Thomas Kinkade is Satan

[StephenHero]

Originally Posted by MsMcGillicuddy

Possibly. But who is to say what is boring and what isn't? Isn't that about as subjective as what is 'good' art?
It's not about the art. It's mostly about the personality of the one forming opinions around it. Say I ask three people what the greatest movie of all time is. Here are the three answers: Citizen Kane, Old School, and Duck Soup. One is obviously more right than the other two by varying degrees, but my opinion of the person who said Duck Soup is highest, even though I'm not really a fan. At least it's an original opinion. This is why those that worship Van Gogh and those that loathe Thomas Kinkade are of negligible interest to me.

 

[MsMcGillicuddy]

A lot of people tend to be less than precise about the difference between what is good and what they like (as another alluded to upthread). Now, some people assume that their tastes = society's, and so the two ideas are inextricably linked for them. If one likes it, it must be good. So since one loves Old School, it must be one of the greatest films of all time. I admit to falling into this mindset at times - except with movies. I recognize I have utterly ****** taste in movies, but believe I can recognize the good ones, even if I don't like them. My knowlege of art is limited primarily to my favorite artist and a smattering of others. But I do know that I do, in fact, dislike the work of Thomas Kinkade.

But the statement about people who like Van Gogh and/or loathe Thomas Kinkade (not sure if they are necessarily one in the same) is intriguing to me. Is the person expressing an original opinion on a topic have a 'better' personality than an unoriginal one, if both are honest? It reminds me a bit of the mindset that leads people to ditch their favorite bands or authors as soon as more people begin to notice them - once the masses catch on, then the music/book must not be as good as one orginially thought, since the masses can't be trusted. It's interesting to me to judge based on preference without knowing for what reason the preference exists.

 

[StephenHero]

For something so expansive, so diverse, and judged so heavily on subtlety in terms of technical merit, there is little room to have have such boring critical opinions and maintain credibility in the knowledge of fine arts. Or if not credibility, originality. Once I was caught at a hipster party in Tribeca and some girl started talking to me about painting because I had recently been to a show and the ticket fell out of my pocket. I asked her what she liked. "Starry Night is my favorite." Of all the thousands of great paintings out there, Starry Night is your favorite? Really? You love the "emotional turmoil" in the sky? It's those types of boring opinions that were handed down from the grad assistant teaching your Intro the Modern Art class that make one's knowledge of art seem lackluster or stale. I like people that formed their own unique opinions slightly detached from (but aware of) the canon of critical opinion. I moved on to the next girl. I'm dying for the day when I meet someone who says Richard Diebenkorn or Louise Nevelson or something similarly nutty. Those people are good for hours of interesting conversation.

 

[musicguy]

All of your opinions should come from your own point of reference. That's not to say you shouldn't listen to the opinions of other people.

Visual art makes me feel something. If I look at a good painting, it brings out many emotions and almost transports me to the scene or the mind of the painter. Looking at Kinkade's works, I see cutesy nonesence with no real substance. They're not necessarily offensive to the untrained eye. However, if you know what you're looking at, you'll realize that it is offensive to create works like this without saying or really meaning anything. There's no soul in his works.

Yet, Kinkade is bringing his works to the public, so perhaps he's the Hugo Boss of the art world, a gateway to the finer aspects of their respective artforms. Still, it can be argued that he is doing harm to the art world. Sort of like what American Idol is to the music world. Popularising and glorifying mediocrity.

 

[musicguy]

Originally Posted by StephenHero

For something so expansive, so diverse, and judged so heavily on subtlety in terms of technical merit, there is little room to have have such boring critical opinions and maintain credibility in the knowledge of fine arts. Or if not credibility, originality. Once I was caught at a hipster party in Tribeca and some girl started talking to me about painting because I had recently been to a show and the ticket fell out of my pocket. I asked her what she liked. "Starry Night is my favorite." Of all the thousands of great paintings out there, Starry Night is your favorite? Really? You love the "emotional turmoil" in the sky? It's those types of boring opinions that were handed down from the grad assistant teaching your Intro the Modern Art class that make one's knowledge of art seem lackluster or stale. I like people that formed their own unique opinions slightly detached from (but aware of) the canon of critical opinion. I moved on to the next girl. I'm dying for the day when I meet someone who says Richard Diebenkorn or Louise Nevelson or something similarly nutty. Those people are good for hours of interesting conversation.

There's nothing wrong with liking Starry Night. There's a reason why it's so well known. At least she said she likes art... but I do understand what you're trying to say.

 

[r...]

Hurting art? Sure the guys work belongs on the trapper keeper of some 6th girl circa 1993 but it doesn't carry enough merit to affect art in any sense. Its like, meant to help relax the bladder when viewed from the inside of some dept store bathroom or something.

As to not valuing someones opinion based on the originality therein. That seems just as guilty of skimming the surface as the persons whose view is deemed at lacking depth.

 

[StephenHero]

Are you telling me you'd find the discussion of men's clothing more interesting with someone who said they shop at the Gap or Banana Republic? If you truly valued the idea that one's taste is never wrong you would.

 

[StephenHero]

This applies to pretty much everything subjective. When you hear someone's favorite books and it reads like a high school English curriculum with Harry Potter or John Grisham sprinkled in, it's hard to avoid writing off that person's ability to form unique opinions.

 

[r...]

I can disagree with someones taste but to me a great conversation doesn't leave me reassured in what already knew.

 

[StephenHero]

Small side note. I know a guy who always wore this flag pin to parties during the hairy years of the Iraq War. He killed it. I think he even got his current job from someone he met at a party. People just want to talk to others that have some sort of opinion or awareness of critical ideas even if they aren't widely accepted as correct. There is nothing more boring than the cliche answer. Whether it's Starry Night, or an Obama endorsement from someone in black rimmed glasses, or an appreciation of Pixar from someone over 18, those opinions just scream "I'm really ******* normal even if I think I'm not."

 

[musicguy]

Originally Posted by StephenHero

There is nothing more boring than the cliche answer. Whether it's Starry Night, or an Obama endorsement from someone in black rimmed glasses, or an appreciation of Pixar from someone over 18, those opinions just scream "I'm really ******* normal even if I think I'm not."

You don't like Starry Night?

 

[StephenHero]

I do. I don't salivate over it though. I prefer its neglected step brother.

 

[bach]

Whether it's Starry Night, or an Obama endorsement from someone in black rimmed glasses, or an appreciation of Pixar from someone over 18, those opinions just scream "I'm really ******* normal even if I think I'm not."

who cares? are you saying you scorn those who hold opinions or tastes which you believe are trite?

that's mildly presumptuous.

 

[musicguy]

It's all about the context in which someone states their opinion. I understand what you're saying StephenHero, but it's rather narrow minded. van Gogh is a great artist.

 

[r...]

Originally Posted by StephenHero

Small side note. I know a guy who always wore this flag pin to parties during the hairy years of the Iraq War. He killed it. I think he even got his current job from someone he met at a party. People just want to talk to others that have some sort of opinion or awareness of critical ideas even if they aren't widely accepted as correct. There is nothing more boring than the cliche answer. Whether it's Starry Night, or an Obama endorsement from someone in black rimmed glasses, or an appreciation of Pixar from someone over 18, those opinions just scream "I'm really ******* normal even if I think I'm not."

You hold a very valid point, and I sense that we agree on a more basic level to have our attentions kept by the new and interesting. Where I dissent is in the idea that original is really original to begin with and not some lame attempt to stand out. I will hear you out either way. These hipster parties you go to are full of people who believe "Im everything but ******* normal even though I really am".

The pin is killer.