I hate THOMAS KINKADE and I will exact revenge!!!!!!!!!
 

My MOST HATED ENEMY in the ART WORLD, THOMAS KINKADE, WILL BE HERE IN hOUSTON ON mARCH 24TH AT THE OMNI HOTEL

he will be selling chances to get his bullshit HACK signature on his prebought bullshit HACK artwork!!! Now is my chance to ddefame him! to DEBASE HIM! to shred his shit in front opf his own goddamn con-artist face!!!! THE FUCK!

the fucker makes you pay for hios "art" then pay to get a ticket to his "ambassador of light " tour, and then pay to have him sign one of his bullshit works! I HATE THIS FUCK SO MUCH!!!! the war begins NOW

here is the fucker I hate

I think that's Ned Flanders.

hi diddly ho, neighborino!

REVENGE-- what did he do to you?

Remember to pick out his eyes and slow cut anywhere in the body.

oy, i just saw his website-- he's truly an art criminal

moreover:

faster cheeto! kill! kill!

Thomas Kinkade is the "Painter of Light". Do you hate light? Even though most of his oeuvre consists of landscapes and pastorals, he manages to convey a sense of warmth through these lovingly rendered, heartfelt paintings. Just watch a loved one's face light up as they witness a Kinkade reproduction for the first time.

it is not his images that I hate.

he has painted maybe 45 paintings that he then mass produces with factory screen printing and he sells them unframed for about 200 dollars to saps, then he has a large crew of "painters" that add brushstrokes to the mass produced paintings and he sellsthose for around 1000 dollars and then he takes some and adds his own brushtrokes and highlights and charges a fortune for those!!!!!! he is a fucking hack who has stores all over selling these fucking shit copies that will be worthless, completely worthless. there are fans that buy dozens of them, spending all their money.
I saw a story on him on 60 minutes. it was worse than anything I had imagines. he is a fucking asshole. he has gone and put himself on the stoick exchange he has his own stock, what a fucko....

Yeah, I don't like him for similar reasons.

There are an abundance of local talented painters and photographers in most areas (even here in Utah!) - with a variety of styles and subjects that could appeal even to more conservative tastes, who sell originals rather inexpensivly and reproductions from giclees to standard sized prints for cheap. I've worked the last few years custom framing and see Kinkade stuff regularly enough, but keep my mouth shut. It's nice to occasionally bump into some of the artists from around here whose work I've aquired recently.

All of my "Most Hated Enemies" are oblivious to the fact.

wait... this is not a monopoly of kinkaid.



or

ha ha ha ha lighthouses

well there are lighthouses & lighthouses. i did a google w/ the terms "lighthouse painting" & came across these:

there's your edward hopper:




(i like other things by him much better though)

and then i found this one:




sure, it's derivative and a bit chagallesque (is there such a word?) but still avoids cheeseball. you know, not avant garde, but lookable. i'd buy that for a reasonable price--im not cosntitutionally opposed to figurative art.


the rest im afraid is mostly shit, ha ha. well i went over like 20 pages.

but yes you are in principle very right. i just wanted to show the occasional exception?

yes that hopper lighthouse is a bit shite. by him i much prefer other thing, such as...



overexposed perhaps but still good:





etc

He is trying to do something that has already been done. First one to do that was Andy Warhol. At least warhol had creativity to doing this sort of shit.

I find warhol entertaining, amazing actually. I think when your creating art you have to do something differen,t or take something that already exists and do it better or add a twist.

warhol used a factory setting to make individual works of art or to make series. kinkade just painst an image and has it reproduced in an actual factory with machines and then sells them as "originals"

he is going down people!@

I've loathed him as well ever since seeing the same 60 minutes piece years ago; perhaps we should have a debate as to who dislikes him more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Instigator
it is not his images that I hate.

It is "his" images that do not like. Naturalism + no narrative content of importance = dreck.
It's readily apparent that he makes regionalized pictures with chee$y intent.
The formal qualities of the artwork can sometimes override this general modern aesthetics rule-of-thumb. Just look at Sargent or Wyeth, for instance. Of course the American Romantic Masters like Cole, Cassat and Eakins...(just to name a few) their pictures were painted back when they meant something, and any one of them are far more deserving of an "Ambassador of Light" title.
http://xroads.virginia.edu/~cap/NATURE/cap2.html

Don't forget...before Warhol there was the whole Dutch Masters school & Michelangelo that employed assistants.

Of course, Kinkade is a whole other case...please, at least bring the noize to his ear, Rob, with all the zeal you originally expressed...

and remember...
Peace lies in finding the True War.

his "work" is worth nothing