Experts refuse to establish the authenticity of the work of abstract artists

NEW YORK. In view of a number of scandals that have occurred recently, art critics have become extremely reluctant to express their opinion on the authenticity of the work of abstract artists, fearing not only to lose their reputation, but also to become the object of prosecution.

Fake Pollock was sold at auction in 2007 for $ 17 million.

The crisis surrounding the fake works of abstract expressionism sold at an auction in New York, about 40 of which were represented by the now discontinued Knoedler Gallery, swept through the entire world art market and had a negative impact on art scholars. The fact of the mass sale of fakes led not only to a federal investigation, but also to the filing of many civil lawsuits.

Ann Freedman, who served as director of the controversial gallery, has now put a lot of effort into proving that she was not at all careless about her duties, and that numerous experts have confirmed the authenticity of each work sold..

Friedman claims that art historians who advised the gallery included senior curators (or former curators) of museums such as the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, the Beyeler Foundation, and the National Gallery of Washington), DC, Dean Sobel; Director of the Clifford Museum (Clyfford Still Museum), David Anfam (David Anfam); the author of the catalog is Rothko, one of the leading art historians, Thomas Crow (Thomas Crow) from New York University (New York University), and many others. Fridman’s claims have not yet been considered in court, and it is unclear whether any of the experts will formally present their opinions on the artists who are their specialization.

It is obvious that, given the record high financial and legal rates in this massive scandal, experts, including those listed above, are more reluctant than ever to want to freely express their opinions.

Most experts stopped all communication with the press for fear of being drawn into legal proceedings. But, in this situation, the silence of experts can only serve the falsifiers, who will undoubtedly continue to try to sell fake works of abstract artists. Jack Flam, president of the Dedalus Foundation, says: “If people had the opportunity to exchange their opinions freely, such cases of falsification would be revealed much faster, and there would not be such large-scale scandals like this. The huge amounts that are now paid for works of modern art make their fake even more attractive than ever. ” According to information provided in court documents, more than $ 80 million was paid for previously unknown works by Mark Rothko, Jackson Pollock, Lee Krasner, Robert Motherwell, Robert Motherwell, Willem de Kooning )Willem de Kooning), Clifford Still (Clyfford Still), Franz Kline (Franz Kline) and Barnett Newman (Barnett Newman).

Glafira Rosales, an art dealer accused of fraud, claims that the work belonged to businessmen living in Mexico and Switzerland. Their appearance from nowhere was explained by the background, which included anonymous collectors who bought works from the artists themselves through intermediaries, and then kept them for decades.

Last month, Rosales pleaded guilty to conspiracy to sell fake art, money laundering and tax crimes. The fakes were allegedly made by a Chinese artist living in Queens, New York.

This is not the first scandal with the discovery of mass fraud in the art world. According to some reports, hundreds of falsified works by Wolfgang Beltracchi (Wolfgang Beltracchi) are in circulation in Germany. The number of counterfeit works of the Russian avant-garde that flooded the art market in 1990 after the collapse of the Soviet Union is unknown. “Loud scandals led to a massive mania of mistrust in the art market, but the craft of falsification is much older than the first instance of violent abstraction,” says Maxwell Anderson, director of the Dallas Museum of Art. The Knodler Gallery case has undermined the reputation of many institutions. The Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao borrowed fake paintings by Barnett Newman, and the Beyeler Foundation borrowed fake works by Rothko from the Rosales collection. “I could easily get involved in one of these deals,” says one leading art adviser.

“Before, it was possible to simply invite specialists to the museum and ask for their opinions in a confidential conversation, now this practice is over,” says dealer Thaddaeus Ropac. At the heart of this problem is the fear of experts to say what they think, caused by a lack of confidence that their words will be conveyed in the future in full and will not entail judicial liability.

Such a situation can turn into a huge problem for the art market, provoking an even greater stream of fake work. The only way out could be changes in the legal system for the protection of art historians. Work is already underway to create such a bill in the United States. But for a competent solution to the problem, one law is not enough. Young artists should now think about issuing certificates of authenticity for their work, and buyers should be more careful about authenticating the work.

Anna Sidorova © Gallerix.ru