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).