Snob. Perhaps if he painted nothing but Evil Clowns, you'd like him?
Posted on 06/15/2010 2:13:18 AM PDT by plinyelder
The painter of light is having a dark period.
Thomas Kinkade, the Placerville native who became one of the world's wealthiest artists with his sentimental landscapes and Christian motifs, has had a string of legal troubles.
His company owes millions of dollars to art gallery owners who successfully pressed fraud claims.
Earlier this month the firm filed for bankruptcy protection from those gallery owners and hundreds of other creditors.
And on Friday, the 52-year-old Kinkade, who calls himself "the painter of light," was arrested on a DUI charge outside Carmel, where he owns a home.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
I'd like some Thomas Kinkade toilet paper, or maybe some Thomas Kinkade cat box liners...
He was hitting his stride when he disappeared solo sailing off the Riviera a few years ago. It was a great story and I wanted to make a small film about him. I connected with his widow, Isabelle del moral - a fair artist herself, but she was devastated by his death and shut down completely.
He’s almost impossible to find. We’ve been looking for one for three years now (got one in the LR - want another for my office). We could locate only one, a lesser work, in a gallery in Montreal. The gallery was asking three times what we paid in 2005 for a better, larger piece. We picked up a work by Jean-marie Duaiv instead.
Google Victor Bassi artist and see what you find.
If it sells for big bucks, I wouldn’t call it “empty nonsense”.
You contend it’s as good as art that goes for millions.
And again, when I look at both they look the same. The fact that some people choose to part with millions of dollars for something that looks like crap is irrelevant. I would never be someone to tell them they couldn't spend their own money in any way they chose to do so.
That’s the “Silver Spoons” house !
The city of Vallejo is bankrupt. Who wants to live there???
Maybe when he gets this behind him he can turn his had to a medium he’s better suited to : butter, sugar, sprinkles.
So a confectioner is not an artist? The choice of medium determines whether a particular piece is art or schlock?
You sound like a bit of an elitist.
I don’t care for Kinkade’s work myself (my wife loves his work though) but then there are few artists work that would ever hang on my wall period.
It isn't about what he pooped, but about who he stooped. The reason that it is difficult to do what Pollock did is because what he did was to be Ms. Guggenheim's sex toy.
Guggenheim Museum.
And whatever "art" she wanted to be famous, is famous. Naturally, every artist with asperations of being in the Guggenheim Museum agree with whatever sentiment she put forth. If Pollock was "good" for her then everyone in the art community liked Pollock.
Of course, that sort of sycophancy fails to translate well to the masses...who see random paint splatters as being...random paint splatters.
Thus, modern art is a classic case of the Elites versus the Masses. What most people like is Kinkade, not Pollock. What the Elites like is whatever is popular in their insular world.
Elitist!!
Shame on you!
But welcome aboard.
Snob. Perhaps if he painted nothing but Evil Clowns, you'd like him?
Actually I just prefer bare walls
You may (or may not) be surprised to learn that I actually like the evil clowns better than Thomas Kincade’s drivel.
I have no problem with his art. It’s a particular style, which will appeal to some people and not to others. Big deal.
But apart from this story and others that have been brought up about similar behavior, I used to date a woman who worked for a promotional firm that had him as one of their clients, and his behavior and attitude toward the firm sounded more in character with these various stories than with the Christian values he espouses (or maybe exploits?).
Is there much of a difference? Kinkade markets the he11 out of his works. He hasn’t painted much (I admit it’s nice) but he’ll sell it to you any way you can imagine and are willing to part with a buck for.
Survival of the fittest often challenges our notion of what constitutes fit.
TY for the info!!
Yes, there is a difference. Pollock’s works sell because Elitists tell Buyers that Pollock’s works are sensational. Status buying.
Kinkade’s works sell because Joe Sixpack likes the way that they look. Buying based upon artistic appeal/appearance.
He laughs all the way to the bankruptcy court.
I fixed it for you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.