[Rembrandt_fan]

You wrote, "However, I completely respect that others enjoy and find peace in them."

I don't. Kincaid plays people for sentimental saps, suckers, marks, and there's usually a backlash once folks know they've been had--especially when they realize that expensively framed monstrosity in the living room will never, ever appreciate. That backlash, when it comes, will be felt throughout the painting profession. I won't presume to speak for all artists everywhere, but from my perspective, the man is bad for business.

[pollyannaish]

But aren't you comparing apples to oranges?

I completely agree regarding his business practices. I feel the exact same way regarding Beanie Babies and other assorted over-hyped and meritless "investment buying opportunities." While I am not sure that there was any illegality involved (this is from the LA Times after all) there is very little doubt that his work will not pad people's bank accounts in their retirement and to market anything in that way is really misleading. It is hard to predict what will appreciate. But one thing you can predict is that it won't be something everyone was told to "save because it will be worth something someday." That just screws up the whole law of supply and demand and defeats the purpose.

If you want your art to be valuable, it has to be timeless, excellent...and rare.

That said, if a card, bookmark, t-shirt, calendar, mug, reprint or original is bought because it brings a person joy...it most certainly is art. And to say someone is tasteless because they like that kind of decoration in their lives is unfair and elitist.

So...I stand by my original post. I don't care for his style and never have. People buying his stuff as an investment were, frankly, idiotic. But if you like it and it brings you joy...I respect that.

[pollyannaish]

BTW, I can also understand how you would be concerned about the effect of something like this on business. Much in the same way I am concerned about something like this reflecting badly on Christianity.