| Кирилл Сызранский |
17.07.2013 18:01 |
"For the sacred symbols pay big money '
Вложений: 4
Цитата:
Сообщение от Cyril Syzransky; 2676411"
as likes to Mikhail Kamensky
|
If I remembered the Honourable Kamensky, you have to open and his interview recall - Chapter «Sotheby's Russia," Mikhail Kamensky - a record price of Russian art .
Here's a snippet, but read, I think we should all interviews:
Цитата:
by authors such as Natalia Goncharova and Mikhail Larionov, included in the global art context, on any trading correct display - Russian art and modernism? You said that the Russian sold at auction Sotheby's «Cubist Woman" (1920) Goncharova was greatly underestimated. Whether strongly affects the value of the product of his environment?
Russian buyer who is familiar with the works of major Russian avant-garde artists, better understands, for example, in the work of Natalia Goncharova than a collector of avant-garde from France, Canada and England. Because he has a full understanding of the creative development of the artist. But when a high-class work by Natalia Goncharova exhibited in the context of the Russian auction collection, mixed stylistically and chronologically, it is in the eye of the beholder, of course, loses. This is understandable, Russian bid are formed not on museum or thematically, but exclusively by the national. Another thing is themed auction of Impressionist and Modern art. When the important work of Goncharova and Larionov is in the same row with the visual works of outstanding modernist and avant-garde European artists deservedly seen as comparable in price, quality and the fate of the other expensive brands of art of the twentieth century. And if Goncharova will be puzzled with a suspicious look extremely traditional buyer Shishkin, then rely on its responsiveness to occur.
From my point of view, "Cubist Woman" Goncharova, sold at auction last Russian for about a million dollars, was indeed significantly underestimated. Do this thing, other than the obvious artistic qualities, have a history. Are there many certainties Goncharova's works on the market? Virtually no! But this work, torn from the European context, is not able to appreciate the world of avant-garde collectors. Russian collectors as a tribute to fashion, prefer early Goncharov, for five to seven years earlier.
Where is advantageous to expose the "intermediate" writers like Boris Grigoriev and Petr Konchalovsky?
Of course, the Russian bid their fans more. Boris Grigoriev carries a special stylistic oddity, adored Russian flavor. Pyotr Konchalovsky, linking the Russian view and Cezannism, again much more interesting it is Russian. He seems secondary to those who have the opportunity to buy Cezanne himself, but it does not feel the Russian language feature "sezannistov." To such "intermediate" reservoir is a significant part of the Artists of the Russian emigration. They themselves have absorbed two traditions, but the market for rare exceptions are perceived as Russian artists.
Well, you can imagine that the same people will buy Aivazovsky and Goncharov?
Either one or the other. An exception may be the investment fund, to which all the same. His goal - to buy something from his point of view, undervalued, and then resell. Collectors usually collect something stylistically close, visually incongruous.
|
|
