Many scholars in recent history have questioned the validity of studying the regionalists as 'good' paintings worthy of the art historical canon, considering the elements of 'bad' painting that pervade their work. Many of these scholars employ modernist tools to evaluate the art of Grant Wood and the American regionalists, and under this standard their work is sometimes seen as kitsch, simple or false. But to what extent are these objections valid, and what implications do they hold for art criticism?