thing is that Kinkade's were so much better. His works just blew everybody else's out of the water."
Not that mediocre art is phenomenally good, but the artist was phenomenally good at making mediocre art.
My family didn’t have any Kincaid paintings but we did have some from Marty Bell. It’s a similar art style and they were sold in similar retail shops, but Marty Bell’s always feature a cottage and...
My family didn’t have any Kincaid paintings but we did have some from Marty Bell. It’s a similar art style and they were sold in similar retail shops, but Marty Bell’s always feature a cottage and don’t have the “dreamy” quality that Kincaid’s have.
Oddly I don’t see a Wikipedia article about Marty Bell so I just linked some info about the paintings below. I seem to remember that she was related to Humphrey Bogart.
My friend's mother used to work at a Thomas Kinkade art gallery in Napa when he was growing up. He would tell me all sorts of sordid stories about the guy. Unfortunately my friend passed away and my memory is hazy. Some of it was adultery related, maybe some abuse, I can't really remember. He would also mention the stuff in this article -- that it was just mass-produced crap that people ate up for some reason. I wish I could remember the darker stuff...
He was pretty well known for his behavior. It's a bit odd that this article references it so obliquely.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Kinkade#Personal_conduct
(For anyone else - it didn't linkify the md for me for some reason)
I can only laugh. I worked for an art vendor in 2000s and remember when we launched our Thomas Kinkade offering. It was a big event for us and led to a ton of orders.
I remember being drawn in by the warmth of his paintings. I used to imagine being inside those houses. But I also recognized that they were thematically basic and repetitious. Back then I didn't think to Google people, so I just assumed he was this old grandfatherly type recluse who just liked to paint. I guess I imagined him living in one of those little winter hamlets.
Then I read about him peeing on Winnie the Pooh and heckling other artists and I can only laugh. If I were a fan I'd be disappointed, and I'm certainly surprised, but at the same time not. The disconnect between his product and his persona seems to be consistent with someone who was just marketing and hustling for cash.
That's what happens when I'm trying to write in different formats in different windows...
Behind the Bastards episode about him from my wife: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFBQMEn_0rw
Dawg what.
I kind of like the mans art but this just makes me feel weird. I don't know though, artists are a bit weird like that.
We don't need to excuse sexual assault as "a bit weird".
I know what you meant - artists do weird shit, as does everyone - but it's right there. The sexual assault.
Uh, yeah, you are right. As jaded as it might sound, I was more taken aback by the pissing more then anything.
This article goes over what his critics said, then talks about his childhood. The article is about a documentary about the artist coming out.
I'd never heard these critiques before and have to say that as someone who is not a professional artist or at critique, they're a great example of why outsiders sometimes think the art world is pretentious. I associate Kinkade with puzzles.
I usually buy puzzles from the thrift store and have picked up a few Kinkades that way. I didn't realize he produced work outside of puzzles, so it's kind of bizarre to hear all this. His art style seems especially suited to puzzles, since the images are loaded with somewhat surreal details and lighting that make an otherwise plain object more discernible.
Although maybe I'm only seeing his works that are suitable for puzzles, because I only see his works that have become puzzles.
In terms of the critical reaction to Kinkade’s work, it feels like an echo of the current hubbub over AI, which one of the article interviewees noted as well
And to be frank, I don’t really like Kinkade’s painting. His composition is often weak, and there is little explorative use of edges or shapes.
That painting with the rotunda next to a river and a path is like particularly atrocious in its shape design and composition. It’s exactly the kind of thing AI would get wrong.
As an example of something different, here’s a landscape by Krenz Cushart that really plays with the shapes much more, in a way that goes beyond reality but not into postmodern abstraction:
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/QWw4B
All that being said, I would never begrudge someone who liked one of Kinkade’s paintings. Is what it is. What looks good to you looks good to you. There is a degree of huffing your own paint that came with the critical reaction to Kinkade’s work at the time.
Thanks for linking those other paintings! My composition knowledge is limited to the "Someone once told me about the rule of thirds" level, so it's helpful to see examples to contrast it against. I can't fully articulate what's wrong with the rotunda—maybe it's too close to the river?—but I can feel the difference.
This analogy makes a lot of sense to me. Kincade optimized for selling his art to the mass market, to the detriment of qualities that artists and art critics care about. He mass-produced his art. And his art took over culturally because he optimized it for that. From the BBC article:
Not that mediocre art is phenomenally good, but the artist was phenomenally good at making mediocre art.
My family didn’t have any Kincaid paintings but we did have some from Marty Bell. It’s a similar art style and they were sold in similar retail shops, but Marty Bell’s always feature a cottage and don’t have the “dreamy” quality that Kincaid’s have.
Oddly I don’t see a Wikipedia article about Marty Bell so I just linked some info about the paintings below. I seem to remember that she was related to Humphrey Bogart.
What are Marty Bell Paintings Worth
For anyone interested, there's this Solar Sands video on Kinkade from a little while back https://youtu.be/DYnbCRrZn54