Well… Could you do the same thing with one of Thomas Kincade’s paintings? Like what if you put water wings on the dessicated mummy of a 13-year old Peruvian girl sacrificied to a forgotten god, placed that in a Wal-Mart[sup]TM[/sup] plastic wading pool filled with the tears of beaten Chechen orphans, and then dropped a Kincade “cozy cottage” painting into the mix? Highbrow?
Apparently the problem being that between all of them, they have only one. Have you ever tried to appreciate art while sharing an eye with thousands? The random keep-away games alone are a significant barrier.
No. But if we did like him we wouldn’t be cool. Not liking Thomas Kincade is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for being cool.
Suuuuuuuuuuuuure you can’t. Uh-huh. That’s why you’re popping a forehead vein. Yep. I believe ya.
No, no. I don’t think it’s possible to pull off “highbrow” with Kinkade’s work…which makes it lower than nobrow.
(Maybe a kickass painting with one of Kinkade’s paintings depicted sticking out of the garbage? Nah, it’d just cheapen the art.)
Maybe, I have a vision of one of those Kincade pictures as a jigsaw covered in honey and slowly being eaten by slugs, call it “invertibrate artiste”
I’m confused. If Kincade were an illustrator of children’s books would his work be so bothersome? Or if his prints were hung in hotel rooms the world over? I’m guessing it wouldn’t. So his work isn’t objectively offensive, it’s the context. I think some of you are upset that so many people are appreciating Kincade’s paintings as “art” at the same level as Picasso or Andrew Wyeth, while you clearly feel they are not. Am I right?
If that’s the case, then it isn’t the fault of the artist, or of the work itself, is it? If anybody can be blamed for Thomas Kincade’s popularity, it’s the people who like him and his work. And isn’t blaming people for something they like just… wrong? Dumb? A waste of energy?
Speaking for myself only - I don’t care who like or dislikes Kinkade. I don’t care one way or another about him. I just stopped in to point and laugh at askeptic’s hysterical rage over something so unbelievably stupid.
Me, I love the comical notion of the false dichotomy, and the practice of putting word’s in your opponent’s mouth before you can engage their argument; arguing with your own words, i.e., because your opponent has offered you nothing to adequately refute.
I’m guessing you’re wrong. I’d find his shit heinous no matter the context.
No lie. I love Salon’s description of his paintings as “hollyhocked and morning-gloried cottage porn.”
. . . right . . . and yet you’re defending him. Methinks someone’s got a dirty, idyllic little secret on his wall! One whose perspective is off, and whose windows are emitting an eerie glow!
So if you don’t like Kinkade, why did you take exception to my Britney Spears comparison? Surely, if it’s completely unreasonable to make any aesthetic judgment beyond “I like it” and “I don’t like it”, then my Britney Spears comparison is perfectly apt, right? Either Britney Spears is every bit as good as John Coltrane, or else there is room to compare the value of different artistic endeavors.
If you would acknowledge the former, I’d consider you a moron, but at least you’d be a consistent moron rather than the hypocritical and self-contradictory moron you appear to be right now.
Exactly!
His relentless self-promotion and his perfect willingness to be declared an “artist” make him a bit less tolerable in my book. At least Christina Aguilera isn’t claiming that she’s one of the greatest musicians of our time.
And besides, blaming people for something they like is fun! Mocking those with no culture is what separates humanity from the animals. Except for the Madagascar Hipster Lemur, of course.
askeptic: There is a difference between reviewing and criticising. There is also a difference between you and someone capable of understanding that difference.
At the risk of being accused of having Thomas Kinkade paintings on my wall, too, I think askeptic has a point. Things like art, music, and literature are very subjective. The Straight Dope as a group tends to be very dismissive of things that we don’t like, rather than just leaving it alone for other people to enjoy.
I’m no Kincaid fan (I actually can’t name one painter that I’m a “fan” of except for Van Gough…guess that makes me an uncultured brute), but I’m not getting why askeptic is being roasted so hard. What’s so hysterical and vein-popping about what he said? I don’t agree with his point that all judgement of art is purely subjective, but I think posters in this thread are being jerkish (except for Kimstu) in their rebuttal.
On one hand he freaks out on the people who don’t like Kincade - I mean really, think about. Someone working themselves up into a lather because other people don’t like Kincade is pretty goddamn entertaining in itself. On the other hand, he “can’t stand the fuckers work”. It reminds me of the guy screaming - “I’M NOT YELLING!!!”.
I (and others) give him a little mild ribbing and he stomps his feet even harder. Maybe I am delirious from working all day, but I find his reaction over such a stupid topic as Kincade “art” pretty goddamn entertaining.
Some people like Kinkade, some people think he is a hack. Me, I have no opinion of him. I couldn’t care less. But who really gives a shit? If you like him, hang him on your wall. Buy the matching sheets and carseat covers. Order the Thomas Kincade collectors plates and ModPodge your puzzle and hang it on the wall. Who gives a shit what Joe Blow message board writer says about your taste in art.
You want to get pissed off and pout, I’m gonna point and laugh.
Notice that never once did he use exclamation marks or all caps. I see mild annoyance in his posts. Not hysteria. But YMMV.
And I find it strange that you’re picking on askeptic, when the only one working up a lather about other people’s preferences is the OP and those who agree with him.
Now, I didn’t see his posts as a reaction to Kincaide, but rather a response to what he believes to be snobbishness and elitism. But of course, ya’ll brushed this fact away with your “mild ribbing”.
That’s really the jist of askeptic’s first post. I guess all that imaginary hysteria and vein-popping obscured it.
You know people are laughing at you too, right?
Well, yeah. askeptic did pretty clearly accuse the OP of being snobbish or elitist. That’s a pretty fair summary. So, he insulted someone. And got insulted back for it! Hardly an outrage. Meanwhile, he got on my nerves with his little “Art is in the eye of the beholder dude.” Not only did he totally skip a comma, but he made a pretty absolute statement about aesthetics that even he won’t try to defend.
Me, I don’t like Thomas Kinkade’s crappy paintings. But I really hate the crowd of ninnies who inevitably (whether here online or out there in the real world) descend on any conversation involving any kind of aesthetic judgment to tell us that all viewpoints on art are equivalent. It’s not a terribly defensible view - note that askeptic asserted as much with the bit I quoted above, but won’t actually defend it. It’s annoying to have folks like askeptic constantly playing police officers and deciding for the rest of us what aesthetic judgments we’re allowed to make. He called me a “pretencious asshole” for arguing with his ill-conceived criticism of the OP. This annoyed me because “pretentious” is not a difficult word to spell correctly. Also, it’s an insult. Why, again, shouldn’t those of us he insults respond to him?
Besides, he’s an annoying little shit. Why shouldn’t be be treated like one?
I guess both sides are laughing. The difference is that your side is the one that has to tolerate crappy paintings purchased at shopping malls and shitty background music. Enjoy!
Picking on him?
Oh for fucks sake drama queen, all I said was “Aaaaaaaaaaaaah, me thinks someone has a Thomas Kinkaaaaaaaaaaaade print in his hooooooooooouse.” I know he was pissed off at some perceived snobbishness from people who make fun of Kinkade. I get that. Pull the stick from your ass and you will realize that I was fucking teasing.
No, you wrongly said he was being hysterical and popping a vein. Tease away if you must be a bully, but at least be fair to your targets.
And I must say…you sound much more like a drama queen than I do. Sounds like you’ve got some “lather” on your own chin.
And the OP insulted people too! And Diane insulted me! And I insulted her! And I’m sure you’re gonna insult me too! See how fun this is, all of us insulting each other in a stupid-ass thread?
Well, like I said, I don’t agree with this either But people were calling him names in response and attributing emotions to him that I didn’t sense. I know we’re in the Pit, but it seemed over the top.
Well, I admit to not being familiar with askeptic’s history. I was responding solely to his posts in this thread. If he does it often, then I admit he should stop.
However, on the other side of the token, I also think people should at least be aware that their tastes are not universally respected or valued–even among equally intelligent, cultured, sophisticated people. Nor is there any reason they should be. It’s kind of like if I posted a Pit thread ranting against ranch-style houses and called the people who buy them “lowbrow”. I would expect loud disagreement and accusations of snobbery. I really don’t see why a rant against Kincaide houses (or whatever) is deserving of some kind of special treatment. But then again, I have better things to do than label things I don’t like as “lowbrow” and laugh at them (oops, I’m guess I’m being the snob now).
Again, I don’t know that he is. He wasn’t that annoying in this thread, but I trust you if you say he’s been in the past.