Post #420340 by Tom Slick on Sat, Nov 22, 2008 3:34 PM

I think that the creativity points are all borrowed and then molded into something else. Biskup, Shag, and Derek all have borrowed styles from Flora and Blair and the likes. They specialize in retro-styled art, and to know what that style is, some main elements need to be rediscovered through the new artist by studying, and in alot of cases copying charactures and main focal points to make any sense within their own creations.

I highly doubt that if Shag, Biskup or derek painted realist oils, they would be as "pop"-u-lar as they are today. They picked a niche in the artworld that alot of generation X'ers understood and actually got. Whether it be because of fond childhood memories of Disneyland, Hanna-Barbara cartoons, or the children's books illustrated by Flora and Blair, whatever it may be, their success is due in part, simply because GenX'ers grasped the artist's stories within the paintings.

I don't think any artist is better than the next. Art is ALL opinionated and taste reflects personal perceptions and preferences, which varies greatly from person to person.
Now, not to belittle Gen X'ers... as I am one too, but most people into "lowbrow" never completely understood or totally appreciated the Van Gohs, Da Vinci, Picasso's or Rembrandts to begin with(at least not in full perspective). I'll also admittedly state that I myself, dont see millions or billions of dollars worth in the Mona Lisa, However, the people with all that kind of money do see millions and billions worth...Who knows, maybe a Shag original acrylic on canvas in the year 2265 will bring a couple million dollars, at which point and if it still evades the test of time, the Mona Lisa would be worth trillions....lol