uhnnn...so, what, if he used black magic, it would've been OK?
I mean, wtf?
Now, having said that, I will say that the one or two times I wandered into one of those galleries I thought they were way over done, a little high on the snob-appeal, and really kinda weird.
It was better when he was just a painter. Who knows what sorta stuff his promoters did in his name, anyway.
(Of course, I used to wonder the same thing about Stephen King. "Here's the idea, now fill in the holes.")
That wasn't meant as an attack on Christianity, I don't think, more an observation of the use of it for a questionable commecrial purpose.
Now, having said that, I will say that the one or two times I wandered into one of those galleries I thought they were way over done, a little high on the snob-appeal, and really kinda weird.
Snob appeal? I doubt there is one serious art snob who has anything but total derision for his work.
So....if you're business decision doesn't work...just sue? TOUGH LUCK investors.
"...a little high on the snob-appeal..."
SNOB APPEAL?!? Good grief, how on earth could anyone feel snobbish about those trite, banal, cornball, uninspired, cloying, laughable pieces of "art"?
I feel bad that the investors lost money, but if they had made good, would they give any credit to the Christian aspect? No, but apparently Christianity gets the blame when things go wrong.
>>It was better when he was just a painter.
I'm not sure he was ever "just a painter". Or at least, hardly anyone had heard of him, then.