You've never lived in England. All those can be true there. It is often heavily overcast with intermittant rain with an occasional break in the clouds that lets bright sun through for a few minutes. The lights can be on in the day because of that cloud cover. Even though it ay be late spring, with flowers in full bloom, it can still be cold enough to need a fire in the fireplace (and some people still use an AGA combined cook stove/central heating).
"You've never lived in England. All those can be true there. It is often heavily overcast with intermittant rain with an occasional break in the clouds that lets bright sun through for a few minutes. The lights can be on in the day because of that cloud cover. Even though it ay be late spring, with flowers in full bloom, it can still be cold enough to need a fire in the fireplace (and some people still use an AGA combined cook stove/central heating)."
Add Seattle into that description!
I don't believe that picture is set in England. That's an American late Victorian-style house.
The issue is not that the pictures lack internal logic. Nor is it whether his work is art or mere illustration. Even as illustration, the work is not strong. It would be possible for a real artist to take the same subject matter and do something original and striking with it. Kinkade advertises himself as the "painter of light," but compared to real artists he doesn't handle light well, much less in an original, insightful way. Even the draftsmanship is mediocre. He's just not a talented guy.