Цитата:
Сообщение от Amina
qwerty,
This forum is open to itself Shapiro and was pleasantly surprised at the quality of work and prices. Just do not understand how lots 53, 54 generally may be questioned. These provenance, appraisal so strong, that, if there is no doubt. Or something I do not understand?
[color="# 666686"]Posted 6 minutes[/color]
qwerty,
I am certainly no expert, but as a lot under the number 56 can be questioned if he Dr Anthony Parton, is the chief expert on Goncharova and Larionov, provides commentary on this lot, but generally to all other lots Larionov.
[color="# 666686"]Posted 15 minutes[/color]
qwerty,
Well, if we assume that Lot 59 is in doubt. when asked why he did not cause any doubts on the Tajan-e in December 2004?
Over 67 lot more could be considered, but even a little bit familiar with the work Burliuk know that he is always repeating his futuristic kompozatsii written earlier. Course should call Shapiro and interest in this lot in detail, as well .. I personally have no doubts.
|
Lots 53 and 54. This is not the provenance and not the kind of expertise that can be trusted. I am somewhat familiar with the works of these artists, these works do not cause me any confidence. Svetlana Klyunkova wrong quite often, and even released her book, found the wrong job. By Rodchenko-Stepanova, there is only one judge - Lavrentiev, knows all collectors and, accordingly, seek to obtain his certificate, which is not here. Moreover, such large-scale oil paintings, whether they are true would not have sold to Shapiro, and at Sotheby's, Christie's, and their price should be 20 times higher than the claimed estimeyta.
Lot 56. Ask any collector with the experience - it will tell you about a pile of incorrect assessments of Dr. Parton, the latter is considered the ultimate expert on Larionov, Goncharova, just to the west, and the attitude among experienced collectors a little better than that relating to "the chief expert" on the Russian avant-garde in the West Mr. Shavlenu or a great connoisseur of art Exter Ms. Nadia Filatoff.
Lot 59. It is a wholly bogus, they were much taken with the participation of galleries Mr. Zlatovskogo in the mid-nineties (I saw pieces 20 variations), they usually come with expertise Schawlow, it is strange that she was not there.
Lot 67. Here I am not 100%sure. You should not think that Burliuk always repeating his futuristic комозиции, it is not so. I doubt, because the thing is very weak here and the black square of Malevich, and semicircles of Sonia Delaunay, a kind of porridge. Rather, "no" than "yes."