Apr 9, 2012
While his work was indeed popular, art critics were particularly harsh towards his paintings and business practices. He was like the Bon Jovi of art, accessible and easily digestible, but nothing that could be taken seriously. One couldn't help but look at his art and find the prints pretty if nothing else. Still they didn't say much, as they were just simple. The human condition was not explored, nor was any sense of meaning.
My folks, as many older people, loved his work, thinking he was the greatest painter since Monet. I understand his appeal, but I can't understand why an artist who's work which was so redundant could keep selling. I mean you can only see so many cottages with babbling brooks in their front yards so many times. And each cottage had so much light coming out of it you'd think it was on fire, and having fourteen smoke stacks didn't help that image.
Much like Andrew Lloyd Webber, Kinkade will never be taken seriously in his medium. We'll never see a major gallery carrying his work, and he knew that, and that's why he made his own across malls the country over. Still if I can say anything good about his work, is that he made paintings accessible, which was something that was far lacking in today's art world. Contemporary art is a fickle, strange, and often dirty business that likes to alienate the public oddly enough, and it was nice to see someone give the finger to them. It is my hope someone does this again, only with more dedication to quality.
"The concept that an artist would be revered by popular culture is an immediate dismissal of his relevance as an artist." - Thomas Kinkade