tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post5790113429546983701..comments2023-12-13T16:57:33.142-06:00Comments on Blogodidact: Shining a Light on the matter: Kinkade - 'Painter of Light'?Van Harveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-573372794306106112012-04-09T20:16:32.406-05:002012-04-09T20:16:32.406-05:00(Lucky for me I downloaded a few hundred of my fav...(Lucky for me I downloaded a few hundred of my favorites, years ago.)Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-89961969120533788082012-04-09T20:12:05.733-05:002012-04-09T20:12:05.733-05:00I've gotta say I am kinda bummed about "A...I've gotta say I am kinda bummed about "Art Renewal" requiring registration to view some of their online art.<br /><br />Still an awesome site... but they could have done without that. Or, then again, maybe they ju$t couldn't continue without that. <br /><br />Sometime's it's easy to forget that server farms cost moola.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-31227573586344965732012-04-09T19:43:20.039-05:002012-04-09T19:43:20.039-05:00Mushroom, Yep.Mushroom, Yep.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-25826064617301269872012-04-09T19:42:27.239-05:002012-04-09T19:42:27.239-05:00Joan, I also think that's a good way to put it...Joan, I also think that's a good way to put it, his paintings were more illustrations on steroids, than what is traditionally thought of as Art. I don't have anything of his, but not because of any 'superior' perspective I have, I never minded when one of his paintings popped up on a page, or in a store, I'd pause a moment and think 'Hmm... nice...', but that was about the extent of interest he got from me. I don't begrudge anybody else if they thought he perfectly captured the sorts of scenes that pleased their souls - good for them... and him.<br /><br />Nothing against Rembrandt, I like him - especially "Philosopher in meditation" & "Philosopher with an open book" <i>love those</i>, but the style I like best is Godward, and Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema, Titian... and so forth. I think I like their clarity & clean lines better. Or at least that's the best explanation I can think of... for them. But that explanation falls all to heck as soon as I pass a Van Gogh.<br /><br />Intellectually, I <i>Hate!</i> everything about Van Gogh's style... <i>Hate it!</i>. I don't like Matisse, or Renoir, or any of those goobers, and I should <i>Hate!</i> Van Gogh... but I couldn't walk past one of his paintings without staring for mucho many moments... for cash money... or even gold.<br /><br />His landscapes, flowers, etc... an electric current plugs through eyes to my spinal chord. Boom. Hooked. His paintings of buildings, I actively dislike (disturbed by), though the one of the outdoor cafe at night gets a pass. His portraits repulse me something fierce, but a cyprus, or a field, or a lake or stary night... boom! Winning!<br /><br />And that's probably all that needs to be said about intellectualizing Art... it goes only so far, and then something much deeper within you takes it from there....Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-76524380938672878182012-04-09T13:53:08.047-05:002012-04-09T13:53:08.047-05:00Kinkade would probably -- and maybe did -- cite No...Kinkade would probably -- and maybe did -- cite Norman Rockwell as being influential. I think he was trying to do what Rockwell did. Joan has picked a good word "illustrate". <br /><br />Kinkade painted beautiful scenes and did so beautifully. As you say, they are most often restful and friendly. They are not powerful painting, necessarily, like Van Gogh's. They are not even powerful in the same way as something like Remington's "A Dash for the Timber" -- the original of which I have seen up close.<br /><br />That brings up the point that some paintings you have to see with the naked eye to "get". And some you can at least begin to appreciate through reproductions. <br /><br />I hate it that I find myself coming to Kinkade's defense.<br /><br />Pure opinion: Pollock just sucked. I have always like Munch's painting. I haven't seen enough Picassos bald-eyed to say one way or the other. <br /><br />Walking through galleries, the paintings that drew me in were generally the classics -- like Godward, Titian, Hayez, Renoir, etc. Partly that has to do with the subjects which are often epic, but part of it is the vision of the painter.mushroomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07651027035577798096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32362551.post-10413599535786336982012-04-09T11:35:13.391-05:002012-04-09T11:35:13.391-05:00Some things are merely illustrative. If performed ...Some things are merely illustrative. If performed to best of the illustrator's ability, we find a beauty in it that transcends the subject matter.<br /><br />I guess I consider Rembrandt more of the painter of light because he made the darkness to be seen as exceedingly dark. Thus, even the faintest hue of reflected light appears as a monumental Truth. The eye sees and approves of the truth in the illustration. Kinkade worked too hard to illustrate the light, imho, and thus it loses its comparative advantage.Joan of Argghh!https://www.blogger.com/profile/14729682908266300507noreply@blogger.com