Good Example Of Kulka, Dutton, And Kitsch Article Review

How does Kulka define kitsch? In spite of the fact that kitsch is a rather loose concept, it is possible to get at least a foothold on the subject if turn to a book “Kitsch and Art” by Tomas Kulka, a philosopher at the Tel Aviv University. Kulka states that kitsch is definitely a part of the art system with an aesthetic side demanding evaluation. Unlike other art forms, kitsch is not ambitious and is aimed directly at a consumer. Kulka’s book is based on three main points about kitsch. The first is kitsch’s exaggeration effect, namely depicting things that are a priori charged with trivial emotions easy to multiply. The second point is the necessity of kitsch to be recognizable by the audience no matter what. And the final point, kitsch does not enrich and contribute to the audience’s associations concerning the depicted object. This issue is completely negative.
How does Dutton criticize Kulka?  Dutton states Kulka’s definition of kitsch might not coincide with the general agreement on the subject but it is still the only philosophic account of it. Dutton agrees with Kulka except for the philosopher’s view on the important social aspects of kitsch. While Kulka reflects on the kitsch’s parasitism, Dutton proposes more ways of kitsch being parasitic.
 What do you think of Kulka's definition? Kulka’s definition reflects my personal idea of what kitsch is. What I like about the philosopher’s statements on the subject is loyalty and respect because he avows that kitsch is not a bad art. Such a phenomena exists in the art world and it needs to be considered.
Why does Kulka think kitsch is worthless? Kulka thinks kitsch is worthless because it has no importance in the history of art and no new manner of representation; visual qualities of kitsch do not correspond to the common aesthetic satisfaction got by great art. Kitsch employs the most conservative stylistic conventions and thus cannot refer to any art status.
Do you agree with him? I completely agree kitsch is worthless and has neither artistic no aesthetic value. Kitsch works are emotionally charged, instantly identifiable, and do not enrich the associations.