William Wegman- Is It Kitsch?

 Whenever I bring up that I'm in a class called Dogs in Art, people always ask if I've seen that painting with the dogs playing poker. 

The painting in question is called A Friend in Need, by Cassius Marcellus Coolidge. It is universally recognizable as a sign of bad taste. Coolidge had a background as a commercial artist; he also painted those silly cutouts you put your head through at carnivals.

These things

The poker dogs are the epitome of kitsch, art that is commercialized, tacky, and appeals to the masses. I was reminded of that in the video about Wegman's art where he criticizes one of his photos that shows dogs wearing sunglasses. 

Wegman doesn't like this picture because he feels that dogs in sunglasses is overdone and kitschy; it's the sort of thing you would see in a funny calendar, not a book of fine art. But all of Wegman's photos depict dogs wearing clothes. What makes his work different? 

 

I would say that this isn't kitsch because there's really no silliness in these pictures. Although the concept of dogs wearing clothes is sort of weird and there is a lot of camp potential, Wegman doesn't take it this direction. The subjects are treated with the gravity of a human model and are dressed in dignified, muted colors. There isn't really a wink and a nod that kitschy art often has. It's a serious photo, even if it's a little weird.