So there is this article about a contemporary garden designer. His gardens were very nice...would not work in my yard - but I get them. In explaining his design theories he says that he thinks of his gardens like Picasso paintings - clean, bold, direct - which he contrasted to paintings by Thomas Kinkade (master of light...ewwww) and presumably to gardens that might be called cottage gardens. I guess I like to think that I am creating a cottage garden in my yard - free form, more emphasis on plants than design, some creeping things, some things allowed to flop...a big heavenly mess (by Picasso standards).

I really am trying to make my peace with this but I guess I kind of think he is right. At least I think my garden IS kind of like a Thomas Kinkade painting. I do try to keep the precious levels on the low side though.

I apologize for offending Thomas Kinkade fans but did anyone else see this article?

I haven't read the article, but it sounds as though this author is generalizing to extremes. Claude Monet was influenced by what we think of as cottage design. That is to say, floriferous. I would like to see him attempt to disparage Claude Monet and still sound like an authority figure.

He seems to be using Kinkade to achieve an air of sophisticated snobbery, and I hate that. I'm sure his gardens are beautiful and his designs flawless. But to dismiss cottage gardening like that lacked grace. And there are worse things to look at than a Kinkade "snowy lane with bright lantern on corner". Those big-eyed children painted by Keane. Those just freaked me out.

If you want to grow a cottage garden, grow a cottage garden.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder so behold your own beauty.

Steven

Steven, did you see Puss in Boots from the animated film Shrek? Great spoof of those pathetic Keane kitties...

Be true to yourself, if you love the cottage style, do it.

I liked Thomas Kinkade better when he painted in the l980s (impressionistic) under another name - "girrard" - not too many people know that Thomas Kinkade painted under that name - I have about six of those paintings and they are beautiful and of course, being impressionistic, true life.

Carrie

Annette

Carrie

Libby

I liked the first couple of Kincade paintings I saw, until I saw that the paintings are too similar to one another for my taste. They're pretty, but geez--that saturated amber light, at any and every time of day! But their intent is definitely to soothe and bring peace and enjoyment, which is mostly what I want out of my gardens.

Bold slashes of color and energy in a garden are neat, too, but I wouldn't claim that they were Picasso-inspired. The designer called Picasso stuff "clean, bold and neat"???? Most of his work (not that I've seen everything) is smeary, jagged and with sketch-like lines. Maybe the designer meant Mondrian???

I imagine that designer finds that he can get rich customers to sign on if he finds a way to relate gardens to high art. His pretensions attract pretentious customers, and there's probably more money in that. Or, if he can convince people that the look they like (something like Kincade) is stupid and will be made fun of, they might hire him instead of of someone else, or planning their own gardens.

It's interesting that they spell Girard/Girrard - two different ways... (weird, I'd say)

I don't know how to post a link, so I copied it and pasted

http://www.gallerydirectart.com/t-310.html

Carrie

This is a better link to information about his use of another name.