Previous Posts: December 2012

The papers of one of the great early 18th century art collectors have been published on The art world in Britain 1660 to 1735 website. The 56 letters, 87 bills and receipts, and miscellaneous accounts, inventories and other documents of James Stanley, 10th Earl of Derby (1664-1736) of Knowsley Hall, comprise the largest archive yet found of the early 18th century art trade. Most of these papers remain at Knowsley Hall.

Derby's collecting can be reconstructed in amazing detail and he emerges as one of the most ambitious connoisseurs of his age. His London agent's account books document a decade of copious and self-assured expenditure, and there is a complete paper trail describing the importation of artefacts from Italy. The best documented agents are two painter dealers, Thomas Wright and Hamlet Winstanley, whose activities on Derby's behalf in London and Italy in the mid 1720s are described in many letters.

The papers are also an important source for the study of the early 18th century art world. They deal with the acquisition of prints, drawings, paintings and sculpture; purchases both in London and abroad; from dealers and at auction; purchases on the secondary market as well as direct commissions from painters; and not only the direct costs of art works, but also framing, colours and other studio materials, customs duties and packaging. They feature painters, picture sellers, importers, print sellers, sculptors, frame makers, shippers and carriers.

Mr Hirst’s company, Science Ltd, said that “Larry Gagosian and Damien have reached an amicable decision to part company”, adding that the artist would continue his relationship with a second gallery, White Cube, in London.

Gagosian issued a statement, saying: “It has been a great honour to work with Damien over the last 17 years culminating with the worldwide showing of the Complete Spot Paintings 1986-2011 at all 11 Gagosian galleries this year;We wish him conti­nued success for the future.”

The recent cleaning of what was believed to be a relatively straightforward composition of a 17th-century female nude in the collection of the Blanton Museum of Art at the University of Texas, Austin, took a turn of mythic proportions when conservators discovered two additional figures: a putto and a recumbent Zeus. They elevate the painting’s main figure from a mere mortal to Danaë, the daughter of a mythical Greek king and the mother of Perseus, a son of Zeus. Scholars have attributed the work to a follower of the French painter Simon Vouet (1590-1649).

The newly discovered figures had been scraped away and painted over at some point after the artist’s death. “[The alterations were probably] done either to hide badly damaged figures or to make the work more marketable and in keeping with the tastes of the 19th and early 20th centuries,” says Colette Crossman, a curator at the museum, who suspected that the painting had been altered. “The composition did not make sense and the subject matter did not connect to the standard [17th-century] iconography,” she says. After discussions, the curators and conservators decided to remove the overpainting and restore the figures.

"Your actions on the 7 October of this year were entirely deliberate, planned and intentional."

Speaking about "yellowism", Judge Chapple said it was "wholly and utterly unacceptable to promote it by damaging a work of art" which he called a "gift to the nation".

He said it was "abundantly clear" that Umaniec was "plainly an intelligent man" and told the court he had described Rothko as a "great painter" in a letter he had written to him.

With all this talk of modern art fakery (which, as you say, is so rife that I've already experienced an extraordinary amount of it during my relatively few years in the trade), I thought I'd share you my favourite personal experience.  In my naive collecting days (not that long ago...) I purchased for a modest sum of around £100 a watercolour on Ebay purporting to be by the hand of Kyffin Williams - the main reason for this acquisition was the fact that I found the work had been offered as a genuine some years previous by Bonhams.

It had failed to sell but I thought the estimate was a touch high and thus I approached them to see if they'd consider re-offering the piece at a more conservative price.  They confirmed it was the same work but said that they'd have to get an 'external specialist' on the artist to inspect it first hand to reconfirm the attribution.  I felt this was probably a bad sign and thus was amazed when they came back and said the expert had proclaimed it to be right. Hence they re-catalogued it in one of their forthcoming sales [now withdrawn].

However, the catalogue had not been live long when I received an e-mail from Bonhams informing me that it had been brought to their attention that the work was a fake as its source had been revealed as former genuine sketch by a completely different artist, the notable but less expensive Alan Lowndes [below].

Someone had cut of Lowndes' signature, added a 'KW', some Williamsesque splodges, and crosses on the spires of a North of England pavilion to make it look like Venice!!   

Quite how this fooled Bonhams, twice, and an apparent expert of the artist's work is beyond me but I guess the story acutely demonstrates much that's wrong with the murky world of modern art - and why I now almost exclusively stick to old masters/pre-1900 pictures which thankfully are infinitely more interesting both academically and aesthetically...

I think you have misinterpreted the eBay price for this picture. The comma is the European equivalent of our decimal point, so the price is only 620 euros.

As an aficionado of Art History News, I enjoy the gossip but worry that you reveal too much of Philip Mould Ltd's methodology. 

The clue with the Sotheby El Greco is its lack of provenance. His work wasn't of enormous monetary value at the end of the 19th century, which explains how Ignacio Zuloaga was able to acquire an El Greco painting in Paris when he was still an impoverished artist. Who the heck was María del Carmen Mendiéta?  Methinks that someone has misidentified her.

Almost 150 artefacts lent to a museum set up to tell the story of Britain's colonial past may be missing, it has emerged, with some of them having been sold without their owners' permission.

Trustees of the British Empire and Commonwealth Museum in Bristol, which has now closed, are in talks with about six of the owners about compensation.

Among them is Lord Caldecote, who said he was shocked to find that a 19th-century maritime painting his family had lent to the museum had been sold at auction. [...]

An investigation by BBC's Inside Out West programme, scheduled to be broadcast on Monday, claims that 144 objects belonging to eight lenders remain missing. They include the oil painting of an East India Company ship, Dunira, by the sailor-turned-artist Thomas Buttersworth.

Caldecote told the Guardian that his late father, an engineer and industrialist, had lent the painting to the museum. After his father's death, he asked for the painting to be returned.

"I decided I would like the picture back. It turned out the museum had sold the picture through Christie's. I don't suppose we'll be able to get it back again."

Caldecote said the picture had sentimental value because an ancestor had captained the ship, part of the East India Company's fleet, and it had been a gift to him. "It was a shock when I found out the painting had gone," he said.

The painting was sold by Christie's to the government of Madeira for £61,250 in 2008. The island can be seen in the background of the picture. Neither Christie's nor the Madeirans realised that there was any issue with the ownership of the painting.

There is an ongoing dispute between the board of trustees of the museum and its former director, Gareth Griffiths, over missing artefacts. There is no suggestion that anyone has made personal profit from any sales.

The board has criticised Griffiths but he insists the care and security of the collection was the trustees' responsibility. He said: "I never benefited from any sales of material and will regard any such inference as actionable."

The director of the British Empire and Commonwealth Museum (BECM), which closed its Bristol base in 2008 pending a relocation to London, has been dismissed from his post following allegations of the unauthorised disposal of objects from the collection. 

 Neil Cossons, chairman of the BECM board of trustees, said: “Gareth Griffiths has been dismissed as director of the British Empire and Commonwealth Museum for abuse of his position as director and the unauthorised disposal of museum objects. We're not in a position to make further comment because of impending police enquiries.” 

Museums Journal understands that at least two items from the Commonwealth Institute collection, which was gifted to BECM early 2003, have been disposed of including a 19th-century Maori wooden panel, which was consigned to auction last September at the Dunbar Sloane auction house in New Zealand. 

A spokesman for the auction house said: “[The panel] came to us from an overseas museum, who were the vendors. They believe they have correct title to the Maori panel.”

Another item believed to have gone on the open market is a bronze casting of an 1860s plaster maquette by pre-Raphaelite sculptor Thomas Woolner, which depicts John Robert Godley, the founder of Canterbury in New Zealand. 

There is nothing particularly new about either the theme or the participants. The birth of the Georgian landscape in art, literature and gardening has been minutely examined down the years. This exhibition's three big names are all familiar; indeed, after Turner and Claude at the National Gallery and Turner, Monet and Twombly at Tate Liverpool, this is the third show this year to present Turner in company with other artists – it's as if he is no longer safe to be let out on his own. Nor was the Royal Academy always so keen on its headline acts. While Turner, from child prodigy until his death, was an academician through and through, both Gainsborough and Constable had fractious relationships with the institution. The latter once had to sit silently as a member of the RA rejected one of his paintings because it was "a nasty green thing". He was elected a full academician only aged 53 and even then by just one vote.

It is with heavy heart that I report that a good 20 percent to 30 percent of 20th-century paintings up for sale these days online and at certain provincial auction houses are “trappers” (shorthand for cheese in the trap). This is a term I have coined by necessity for works that cleverly “suggest” themselves as the work of recognized artists but not cataloged as such — paintings purportedly by people like Jack Vettriano, Augustus John or Francis Bacon, placed in oldish frames, and often with fake exhibitions labels on the back. They are sold as by “unknown artists” and priced with tantalizingly low estimates in the hope of getting two rival bidders, thinking they are onto a winner, to fight it out. The vendors normally disappear into dust when you try to track them down, but could be anybody from the faker himself, an intermediary or even the auctioneer.

I bought one of these, a putative Picasso representing four abstract reclining nudes, for £120 at auction earlier this year (for research purposes only I might add) and had it resting on the floor of my West End gallery in London for a couple of weeks before I took it home. How depressing is this? One of my better clients spied it on the ground among the Van Dycks, Gainsboroughs and Sir Thomas Lawrences and drawn by the zeitgeist ruggedness of the forms, turned to me and said, “God I love this stuff. So pleased you are getting in to it.”

One consequence of the opening of the Louvre Lens, is that the Raphael Portrait of Baldassare Castiglione, which was for a time part of the Raphael "Les denieres annees" exhibition at the Louvre, is no longer on show in the exhibition (it's been sent to Lens).

Yet the exhibition catalogue makes the point (on page 296) that comparing the Castiglione portrait with the Raphael/?Giulio Romano double portrait supports the attribution of the double portrait to Raphael, rather than to Sebastiano del Piombo or some other venetian painter.

Perhaps the hope is that people will come back to the Louvre sometime next year to confirm this statement in the catalogue.

Just One Eye is pleased to announce an exciting new project with renowned artist Damien Hirst and 2012 CFDA award winners The Row - the first in a series of curated artistic partnerships.

"We are longtime admirers of both Damien and The Row’s work,” explains Just One Eye co-founder Paola Russo, "and our main focus here is to nurture work between artists working in different mediums. We couldn’t have dreamed of a better way to debut this series of partnerships."

The resulting project is a fascinating study in contrasts; the classic elegance of The Row’s black patent, Nile crocodile leather backpack, adorned by the rebellious hand of Hirst.

Created in a limited edition of 12 and with a portion of each sale to benefit UNICEF, these works blur the line between high art and high fashion. Signed by the artist, each backpack features uniquely individual embellishments, from an assortment of prescription pills, to Hirst’s signature spots. "We are thrilled to be part of this project with Just One Eye”, add Ashley and Mary-Kate Olsen, “their unique approach on artistic collaborations is always inspirational".

Offering a wide array of fashion, art, and objects, Just One Eye is a new retail and e-commerce experience, striving to promote established designers alongside groundbreaking young creatives.