'Painter of Light' Kinkade in a dark spot with DUI arrest, bankruptcy case

Source: The Modesto Bee

The painter of light is having a dark period.
Thomas Kinkade, the Placerville native who became one of the world's wealthiest artists with his sentimental landscapes and Christian motifs, has had a string of legal troubles.
His company owes millions of dollars to art gallery owners who successfully pressed fraud claims.

Read more: http://www.modbee.com/2010/06/15/1209920/painter-of-light-kinkade-in-a.html

---

Heh. Who would have thunk it?

was being a hack.

Producing calendar art for white trash with money really isn't a crime, lots of people out there do it. What Kinkade did is churn out prints of the originals, stick a few blobs of extra paint here and there, and market those prints as original paintings.

Saccharine stuff sells. It always has and always will and who's to say it's inferior to meaningless postmodern stuff that just takes up wall space in huge corporate lobbies? While I don't line my walls with the equivalent of cotton candy, a lot of people really do love the stuff. It makes them feel good.

However, he's the first person to have blurred that line between original painting and cheap prints and done it successfully. The effect was to cheapen the former, and that is his true crime.

Bankruptcy and disgrace are too good for this fraud.

a hack. Really, guys like Kinkade cheapen the whole idea of art, and that's a terrible thing. Art is art and kitsch is kitsch, and they're not at all the same thing. Guys like Kinkade who try to claim that their particular kitsch is art deserve what's coming to them, and then some. That said, the whole Kinkade phenomenon is a wonderful and telling commentary on the American psyche.

When they found out that I did art, they had to show me each and every painting they bought. they must have had 40 of his pieces. It took all my self control to keep my lips sealed.

Even worse, when I found out that they had thoroughly confused and warped the brain of their daughter, well, that was that. All for the best, I think.

:rofl:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avant-Garde_and_Kitsch

:-)

And me, for that matter....

to give his colors an extra glow. IIRC, it's a trade secret and he doesn't give out the formula. That kind of innovation should be admired at least.

Hey, perhaps his creditors can seize the formula as part of the bankruptcy proceeding? It's his single greatest asset, the one thing that justifies that whole trademarked "Painter of Light" crap.

Wait, they can also seize the trademark! Oh, this gets better and better!

"The company owes 1,000 to 5,000 creditors a total of $10 million to $50 million, according to court documents.

A list of creditors more than 100 pages long was appended to the bankruptcy filing."

And I thought I had money problems.

Really, this guy brought tackiness to a whole new level... :rofl:

the fraud should receive jail time, i'm tired of art fraud being treated as a joke

in the new orleans area we had something similar but smaller time -- a woman and son selling factory produced crap w. a few daubs splashed on ea. one by some chinese artist, then labeled as "original art" by new orleans artist, sold for up to $4K apiece -- they were prosecuted as criminals, not in civil court, as indeed they should be

taking thousands of dollars -- in kincade's case, MILLIONS of dollars -- for work you did not do is the crime of fraud and it needs to be vigorously prosecuted

a mass produced work is not an original work and to pretend it is -- that's just theft and fraud

i say put him in jail and not just for the DUI

Of course the gallery owners are complicit in that.

it seems to me these gallery owners are saying they did NOT know the paintings were not as described

i'm sure any gallery owner with eyes in his head knew the paintings were tacky, but it doesn't follow that he knew that a painting described by the artist as an original was in fact a mass production with a few daubs splashed on it

in the new orleans case described in my previous post, the gallery owners not only knew but commissioned (in china) the fraudulent paintings, so they had reason to know they were mass productions, they'd hired it done

it SOUNDS like these gallery owners were approached by kincade and told that the paintings were originally and only kincade and kincade's assistants knew they were actually frauds

the claims were fraudulent. No reputable gallery dealer would be involved--he had his preferred outlets. Of course they knew, but now they pretend. They were complicit.

I'm really surprised he hasn't been prosecuted for a criminal scam. These paintings Kincade got thousands for have no such value. They are basically trash, as far as art value is concerned.

If he's bankrupt, I'm gonna celebrate that.

i don't know enough abt that kind of art marketing to have an opinion

anyone who knew the paintings were frauds should be in CRIMINAL court, from kincade on down

Really should be illegal--people have been duped out of millions upon millions thinking that his art has "value."

"paintings."

Mass produced junk.

excellent comparison

After hearing all your opinions here I will no longer think his work is pretty.

















































:snark:

That's when I knew he sucked.

Conservapedia "Masterpiece of the week" around October 29, 2007

h/t: Rationalwiki

his stuff is grossly over-rated

His stuff's as bad as Frazetta and Boris. Horrible as art-- but great as posters for a dorm room or a geek's cheap, first apartment.

http://www.usatoday.com/life/2002/2002-03-12-kinkade.htm

There are nine versions of each reproduced image, from Standard Numbered editions, for a few hundred dollars, to Studio Proofs that feature a textured canvas, more highlighting and Kinkade's machine-etched signature — compete with his DNA, courtesy of mixing the ink with the painter's hair and blood.

:crazy:

the article doesn't explain, except that he seems to owe some money to gallery owners.

Sure, it's a stretch to call what Kinkade does "original works of art" but how is it fraud? His factory techniques
are well known. And marketed as prints, usually, not unique works. Did the gallery owners front him cash for stuff
he didn't deliver? That's a sweet deal if true, and let's say very rare.

http://www.nctimes.com/news/state-and-regional/article_37e67a0d-fe1b-5a3b-8748-b6b311473810.html

Jesus art can be demeaning and exploitative, but Fraud? Huh...

on edit: Oh, yeah. He was franchising "Thomas Kinkade Galleries" at a handsome price, oinly they didn't make as much money as claimed. Duh.