fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3203 ]

[ SECRET POST #3203 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3203 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 062 secrets from Secret Submission Post #458.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Why do art people hate Thomas Kinkade? Sure, his work is saccharine and overly sentimental but I think it's meant to be? Plus, the dude made major bank.

So why is he so hated in the art world?

Pretty sure it's from oversaturation. His work became too commercial, so artists, being the inherent hipsters they are, got tired of it.

lol, I would not be surprised at all

Hey, *I* got tired of seeing his stuff, and I'm not an artist, nor would anyone describe me as hipster,LOL!

I'm an amateur artist but I had no idea who Kinkade was. Googled him, and his works look like the pinnacle of tastelessness? So my guess'd be that people hate him for getting a shitton of cash from his exceptionally bad art.

Like, the problem isn't that it's sentimental. It's just technically bad. He has no idea how colours work.

....Well I think it's pretty.

Yeah, no, his art is actually pretty good, just busy. Besides, I love his disney pieces.

Kinkade is probably the epitome of kitsch and a lot of artists hate that. He found his niche, found his audience, and created work for them. Personally, I don't have a problem with the dude's work (his colors are a little overly saturated for my tastes but w/e w/e) and his grasp on lighting is pretty great.

I should explain, his ability to make light look like LIGHT is pretty great; his light sourcing, haha, that's a different story.

Edited 2015-10-11 20:25 (UTC)

I don't even understand its reputation for being saccharine. I'd just call it generic.

My mother thinks his art is scary. Everything's lit up way more than it needs to be, like he's terrified of allowing any darkness in.

This is a hilarious description, thank you. And very spot-on.

Wasn't his tagline "The Master of Light?"

Oh damn, I think someone gave me a puzzle of one of his pictures when I was younger.

I'm an art student and Kinkade mostly looks very commercial, which artists generally don't like cause it doesn't strive for anything besides making bank. Its not personal or pushing the artists skills its just kind of... there.

This is pretty much my beef with him. There's no soul behind his work, just the question of "how much light does it need to sell?" (I'm an art history teacher, btw.)

isn't that that guy where every single one of his paintings is some cutesy cottage scene lit with unholy orange light like everything's on fire?

Re: Question thread!

(Anonymous) - 2015-10-11 21:48 (UTC) - Expand

I just looked him up and ugh, it's work that's actively tailored for people's uninspired fantasies of the imaginary ideal past. It looks so fucking fake to me, I can't imagine putting that on my wall and sighing happily at how much money I paid for it.

Buuuuuut if that's what gets you off, fine, whatever.

I like Thomas Kinkade. Sorry (but not really).

I wouldn't hang them on my wall (that would make my apartment feel like a hotel), but his paintings make fabulous jigsaw puzzles and sometimes they're nice to just look at wistfully.

Edited 2015-10-11 22:14 (UTC)

Re: Question thread!

(Anonymous) - 2015-10-12 03:06 (UTC) - Expand

Doesn't do anything interesting, is extremely schmaltzy, is popular.

I don't mind him, personally. Yeah, it's not amazing artistically, but they're kind of pretty, I think.
Besides, if you're talking about things that are painfully generic, I find the common computer art style that's often used for game and MMO art, and a lot of fanart, to be far more painfully generic and commercial.

Re: Question thread!

(Anonymous) - 2015-10-12 01:09 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Question thread!

ketita - 2015-10-12 01:19 (UTC) - Expand

I am not an artist and have no connection to the art world. However, I personally dislike Thomas Kinkade because something about his paintings makes me feel like I'm being forced to swallow packets of sugar.

Also, my mother fell in love with his work when I was in middle school, so I spent a good chunk of my adolescence surrounded by and drowned in it, and I'm sure that hasn't helped.

I don't hate him. But there's not exactly anything innovative or cool about his works that make me like it.

1. Kitsch without being ironic about it.
2. Mass production of stuff that gets stamped with the Kinkade name.
3. He's not that good in terms of either technique or composition.
4. Shady business practices including undermining his own retail studios.

he's not very good. he had technical skills, but they weren't very well executed. it's the kind of art non-art people think is good because there's lots of stuff in it.

Probably because it doesn't fulfill what a lot of people think art should be. Looking saccharinely pretty, having deliberate mass appeal and no message or substance... a lot of people would say that isn't the point of art. Kinkade is to serious art critics what McDonalds is to Michelin inspectors.

That and his company has been accused of shady business dealings with its gallery franchises, using Christianity to convince people to buy in, forcing them to invest in a huge inventory and then undercutting them by letting other places sell the art at lower prices.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only