Defining kitsch is always just a bit touchy.
In general, rococo could probably be considered the "kitschification" of baroque, that is, baroque taken to ridiculous extremes, without being considered an original art movement. In general, the important art movements are to some extent opposite "reactions" to the existing status quo, once the status quo becomes tedious and repetitive. Then, after a period of vibrancy, they get carried to extremes, and become subconscious parodies of their progenitor movements, but without much in the way of substance. I suspect every art movement has its kitsch stage as it begins to die off.
Kitsch is also a delicate matter of environment and placement. For example, Michaelangelo's "David" itself is certainly not kitsch. However, if you place a full size copy in your foyer and put up moving track lights so that everyone driving down the street can see it through the glass of your front door, that is high kitsch.
Kitsch is not merely something you don't like I think. If you don't like Picasso, you can't just from there label it kitsch. On the other hand, you may love wall sized pictures of Elvis on black velvet, but there's no escaping it's kitsch. Maybe you just like kitsch. |
