So. This is Awesome.

Behold a couple of selections from the War on Kinkade Series:

There’s more where that came from here.

  • http://www.parafool.com/ victor

    It all makes sense now: every one of Kinkade’s paintings was painted on Endor.

  • kenofken

    Another concept that might work is to have the Trainspotting crew in Kinkadeland!

  • http://janalynmarie.blogspot.com/ Beadgirl

    See? Good *can* come of evil.

  • Obpoet

    At least he is dead, so as to be spared the mockery. Never mind the joy he brought to millions. Had his subjects been sacrilegious, I am sure he would have been praised enough.

    • http://www.likelierthings.com/ Jon W

      His subjects were sacrilegious. He told lies about the world in order to make money. Just because he told different lies than Hollywood didn’t make him that much better.

      • LSUStatman

        Care to be specific about the lies he told? Because I just don’t see it. I see a particular way of looking at the world, but not lies. At least not any different that the lies that pretty much every other artist in the world tells.

  • LSUStatman

    Very funny. Sums up the hostility so many have to Kincaid.

    That said, I have never understood that hostility to Kincaid. He was a talented painter. Certainly, not as talented as a Rodin, Picasso or Rembrandt, but way more talented that 99% of the population. He produced an art that millions of people liked well enough to buy. What’s so wrong about that?

    The “enlightened” art critics called it schmaltz. So what? Many of the artistic works they love seem to me to be mere nonsense. They want more “edge”, as if whatever “edge” is, it is ultimately more important than beauty. I disagree. There is a need for “edge”, so that the human intellect doesn’t stagnate, but to make the quest for “edge” the central focal point of all art simply doesn’t give any honor to beauty.

    I don’t own a Kincaid, because I have different tastes. My family does have a painting by an aunt that is quite a bit better than previous expectations. Would I expect it to be in the national gallery? No, but it is better than some of the crap that is put there by the “expert” art critics. I place Kincaid in a level above that aunt, and so do so many people.

    To me, the hostility of people against Kincaid is a manifestation of some idea that if something is popular, it must be bad. I would much rather appreciate a person who is trying to bring some beauty into life using his talents.

    Peace

    • Andy

      I agree – my mother loved Kincaid – she saw something in his stuff that I never saw, but that is what makes people unique. I do not understand the hostility towards him or his work.

    • KyPerson

      I never liked his most popular stuff, I always think of it as painting with cake frosting. But I have seen some of his early plein aire paintings and they are quite good.

  • PalaceGuard

    The reason for the hostility is that he made schlock, and, by extension, kitsch, look bad! His smarmy canvases lack the sheer exuberant tackiness of a velvet Elvis or the misdirected genius of poker-playing dogs. Do some people love his work? That’s their prerogative. I am, however, under no obligation to pretend that I see it other than I see it.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X