Ten Year Old Kuwaiti Kid Hailed as "Picasso Jr"

Good for him. All art enrich the world.

I've seen worse on museum walls.

That being said, I'm not sure "it looks like a Picasso" is an artistic merit. What most people don't get about modern art is that it was very rooted in its historical context as a reply to antecedent or other contemporary art; Picasso is significant as much for his innovations as for his techniques. Imitating the style of 80 year-old canvasses isn't very theoretically interesting; you may as well imitate Norman Rockwell, except the latter isn't hip and cool at moment so you won't get any sweet international art agency contracts.

It's often said that good art is universal but great art is incidental. If people pay high prices for this kid's art then his paintings will assume titular greatness. The preference of the everyday man impacts the sensibilities of the rich, who often crave contrasts, and thereby lending legitimacy with their money to some of the most horrid artistic expression of years gone by.

I don't think he's "imitating" anyone. Your perspective is too Eurocentric. If I paint lions and sailboats, and such exotic scenery as swans basking in the July sun, or burglars raping Parisian nuns, then I must be reproducing the ideas of some dead Spanish guy right? The subject matter, the expressive medium, and color choice became proprietary before my paint even touches the canvass? Because Muslims, Asians, Blacks, etc. can never be original right?

I used to think that artists paint, mostly, with a free will and social consciousness divorced from fiduciary concerns. It is often not the case. Most artists originally started out this way. However, as soon as a clientele is built, artists will bend to the consciousness of their prior purchased clients In the case of Picasso, he has a list of wealthy clients waiting for a piece of art they hope he will paint, and he consequently does. Children's art has always fascinated me because although it bounces between paradigms set by adults, the vibrant naivete and Panglossian idealism often come through. I hope this kid the best. His art will continue to change. And I like what I've seen from him so far.

True, but I think one of the biggest mistakes of the 20th Century visual arts is that certain artists got way too attached to their own idiomaticisms. Hopefully we're entering an era where we can appropriate freely from the past without being committed to any one style or technique.

As for Picasso, I'm always suprised by the breadth of his work. Picasso himself didn't always "look like Picasso".

Hmm, so because I find this kid's art aesthetically pleasing but derivative and intellectually uninteresting, I am a racist? Put it back in the deck, buddy.

I don't understand what this means. Artists have been freely appropriating from the past for centuries.
Almost all artists are like this and posthumously come to be defined by the period that earned them their greatest commercial or critical success. Turner used to paint religious figures and the insides of cathedrals. Magritte began by painting impressionist female nudes. Who today remembers any of that?

I agree with this. I don't think there is anything particularly interesting about an artist who produces works that "look like" the works of another artist unless it's part of a particular movement. That being said, I think this child's art still shows more talent than most of the crap contemporary art that is out there. I know a lot of people will disagree with me about this, but in my opinion painting three lines or painting a single dot on a canvas does not display artistic talent.

All of these "art prodigies" that make abstract act have heavy handed parents that are shameless promoters. None amount to anything. The only way one could aptly be described as an equivalent of Picasso is for him to demonstrate a similar grasp of realistic 3d modeling and light/ shadow perception. Imitating art that doesn't have light sources eliminates almost every technical skill outside of compositional balance and color scheming. Picasso at 8. Picasso at 9. Picasso at 12. Picasso at 15. I'm not even sure they're great for a 10 year old.

Picasso was not a particularly gifted child artist (certainly not a bad one) and that's all in his honour; I'm wary of hailing a ten y/o as a genius painter.