Reproduction Businesses Of Thomas Kinkade's Painting

Reproduction Businesses of Thomas Kinkade's painting

When I read the article by Susan Orlean, I am very aware of the big business Thomas Kinkade is trying to create by reproducing his original paintings mechanically using digital technique, but I have also carefully examined whether this article which discusses about the reproduction of his art works has a correlation with Walter Benjamin's essay "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction".

A certain emotion or an "aura" is said to be present when an artist creates an art work. However, some of the reproduction pieces inside Kinkade's signature gallery are highlighted by his specially trained assistant; I believe these paintings are no longer evoking this so-called "aura" of the original work. Aura is something that cannot be duplicated. Reproductions of art pieces are simply tangible and concrete object. They are digital imitations that "could be soaked in water, peeled off the paper, and affixed to a stretched canvas, so that it showed the texture of the canvas the way a real painting would." As Benjamin stated, "Ð'... the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be." The original paintings have their own unique characters and history, and these are not the things that art reproductions can generate. "The presence of the original is the prerequisite to the concept of authenticity."

To recreate an original masterpiece such as Kinkade's "Julianne's Cottage", and to print it onto the canvas takes away its original beauty and changes it into an everyday, insignificant object. Although highlights of the paintings are done to entails stippling paint dots to give an image "more texture and luminescence", but Glenda, one of the highlighter mentioned in the article would even allow customers to perform the highlights themselves, these reproductions are no longer authentic, it is the unique involvement that is counted significant by the public to make the painting "truly one-of-a-kind". Kinkade's business world is marketing businesses with the recreations of his art paintings that can provide continuing supplies "in the pursuit of gain" discussed by Benjamin. In my opinion, the digital reproductions of Kinkade's art works are not intended for political or even social action, but for economic action.

The sensation of "absent-minded" is also apparent when the customers at Kinkade's signature gallery are trying to engage themselves in the art world of Kinkade's paintings. They are distracted by how popular the paintings are with Kinkade's signatures on them and react with the emotions the whole gallery atmosphere creates. Their state of mind is focused on the name of Kinkade and his biography but not the imperative aspects of his art works. For example, when the customers respond when they bought one of the reproductions from Kinkade, "Ð'... he's just this really huge thing! It's almost like a whole world."; "Ð'... Here the clock says five-o-two, which is Thom and Nanette's wedding dateÐ'... Ð''NK' Ð'- that's for his wifeÐ'..." It is rather confusing to me whether the customers are buying an art work they akin to or simply because of the popular name and the auto-pen signature by Kinkade in the lower right-hand corner of the reproduced painting.

Digital reproduction can bring new elements to the process diffusing art. First of all, people can reproduce the work so quickly, the paintings available in Kinkade's signature gallery range from few hundreds to several thousands dollars; second, people can make many copies of one certain art work and continue making profit revenues, such as the "all but two Thomas Kinkade galleries are now owned by franchisees"; third, reproductions create capacity for buyers or users to manipulate the art work and control the context of viewing, for instance, customers