I knew he’d have his defenders.
I’m still unconvinced. I don’t like his stuff.
Thomas Kinkade is lousy!
I’m kidding 
I mean Rockwell.
Forbin: You don’t have to like Rockwell. But your reasons for not liking him were these:
Huh? You mean a painting like Murder in Mississippi (linked to above) which depicts civil rights workers getting slaughtered isn’t “passionate” and doesn’t have enough “conflict” for you? It isn’t “important” enough for you?
And do you mean that the several paintings we have linked to have “nothing important” to say and are “boring”? You seriously think he never had anything important to paint? Could you please explain how you came to this conclusion?
Who was that artist in the 80’s - early 90’s who hired other artists to execute his sketches or would make one of something and have his assistants make “original” copies and his clients were completely OK with this and he was unapologetic about it .
He did a huge business with wealthy clients. He did sculpture and painting. It was not Andy Warhol. IIRC his name a was Kommetko… Komoko or something that sounded similar?
astro – are you thinking of the guy who did the chrome version of the blow-up Easter Bunny? I’m thinking Koontz, but a quick google of koontz-bunny didn’t do me much good. (Well, it was entertaining, but it didn’t bring up the guy I’m thinking of.) Yeah, he was annoying.
Julian Schnabel is a pretentious @ss.
I also like the pre-Raphaelites, though I’ll admit Wm. Holman Hunt can be a bit … preachy. (I’ve always had kind of a fondness for his Scapegoat, though: http://www.csudh.edu/dearhabermas/scapegoat.htm
And I’ve always loved Hicks – my fellow Quaker.
(Along these lines, there was a really wonderful show on American landscape painting of the 19th century here in Philly last summer – a couple of huge honkin’ Bierstadts – yup, love the Hudson Valley school, too.
Oh, wait, the OP wanted people I don’t like? I’ve never liked Renoir much – those hectic fleshtones…
Noone’s mentioned Bob Ross?
OTOH, don’t mess with Bill Alexander.
More seriously, what do people think of Nagel these days?
I don’t mean the events weren’t important.
I simply don’t believe that NR had the gravity or depth to adequitely portray them. Vegetables are delicious, snappy, flavorful food too, but they can be boiled to mush. I prefer al dente.
Norman Rockwell just isn’t for me.*
I knew he was regarded as an “illustrator” BTW. I dislike that label as others have mentioned. Remember, I work in the decorative (applied, if you prefer{Hell, Industrial if you prefer}) arts. I think we often have much more to say than the so called “fine” artists. The harmonies of J.S. Bach are profound, but the Dianna and Minerva commode by Thomas Chippendale isn’t?
I don’t think so!
*Merely a matter of taste. I don’t like Christmas either, and every year, well meaning people try to troubleshoot my obviously wrong point of view. This seems like the same thing to me. We disagree, that’s all.
I was thinking of Jeff Koons – here’s a link:
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Exhibit/9929/koons/
Is this who you were thinking of, astro? Regardless, he’s one of my nominees.
Perhaps you’re thinking of Mark Kostabi? BTW, many old masters would also put their signatures on work done by their apprentices under their guidance. Not that I’m comparing Kostabi to a master, by any stretch of the imagination.
Sorry, pulykamell*, but Francis Bacon’s paintings are just horrid and unwatchable to me. Whatever is supposed to be so “important” about him is lost in the intense repulsiveness he flings in the viewer’s face. Sorry, I just can’t relate to that. He is inaccessible. It’s like hip-hop rap music. Its defenders protest that it has a lot of important things to say … but the sound upfront is so ugly and repellent, I just can’t let it in my ears.
There have already been many Kinkade bashing threads here, if you look far enough. That one is too easy. It should be disregarded, just for the fact that it is the one that pops into everyone’s mind without really having to think about. 
Actually, I can’t really think of any that I would say I hate, except for people who are strictly shock art. Like the guy with the decomposing cow’s head, or whatever it was. Forgive me for not finding the link, but I can’t bear to look at his art again.
Fine—if you don’t like him, that’s fine. No other explanation necessary. Your specific reasons for not liking him (IMO) are hard to back up too concretely. (I think the rest of us have given ample cites which indicate that you are in the minority in how you interpret his efforts.) So the bottom line is that you don’t like him. No biggie.
I’ve never been a big fan of Keith Haring’s dancing dudes.
Oops. Wrong link.
JayElle beat me to it. Keith Haring, hands down.
I agree…
Keith Haring
booooooooring
That’s him!
I have to agree that Keith Haring was one of the most overrated painters of the 1980s, along with the pathetic Michael Basquaet (sp?).
One the other side of the coin, the '80s produced some really interesting painters, especially Eric Fischl and Ralph Humphries.
Christo.
http://www.christojeanneclaude.net/christo/xtojc/wc.html
Sorry but throwing a tarp over something and wrapping it with rope does nothing for me. Neither does wrapping a stick in a rag and wrapping it with string. Nor does wrapping a hillside or coastline with sheets. (Do you see a pattern here?)
I gotta agree with Haring, Nagel and Kinkade as well.
As someone who’s similarly not a Hunt fan, but who lived in Liverpool for some years and often had the chance to look at it in the Walker, I’ll fondly agree with you about the Scapegoat. Not a great painting, but the sort of thing that can become wonderfully familiar.
Jeff Koons is best compared with Dadaists such as Marcel Duchamp, the guy who mounted a urinal on a platform and called it a “fountain” and who scrawled a moustache on a Mona Lisa postcard. I love Koons’ stuff and his attitude and sense of humor and am happy to see his work displayed in prestigious museums worldwide.
I can’t believe nobody has mentioned Leroy Neiman yet.