Fake Goncharov

[OlegTsi]

Originally Posted by Cyril Syzran ; 1706133"

advokat, and you are familiar with the special report of the International Confederation of antique and art dealers in Russia and CIS ( MKAAD ) to protect heritage Natalia Goncharova in connection with the release of books and Bazetu Parton ?
__________________

On some fakes by Goncharov, presented in this report, we have discussed here:
http://forum.artinvestment.ru/showpo...&postcount=802

" Samokatist " was proposed in the Paris auction house for 400,000 euros.

[advokat]

I am not surprised when the forum members share photos and discuss the paintings to their authenticity , vote and decide , as the meetings of the Committee Kandinsky - to include the work in the catalog , it is reasonable or not to include.
I sincerely wonder Irina Lebedeva ( which is not personally familiar ), and James Andrew Sarabyanovu Battervinku ( which sign) , when they were leafing through the book , both Parton and Bazetu divide the published work on "clean" and "dirty ." Stanislavsky would say " do not believe it."
Well, would say " in my personal opinion ," " I believe ," "may ".
By the way it was I who suggested to the publishers ' catalogs fake black "to include the word in the title and print it the largest in CAPITAL LETTERS.
And what you've heard about at least one lawsuit against us all well-known author and publisher ?

I read a letter signed by Lebedeva, and felt a hand GTGshnogo Counsel not familiar with European and American laws on freedom of speech , copyright, and others. But this is - is another story.

[Тихая Сапа]

Originally Posted by advokat; 1707003"

And what you've heard about at least one lawsuit against us all well-known author and publisher ?

Yes I have one complaint about not listening. Some cherish and others will not , but claims there is generally no .

Originally Posted by advokat; 1707003"

I honestly wonder Irina Lebedeva ( which is not personally familiar ), and James Andrew Sarabyanovu Battervinku (with whom the sign), when leafing through the book , both Parton and Bazetu divide the published work on "clean" and "dirty ."

It's full of things so outrageous that even seen on the photos , though none seriously hearing arguments on the basis of photo not accept it, it's true.

Added after 15 seconds

Originally Posted by advokat; 1707003"

And what you've heard about at least one lawsuit against us all well-known author and publisher ?

Yes I have one complaint about not listening. Some cherish and others will not , but claims there is generally no .

Originally Posted by advokat; 1707003"

I honestly wonder Irina Lebedeva ( which is not personally familiar ), and James Andrew Sarabyanovu Battervinku (with whom the sign), when leafing through the book , both Parton and Bazetu divide the published work on "clean" and "dirty ."

It's full of things so outrageous that even seen on the photos , though none seriously hearing arguments on the basis of photo not accept it, it's true.

[Konstantin]

Originally Posted by advokat; 1707003"

leafing through the book , both Parton and Bazetu divide the published work on "clean" and "dirty ".

From your posts that you think all the pictures of the two books Goncharova Parton and Bazetu unquestioned ? Yes ?

Originally Posted by khmelev; 1706833"

When the timing exhibited at the exposition "In terms of Malevich's " fake Lissitzky, resented if the public art ?

Now what? Advise participants of the forum to keep quiet because the rest of their lives? Why ?
And you or you are not outraged public?

Added after 2 minutes

Originally Posted by Silent Sapa

what is better - do little or nothing at all?

Yes, we already do with you.
Do a search in google "fake Goncharova" in English and see what pops up.
I think it is not enough.

The same "fake Burliuk" yes a lot already.

[Vladimir]

Originally Posted by Konstantin

Yes, we already do with you.
Do a search in google "fake Goncharova" in English and see what pops up.
I think it is not enough.

Yes, on request goncharova fakes popping up our debate.

[advokat]

My answer to Constantine:
Of course I do not think that in both books are of impeccable and, moreover, convinced that there is a fake.
Also, have not really sure what the reasons Andrew Sarabianov or Confederation persuaded everyone. Given that I'm not going to criticize them - their opinions I respect.

But the proposed option obhait everything published works are not legally nor any premlem "iskusstvlvedcheski." Voting such issues simply can not be solved. Kindergarten one! Those present at the press conference, overwhelmed with good intentions (though there are other motives, but is a separate issue), set and publicized the right question about questionable number of published pictures. But neither to resolve the problem it does not.

In my view,a positive result of this hype is just that, in each case to provide any pictures of her Goncharova for sale will need further investigation.

In this course should be taken into account all available information, including the monographs published in Bazetu and Parton, TG and Center Grabar, Pospelov and Sarabianov and any critic who commented on the specific job. Private business auction house or private lichtsa trust one or the other authority. Western community do not care expertise of Russian experts and Russian buyers - are not interested Bazetu. But even there, and there are the really important information, research, archives, etc.

And I repeat my opinion:
tying the war without being sure of victory, not reasonable. I did not see any prospects of winning until the press conference, the participants' perspectives and loss are evident, as there is no objective evidence of the authenticity of the allegations of "experts" 60-70%of the published pictures, the lack of specific names in the provenance, and the designation "private collection" - this is absolutely normal and perfectly acceptable form of origin of works of art. Moreover, market professionals do not once have seen and will see where in the description of an object is, such references are repeated several times, suggesting that the subject is repeatedly passed from one private collection to another.

Sovdepovsky approach to the "registration and residence permit" in the West will not ever! It is the story of collecting works of art in the Soviet Union and Russia confirms this argument - many exhibitors' collections of collectors "were either looted or against them, the MIA and the KGB inspired criminal cases ended in the confiscation of their collections, traces of which still have not been found.

And just this criticism the authors of these two books discredits all their arguments, both for its emphasis.
By the way Bazetu answered on the site at this reproach, and answered quite well (I would say better, but it's not my job).

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Originally Posted by advokat; 1708223"

Sovdepovsky approach to the " registration and residence permit " in the West will not ever! It is the story of collecting works of art in the Soviet Union and Russia confirms this argument - many exhibitors ' collections of collectors " were either looted or against them, the MIA and the KGB inspired criminal cases ended in the confiscation of their collections, traces of which still have not been found .
  

Sorry, but now you 're trying this phrase "put a shadow on the fence ."
Why? There are no other arguments?
You still remember the gulag .

Added after 1 minutes

Originally Posted by advokat

the way Bazetu answered on the site at this reproach, and answered quite well.

Very poorly answered.

Her answers are designed just for prospective buyers of its books falshaka.

[advokat]

Originally Posted by Silent Sapa

I really wonder how all came to public discussion.

........

So I really wonder who was the real initiator of the conference?

And you have the answer to your question?
Or at least a suggestion?

Added after 3 minutes

Originally Posted by Cyril Syzransky

....

Very poorly answered.

Her answers are designed just for prospective buyers of its books falshaka.

I agree with you completely in this.

[Маруся]

For several days, check my topic, and not get tired of wondering how she changed in her eyes: just this morning was a message from an article about Artem PO Avena in "ArtChronika» № 6-7, 2011. Not too lazy, went out, bought, read, and the messages are no longer ...

Nevertheless, speak for their own beliefs and about the article, and on the discussion:
Yes, Peter O. loudly said: "The government should initiate something to investigate," etc. But he also made it clear to collectors that they need to have a head on their shoulders and checking provenance, while the state ... all of the above.

In my opinion, another badly - very badly, that our esteemed critics from the Russian Museum, and Andrei Sarabyanov, before criticizing others' publications - do not consider it necessary to correct factual errors even in their own publications ... It is a national disgrace.

In this regard, very much like to know which of Russian art works of Natalia Goncharova worked after leaving Russia?? And if someone is doing, he probably knows that the last wife, Larionov is not so fond of everything that is connected with its predecessor, which handed out right and left not only the work of Natalia Goncharova, but also of his brother Mikhail Larionov - Ivan . Thank you, that even in the trash does not throw ...

[Artem]

Originally Posted by Maroussia ; 1716463"

this morning was a message from an article about Artem PO Avena in "ArtChronika » № 6-7, 2011. Not too lazy, went out, bought , read , and the messages are no longer ...

I tried to copy an article for the Forum - Falsifiers stories in "ArtChronika » № 6-7, 2011. Very good interview with Peter Aven , Mr. Aven speaks a lot ... including about the " expertise" - Jafarova , Valyaeva .

Originally Posted by Maroussia ; 1716463"

In my view, another badly - very badly, that our esteemed critics from the Russian Museum , and Andrei Sarabyanov, before criticizing others' publications - do not consider it necessary to correct factual errors even in their own publications ... It is a national disgrace .

Did you forget ? ... that our esteemed critics from the Tretyakov Gallery, Marshall Center . Grabar do the same ...

That 's it - a real national disgrace.