Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The pile-on on Thomas Kinkaide - it's not about the art - [View all]IDemo
(16,926 posts)50. Cheesy as Kincaide's work may have been
It was the realization that I would never be part of the school of "art" such as this that made me quit art school and my pursuit of art as a career:
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
116 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I'm more into steampunk. Never really liked many paintings except for Monet regardless of the
Snake Alchemist
Apr 2012
#14
Well, you can compare Monet's treatment of the little footbridge in his Giverny garden painting
CTyankee
Apr 2012
#24
I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be realizing from their treatment of footbridges. nt
Snake Alchemist
Apr 2012
#29
I don't think there is anything you are "supposed" to be realizing, except what
CTyankee
Apr 2012
#62
Of course. You are right about Christina. But I do think that Wyeth was aware of Eakins works.
CTyankee
Apr 2012
#52
I have never been intellectual enough to tell people what qualifies as art and what does not. nt
Snake Alchemist
Apr 2012
#73
Now art is a science? Reminds me of parents telling their kids "that's not real music" througout
Snake Alchemist
Apr 2012
#93
And besides, Picasso was, with his Analytic Cubism, carrying Cezanne's vision (see his Bibemus
CTyankee
Apr 2012
#60
Skill doesn't make something art. Viewers liking something doesn't make it art, either.
Demit
Apr 2012
#66
What makes it "art" is being collected by rich people. That's the sum & total of it.
HiPointDem
Apr 2012
#82
He stood there next to a stack of printed canvases, dabbed on a highlight, signed the canvas, and
Demit
Apr 2012
#77
Of course you were addressing me. You hit Reply to my post, and you were quoting my words.
Demit
Apr 2012
#107
Seems, he was somewhat of a vicious hypocrite with socoipathic tendencies....wow.
Ecumenist
Apr 2012
#3
YES! No time to go into details, but he was unethical and treated people badly.
TalkingDog
Apr 2012
#7
Thank you. That's exactly what I keep saying. Hell, I even "like" Bob Ross on my facebook page.
TalkingDog
Apr 2012
#6
People like warhol aren't hard to understand. They like cash, they like to be around people with
HiPointDem
Apr 2012
#101
Do you think we'll see Kinkade's stuff at MoMA, on the same floor with the Jasper Johns and
CTyankee
Apr 2012
#27
As I have said, this "high art/low art" discussion is timeworn. It goes on and on. And there is
CTyankee
Apr 2012
#58
Except that the people doing the pile-on seemed to make it about his art.
Tommy_Carcetti
Apr 2012
#28
He should have just done a "Piss Christ" and others would have loved him
The Straight Story
Apr 2012
#59
it's outrageous that Kinkaide was rewarded with million$ for his unoriginal appeals
librechik
Apr 2012
#72
lots of hypocrisy out there; this guy's hypocrisy seems to have spawned threads all out of
HiPointDem
Apr 2012
#113