A collecting forum. CollectingBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » CollectingBanter forum » Collecting newsgroups » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

FA: Thomas Kinkade ORIGINAL "Home for the Evening"



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old December 4th 05, 10:28 PM posted to alt.art.marketplace,rec.arts.fine,rec.collecting,alt.marketing.online.ebay
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Thomas Kinkade ORIGINAL "Home for the Evening"

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 19:55:04 GMT, "Thur" wrote:


"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
.. .
On 04 Dec 2005 16:24:35 GMT, (Biljo White) wrote:

"Kris Baker" wrote:

...and the *worst* thing about it all is that he's conned many
people into buying valueless "originals". They have no value,
people have no "investment" (as promised), and I'd much rather
have the Agapito Labios painting I bought for $2 a few years
ago. Look *that* one up.

I think it amounts to fraud -- as you say, people are conned into buying
'art' they are told has monetary value, only to find out later that its
appraised or auction value is almost nothing.


And this is different, how, from Beanie Babies or the other fad items
we see on eBay?

Also, he has turned the
'print' con into an art of its own - peddling worthless photomechanical
reproductions as 'prints' for absurd prices.


How is something that goes for absurd prices "worthless"? Can you say
"oxymoron"?

I wouldn't buy a Kinkade postcard, but I wouldn't buy a Precious
Moments tchotchka either. Horses for courses.

--


Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL


The basis of the objections would probably disappear if the buyers
were not seen as being duped into believing they were
1) buying something that they thought was good art.
2) buying something that would increase in value because others
would want it, also in the belief it was good art.
Sometimes these pieces might be sold on, but time will see them cast
aside, as we all cast aside stuff we know has no lasting value.

How is something that goes for absurd prices "worthless"?


I am not sure if you really mean to ask it, but some things can be
overpriced, and some things can be overvalued.


I would hope that you understand the difference between "overvalued"
or "overpriced" and "worthless'. Different things.

Nothing is really overpriced if there are people who are willing to
pay the price.



--


Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
Ads
  #22  
Old December 5th 05, 04:04 AM posted to alt.art.marketplace,rec.arts.fine,rec.collecting,alt.marketing.online.ebay
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Thomas Kinkade ORIGINAL "Home for the Evening"

Kris Baker wrote:

"Mani Deli" wrote in message
...
Whats wrong with Kinkade?

I don't like his work but I like Kinkade because he sells his work for
lots of money and his success bugs Artzy fartzies no end, he knows his
craft and his work is more original than the miles of schmiery
contemporary impressionism.

His work ranks with a fair illustrator. Although I don't care for his
subject matter, I respect anyone who knows his craft whether or not I
like his work.


Because he doesn't paint his "art". His crap is made on an
assembly line, and he signs the finished "product".

It's not art; like you say, it's illustration. The kind you see on
the front pages of romance novels, and in sleazy women's
magazines (usually advertising rectal health products).

...and the *worst* thing about it all is that he's conned many
people into buying valueless "originals". They have no value,
people have no "investment" (as promised), and I'd much rather
have the Agapito Labios painting I bought for $2 a few years
ago. Look *that* one up.


Sounds like a Pokemon to me.

A
  #23  
Old December 5th 05, 04:46 AM posted to alt.art.marketplace,rec.arts.fine,rec.collecting,alt.marketing.online.ebay
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Thomas Kinkade ORIGINAL "Home for the Evening"


"Angrie.Woman" wrote in message
...
Kris Baker wrote:


...and the *worst* thing about it all is that he's conned many
people into buying valueless "originals". They have no value,
people have no "investment" (as promised), and I'd much rather
have the Agapito Labios painting I bought for $2 a few years
ago. Look *that* one up.


Sounds like a Pokemon to me.

A


I know nothing about Pokemon, but I now know my Labios

Mine's like the girl, without the dog:
http://www.converseclocks.com/inventory.asp?k=734

Kris

  #24  
Old December 5th 05, 04:53 AM posted to alt.art.marketplace,rec.arts.fine,rec.collecting,alt.marketing.online.ebay
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Thomas Kinkade ORIGINAL "Home for the Evening"

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 17:23:43 GMT, "Kris Baker"
wrote:


"Mani Deli" wrote in message
news

The people who pay for Kinkade don't give a **** about what you'lld
rather buy.


Ah, but that's where you're wrong. Theyll'd [sic] be caring a LOT
when they try to profit from their "investments"....which is how this
crapmeister has sold his wares fromt he beginning. He's the
silkscreen version of "collector plates".


Never the less, the people who pay for Kinkade don't give a **** about
what you'lld rather buy.
  #25  
Old December 5th 05, 06:48 AM posted to alt.art.marketplace,rec.arts.fine,rec.collecting,alt.marketing.online.ebay
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Thomas Kinkade ORIGINAL "Home for the Evening"

Thur wrote:
"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
...
On 04 Dec 2005 16:24:35 GMT, (Biljo White) wrote:

"Kris Baker" wrote:

...and the *worst* thing about it all is that he's conned many
people into buying valueless "originals". They have no value,
people have no "investment" (as promised), and I'd much rather
have the Agapito Labios painting I bought for $2 a few years
ago. Look *that* one up.

I think it amounts to fraud -- as you say, people are conned into buying
'art' they are told has monetary value, only to find out later that its
appraised or auction value is almost nothing.


And this is different, how, from Beanie Babies or the other fad items
we see on eBay?

Also, he has turned the
'print' con into an art of its own - peddling worthless photomechanical
reproductions as 'prints' for absurd prices.


How is something that goes for absurd prices "worthless"? Can you say
"oxymoron"?

I wouldn't buy a Kinkade postcard, but I wouldn't buy a Precious
Moments tchotchka either. Horses for courses.

--


Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL


The basis of the objections would probably disappear if the buyers
were not seen as being duped into believing they were
1) buying something that they thought was good art.
2) buying something that would increase in value because others
would want it, also in the belief it was good art.
Sometimes these pieces might be sold on, but time will see them cast
aside, as we all cast aside stuff we know has no lasting value.

How is something that goes for absurd prices "worthless"?

I am not sure if you really mean to ask it, but some things can be
overpriced, and some things can be overvalued.
Overpriced explains itself, but overvalued can mean so much more.
If two morons bid each other up to a record auction price for a
dog turd, then there is an example of absurd prices for a worthless
item, to quote the extreme. (It may happen one day, the way things
are going)


And things may be getting smellier than a rotting fish:

http://www.ibfn.org/news/newsarticle.asp?a=351

  #26  
Old December 5th 05, 06:52 AM posted to alt.art.marketplace,rec.arts.fine,rec.collecting,alt.marketing.online.ebay
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Thomas Kinkade ORIGINAL "Home for the Evening"

Thur wrote:
"Tony Cooper" wrote in message
...
On 04 Dec 2005 16:24:35 GMT, (Biljo White) wrote:

"Kris Baker" wrote:

...and the *worst* thing about it all is that he's conned many
people into buying valueless "originals". They have no value,
people have no "investment" (as promised), and I'd much rather
have the Agapito Labios painting I bought for $2 a few years
ago. Look *that* one up.

I think it amounts to fraud -- as you say, people are conned into buying
'art' they are told has monetary value, only to find out later that its
appraised or auction value is almost nothing.


And this is different, how, from Beanie Babies or the other fad items
we see on eBay?

Also, he has turned the
'print' con into an art of its own - peddling worthless photomechanical
reproductions as 'prints' for absurd prices.


How is something that goes for absurd prices "worthless"? Can you say
"oxymoron"?

I wouldn't buy a Kinkade postcard, but I wouldn't buy a Precious
Moments tchotchka either. Horses for courses.

--


Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL


The basis of the objections would probably disappear if the buyers
were not seen as being duped into believing they were
1) buying something that they thought was good art.
2) buying something that would increase in value because others
would want it, also in the belief it was good art.
Sometimes these pieces might be sold on, but time will see them cast
aside, as we all cast aside stuff we know has no lasting value.

How is something that goes for absurd prices "worthless"?

I am not sure if you really mean to ask it, but some things can be
overpriced, and some things can be overvalued.
Overpriced explains itself, but overvalued can mean so much more.
If two morons bid each other up to a record auction price for a
dog turd, then there is an example of absurd prices for a worthless
item, to quote the extreme. (It may happen one day, the way things
are going)


And the way things are going, should we be surprised if paintings by
monkeys outsell paintings by humans (even artists)?:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8291421/

  #27  
Old December 5th 05, 01:51 PM posted to alt.art.marketplace,rec.arts.fine,rec.collecting,alt.marketing.online.ebay
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Thomas Kinkade ORIGINAL "Home for the Evening"

Mani Deli wrote:
On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 17:23:43 GMT, "Kris Baker"
wrote:

"Mani Deli" wrote in message
news
The people who pay for Kinkade don't give a **** about what you'lld
rather buy.

Ah, but that's where you're wrong. Theyll'd [sic] be caring a LOT
when they try to profit from their "investments"....which is how this
crapmeister has sold his wares fromt he beginning. He's the
silkscreen version of "collector plates".


Never the less, the people who pay for Kinkade don't give a **** about
what you'lld rather buy.

They will when they go to sell it in an effort to pay some retirement
expenses.

A
  #28  
Old December 5th 05, 02:25 PM posted to alt.art.marketplace,rec.arts.fine,rec.collecting,alt.marketing.online.ebay
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Thomas Kinkade ORIGINAL "Home for the Evening"


Biljo White wrote:

I think it amounts to fraud -- as you say, people are conned into buying
'art' they are told has monetary value, only to find out later that its
appraised or auction value is almost nothing. Also, he has turned the
'print' con into an art of its own - peddling worthless photomechanical
reproductions as 'prints' for absurd prices.


Nah, fraud implies some degree of intelligence, and even wit. I think
of Courbet (towards the end of his life) who threw himself into that
whole heartedly, having a couple of hacks paint Courbet-like pictures,
and the signing them; or Dali who signed vast amounts of blank paper
before his death.

Kinkaid popularity is symptomatic of something both emptier, and more
dangerous - the need for the broad mass of people to operate on faith,
rather than reason. That faith can be anything - from Catholic dogma or
Islamacist self-ignition to the new Scientism of Kyoto; from tulip
mania and beanie babies to the NASDAQ; from nationalistic fervour to
peace-mania. Modern "schools" of art; ARC.

All these are based on the unquestioning acceptance of one set of
axioms over another; and people tend to them because, just like math
for Barbie, questioning one's own beliefs is hard. It's much better to
allow someone simply to provide one the answer.

Personally, I think Kinkaid is of great value, but in a perverse way.
The fact of his popularity puts the lie to a broad segment of academic
thinking, and obviously upsets large numbers of group thinkers from the
art-as-intellectual-exercise-or-therapy side (look at the length of
this thread). OTOH an examination of the actual popular images reveals
a good deal about the nature of general society - much more than an
academic counterpart, like Warhol - that buyers/believers tend to
gloss over. (That alone may help it keep it's value over longer
periods). Why are they generally devoid of people? Why - even in the
most luxuriantly summery images - is there often snow in the ground?
Why is having one's hut lit with arc lamps considered comforting? And
when he does venture into some sense of realism, why does his world
stop in the mid 1920's?

Cheers;
CB

  #29  
Old December 5th 05, 03:19 PM posted to alt.art.marketplace,rec.arts.fine,rec.collecting,alt.marketing.online.ebay
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Thomas Kinkade ORIGINAL "Home for the Evening"

On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 13:51:16 GMT, "Angrie.Woman"
wrote:

Mani Deli wrote:
On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 17:23:43 GMT, "Kris Baker"
wrote:

"Mani Deli" wrote in message
news The people who pay for Kinkade don't give a **** about what you'lld
rather buy.
Ah, but that's where you're wrong. Theyll'd [sic] be caring a LOT
when they try to profit from their "investments"....which is how this
crapmeister has sold his wares fromt he beginning. He's the
silkscreen version of "collector plates".


Never the less, the people who pay for Kinkade don't give a **** about
what you'lld rather buy.


They will when they go to sell it in an effort to pay some retirement
expenses.


I'm aware of Kinkade, I've seen some of his work, but I have no
interest in owning a Kinkade. But I'm tolerant enough of other
people's taste that I wouldn't criticize anyone for buying something
just because I don't consider it acceptable.

I know that there's some speculation in buying Kinkades, but I'm not
aware that people buy his work just for investment. Possibly so, but
anyone involved in the art market for investment purposes would surely
do a little research into the long-term projections for art values.

Kinkades may have some short-term investment potential. If
something's "hot", there are people that will pay the price.
Kinkade's wouldn't be the only thing that enjoy value appreciation
even though they aren't generally recognized as inherently valuable.

I don't think anyone has any business deciding that someone else's
taste in art is lacking. Kris is very proud of the piece she picked
up, but I see it as something too close to those paintings of big-eyed
children, clown paintings, and dogs playing poker. My assessment
shouldn't make any difference to Kris, though, and I'm pleased that
she's happy with her purchase. I hope she's happy because she likes
the look of it on her wall, and not just because it's worth more than
she paid for it. It's quite possible that she wouldn't want some of
the originals that I own on her wall, and that doesn't bother me.

There are so many things that we buy that don't have an intrinsic
value commensurate with what they are. That's what disposable income
is for, though. No one wastes money on things that please them.






--


Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
  #30  
Old December 5th 05, 03:20 PM posted to alt.art.marketplace,rec.arts.fine,rec.collecting,alt.marketing.online.ebay
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Thomas Kinkade ORIGINAL "Home for the Evening"

If playing the Beatles backward gaves initmations of Satanism, what
lies below the surface of Kinkaid?

The Nuclear Powered House In the Depths of Suburban Hell
or
Why Doesn't the Snow Melt?


http://www.gammarat.com/Misc/Misc/c1_12%5b1%5d.jpg

(and what levels does one sink to on too much coffee...)

CB

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Star Trek cards for auctionne! Lynne Stewart Cards:- non-sport 0 September 27th 04 01:50 AM
NEW TRADE LIST Ray Morgan Basketball 0 January 20th 04 02:42 PM
FS - Football Singles The Dogger Football (US) 0 November 5th 03 12:04 AM
FS - Early 90's Football (Long List) LD Football (US) 0 October 16th 03 12:58 AM
CPK Dolls & Misc Items--- FS Sue from NY General 0 August 28th 03 05:53 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 CollectingBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.