http://www.museumofbadart.org/collection/
We live in a true golden age of creativity, where so many people have the opportunity to explore their creative talents. Diversity in this arena is a good, no, great thing as it allows for a huge variety of individual styles, which, if you don't like them, you don't have to look at them or buy them for that matter.
As far as poker playing dogs go, count me as a fan. For a series of pictures to be over 100 years old and still maintain their appeal tells me that they are indeed something special. Special enough that, on February 15, 2005, the originals of A Bold Bluff and Waterloo were auctioned as a pair to an undisclosed buyer for US $590,400.
In Cleveland, the Museum of Art had a chance some years ago to buy a large collection of work by Norman Rockwell. They passed, saying that they wanted art, not illustration. A stupid decision, IMHO, and although I'm not well versed as to what is in their collection, I think it a safe bet that there would be several 20th century pieces of “modern” or abstract art valued at tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars, the value of which if based on artistic content alone would be worth but tens or hundreds of dollars and nothing more.
R.I.P Mr. Kinkade.
I appreciate your post. Everyone can be a critic. I’ve taken art classes over the years, as much to pull my mind out of my left brained profession as anything and at least with art I don’t have to worry about punishing those who live with me as I do if I play the piano or sing ((I have lived with musicians all my adult life). I am proud of some pencil drawings I’ve done of old family photos. I had them framed and there they hang in the spare bedroom. But I know that they aren’t great works of art. What they did was help me understand a bit the process of creating art. I do agree with other people who have posted that many truly great artists are a bit to a lot nuts. Many have mental health issues and addictive personalities. It sounds like Thomas did and that may be what led to his early death. I don’t have any paintings but I do have a little Christmas music box with his name slapped on it. It reminds me of a little cardboard and glitter church that was under the Christmas tree when I was a child. I think that’s what artists like Norman Rockwell and Thomas Kinkade did, remind of us of our childhood.
I love this thread - thanks for the link.
My two cents worth: good art is what you like; great art is what endures.
Same way with music. We’ve got a radio station in the Chicago area that plays a terrific selection of (what I consider) good, listenable music - the classier 70’s/80’s stuff - more Steely Dan than you hear on most stations, as an example. One of their tag lines is something like “the greatest music ever made”.
Well, 200 years from now people will still be listening to Bach and Mozart, and probably Joplin and Ellington. Becker and Fagen? Maybe, but I wouldn’t dare to venture that as a certainty.
If individuals like Kinkade, that’s fine, and by that standard, he’s good. Will anybody care about him in 200 years? Now that’s another question.
And in the context of your post, I have a feeling that if somebody slipped a lesser work by Munsch or Chagall in that gallery at your link, 98% of the viewers wouldn’t notice. Yet most would agree that Munsch and Chagall are great artists.
Or maybe we’ll have to wait another 100 years or so to be sure.
***Just a few thoughts on Kinkade and his art.**
Well, he IS better than Bob Ross.