How Thomas Kinkade Ruined the Art Print Market…
…and it may have been a good thing.
(This the first in a series posted over the next several weeks)
The art world is in flux today with a perception vs. reality problem that exists between artists, art galleries, and art buyers. Debate over what is an original piece of art, a print, or a limited edition is generating controversy, lawsuits, and a distrust leading to suspicions that affects artists that are truly honest about their work. And no one has perpetuated the instability than artist Thomas Kinkade, known for his images of cottages and themes of “life-affirming values”.
In a series of posts over the next several weeks I will be commenting the differences between the variety of art processes. Explain how some artists and art gallery owners have exploited those processes to mislead naive art buyers into purchasing art that may not have the value that the buyer was led to perceive. I am using artist Thomas Kinkade as an example of my criticism since his business dealings have been in the news lately and he has been the most blatant in reference to the controversy of what the buyer is receiving when purchasing a fine art print. I will not be discussing the merits of his work. I believe that every artist has his or her market and if a collector likes the work then fine, that is fair. But only if the buyer purchases the art with full disclosure of what the product is there is not a problem. But deception in the art buying process is a different story.
The art buyer I am refering to is not the professional or connoisseur that has a history of purchasing art. If that were the case it would be a simple case of caveat emptor. Most serious art buyers don’t even give a second thought to Kinkade’s work. What Kinkade has done is target middle America with his work and made Ma and Pa Kettle believe they were purchasing the very same type of art purchased by the New York SoHo collector. On a “60 Minutes” segment about Kinkade a couple from Mission Viejo, California, admitted to purchasing hundreds of Kinkade prints and called the prints “paintings”. Therein lies the problem. They were reproductions, prints, not paintings. Kinkade has done a masterful job of marketing and promotion. But the grandmas and grandpas that purchased his work are now wondering if they’ve been duped.
Next Monday: Kinkade and the Limited Edition Art Print