Well, now, here’s a thought for a Thursday: Globe and Mail culture columnist Russell Smith posits that, at root, there isn’t a whole lot of difference between what Damien Hirst does and what Thomas Kinkade did. That is, provided you look past the fact that Kinkade painted idyllic landscapes, sort of, featuring cozy little cabins lit from within by what appeared to be 100,000-candlepower spotlights, and then hired people to highlight prints of those paintings – which he then sold at a huge markup – whereas Damien Hirst hired a bunch of assistants to paint perfectly round dots on a bunch of giant canvases. Which he then sold at a huge markup. Also, Hirst put a shark in formaldehyde, which is something that Thomas Kinkade apparently did not do. But Kinkade did urinate on a statue of Winnie-the-Pooh at the Disneyland Hotel in Anaheim while saying “This one’s for you, Walt,” which Damien Hirst apparently has not done, either, and that is, in lots of ways, even more punk rock than sticking a tank full of dead shark in the middle of the Saatchi Gallery. (FULL ARTICLE: Russell Smith, The Globe and Mail)
Are Thomas Kinkade and Damien Hirst Artistic Kin?
April 12, 2012