quite simply...

...magisterial.

While usually I save my non-critical feedback for a 'comment' , I feel compelled to concede publicly.

Mark, you are absolutely right.

I took up my defense of K. primarily out of my sympathy for easy targets and under-dogs (although numbers-wise, I suppose he's sort of an over-dog, but that's beside the point). Now though, I completely agree with Mark, on both points. 1) Kinkade's work is not actually arcadian
[quick side note, so we're using the same language: I was using the arcadian/utopian split given to us by Jacobs & the Horae, arcadian = harkening back to Eden, utopian = visionary for a new, as-yet-unknown future. You used 'utopian' but I am pretty sure you meant arcadian, correct me if I am wrong. I just disctionary.com'd that shit though, and arcadian actually 'means' rural, rustic, but let's just go with my initial understanding for coherance's sake.]
& 2) Yeh, why the hell do we need arcadian art?

The insight into Kinkade's gnosticism is spot on, out of my desire to defend I was blind to the fact that K's world is ABSOLUTELY NOT EDEN. Because in Eden, there would be no shame over the carnality (in wheaton-buzzwords, 'embodiment') of existence. Sex, nakedness, feasting, BBQ sauce on fingers and chins, placentas, hugs and the ashes from last night's fire would be embraced and celebrated. I cannot believe I hadn't noticed the lack of figures. Jeez. I am just repeating your points. Take it as a compliment.

And now, truly, lets never talk or think about him again. Gag.

on 2)
Yeh, obviously I used to think that we need art with edenic vision - to remind us. And I think I was taking this from the school of theology that explicates Christ's coming/work as a restoration of original creation. I don't know nearly enough historical theology to know if this is totally true: but I think this is primarily a 20th century take on our Lord. Interesting, given the 20th century and some of the ensuing resurgences of gnosticism. Jesus himself certainly did not use such language. He was about (among other things) restoration. "Behold, I make all things just like they were" No. He makes all things new! So the art that does this, the art you were mentioning (Inferno, et al.), is the art that joins in the work of Christ, in his gospel. It is a forwards-looking vision. Nevermind the fact that it's impossible to imagine life pre-sin, since we are always already immersed in it.
Since your post, I am now convinced that the story of something taken and transformed has a much better chance of being true.

Thank you.

I hereby rename this blog: 'Ben comes up with narrow, semi-douchy thoughts and Mark rejoins with the truth and beauty of the gospel'...