Does Thomas Kinkade piss off any other artists out there? Why?

Answer 1

I've never seen his work before, so I just had a look at some. It's very chocolate box isn't it, not to my taste at all. He is quite talented at what he does, and good luck to him for making a living out of it.

I understand fully how some young artists who are struggling in the art world can be offended that someone who paints to a formula in a style that is not fashionable can do so well, when they are not.

The art world is very unfair and there is a lot of inequity. You can let it eat away at you, or you can shrug, let it go, and get on with what you do.

I've been on both sides of the coin. I have my serious work, then I have my commercial work.. done to a formula, for a market.. boring, but it really pays off for me. At the same time I resent it that people readily pay for inferior work, while my better work goes undone because I don't have the time... that hurts.

Answer 2

I find it interesting that so many so called artists don't like Kinkade. Where in the artists rule book does it say you have to be starving or have no skills to be an artist? Kinkade can draw which is something that most people that pick up a brush can't say these days. True, I find his work a bit repetitive, but he's developed a system that allows the common man to have a nice piece of art in their home at a price they can afford. And his work makes people feel good. I really think the criticism comes from an overdose of sour grapes. Besides being a pretty good artist (he also does impressionism), he's a good marketer of his wares. Maybe would be artists could take a lesson.

Answer 3

Thomas Kinkade makes a very good living doing formula paintings that can be mass produced. Although I don't consider him to be a true artist, I admire that he has found a way to make a living in a very tough field to do well. He's not a true artist, though, because his work is not outstanding or innovating enough to be hanging in the museums after his life time. If you've seen on Kinkade, you've seen them all.

Answer 4

He doesn't piss me off. It's his fans that piss me off, for the most part.

They've really bought into Kinkade's marketing scheme. Most of them really believe that their giclee reproductions are valuable pieces of art, not the glorified posters that they really are, simply because Kinkade put his signature on them (when the only things Kinkade has ever done that could possibly be worth anything at all are his oil paintings). That level of ignorance just exasperates me. And their ignorance could be so easily relieved, if they'd only spend one/twentieth as much time learning about printmaking (let alone art) as they would spend deciding where to put their 401K money, or which new flat-screen TV to buy.

I'm also still trying to figure out how someone who can't ever seem to decide once for all where his danged light source is, can call himself a "painter of light". He's painting something, for sure, but light ain't it.

Some phrases that always come to mind when I encounter Kinkade afficionados:

"A *LITTLE* knowledge is a dangerous thing."
"A fool and his money are soon parted."
"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink."

They did an outrageous sendup of Kinkade on somethingawful.com. I'm not going to link it, because some of the things they did to his paintings WERE truly awful, but...I laughed til I cried, and couldn't breathe anymore...

Answer 5

Kinkade makes money. He figured out that there is a market for sentimental cottage scenes, and he produces. Some of his landscapes are beautiful, it is too bad that he is not more well-rounded. I have heard that he uses a production line to produce the paintings so fast and in such quantity - so what was once a work of art may now be considered a product.

Answer 6

I don't consider Thomas Kinkade an artist. He's like Hallmark, churning out pretty, mass-appeal, meaningless people- pleasers. He states nothing with his work. It's not original or thought provoking. Art should be challenging as well as aesthetically pleasing.

Answer 7

i in my view do no longer understand how a man or woman can say that in case you do no longer have faith interior the trinity (invented on the council of Nicea in 325 A.D.) which you at the instant are not a christian. Juses became no longer a trinitarian, it became in no way coined till 3 hundred years After Jesus (provide or take some years) time. it incredibly is a guy made doctrine and opposite to the completed new and previous testomony. Now, to the question to hand. Mormons have their "own" bible that they think of is extra suitable to the Bible. that's what makes them "no longer christian". a minimum of Islam admits a difference. their own e book, their own chief, and the two take the diety of Jesus and slam him. A Christian is somebody who's pointed out with Christ in demise,burial and resurection. To the element. A Follower of christ and confesses that he's LORD , it incredibly is comparable to GOD. seem up this scripture Genesis 27:20 KJV who's the Lord? Genesis 27:20 KJVA Exodus 8:10 NAS there are various verses that say the Lord is God. Mormons and J.W.'s deny this, only as islam does

Answer 8

Kinkade is not my favorite living artist and I would not buy his work, but his work is still better than 99% of all artists out there.

Answer 9

Pffft, I don't not consider him a real artist. His stuff is too mass produced for my tastes. Not too mention I think it looks like rubbish..LOL.

Sharp is spot on!

Answer 10

Yeah a bit. His paintings are pretty but he never does anything different they're all too happy and fairy tale for me.