I wish I could lay claim to this one, but the bug speaks for itself.
Posted on 03/06/2006 8:18:41 PM PST by tbird5
I don't know much about the LDS, but my next door neighbor who was one was a nice guy. I think well of Orson Scott Card as well. But if Kincade is one, he's surely generating some negative publicity.
That is truly funny! Rockwell is a genius, you have to give him that.
My absolute favorite artist is Bob Byerley. He takes my breath away and I probably will buy a book of some of his paintings, just to look at them everyday.
For those who don't know this amazing artist, he has a web site and his work is displayed in over 3,000 galleries.
From his site:
Bob Byerley--Painter of Our American Childhood
"Bob Byerley is one of the foremost painters of children today. Considered a modern day Norman Rockwell, Bob's nostalgic "Trompe l'Oeil" fool the eye realism oil paintings evoke a feeling of a kinder and gentler age in which he grew up.
Bob Byerley's classical ultra realistic interpretations of the everyday experiences of the child, awakens in the viewer, long forgotten memories. The art combines precise academic painting techniques of the Old Dutch Masters with the heart and soul of Norman Rockwell.
Byerley's children are real, not fabricated or cutsie. In his paintings, imagination abounds. His children interact naturally with fairies, elves and surrealistic imaginary animals.
Bob Byerley paints children doing things rather than viewing things; his kids are alive with vitality and mischief.
We invite you to come along and visit the Neighborhood and enjoy some of the finest art work in realism being done today".
Reruns are still around; his career has been slowed down slightly by the fact that he's been dead for the last ten years.
Hey... I remember you recommending him on one of the last art threads we both were on. Thanks for providing the url again!
O my gosh, THAT is the "gum depository"? When I first read the story, I wanted to smack the kid. Now I think he MIGHT just be a brilliant art critic. What a perfect commentary on that art!
I wouldn't argue with anything you said, and my post doesn't. Among my two major thoughts (the snobbery and bitter anger aside):
1. The LAT is suddenly reliable?
2. Lawsuits are suddenly sources of sober, historical truth?
I just wonder whether any of the piles-on have ever been the target of any kind of a lawsuit, whether they've had any personal acquaintance with the throw-in-every-vicious-lie-you-can-dream-up vomit that court documents can be. I'll say no more than that.
Dan
I wish I could lay claim to this one, but the bug speaks for itself.
And you think that on the basis of an article in the L.A. Times.
I am not *much* exaggerating when I say that, if the LA Times printed an article making the the breathless claim that water was "powerful wet stuff," I'd feel the need to walk over to a tap, to see if something had changed.
Dan
Now I'd buy THAT!!! lol
Sorry, I didn't mean *you*. I only pinged you because you mentioned Americans' non-education about art, and I referenced that in my full diclosure.
The snobbery is the people making snide "velvet Elvis" and "Precious Moments" comments, as if they (the commentors) are somehow more hip and enlightened than the unwashed masses.
>> Here's a couple of REAL "painters of light" - Albert Bierstadt and Thomas Cole - to take the taste out of our mouths . . <<
Wow. you sure know how to settle an argument!
Most people want a little bit of beauty in their homes. They will take it where they can find it, and if someone like Kincade or the Precious Moments guy can sell them on it's being "collectible" then people will buy this stuff thinking it has investment value as well as beauty.
The "unwashed masses" (not MY term) buy things that are marketed, because they don't know where to buy art other than at mall gelleries or through QVC, places like that. They are taken advantage of by people like Kincade.
When Thomas Kincade's company convinces elderly people that $400 for a print is an "investment" that is not honest. When Precious Moments grinds out 50,000 ceramic figurines of a shepherd, those are not collectible, and that's a bit dishonest, too.
I love all kinds of art, although I tend to favor paintings that tell a story (why I like Rockwell). I have lately become interested in a local artist who makes interesting 3-dimensional collages with old bits of things inside glass cases. Interesting to look at and very evocative of history.
I just hate to see people waste their money while limiting their horizons.
So, when you are at an art museum (okay, just pretend), you think it's all right to deface paintings you don't personally like?
Dan
What's sudden about it? Kinkade has been around for a decade or more and been a media phenomenon. Now he's being sued, which makes him newsworthy.
Lay off the soup cans... If not for his inability to deal with his sexual inclinations, Andy Warhol would've been the kind of guy who would be quite admired around here: A fiercely pro-American, devout Christian. (He was a daily communicant Orthodox Catholic!) And, unlike many poseurs, he actually could draw perfect forms.
What's with the soup cans? He spent most of his childhood sick, with a working mom. He became infautated with the fact that there were like 40 varieties of Campbells, but he could always get exactly the same taste whenever he wanted to. His paintings of the cans was a celebration of the triumph of American capitalism in relieving the hardships of the otherwise underprivileged.
And, by the way, there is more than a little subtle promotion of artistic chops in the fact that he drew free-hand perfectly identical ovals over and over again.
Plus, frankly, I find them aestheticaly pleasing. "^)
(Picasso similey!)
Check out the engaged couple: a matter of convenience: she has money, he has title. They are not even facing each other. Their marriage is doomed from the start, as we see in the four other prints and paintings of the series.
Re prints and paintings. Hogarth made one set of paintings of the series, from which engravings were made and sold as prints. This is the authentic way to do so, although new technologies today make it easier to make such sales fraudulent.
Why do teenagers's attitudes always come through so well with pastel portraits? :^)
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.