Yowie wrote:
On 5/05/2010 10:49 AM, tanadashoes wrote:
hopitus wrote:


You have a discerning eye, anyway. Kinkade was/is (like, is the dude
dead?)
NOT Picasso. ROFL. Do you like Toulouse Lautrec? One of my faves.

Unfortunately, Kinkade is still alive and living and has his art studio
in Western North Carolina.

Good luck to the guy - he has talent that he's put to use and folks love
what he does. Its not to my taste, but hey, he's probably brought
happiness to more people than I ever well, so goo on him.


His art is not demanding. There is not need for an emotional response to
his work. It is pretty lighting and so forth, but that's about it. I was
more impressed with Mary Casset, Laura Burch (who also doesn't demand an
emotional response, but gets one), Monet, Manet, and Suratt.

Now the impressionists knew about light! I paid a small fortune and
fought my demophobia to see an exhibition of Money and the
Impressionists at the NSW art gallery last year. I could have sat there
all day and still not had my fill of them, but the crowd itself kept us
moving at a steady pace. My very favourite is this one
http://www.rleggat.com/photohistory/...et-sunrise.jpg
but I have yet to see an even remotely adequate reproduction of it. I'd
encourage everyone to get to a Monet exhibition if they possibly could.

Seurat is the guy who painted in another imrpessionist who painted in
dots - he could be plamed for the method of colour printing using just 3
(or 4) passes of ink - by using dots.

And Laura Burch's work is just delightful without being saccharine. But
perhaps I am biased because of the subject :-)

Yowie




Yeppers, you have picked one of my favorite Monets. I also love the
Giverchney garden series. Or was that Manet? One of my fantasies is to
own a Laura Burch print or painting. Won't happen, but I can dream, right?

Pam S.