He is fortunate that he found a niche that sells really well. I mean really really well. According to a cite in Wikipedia, "Kinkade is reported to have earned $53 million for his artistic work in the period 1997 to May 2005." Since then he has started a partnerships with Disney, NASCAR and movie studios.
What really upsets me is I actually wanted to buy a print of a painting in his gallery in Albuquerque, NM (see top picture). I liked the print but refused to buy it because I have such a negative reaction to the crap that he mass markets (see bottom picture).
This does not seem rational. I should have bought the print. Would I act this way in other areas. Would I not go to see the J.J. Abrams Star Trek because Paramount also made Transformers. No, I should have put up the $55 for the print.
You can look at some of Kinkade's work at http://www.thomaskinkadegallery.com/kinkade.php.
A funny parody of Kinkade painting can be viewed here http://www.somethingawful.com/d/photoshop-phriday/paintings-light-ii.php?page=2 Sphere: Related Content
2 comments:
What bothers you more? Buying his work? Or, owning his work? Are you afraid that others will question your taste if you own a Kinkade? Is there something to an artist making a lot of money because the audience wonders if the products are based on creative ingenuity or a paycheck. Both can exist too, but I am just wondering.
Are you suffering from buyer's remorse?
I think the idea of owning a Kinkade is what bothers me. I would not be so harsh on other people for focusing on the area that is most advantageous.
I am not sure if the artist's motivation should be factor in the process of judging any piece of art.
I am suffering from non buyers remorse.
Post a Comment