Page 1 of 2

But is it ... ART!

Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2012 4:16 pm
by rubato
I'm struggling to say something nice and non-snarkey about Thomas Kinkade.

He was a painter although most of his 'works' are actually prints with a few dabs of paint applied in an assembly line process which magically transformed 5$ offset lithographs into things which the buying public thought 'collectable' and paid from $100 to $10,000 for (although it is doubtful if any of them well ever sell for more, or even as much as, their orig. price since the market has been pre-flooded).

The pictures are competent, pleasant, and treacly sentimental and just what a lot of people want to look at in their homes.

The good things I can honestly say about him have to do with the price and separately, the value, of images. The first is that he found a way to make a living as a painter and get paid when the economics of making 1 of a kind 1 at a time works of art are prohibitively against any new comers and good for him for doing so. The second is that by pricing the works in a range which made them a significant purchase to a middle-income buyer he got those buyers to actually stop, look at and engage with an image when they are bombarded with images and almost never notice them.

I'd like him better if he had then directed all of those people outwards into the larger art world via open studios or something like that so that they could nourish and be nourished by the many artists in their own communities.

He was successful as an artist in an era which is very difficult for artists.

http://news.yahoo.com/calif-artist-thom ... 35368.html

yrs,
rubato

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2012 4:22 pm
by MajGenl.Meade
It's as much art as whatever the stupid British Arts Council forks out thousands and thousands for - in fact, it's more art than almost anything being produced that doesn't involve velvet and Elvis. Perhaps I lie... about the second part.

But does his work cause anyone to think about art at all? Is it devoid of meaning? I think of it as similar to those Xmas television images of a log fire burning. Or goldfish.

Whatever - 54 is not a good innings.

Meade

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2012 5:31 pm
by BoSoxGal
He compared himself to Walt Disney and Norman Rockwell. I think not.

100 years from now, his 'art' won't be discussed in art history courses, and his 'novels' won't be discussed in literature courses.

It's dreck - although with regard to the pictures, at least they're pretty dreck. The books are the kind an intelligent person couldn't get past page two without gagging.

I feel sorry for him and his family, dying so young - but if you've seen a photo of him, it's obvious he didn't use his millions to take care of himself physically; probably died of heart disease.

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2012 6:34 pm
by dales
Never cared much for his work, but many who did. :shrug

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2012 7:02 pm
by Rick
Image

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2012 7:07 pm
by dales
LOL! :lol:

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 4:08 pm
by dgs49
I like Dave Barry's definition of not-art: "If I could have done it, it ain't art."

In every area of art there are those practitioners who manage to make a lot of money producing "art" for the masses, and it drives the self-appointed purists nuts. Clearly, there are many people with much more artistic talent who don't make a tiny fraction of the money, or get anywhere near as much public notoriety as the "whores."

Kinkade's pictures are no worse than Paul McCartney's music or Clive Cussler's novels. They give a lot of people some enjoyment but won't be remembered for very long after the artist passes from the scene.

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 8:22 pm
by Gob
Image

Canberra's latest piece of public "art", known as "The Lemon Juicer", or "The Tear of the Taxpayer".

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 9:13 pm
by Joe Guy
.

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 6:38 am
by Beer Sponge
Image
This one pissed me off! $600,000 in taxpayers money for a pile of silver balls? In my home town? And this shit is art?

Here is an article, for more on this crap.

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 6:47 am
by Gob
It's a load of balls!

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:19 pm
by rubato
Re: "public art". It is as true there as it is in all things that if you are not making mistakes then you're doing nothing worthwhile.

yrs,
rubato

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 1:04 pm
by Lord Jim
It seems to me that governmental bureaucracy judgements about art serve one useful purpose...

They provide the citizenry with physical, visual representations of the type of judgement these bureaucracies exercise on a daily basis in most other areas where they have decision making power....

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 2:13 pm
by Sue U
Does anyone now doubt that what Picasso, Braque and Cezanne created was "art"? Does anyone now doubt that De Kooning, Kilne, Motherwell, Frankenthaler and Rothko were artists? Does anyone now doubt that Duchamp, Ernst, Dali, Ray, Miro, Magritte and Tanguy were visionaries?

I swear, you people would have been sitting around Lascaux saying, "Well, it doesn't look like a horse to me!"

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 2:52 pm
by BoSoxGal
So you think Kinkade will be taught alongside Picasso someday?

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:20 pm
by BoSoxGal
So much for the fairy tale:
MONTE SERENO, Calif. — Thomas Kinkade’s paramour is accused of threatening to release damaging information about the painter’s family and businesses on the morning of his alcohol-fueled death, according to court documents obtained by The Daily.

Amy Pinto, 48, had been living in Kinkade’s storybook mansion here since at least January 2011, roughly nine months after the artist had separated from his wife of 30 years.

Kinkade, 54, died April 6 after apparently “drinking all night,” according to a recording of a fire department dispatcher. An autopsy was conducted April 9, but a determination of the cause of death awaits the results of toxicology tests.

Pinto, who did not respond to The Daily’s requests for comment, was described by a local reporter as “in tears.”

But a complaint filed against Pinto in Santa Clara County Civil Court three days after his death paints a different picture of her state of mind.

Pinto showed a family friend, Linda Raasch, a trove of personal photographs, papers and memorabilia on the morning of Kinkade’s death, then refused to return them and threatened to release them even though Raasch warned it would hurt the family, according to the civil complaint.

And Kinkade bodyguard Dean Murray claimed he heard Pinto disparaging Kinkade’s wife and daughters on several occasions and that she was “gathering evidence” to “tear down” the family and its businesses, the complaint states.

“It could only be for her gain,” Raasch told The Daily. “One who truly loves someone would not have that in the forefront of their mind on the day their loved one dies.”

Raasch, the godmother of the Kinkades’ four daughters, would not disclose exactly what the family is afraid of.

But the complaint states Pinto has already released private information to the news media. She has been quoted as saying Kinkade died in his sleep, had heart issues, had been living with her for the past 18 months and loved her. Kinkade paid Pinto’s insurance, credit card bills and other expenses, according to the complaint.

Although not a secret, Kinkade’s separation from his wife, Nanette, went largely unpublicized until his death.

Kinkade built the world’s most profitable art empire, selling his idyllic scenes to buyers inspired by their messages of family and faith. He hid the letter “N” in each painting as a profession of love for Nanette and chronicled his family life in a quarterly magazine for collectors. He even named four model homes in a Kinkade-themed subdivision after each of his four daughters — Merritt, Chandler, Windsor and Everett.

“I think Thom honestly believed all of the things he was talking about, as kind of the meaning behind his paintings,” said Craig Fleming, the former chief executive and president of the Thomas Kinkade Co., one of Kinkade’s businesses.

But his public persona belied a troubled personal life that spiraled in 2010 with the separation, a drunken driving arrest and bankruptcy.

“That is not a message that Thom would have ever wanted to get out amongst his collectors,” Fleming said. “He was a very proud ... I think it probably would hurt the business if [Pinto] was saying those things.”

The complaint was filed on behalf of Kinkade’s parent company, Windermere Holdings, and Nanette, trustee of the Kinkade Family Trust, which owns the Kinkade companies and possibly more than 1,000 of his original paintings.

Pinto will not be served for “private reasons,” a spokeswoman for the trust said.
 
The complaint seeks an unspecified amount in damages and an order barring Pinto from talking and forcing her to return any items covered in a confidentiality agreement she signed in February 2011, shortly after she had moved in with Kinkade.

The complaint also claims she has business information and implied she might be working with others. Raasch said she was “appalled, shocked” at Pinto’s threat on the morning of the artist’s death. “It’s a true statement of her character.”

Nanette Kinkade and three daughters had traveled to Australia to visit the fourth daughter the evening before the painter’s death and were scheduled to stay until April 14, according to the couple’s separation papers.

Pinto has two daughters from a previous marriage — one in college and the other living with her ex-husband, Russell Walsh.

She graduated from the University of South Carolina-Columbia and worked as an electrical engineer, but mostly stayed home during their marriage, Walsh told The Daily. She returned to work full-time around the time of their divorce in 2007, but stopped working once she met Kinkade, Walsh said.

“I think she would have been happy not working,” he said.

Walsh described Pinto as a “very smart woman” born in India and raised in Kuwait, who graduated valedictorian from her high school and was involved with her church.

But he said Pinto’s values and lifestyle changed during a mid-life crisis — around her 40th birthday — and she even appeared on the plastic surgery reality TV show “Dr. 90210” to get breast implants.

In court papers, Walsh claims that after Pinto moved in with Kinkade, their youngest daughter — 16 at the time — had “little interest in having overnights with her mother anymore” because of Pinto’s lifestyle and spent only six nights with her in a five-month period.

When The Daily visited the Kinkade house on Friday, a security guard said Pinto and her daughter were inside, but didn’t want to be bothered.

Raasch said she “would imagine” the Kinkade family would be concerned that Pinto was still inside the home, given that she was purportedly gathering evidence to harm them.

— Additional reporting by Kamala Kelkar and Noreen O'Donnell
@missryley

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:29 pm
by Lord Jim
Amy Pinto, 48, had been living in Kinkade’s storybook mansion here since at least January 2011, roughly nine months after the artist had separated from his wife of 30 years.

Kinkade, 54,
Guy ditches his wife of 30 years to take up with a chick who's only six years younger than him? What was he thinking? :shrug :lol:

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:44 pm
by dales
Image

Is the woman in the middle, Amy Pinto?

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:49 pm
by loCAtek
Isn't he the guy, who spammed all those animated screensavers? :arg

Re: But is it ... ART!

Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 10:48 pm
by rubato
Sue U wrote:Does anyone now doubt that what Picasso, Braque and Cezanne created was "art"? Does anyone now doubt that De Kooning, Kilne, Motherwell, Frankenthaler and Rothko were artists? Does anyone now doubt that Duchamp, Ernst, Dali, Ray, Miro, Magritte and Tanguy were visionaries?

I swear, you people would have been sitting around Lascaux saying, "Well, it doesn't look like a horse to me!"
You're talking about the Edmonton ball bearing sculpture not Kinkade, right, right?

yrs,
rubato