Kinkade

Read the article: "That Old Master? It's Down at the Pawnshop" and discuss it's emphasis of the commercial aspect of art in relation to the Kinkade-video.

I don’t believe that the Kinkade “paintings” have the same sort of value as other established artists because of the large scale marketing of Kinkade’s product line. There is a certain value that is never changing, or at least difficult to change, for a one-of-a-kind artwork. Because of the rarity of a one-of-a-kind, it is not influenced by the supply and demand effects within the economy, simply because there is no supply. There is only one. Kinkade is clever to use the explosive popularity of his works now before the market changes and he can no longer sell his products at such a ridiculous price. I don’t understand how his artworks that come off an assembly line can be sold at such a high price. Maybe I need to see for myself before I judge, but it doesn’t seem fair for other original paintings that are mass produced on a press to sell at Wallmart for $30. Relating back to the article, Kinkade’s paintings would be worth little because once everyone gets the Kinkade paintings that they want, there will be little demand for his products, which will most likely cause the prices to plummet. The price of his works is artificially inflated for the time being. Who knows how long it will last, and it could consistently retain popularity. However, I don’t see any security in buying a Kinkade because of the marketing involved. The value can change at any moment. I see Kinkade like a pop singer who usually only lasts a few years before another boy band comes in and replaces him. Also, since it isn’t a one-of-a-kind production, why would someone buy your particular Kinkade painting if they can purchase a new, autographed Kinkade at the many, and growing, Kinkade galleries throughout the world.