Thomas Kinkade 101

Thomas Kinkade "Painter of Light"
Thomas Kinkade is that painter fucker who even has his own "stores" in touristy towns that attract wanna-be-rich tourists, Like Santa Barbara and Carmel and Laguna, and who paints without a doubt the shittiest piles of shit in the shittiest pile of shit manner in the whole history of shitty painting. His fucking "art motto" is "Painter of Light." Talk about having your head on backwards from an art standpoint: he is just the opposite of a "painter of light." There is absolutely no "light" in his paintings. There is no way to determine where any light source in the scene exists. He paints the most hellish little fairy cottages and villages, and some of these little dollhouse ghettoes have "lights" in the windows. If that is what they are referring to by Painter of Light they should be saying painter of "lights." Or even more accurately "Painter of Light Bulbs." Because a "painter of LIGHT" would have a completely different meaning to anyone who knew anything about painting; for instance an actual painter or a student of painting or a student of art or an ant in an ant farm, it would mean something very specific and something that is the most elusive element to "paint" which would be "the light." The "light" in a landscape - and I guess that would be the category of Kinkade's elf huts: landscapes - the light in a landscape is supposed to emanate from varied and contrived aspects of the sun - a large star in the sky - radiating photons onto the earth. Depicting "the light" is the most elusive aspect of landscape painting. In Kinkade's case it is more than elusive, it is extinct. It is banished. It is in chains in Tartarus. It ain't there. And it ain't ever gonna be there. What's there instead is a kind of invisible atmospheric gastric-colored pudding that covers everything you see in a grey sort of scary-clown dreamscape of lifeless, soulless, pinhead architecture. One can only surmise, with the imagination of William Blake, what is the mental and emotional make-up of anyone who would pay thousands and thousands of dollars for an original - forget about the endless lithos - who would want an original version, in the actual tar-pit paint strokes of a fucking goddamn Hobbit house painted in the amteurish style of a Haight-Ashbury street drunk who got kicked out of art school for "horsing around with cartoons of troll dwellings in toxic-aired settings." Thomas Kinkade is very aware of his critics and attributes any criticism of his "work" to "evil." Even thinking or uttering or entertaining the notion that his "work" is not whatever HE thinks you should think it is, well, this is Satan at work. This is evil, I guess on a par with Islam slamming two planes into two artworks filled with employees of capitalist private enterprise. It all comes from "the darkness." Why? Because Thomas Kinkade mentions JESUS all the time. So HE can't be evil. YOU must be. And the more you criticize him the more evil you are. If all you did was criticize Thomas Kinkade's "work" then I guess you would have reached the definitive, most intense level of evil possible. It would be like spending all of your time criticizing God. Which is ALSO the ultimate level of evil. Thomas Kinkade really actually does consider any disparaging remarks made about his foul and abased paintings of multi-hued oatmeal buildings to be of Satanic origin. Not legitimate, scholar-based, anchored-in-truth appraisal or even honest opinion. It is all a dark and choreographed ATTACK. The purpose of which?....well, even I as a BAD Christian can figure that one out. You see if you criticize Thomas Kinkade's shit you are criticizing Christianity, Jesus, the Bible, Yahweh the Creator, and all that is good in the universe. It's all equal. Kinkade's paintings equal Christianity equal Jesus equal the Bible equal America equal God The Good. What can we conclude about such an attitude. You, there, you in the back: what can you conclude.