#Knoedler

[otrtbs]

okay thinking about the secret art history au fic idea i've had again and like yeah.

pandora taking them all out into the woods and taking a bite out of a raw deer heart for a performance art piece (james being absolutely horrified)

james running into regulus on day one who says "cubitum eamus?" instantly and james is like "??????"

peter turning up dead after betraying the art history group bc duh

marlene mckinnon breaking into a professor's art show and slashing all his paintings with a meat cleaver

all of the group meeting at sirius and regulus' elaborately decorated apartment the night before exams because it's a tradition to study doing drunk flashcards (they all show up to tests hungover except for dorcas and peter who never seem affected no matter how much they drink)

barty being a nepo baby and by being a descendant of michael knoedler and having a lavish country house everyone visits to drink whiskey out of tea cups and hold seances to talk to dead artists

the group running a little shop of forgeries that mary swears is just for practice at being an art restorationist but ,,, some of the fakes keep conveniently going missing

james staying over the winter break in a freezing vermont apartment with no heating before regulus shows up on his doorstep like 'come stay w me'

the group in charge of identifying 17th century prints for a project and sabotaging each other because the winner curates the university's next art show

lily taking james to a burger king parking lot to do cocaine after he starts spiraling about peter's death

instead of a bacchanal there's a heist challenge (most expensive work stolen wins) and people wind up in JAIL but regulus and sirius use their bajillion dollars to bail them out

pandora volunteering at a hospital to watch patients die so she can depict the changeover from life to death better in her artworks

their exams being all-intensive spot the forgery, restore this artwork, bring in a miniature of a gallery space u designed with artworks and an explanation of ur curatorial process

[mybeingthere]

In 1949, Mademoiselle Magazine named Honoré Sharrer (1920–2009) “Woman Artist of the Year.” In 1951, she had a solo exhibition at New York’s prestigious Knoedler Gallery, where her five-panel work, Tribute to the American Working People (1946–51), attracted favorable critical praise. Indeed, the first dozen years of Sharrer’s career promised a successful, high profile future. And indeed, Sharrer worked as an artist for the rest of her life, producing a body of accomplished and impressive paintings.

But the acclaim faded, done in by a combination of Senator Joseph McCarthy’s wave of repression, by Sharrer’s adherence to figural art in the face of the dominance of abstract expressionism in the 1950s and ‘60s, and by the fact that the artist was a woman. Her “rediscovery,” after her death, and recent touring museum exhibition, A Dangerous Woman: Subversion and Surrealism in the Art of Honoré Sharrer (Columbus Museum of Art, Columbus, OH; Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts, Philadelphia, PA; Smith College Museum of Art, Northampton, MA), are similarly the result of social forces that are now encouraging the reexamination of an under-recognized body of work and of major talents unfairly ignored.

[youvebeenlivingfictionalnbcyoa]

Go Off and Find Your Own Room

Starting Choose Your Own Adventure Post

Warnings: Cursing; fluff; Nathan being himself; one obscure art forgery joke

“Uh…You know what, I’m just gonna find my room, put down my shit,” You start down one hall, shifting your bag on your shoulder. 

“Oh! Do you know your way around here?” 

“Nope. I can, uh…” You turn to face him as you take a few steps backward, waving your hand blandly. “I’ll figure it out. See you later!” You whirl away from him, charging down the hall before he can argue or say another word. You practically dart around a hall corner and go still, looking around. You bite your lip, looking down at the heavy pass. Let’s see. If you were Nathan Bateman and had built a subterranean labyrinthian work facility, where would you put the guest bedrooms? 

…

Then again, if you were Nathan Bateman and had built a subterranean labyrinthian work facility, you probably wouldn't build guest bedrooms. You’d put a bed in your office and avoid kitting the place out with plush furnishings to discourage lingering. But he can’t have invited you all out and done that…Could he? 

Fuck, you hope not. You look down the hall, spotting an elevator. You look down, tapping the heavy entrance pass against your palm as you stride toward it. You press your pass against the pad, muttering, “Nice,” as the door opens. You step inside, holding the pass up against the pad. It’s just a second before the elevator jolts. You glance around, eyeing the walls and ceiling, easily spotting the camera in the upper right hand corner. You turn from it again, shifting your bag on your shoulder as the doors open. 

You eye the uplit walls, the slate gray floor, and the cranberry-hued carpet as you walk down the hall. You come to the first door, pressing the pass to it. It beeps in dissent, the pad remaining red. You pout, walking further down the hall and raising the pass to the next pad. It remains red and closed as well. You puff your irritation through your cheeks, grumbling, “Son of a bitch.”

You trundle on to the third, raising your pass and groaning, “Ah, thank fuck,” when the pad flashes blue. You open the door, another groan of irritation bubbling up into you when you see that it’s a sitting room, and otherwise unremarkable…And then you go quiet when you spot a Pollack on the far wall. 

You lower your hand, shifting your bag on your shoulder as you step more deeply into the room, taking it in. 

“You like it?” 

You jump at the question, snapping, “Jesus—” You whirl around, heart pounding in your chest, “Fuck me, man, don't do that.” 

He’s smiling, the smarmy fucker. You push your breath out from between pursed lips before drawing in another deep breath to calm your head. You clear your throat, forcing your composure. 

“Hello,” You finally chirp. 

“Hi there. How was the hike?” 

I’m sweaty, I’m tired, there’s a forty percent chance that my knee is bleeding—

“The scenery was…Nice.” 

“What’d you do to your knee?” He asks, waving toward the patch of dirt there.

Pushed it into the ground for fun, you pompous asshat. 

“Tripped.” 

“Bummer.” 

“Sure.” 

Bateman nods a little before he waves toward the painting. “Please, take a look.” 

You hesitate before you do as he urges, turning to look at the painting again. 

“You had it long?” You ask. 

“A while, yeah. It was the first piece I ever acquired. Want a beer? Must be thirsty after that hike.” 

“Uh…” You nod. “Sure. Thanks.” 

You curl your arms around yourself, chilled by the push of air conditioning as the sweat begins to dry on your skin.

“Here,” He urges, “Put your bag down, take a load off.” 

You glance up at him doing a double-take and spotting the beer being held out to you.

“Thanks,” You mutter, shrugging off your backpack and taking the beer. “Your first piece must’ve been a while ago now.”

“It was.”

“Mm...Pollack, huh?"

"Yep."

"You get this at Knoedler?” 

You can’t help but grin as his expression darkens. 

“I’m kidding,” You tack on with a chuckle, turning to face the painting again as you raise your beer. Then, before you can help yourself, “...Mostly kidding.” 

“It’s authentic.” Bateman’s insistence is stony, and he doesn’t bother to hide his irritation. 

“No, sure. Sure.” 

“Why aren’t you with the others?”

“Because I feel, uh…” You wave down toward your dirty clothing. “I’m gross, so. I wanted to shower, maybe knock out early and fend off the jetlag.” 

“You’re not gonna come to dinner?” 

“We’ll be here for, what, three days? There’ll be other chances to have dinner together. Unless there’s some sort of team-building exercise tonight that I don’t know about.” 

You force yourself to keep your focus on the painting in front of you, your face heating with nerves. You only just manage to keep yourself from turning to look at him—though you are incredibly tempted. It’s a moment before Bateman concedes: 

“Yeah, there’ll be other dinners.” Then, “Though if you leave me alone with those chucklefucks tonight, I might have to lower your salary.” 

You scoff out a stunned laugh, turning to look at him. 

“This whole trip was your idea!” 

“Yeah, but I didn’t think anyone would actually show.” 

“You sent us tickets.” 

“I was being polite.” 

“Well,” You chuckle, raising your beer to your lips. “That’ll teach you.” 

Bateman is quiet for a moment, his gaze sweeping your face. You’re not sure what he’s taking in—the streaks of dirt on your face, or the subdued interest in his artwork.

“So?” He presses. “You coming to dinner?” 

You definitely are | You definitely are not

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

dirk ashly knoedler

* * * *

Christianity is mainly wishful thinking. Even the part about Judgment and Hell reflects the wish that somewhere the score is being kept. Dreams are wishful thinking. Children playing at being grown-up is wishful thinking. Interplanetary travel is wishful thinking. Sometimes wishing is the wings the truth comes true on. Sometimes the truth is what sets us wishing for it. –Frederick Buechner

[via Alive on All Channels]

[rehsgalleries]

SOME OF OUR FAVORITE SOLD PAINTINGS - NEXT:

CESARE AGOSTINO DETTI

(1847 - 1914)

Chemin fleuri

Oil on panel

16 1/2 x 22 inches

Signed

PROVENANCE

The artist

M. Knoedler, Paris, October, 1898

Winfield Scott Thurber Art Galleries, Chicago, IL, October 1898

M. Knoedler & Co., New York, February 1899

Blakeslee Galleries, New York City, April 20, 1899

William & Mary Harrah, Michigan

Anon. (American Art Galleries, Ltd., Chicago, Estate of Mary E. Harrah)

Rehs Galleries, Inc., New York City

Private collection

https://rehs.com/Cesare_Agostino_Detti_Chemin_fleuri.html

[joostjongepier]

Wat?   The Gulf Stream (1899), Northeaster (1895, bewerkt rond 1901) en Maine Coast (1896) door Winslow Homer. Ter vergelijking: Het vlot van de Medusa (1818)  door Téodore Gericault en Watson and the Shark (1782) door John Singleton Copley

Waar?   Tentoonstelling Winslow Homer – Force of Nature in de National Gallery, Londen

Wanneer?   6 januari 2023

Een fascinerend werk dat ook de omslag van de catalogus van de tentoonstelling siert is The Gulf Stream. Te midden van hoge golven dobbert een zeilboot. De mast is afgebroken en het zeil hangt over de rand van de boot. Aan boord ligt een zwarte man, voeten en bovenlichaam bloot, met om hem heen wat suikerriet. Rondom het bootje zwemmen haaien. Op de achtergrond doemt mist op. Een onheilspellende scène die niet veel goeds lijkt te voorspellen voor de man op het bootje. Toch is zijn houding eerder ontspannen dan gestrest, zijn blik eerder onbewogen dan angstig. Linksboven zien we, gehuld in mist, een zeilschip opdoemen. Zal de bemanning het bootje opmerken? Zal de man gered worden? Of zullen de haaien hem verslinden? Homer laat het, zoals bij veel van zijn schilderijen, over aan de beschouwer om een antwoord op deze vragen te bedenken.

Het doek doet mij sterk denken aan het vlot van de Medusa van Théodore Géricault. Hier echter geen grote groep opvarenden op een vlot, maar één enkele man in een klein bootje. Een ander werk waar het doek me aan doet denken is van een landgenoot van Homer. Ik zag het op de tentoonstelling Es war einmal in Amerika in Keulen: Watson en de haai door John Singleton Copley. Op dit schilderij is een jongeman te water geraakt in de baai van Havanna. Terwijl mannen in een boot proberen hem te redden, zwemt een haai met opengesperde bek af op de drenkeling. Het doek van Winslow Homer is verreweg het meest enigmatische van de drie. De gelaten houding van de man, de haaien, het schip in de verte: alles draagt bij aan een open eind. Ik zie de scène als een filmopname voor me, waarbij een spannend muziekje aanzwelt onder de beelden.

De tentoonstelling in de National Gallery eindigt met laat werk van de kunstenaar. De mens is steeds meer naar de marge gedrongen of zelfs helemaal uit beeld verdwenen. De zee zelf is het onderwerp geworden. Woest kolkende golven slaan stuk op de kust van Maine.

Ook bij het zojuist beschreven werk The Gulf Stream is het Winslow Homer in de eerste plaats te doen om de natuur. Alle narratieve elementen in het werk zijn bijzaak. In een brief aan Harrison Morris van de Pensylvania Academy of Fine Arts dringt de schilder erop aan dat de titel The Gulf Stream niet zal worden veranderd. En aan zijn kunsthandelaar Roland Knoedler schrijft hij: “Het onderwerp van deze foto is vervat in de titel. [...] Ik ben de Golfstroom tien keer overgestoken en ik zou er iets van moeten weten. De boot en de haaien zijn bijkomende zaken van zeer weinig belang. Ze zijn door een orkaan in zee geblazen.”

Natuurlijk staat het de kunstenaar vrij zijn werk te beschouwen zoals hem goeddunkt. Als kunstkijker staat het mij echter even vrij mijn eigen interpretatie aan het werk te geven. En eerlijk gezegd interesseert het lot van de man mij meer dan de golven die om hem heen klotsen. Maar ja, ik ben dan ook een echte landrot.

[naran-blr]

Nelly Harvey o Nelly Ellen Harvey (1877-1961) pintora inglesa.

Nació en Barton, una localidad situada en el condado de Lancashire, cerca de Manchester.

Era hija del fabricante de botas irlandés Thomas Harvey y de la modista de Haddnham, en el condado de Buckinghamshire, al oeste de Londres, Susan Baverstock. Residían en Manchester, el matrimonio y sus tres hijos: Matilda, Mary Ann y Nelly.

Al fallecer su padre en 1881, su madre se casó de nuevo con el viudo Henry Counsell, que era tendero y aportaba al matrimonio tres hijos anteriores.

Residió largo tiempo en España. En 1908 aparece activa en la península, donde frecuentó la alta sociedad madrileña.

Primero alcanzó  fama como copista en el museo del Prado, donde lleva a cabo copias de cuadros de Velázquez, Rubens, Tiziano y El Greco, y seguidamente como retratista.

Perfeccionó después sus estudios en Roma, visitando Italia, Berlín, Francia y Nueva York.

Los primeros retratos que  pintó fueron el del embajador de Inglaterra Maurice Bunsen y el de Madame de Lermontoff, mujer del embajador ruso. Participó en la Exposición de Otoño de 1908 con Un retrato de niña.   

Posteriormente marchó a vivir a Munich en compañia de su madre durante un par de años,  realizando en marzo y noviembre de 1911 viajes a Nueva York donde llevó a cabo una exposición de sus retratos en abril de 1912 en la prestigiosa galeria Knoedler. 

Después de residir en París y en Nueva York, en 1914 decidió instalarse definitivamente en Madrid, abriendo un estudio y otro taller contiguo, para impartir clases a sus discípulos, en la calle Españoleto.

En 1914 realiza el retrato de su madre, la Señora de Jorge Soto y en 1915 participa en la Exposición Nacional de Bellas Artes.

En 1916 expuso individualmente en el Salon Iturrioz, presentando un conjunto de 37 obras, paisajes y retratos, destacando los de los Marqueses de Belvis de las Navas, Duque de Santo Mauro, Goy de Silva, Francisco Pérez, Señora de Salamanca, Conde de Sedano y Marques de Belpuig.

En 1916 y 1920 realizó un retrato de la Reina doña Victoria.

En 1925 retrató al Consul de Perú en España y en 1933 a la hija de los embajadores de Alemania.

Expuso en el Salon de Otoño de 1925 dos naturalezas muertas, el de 1934 con Retrato de niña y en 1930 en la Exposicion Nacional de Bellas Artes con los retratos de la señóra de V. y del P.Julián Valdepares. En 1946 presentó obras en la Exposicion del Intituto Británico de artistas españoles e ingleses.

Falleció a los 91 años de edad, en Madrid. Nunca se había casado.

Su obra está presente en multitud de colecciones privadas españolas y americanas.

Le ponemos cara.

[carlosvalterfraenkelcabral]

Gibran Kalil Gibran - O PROFETA [O MESSIAS]/ Ebook

Khalil Gibran

Origem: Wikipédia, a enciclopédia livre.

Gibran Khalil Gibran (em árabe: جبران خليل جبران بن ميکائيل بن سعد; em siríaco: ܓ̰ܒܪܢ ܚܠܝܠ ܓ̰ܒܪܢ; Bsharri, 6 de janeiro de 1883 – Nova Iorque, 10 de abril de 1931), também conhecido como Khalil Gibran (em inglês, referido como Kahlil Gibran[a]) foi um ensaísta, prosador, poeta, conferencista e pintor de origem libanesa, também considerado um filósofo, embora ele mesmo rejeitou esse título,[2] e alguns tendo-lhe descrito como liberal.[3] Seus livros e escritos, de simples beleza e espiritualidade, são reconhecidos e admirados para além do mundo árabe.[4]

Seu nome completo, transliterado para línguas ocidentais (de base alfabética predominantemente neo-latina), é Gibran Khalil Gibran, assim assinando em árabe. No colégio dos Estados Unidos, onde viveu e trabalhou a maior parte de sua vida, um erro de registro reduziu o seu nome para Kahlil Gibran.[5]

Em sua relativamente curta, porém prolífica existência (viveu apenas 48 anos), Khalil Gibran produziu obra literária acentuada e artisticamente marcada pelo misticismo oriental. Sua obra, acentuadamente romântica e influenciada por fontes de aparente contraste como a Bíblia, Nietzsche e William Blake, trata de temas como o amor, a amizade, a morte e a natureza, entre outros. Escrita em inglês e árabe, expressa as inclinações religiosas e mística do autor. Sua obra mais conhecida é o livro O Profeta, originalmente publicado em inglês, pela primeira vez nos Estados Unidos em 1923, e desde então se tornou um dos livros mais vendidos de todos os tempos, tendo sido traduzido em mais de 100 idiomas.[b] Outro livro de destaque é o Asas Partidas, em que o autor fala de sua primeira história de amor.[7]

Nascido em uma aldeia do Mutassarifado do Monte Líbano governada por otomanos, de uma família cristã maronita, o jovem Gibran imigrou com sua mãe e irmãos para os Estados Unidos em 1895. Como sua mãe trabalhava como costureira, ele foi matriculado em uma escola em Boston, onde suas habilidades criativas foram rapidamente percebidas por um professor que o apresentou a Fred Holland Day. Gibran foi enviado de volta à sua terra natal por sua família aos quinze anos para se matricular no Collège de la Sagesse, em Beirute. Retornando a Boston após a morte de sua irmã caçula, em 1902, ele perdeu o meio-irmão mais velho e a mãe no ano seguinte, aparentemente contando depois com a renda restante de sua irmã por seu trabalho em uma loja de costura por algum tempo.

Em 1904, os desenhos de Gibran foram exibidos pela primeira vez no estúdio de Day em Boston, e seu primeiro livro em árabe foi publicado em 1905 na cidade de Nova York. Com a ajuda financeira de uma recém-recebida benfeitora, Mary Haskell, Gibran estudou arte em Paris de 1908 a 1910. Enquanto esteve lá, ele entrou em contato com pensadores políticos sírios promovendo a rebelião no Império Otomano após a Revolução dos Jovens Turcos;[8] alguns dos escritos de Gibran, expressando as mesmas ideias, seriam eventualmente banidos pelas autoridades otomanas.[9] Em 1911, Gibran se estabeleceu em Nova York, onde seu primeiro livro em inglês, O Louco, seria publicado por Alfred A. Knopf em 1918, com escritos de O Profeta ou Os Deuses da Terra também em andamento.[10] Sua arte visual foi exibida na Montross Gallery em 1914,[11] e nas galerias de M. Knoedler & Co. em 1917. Ele também se correspondia notavelmente com May Ziadeh desde 1912.[9] Em 1920, Gibran refundou a Liga da Caneta com outros poetas mahjari. Na época de sua morte, aos 48 anos, por cirrose e tuberculose incipiente em um pulmão, ele alcançara fama literária em "ambos os lados do Oceano Atlântico",[12] e O Profeta já havia sido traduzido para alemão e francês. Seu corpo foi transferido para sua aldeia natal de Bsharri (no atual Líbano), para a qual ele legou todos os futuros royalties de seus livros e onde fica agora um museu dedicado a suas obras.

Conforme as palavras de Suheil Bushrui e Joe Jenkins, a vida de Gibran foi descrita como uma "frequentemente capturada entre a rebelião nietzschiana, o panteísmo blakeano e o misticismo sufi".[9] Gibran discutiu temas diferentes em seus escritos e explorou diversas formas literárias. Salma Khadra Jayyusi o chamou de "a influência mais importante na poesia e literatura árabes durante a primeira metade do século [XX]"[13] e ele ainda é comemorado como um herói literário no Líbano.[14] Ao mesmo tempo, "a maioria das pinturas de Gibran expressava sua visão pessoal, incorporando simbolismo espiritual e mitológico",[15] com a crítica de arte Alice Raphael reconhecendo no pintor um classicista, cuja obra devia "mais às descobertas de Da Vinci do que a qualquer insurgente moderno".[16] Seu "prodigioso corpo da obra" foi descrito como "um legado artístico para pessoas de todas as nações".[17]

Ebook

[romans-artblog]

EXPLORING THE ETHICS AND FINANCE OF ART AUTHENTICATION: WHAT ARE THE MORAL IMPLICATIONS OF SELLING A COPY?

In the last decade, the art market has experienced something of a boom. In 2017, Christie’s auction house sold Da Vinci’s ‘Salvator Mundi’ (shown in fig. 1) for an eye-watering $450,312,500 (after buyer’s premium), becoming the most expensive painting ever sold at a public auction – beating the previously held record of around $300,000,000 for Willem de Kooning’s ‘Interchange’ in 2015. The sale has exacerbated the profitability of trade in the art market, and therefore illustrates how some unscrupulous dealers may be driven to sell forgeries as authentic artworks. For example, in 2011, the Knoedler art gallery of New York became embroiled in one of the biggest art scandals in modern history. Having been the oldest operating art gallery in the United States, conducting business between 1846 and 2011, it was forced to close its doors when it was discovered that they were selling forgeries to customers for millions of US dollars [Bowley, Cohen & Rashbaum, 2013]. The paintings they sold as forgeries were purchased from an intermediary who provided little information on the seller and no paperwork to prove provenance, and yet the gallery sold the paintings as authentic anyway. One such painting sold by the gallery was purchased from the seller for $950,000 and was sold for $15,000,000 –a nearly 1500% rate of profit. Customers were purchasing artworks for millions of dollars that were ultimately worth a fraction of the cost. The case has stressed the importance of proving the provenance and scientific identification of a painting, but it also raises the questions of just how an artwork is authenticated and subsequently valued, as well as questioning whether an artwork should be devalued if it is discovered to be a forgery even if the artwork is entirely original and of the same technical skill as the artist the forger has claimed it to be by – if an artwork is devalued once it is discovered to be a forgery does this mean that the true value of the piece lies in the name of the artist who created it, as opposed to the creativity and skill used to make it? In this essay I would like to discuss these questions, but most importantly I would like to discuss how ethical it is to sell an artwork that has a strong chance of being a forgery as a definitive authentication. Using contextual analysis and behavioural economic theory, as well as wider examination, I will explore how it is ethically dubious to sell an artwork in the name of an artist for profitable gain, as well as explaining why these artworks should be devalued once discovered.

To understand why (most) forgeries are devalued once the artwork is discovered to be fraudulent, it is important to understand how art is appraised in the first place, as well as the process followed to determine the authenticity of a painting. Artistic quality and the artist’s name are two crucial factors to a valuation, but in reality, art appraisal is much more complex than these two elements alone. While not always relevant, the topic of an artwork can play a significant role in the valuation of it – over time opinions and tastes vary, so a piece that was not desirable a few decades before may become quite popular. There are of course anomalies, however it would be naïve to think that the art market is exempt from the law of demand [David, Oosterlinck, & Szafarz, 2013]. For example, the pre-Raphaelite desire to return to the artistic values of the early renaissance, or simply just the artworks created in the Italian quattrocento, led to a revival in the interest in renaissance art, bringing the art and style to the forefront of the western conscious nearly 400 years later. Up until this point collectors of Italian renaissance work were not uncommon but often viewed by others within the art world as having outdated taste [Bullen, Brewster, & Jacobs, 1998]. On a similar note, some artworks will have more contextual value to certain groups of people or individuals than others, and therefore may be worth more to them from a monetary standpoint. Preservation of an artwork can also significantly impact its financial worth – a piece that has extensive damage or has been poorly conserved would in most circumstances be worth a fraction of what it would be in perfect condition. There is then of course the appraisal factor of authenticity, which also has multiple facets, but for the sake of this essay shall be simplified to three elements: art historical evaluation, forensic analysis, and provenance. Further to this, it is also important to note that the discussion of artwork throughout this essay becomes reliant on the commoditisation of art, in which art becomes a material bought and sold by collectors and dealers to gain a profit, rather than an object purchased for cultural enrichment. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote in their series of manuscripts ‘The German Ideology’ that “in a communist society there are no painters but only people who engage in painting among other activities”, stating that the division of labour in society results in people being forced to commoditise the artworks that they create and sell them in order to survive, but should labour be divided equally and fairly, there would be no need for ‘artists’ as people would be able to create their own art for pleasure. Should a marxist approach be applied to the creation of art, the art market would not exist as people would be adequately trained to create any art piece that they desired rather than purchasing it from others. The art discussed in this essay has been removed from a setting of creation for enjoyment and becomes an object for the elite to purchase as a status symbol and for-profit gain.

One of the finest examples of an artwork’s authenticity being called into question, and therefore raising questions of its valuation, is an ongoing one - that of the previously mentioned Salvator Mundi by the renaissance master Leonardo Da Vinci, shown in figure 1. The painting sold for just over $450 million in 2017, despite being bought from previous owners for less than $10,000 in 2005. The astronomical price, and apparent price inflation, of the painting raised many eyebrows, but now the authenticity, and how ethical the handling of the endorsement of the artwork was, is being questioned by scholars [Hope, 2020]. The auction house Christie’s provides an extensive provenance for the painting, which is readily available on their website, however Hope argues that there is a lack of evidence to infallibly prove the paintings' authenticity with this alone – Christie’s own website has a notable amount of ‘possibly’s and ‘probably’s when stating the painting’s course through history into the current owner’s hands, suggesting that even they themselves have doubts of the painting’s legitimacy. While it is common for artworks to have gaps in the records of ownership, the ones noted here are substantial.

And yet, the painting was still approved by the British National Gallery to be included in their 2011 exhibition ‘Leonardo da Vinci: Painter at the Court of Milan’, with Hope making mention in his article of the Gallery’s role in the subsequent record-breaking sale. The artwork was not originally included in the Gallery’s press release but was added at a later date and included in the exhibition guide [Carelli, 2019]. The exhibition guide states that the artwork is categorically a newly discovered Da Vinci piece but fails to make mention of the authentication process underwent by the painting, or the opinion held by many experts in the field that Da Vinci painted at the very most no more than 20% of the painting [Ekuland, Higgins, & Jackson, 2020]. Further to this, the Gallery’s statement upon the addition of the artwork to the collection was as follows: “It will be presented as the work of Leonardo, and this will obviously be an important opportunity to test this new attribution by direct comparison with works universally accepted as Leonardo’s.” It could be argued that if the national gallery were able to prove that the artwork is a definitive Da Vinci, it would not be necessary to test the painting alongside those that had already been attributed to the artist, so the inclusion of this line in their press release suggests that, once again, they themselves are uncertain that the painting truly is authentic. There appears to be an element of cognitive bias involved, specifically confirmation bias, in which the experts who have appraised the artwork wanted the painting to be a Da Vinci and thus have assessed it as such; the inclusion of a newly approved piece by the renaissance master, the first identified in over 100 years, would have understandably bolstered the Gallery’s already Goliathan exhibition on both a national and international scale. This is not to say that the authenticators have deliberately misidentified the painting, but rather the effect of the confirmation bias at work, and the dealers honestly believe that the artwork is genuine despite evidence that proves otherwise. It would be easy to assume that experts involved would not be so willing to authenticate a painting when there seems to be ample documentation to the contrary, however, as with any certification process, there is always a margin for human error, and it would not be entirely implausible to think that this has been the case here, especially with so much to gain for everyone involved from the painting being positively identified.

Once the painting was sold in 2017, it was reported that it would go on display in the Louvre Abu Dhabi in a highly-anticipated 2019 exhibition, and yet, the painting has not been seen since its sale [Harford, 2019]. There are multiple theories as to its current whereabouts, with the generally accepted one being that it’s being stored on a yacht belonging to the paintings apparent owner Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. With the claims of inauthenticity that have dogged the painting since the sale, it is not entirely surprising that the Crown Prince has been reluctant to display the artwork, having spent nearly half a billion US dollars on a painting that may be a fake. It could be argued that the seller, and perhaps even the National Gallery, have deliberately engineered the situation to make the artwork appear as authentic as possible – however the authenticity of a painting can almost virtually never be confirmed with absolute certainty, and such is a risk that the buyer takes when purchasing, especially when dealing in such large sums of money.

An issue that needs to be raised when discussing this topic is acknowledging at what point a copy starts being a forgery. Over the millennia, many artists trained as apprentices in bottegas, creating sketches of Ancient sculptures, before moving onto the replication of a master’s paintings, and then ultimately working with live models from which they could finally create their own original artworks. The emulations of previously crafted artworks were clearly not created with the malicious intent to profit from another artist’s work, but rather almost complimentary, with the point being that these pieces were so great that there is something to learn from them. There are also the cases of artworks that have taken obvious reference from other pieces, such as the very well known case of Titian’s ‘Venus of Urbino’ and Manet’s ‘Olympia’, shown in figures 2 and 3 respectively. There is a very clear comparison to be drawn between the paintings, with Manet directly referencing Titian. However, despite the obvious visual parallels, the symbolism within each of the individual artworks creates completely different narratives. From the dog at the foot to the wedding dress being pulled out of a chest at the rear of the image, Titian’s painting tells the story of a bride-to-be who will always remain loyal to her husband. Manet, on the other hand, shows Olympia, a prostitute looking her next client directly in the eye while her maid hands her a bouquet – a gift from her ‘suitor’. Although Manet has unmistakably alluded to Titian’s masterpiece, the art community would by and large agree that the impressionist has not simply created a copy of the renaissance masters work, but created a commentary on it.

A similar concept in a more contemporary setting, in 2018 the Simon Lee Gallery in New York held the exhibition ‘Fake as More’, which invited the viewer to examine selected artworks and view how the creation of art over time has become a repetitive process – in their own words, the artworks are “each in varying states of repetition, replication, copy and self-copy”. The exhibition included Sturtevant’s ‘Warhol Licorice Marilyn’, shown in figure 4. Practising across multiple mediums, the artist created replications of her contemporaries’ pieces – although ‘Warhol Licorice Marilyn’ was created in 2004, the artist was active at the time that Warhol created his screen-print using the same image of the actress Marilyn Monroe in 1967, an image which he had used multiple times previously when creating a series of diptychs, shown in figure 5. Sturtevant became the spearhead of appropriation art in the 1980s, although the artist herself did not align her practice with the movement [Sotheby’s, 2022]. She argued that her artwork was an effort of replication and not appropriation – differentiated by motive, Sturtevant’s work was created to encourage the viewer to think about the production of art itself, whereas appropriation art is made purely to copy a piece as closely as possible. In this particular piece by Sturtevant, she has meticulously followed the same steps that Warhol would have when creating his original piece, even going so far as to use the exact same reference image, as mentioned earlier. The resulting piece does have some notable differences, such as the original having more definitive detail in the hair as well as different colours being used for the majority of the work, and yet ‘Marilyn Licorice Warhol’ clearly emulates the original, and could easily be mistaken as a creation of Warhol’s hand. Warhol was not unaware of Sturtevant, and even gave her one of his pieces from his ‘Flowers’ series for her to study and attempt to replicate. Interestingly, Sturtevant has chosen to create a work of Warhol’s that is similar to a wider series of pieces that he made in 1984, ‘Details of Renaissance Paintings’. In this series, Warhol chose select renaissance images and focused on a particular area within them to create a bright print, exploring the details of a small portion of the painting – an example of one of these, his rendition of Sandro Botticelli’s ‘Birth of Venus’, can be seen in figure 6. Andy Warhol has become one of the faces of pop-art, his Campbell soup cans and Marilyn prints becoming synonymous with the movement, using his works to discuss the presence of consumerism in the cultural DNA of the United States [Warhol, 1977]. This particular series, ‘Details of Renaissance Paintings’, relies on the production of previously created artworks, and while not entirely the same, the screen print that he created of Monroe used an image that had been taken as a publicity shot for the actress’s 1953 film Niagara; in this instance the artist has used imagery by another person to create a new piece – once again showing how the creation of art is constantly in a state of copying, perfectly encapsulating the exact purpose of the ‘Fake as More’ exhibition. All of the artworks previously mentioned from Titian’s to Warhol’s ‘Venus’s feature this recurring theme of copying, and yet they are all considered individual artworks within their own right. The key notion here is that the creator acknowledges that the art leads back to a previous alternative artwork. They are not being sold as entirely brand new imagery, but intentionally referencing something else. The value of these artworks do to rely on the actual resemblance to the artwork it is referencing, but how well the viewer can make link back to the reference. When looking at ‘Olympia’, the viewer is supposed to make the link to ‘Venus of Urbino’ - the creation of art is simply a never ending cycle of reproduction.

As mentioned earlier, a key component of an artwork’s importance can lie within its contextual value. A painting may have particular societal significance which may be more valuable, both monetarily and socially, to certain groups. When a copy becomes a forgery, it loses educational worth. In 1946, the Dutch painter Han Van Meegeren was accused of collaborating with nazis during the Second World War when a supposed Vermeer that was known to have previously been in his possession was found in the belongings of Hermann Goering – when the artist was accused, he shockingly admitted that the work was not in fact a painting by the Dutch golden age painter, but was rather a forgery made by himself [Hauben, 1967]. Meegeren had started his career as a legitimate artist in 1914, having studied architecture at university before quitting to study art and gaining some popularity, but his work was soon criticised by his peers for his lack of originality as the art world shifted towards more modern tastes such as cubism and surrealism. Wanting to prove a point, Meegeren set about creating an original artwork in the name of Vermeer; it took him 6 years to perfect his technique – including the purchase of real 17th century canvases that he would reuse as well as baking a painting once he had finished applying the paint - but once he had, the painting was not only accepted by experts in the field, but was renowned as one of the finest works by the Dutch master. At this point, Meegeren could have admitted to the ruse that was designed to force his contemporaries to acknowledge his artistic capabilities, however upon seeing how profitable creating an artwork and selling it as a master’s could be, he quickly descended down a path of forgery, creating a further unknown amount of paintings and amassing great wealth. When he was caught making deals with Nazi generals, he was once again faced with 2 options: either allow himself to be charged with consorting with the enemy, or confess to years of selling fakes as authentics. Clearly, the artist decided that the latter was the lesser offence. While it is of course obvious that the artist would not want to be associated with Nazi Germany in the aftermath of the Second World War, his willingness to admit to forgery over selling Dutch cultural capital to leaders of the German regime provides something of a benchmark to the morals of selling fakes. Meegeren was convicted of selling forgeries in 1947 and sentenced to a year in prison, a sentence which he did not serve as he died of a heart attack before he could be transferred to the prison, so, at least in the eyes of the law, there was clearly a lack of ethics held by the artist in some way, and yet he still chose to confess to forgery and subsequently serve a year in prison over association with Nazis and the selling of Dutch heritage artefacts to an enemy.

Overall, it is clear that there are always moral implications when both creating and selling and artwork that copies another, whether the copying is intentional. Through the research that I have conducted however, I would argue that the replication of artworks can sometimes be ethical, dependent on the artists intent. For example, as discussed previously, Sturtevant would deliberately create artworks that resembled other artists, and yet her artwork was not created to deceive the audience, but rather to actively encourage the viewer to examine how an artwork is produced, and therefore how they engage with it. Sturtevant even had permission from Warhol to recreate some of his works, with the latter famously stating “I don’t know. Ask Elaine.” when asked about the production techniques used in his creative process [Christie’s, 2022]. Sturtevant’s work is about artistic expression and not consumer deception. I also believe that these pieces should not be devalued in comparison to the artworks that they are referencing, as they are individual artworks in their own right that simply reference other pieces – if they had been created with the intent to deceive, I would then argue that they should be devalued, as they would lack contextual value. Han Van Meegeren intentionally created forgeries with the intent of deceiving others, and yet still preferred to have been known as a forger who victimised Nazis rather than a Nazi sympathiser. In cases so extreme as, supposedly, Da Vinci’s ‘Salvator Mundi’, I believe that while the promotion of the artwork encouraged the public to wholeheartedly believe that the painting was unequivocally authenticated, Da Vinci was prolific for not completing artworks, and with so few in public domain after 500 years, there is only so much that the experts can do to prove its authenticity, and therefore the purchaser must acknowledge the risks that they are taking when buying the artwork for such a grand amount. As mentioned earlier, most of the artworks discussed within this essay have been removed from the Marxist theory of art production, and while originally may have been created for the artists own enjoyment, they ultimately have become part of a wider market that now exploits the product of artwork [Marx & Engels, 1845-47]. Should the artworks be returned to the environment of creation for leisure, the risks of purchase would cease to exist as art would no longer have any monetary value and, once again, the buyer could simply produce the artwork themselves. Perhaps the most important question to ask is not how ethical is the sale of copied artworks, but rather, how ethical is the consumption of art as a commodity at all?

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Amineddoleh, L., (2015) Purchasing Art in a Market Full of Forgeries: Risks and Legal Remedies for Buyers. International Journal of Cultural Property, 22(2-3), pp.419-435.

Bowley, G., Cohen, P. and Rashbaum, W., (2013) Dealer at Center of Art Scandal Arrested on Tax Charges (Published 2013). [online] Nytimes.com. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/22/arts/design/dealer-at-center-of-art-scandal-arrested-on-tax-charges.html

Bullen, J.B., Brewster, B. and Jacobs, L., (1998) The Pre-Raphaelite Body: Fear and Desire in Painting, Poetry, and Criticism. Oxford University Press.

Carelli, F., (2013) ‘Leonardo da Vinci: painter at the Court of Milan’ An Exhibition at the National Gallery: 9 November 2011 – 5 February 2012. London journal of primary care. [Online] 5 (2), 100–101.

Christie’s, (2022) ANDY WARHOL. [online] Available at: https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-5063390

Christie’s, (2021) Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519). [online] Christies.com. Available at: https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-6110563

Christie’s, (2022) Sturtevant (1926-2014). [online] Available at: https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-5896047

David, G., Oosterlinck, K. and Szafarz, A., (2013) Art market inefficiency. Economics Letters, 121(1), pp.23-25.

Ekelund, R.B., Higgins, R. and Jackson, J.D., (2020) ART as meta-credence: Authentication and the role of experts. Journal of Cultural Economics, 44(1), pp.155-171.

Frank, S. J. & Frank, A. M., (2021) A Neural Network Looks at Leonardo’s(?) Salvator Mundi. Leonardo (Oxford). [Online] 54 (6), 619–624.

Harford, T., (2019) ‘Salvator Mundi’ and the limits of certainty. FT.com

Hauben, R., (1967) Han van Meegeren: A Study of Forgery. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 31(3), pp. 164.

Hope, C., (2021) Charles Hope · A Peece of Christ: Did Leonardo paint it? · LRB 22 December 2019. [online] London Review of Books. Available at: https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v42/n01/charles-hope/a-peece-of-christ

Marx, K. and Engels, F., (1845-47) The German Ideology in Collected Works. New York: International Publishers Co. pp.418

Musee d’Orsay, (2022) Olympia - Edouard Manet | Musée d'Orsay. [online] Available at: https://www.musee-orsay.fr/en/node/91143

The Museum of Modern Art, (2022) Andy Warhol. Untitled from Marilyn Monroe. 1967 | MoMA. [online] Available at: https://www.moma.org/collection/works/61239

Simon Lee Gallery, (2022) Fake As More. [online] Available at: https://www.simonleegallery.com/exhibitions/150/

Sotheby’s, (2022) Sturtevant: On Repetition and Différence. [online] Available at: https://www.sothebys.com/en/articles/sturtevant-on-repetition-and-difference

Uffizi Gallery, (2022) Venus of Urbino by Titian | Artworks | Uffizi Galleries. [online] Available at: https://www.uffizi.it/en/artworks/venus-urbino-titian

Warhol, A., (1977) The philosophy of Andy Warhol: from A to B and back again (Vol. 75). Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

[literarytourist-blog-blog]

Scott Ferris on Artist and Book Illustrator Rockwell Kent

Scott R Ferris, is a  researcher, writer and specialist in the art of Rockwell Kent (1882-1971). He has conducted many lectures on Kent and has served as curator for a lot of Kent exhibitions.

  Here's a thumbnail of Kent culled from what Zoë Samels has written on the U.S. National Gallery website:

  He attended the Horace Mann School in New York City where he excelled at mechanical drawing. After graduating he decided to study architecture at Columbia University. In 1905 he moved from New York to Monhegan Island in Maine home to a summer art colony where he found inspiration in the natural world.

  He found success exhibiting and selling his paintings in New York and in 1907 was given his first solo show at Claussen Galleries. The following year he married his first wife, Kathleen Whiting, with whom he had five children.  For the next several decades he lived a peripatetic life, chilling in Connecticut, Maine, and New York. During this time he took  extended voyages to remote, often ice-filled, corners of the globe: Newfoundland, Alaska, Tierra del Fuego, and Greenland, to which he made three separate trips. For Kent, exploration and artistic production were twinned endeavors. His travels to these rugged, rural locales provided inspiration for both his visual art and his writings. He developed a stark, realist landscape style that expressed both nature’s harshness and its sublimity. Kent’s human figures, which appear sparingly, often signify mythic themes, such as heroism, loneliness, and individualism. Important exhibitions of works from these travels include the Knoedler Gallery’s shows in 1919 and 1920. Kent wrote a number of illustrated memoirs about his adventures abroad, including Wilderness: A Journal of Quiet Adventure in Alaska (1920)

  By 1920 he had taken up wood engraving and quickly established himself as one of the preeminent graphic artists of his time. His striking illustrations for two editions of Herman Melville’s Moby Dick—  precise and abstract images that drew on his architect’s eye for spatial relations and his years of maritime adventures—proved extremely popular and remain some of his best-known work. Throughout the 1920s and 1930s his print output included advertisements, bookplates, and Christmas cards. His satirical drawings, created under the pseudonym “Hogarth Jr.,” were published in magazines such as Vanity Fair, Harper’s Weekly, and Life. 

By the onset of World War II, Kent was focusing energy on progressive political causes, including labor rights and preventing the spread of fascism in Europe. Though he never joined the communist party his support of leftist causes made him a target of the State Department which revoked his passport after his first visit to Moscow in 1950 (though Kent successfully sued to have it reinstated). As his reputation declined at home and his work fell out of favor, Kent found new popularity in the Soviet Union, where his works were exhibited frequently in the 1950s. 

  I visited Scott at his book-filled home in Boonville, in upstate New York, to trace the arc of Kent's life through the lens of various items in Scott's extensive collection of Kentiana

Check out this episode!

[otrtbs]

lowkey vibrating at the thought of a tsh-esque fic!! one of my favorite books and i’m just already so ready to see how/if it progresses? or who the fic would even be containing omg.

omg hii!! yeah hehehe just like,,, idk why i just want art history and marauders 5ever and ever and ever,,, like tbh im thinking after i write the dinner fic,, i'll just abandon every other wip idea and go full in and be an art history marauders writer for the rest of my fandom life literally it's just so preliminary rn (tsah the secret art history <3) it would be jegulus bc i love them sm and james would be the richard papen of it all i guess,,, like he would be the transfer kid into the elite club of art history students and the outsider,,,, and it would be pandalily as well but lily would be the one playing the judey poovey roll-ish,, she's the one who's like "these ppl are crazy maybe u should do coke in a burger king parking lot abt it" but she's not vapid or anything she's dating pandora who is very much in the secret art history cult so she knows how insidious it all is they're all very competitive and secretive and there's this huge print project that they're all working on for the first semester (they're in teams but they're all working against one another and the winner gets to curate the university's next art show) and barty is the nepotism baby "my father is a descendant of knoedler come 2 my house in the countryside and drink whiskey out of dainty teacups",, they do crazy things to prove how INTO art they all are,,, (steal ruins from archeological sites they're working on,,sneaking their own works into prestigious art exhibitions,,, creating a little shop of forgeries "just in case",,, trying to break in museums and slash paintings w meat cleavers a la mary richardson) i want something BIG something BACCHANAL-ESQUE but i haven't gotten that far ,,,, but i also want to write a re-telling of van gogh and gauguin and the yellow house months one day but wolfstar style and regulus would be theo and would send his brother money and fund his painter lifestyle and be his art dealer as best he knew how AND THEN JAMES WOULD BE JOHANNA FOR SIRIUS IYKYK also just really obsessed with art restorationist lily evans and her conservation studio taking on a protégé (mary) and them falling in love over restoring art works but idk that's just a wisp of an idea

[backtobookbasics]

The Art Fraud Podcast is about America’s largest art fraud that was committed by the Knoedler Gallery’s former director, Ann Freedman, and an art forger, Glafira Rosales, which spanned 17 years. This podcast is  Written by VANITY FAIR reporter Michael Shnayerson and hosted by Alec Baldwin, who is also an executive producer and has a personal experience with art fraud. There are eight episodes, each approximately 40 minutes long and explaining different aspects of this scandal, such as how Anne Freedman became the Knoedler’s director, Glafira Rosales’s only public interview, and the De Sole et al v. Knoedler Gallery, LLC court case. While the audience will most likely be podcast listeners that are art enthusiasts or have a true crime obsession, the listener need have no knowledge as this podcast starts from the beginning and builds the story through the episodes. Art Fraud gives insight as to how long scandals can take to come to light and the risks associated to both calling out a fake and trying to pass off a fake as the real thing. This is an early 2022 series that presents as more historical, and tries to present all components in a neutral means and information can be verified through previously published news articles and court transcripts. Art Fraud can be found wherever podcasts are streamed or hosted by searching “art fraud.”

Baldwin, Alec, host. Art Fraud, IHeartRadio, 01 Feb. 2022. https://www.iheart.com/podcast/art-fraud-91404660/

[ftnbooks-blog]

Paul César Helleu (1859-1927)

Paul César Helleu (1859-1927)

[thegetty]

5 Books on Art Provenance A Shelfie from Kelly Davis, Research Assistant at the Getty Research Institute

Hi, I’m Kelly Davis, research assistant in the Getty Provenance Index at the Getty Research Institute. My background is in English, but I graduated with a master’s of library science and a master’s in art history from Pratt Institute in 2014. Books have been an important part of my life since I can remember. These are 5 that inspire and aid me in my work.

1. The Rape of Europa: The Fate of Europe’s Treasures in the Third Reich and the Second World War by Lynn H. Nicholas (Vintage Books, 1994).

One of the first books to focus on Nazi-era provenance and also one of the most famous. The publication of this book in the early ‘90s launched an international interest in the repatriation of art looted from Jewish art dealers and families during World War II and encouraged organizations to create guidelines such as the Washington Conference Principles on Nazi-era Confiscated Art (1998) and the AAM Guidelines Concerning the Unlawful Appropriation of Objects During the Nazi Era (2001). It inspired me to focus on provenance in my art historical studies and might have been the first step to where I am today.

2. Rogues’ Gallery: The Secret Story of the Lust, Lies, Greed and Betrayals that Made the Metropolitan Museum of Art by Michael Gross (Broadway Books, 2009).

While at the Last Bookstore in DTLA a few years back, a good friend of mine pulled this book out and handed it to me, exclaiming that she loved it and I had to read it. Somehow I hadn’t heard of it, but it piqued my interest as I enjoy nothing more than a gossipy read about the inner workings of established museums. While this isn’t about provenance specifically, and is more “pop” than some of the other academic texts on this list, it’s a fun and fascinating story and will certainly intrigue any lover of museums.

3. Memories of Duveen Brothers by Edward Fowles (Times Books, 1976).

This, along with a small stack of other books written by J.H. Duveen, or about the House of Duveen by those with intimate knowledge of it, have been gracing my desk for months. Like Knoedler & Co., Duveen was instrumental in the migration of European art to America in the early 20th century, and also like Knoedler, the Getty Research Institute owns the Duveen archive. Here in the Provenance Index, we’re interested in seeing what more we can do with stock book records we have on site, so I’m boning up on my knowledge of this great firm. These books are older primary sources, meaning what is said in them could be quite subjective. Of course, this is also what makes them so delightful.

4. Provenance: An Alternate History of Art edited by Gail Feigenbaum and Inge Reist (Getty Publications, 2012).

This book was a gift from Dr. Frima Hofrichter, one of my mentors in graduate school. Frima knew I had been accepted to the internship program here at the Getty, and what gift better than one on provenance published by the GRI and edited by Gail Feigenbaum, one of our esteemed associate directors? If Nicholas’s book was my introduction to “pop” provenance, this was my introduction to the academic career path ahead of me. A collection of essays on topics from collector’s marks to provenance in the Third Reich, reading this acquainted me with a number of respected scholars in the field, and names I would encounter during my time at the Getty.

5. The AAM Guide to Provenance Research by Nancy Yeide, Konstantin Akinsha and Amy Walsh (American Alliance of Museums, 2001).

The quintessential reference for provenance research, not so much a book you read but one you keep coming back to. Although the guide is being refined as we move forward in the 21st century (see the ArtTracks project at the Carnegie Museum of Art for more info), this book is still the standard for curators, librarians, collectors, and anyone else involved in provenance and the history of collecting. It’s been invaluable for the past few years as I’ve worked on the Knoedler & Co. stock books database. The appendices are particularly useful to a researcher, with information on dealer archives and locations, as well as a list of “red-flag” names to watch out for when dealing with World War II provenance.

[frank-o-meter]

I just saw a fascinating new documentary on Netflix called “Made You Look” about fake art. It’s clues you in on the integrity of the art world. People who should have know they were dealing with fakes were more interested in their own profits than honesty.

Ann Freedman, the art dealer at the center of the story quickly refuted evidence that the art she sold was fake.

When one buyer complained, Freedman was reported to offered to sell the suspect painting to someone else (perpetuating the fraud).

By the way, according the the doc she profited from the sales to the tune of $10 million.

The art fraud occurred at Knoedler Galley in NYC. between 1994 and 2011 and involved 40 faked Abstract paintings supposedly by Pollock, Rothko, and others. The sale price was upwards of $80 million.