Legal Dispute

“Culture Wars in Ukraine: History Lessons”

“Culture Wars in Ukraine: History Lessons”

via “The Economist

Scythian gold helmet

“HE WHO controls the past controls the future.” Orwell’s dictum now faces a new test. Shortly before Russia annexed Crimea, the Bakhchisaray museum, north of Sevastopol, lent some valuable artefacts to an exhibition in the Netherlands. The question as to which country these (and other objects from Crimean museums) should return is creating a diplomatic conundrum.

“Let yourself be overwhelmed by the gold of Crimea,” boasts the Allard Pierson Museum in Amsterdam. Never before has Ukraine lent so many mostly Crimean treasures. The Black Sea peninsula is filled with gems left by invaders over the centuries. The exhibition includes a Scythian gold helmet from 400 BC, pottery from Greek colonisers and a lacquered Chinese box that came along the Silk Road. “We have given our very best objects,” sighs Valentina Mordvintseva, a curator at the Crimean branch of the Institute of Archaeology. She fears she may not see them again.

Who is the rightful owner? On legal grounds, Kiev has the upper hand because the Allard Pierson signed a loan agreement with the Ukrainian state. And as the Netherlands does not recognise Russia’s annexation, Ukraine still owns the property. Yet the Dutch also signed contracts directly with the lending museums. And, says Inge van der Vlies, a professor at the University of Amsterdam, there is an ethical case for returning the objects to them. But there is no guarantee that Russia might not pinch the pieces the moment they arrive.

The Dutch foreign minister, Frans Timmermans, does not wish to meddle but he also wants to avoid being seen to accept a new form of art looting. This may be impossible; whether the gold returns to Crimea or to Kiev, each side will accuse the Dutch of pilfering. . . . .

READ MORE

 

“New York’s Four Seasons Restaurant Sued over Plan to move Picasso Painting”

This actually could be quite the issue. On the one hand, the  question arises as to the circumstances surrounding the Four Season’s acquiring the painting.   What was the contractual agreement–that they would maintain the painting, that it would stay in the same spot indefinitely,  that it had to always be available to the public.  Did they not make any provisions for this type of situation?  I’m guessing that the case is going to hinge upon how significant the damage to the wall is, how much more damage would postponing the repair cause, and can they move the painting safely out and back.  Maybe they could just cut the wall out with the painting, rebuild behind it, shore it up, then just replacing it in some artsy way?  Or carefully slide boards behind it and lay it down to remove it?  Either way, it’s important to give the owner his rights, but landowner rights are vital too. Plus, if the wall damage causes harm to someone later, who is liable for the injury? ** DB

“New York’s Four Seasons Restaurant Sued over Plan to move Picasso Painting”

Via FoxNews

New York’s storied Four Seasons restaurant has for decades harbored one of the city’s more unusual artworks: the largest Pablo Picasso painting in the United States. But a plan to move it has touched off a spat as sharply drawn as the bullfight crowd the canvas depicts.

Pitting a prominent preservation group against an art-loving real estate magnate, the dispute has unleashed an outcry from culture commentators and a lawsuit featuring dueling squads of art experts.

The building’s owner says Picasso’s “Le Tricorne,” a 19-by-20-foot painted stage curtain, has to be moved from the restaurant to make way for repairs to the wall behind it.

But the Landmarks Conservancy, a nonprofit that owns the curtain, is suing to stop the move. The group says the wall damage isn’t dire and taking down the brittle curtain could destroy it — and, with it, an integral aspect of the Four Seasons’ landmarked interior.

“We’re just trying to do our duty and trying to keep a lovely interior landmark intact,” says Peg Breen, president of the conservancy.

The landlord, RFR Holding Corp., a company co-founded by state Council on the Arts Chairman Aby Rosen, says a structural necessity is being spun into an art crusade.

“This case is not about Picasso,” RFR lawyer Andrew Kratenstein said in court papers. Rather, he wrote, it is about whether an art owner can insist that a private landlord hang a work indefinitely, the building’s needs be damned. “The answer to that question is plainly no.” . . . .”

READ MORE

“Cornelius Gurlitt and the complexities of rehoming Nazi-looted art”

“Cornelius Gurlitt and the complexities of rehoming Nazi-looted art”

by Rita Lobo via “European CEO

A priceless haul of invaluable art thought to have been destroyed by the Nazi’s has recently been uncovered in Germany, raising questions about if and how artefacts are returned to their rightful owners or their heirs

“A priceless haul of invaluable art thought to have been destroyed by the Nazi’s has recently been uncovered in Germany, raising questions about if and how artefacts are returned to their rightful owners or their heirs

When the Bavarian customs officer searched Cornelius Gurlitt aboard a train crossing the Lindau Border in 2010, he had no way of knowing that he was about to reignite one of the fiercest cultural debates in European history. Gurlitt, the son of an important German art curator during World War II, turned out to be sitting on a veritable trove of priceless works of art thought to have been lost during or shortly after the war – a fact only discovered because police raided his home on suspicions of tax evasion.

An elderly recluse living in an affluent neighbourhood of Munich, Gurlitt had inherited from his father, Hildebrand, over 1,200 pieces the curator had acquired during the war. The story of how Hildebrand Gurlitt came to be in possession of such an array of what the Nazi’s had labelled ‘degenerate art’ – during a time when collectors were fleeing Europe in droves – is murky at best. But because Germany does not have a law preventing anyone or any institutions from owning looted art, it is unlikely that the provenance of Gurlitt’s collection matters very much, should he wish to retain it.

There is no evidence that Hildebrand, who was part Jewish, stole any . . . .”

READ MORE

“‘It’s a Form of Addiction'”

On the weird off-chance that you have’t heard, Tony Podesta and his wife, Heather Miller, are currently filing for divorce. A large issue at stake is the treatment of their massive art collection. She says she collected it on her own, he says he began to build it long before he married her. Who gets it? My guess- Podesta gets what he brought into the marriage, and they split the rest of the baby 50/50. **DB

“‘It’s a Form of Addiction'”

John Hooper via “The Guardian

In happier days, the Podestas show off some of their art collection in 2004. (Photographer: Robert A. Reeder/TWP)

“We’ve all heard about artists who suffer for their work. Tony Podesta and his wife, Heather Miller, suffer for other people’s. When they bought a 2,000lb Louise Bourgeois sculpture for their home in Washington, for instance, it required substantial renovations to the building. “We had to get a structural engineer in to sort out what sort of support it needed,” says Podesta. “And we not only had to build support underneath where it was going but temporary support from the point at which it entered the house to the point at which it was placed. I don’t think it’ll ever leave.”

Then there is the travel involved. The couple have unusually demanding jobs. He is one of Washington’s top lobbyists, renowned as the man who first built bridges between Silicon Valley and Capitol Hill. She has joined the lobbying business after a career as a top-flight lawyer in Congress and the Senate. Most people in their positions would spend their leisure time unwinding. Instead, they make what Miller calls “Herculean” trips to Europe and further afield to buy art. It is perfectly normal for them to leave Washington on Friday evening and return the following Monday morning, having visited more than one European capital in the meantime.

Their travelling, and the knowledge of the global art scene they have acquired, has turned them into two of America’s best-known collectors. They were meant to be in Rome on vacation when I caught up with them. But the day before they had been out ferreting in Trastevere, where they found a couple of Wolfgang Tillmans photographs, which they unwrapped with engaging enthusiasm.

They are known for purchasing “awkward” works, such as video installations, that many other private collectors will not consider. “It’s easy to store them, but difficult to display them,” says Podesta. To get round the problem, he and his wife have excavated a huge subterranean vault beneath their house outside Washington – a white space 5m square and 4m high in which it will be possible to show “very complicated video pieces” on all four walls.

Miller, the daughter of academics, still marvels at her involvement in a world and way of life she got to know only after meeting her husband. She recalls one of their first visits to a gallery and how the owner told Podesta he had a work by a particular photographer “going cheap”. It turned out he wanted $40,000. “So I’m standing there in front of this photograph and I’m thinking to myself, like, ‘This is cheap?’ ”

Her husband, who looks less like an aesthete than a character from the Sopranos, became involved with collecting no less accidentally. He was helping Ted Kennedy in his failed bid to challenge Jimmy Carter for the 1980 Democratic nomination. When he ran short of cash, Kennedy laid off three-quarters of his staff.

“Those of us who remained were paid in donated art. Robert Rauschenberg, Andy Warhol and Roy Lichtenstein were all supporters,” he recalls. “I ended up leaving the campaign with a treasure trove.” Collecting became a “form of addiction”.

Today, he reckons, he and his wife have the world’s biggest collection of Anna Gaskell (“maybe second to Anna Gaskell”). Other contemporary favourites include Gillian Wearing, Marina Abramovic, Sam Taylor-Wood and Olafur Eliasson, whose work Podesta discovered 10 years ago, when the artist was still at the Royal Academy of Arts in Copenhagen.

They are always looking out for little-known artists. Asked to come up with a handful of names that are in the second rank now, but that will one day be in the first, they offer a list that ranges across the world: Britain’s Darren Almond, Janaina Tschape from Brazil, Mads Gamdrup from Denmark, the Italian artist Loris Cecchini and Patricia Piccinini, a Podesta protegee who is to represent Australia at the Venice biennial.

It is tempting to see Podesta as a US equivalent of Charles Saatchi – another entrepreneur who has also operated with great success on the margins of politics. Specialising in photographs and video, Podesta is more focused, though he says that his most admired possession is a sculpture, another of Bourgeois’s works, “a gloriously beautiful carved marble”.

But, for pure investment reasons, did he and his wife ever buy works they didn’t like? “We don’t buy anything we don’t love,” he says. “Some people collect one of lots of different people. Our style is to collect a smaller number of artists – probably 50 – in some depth. We’ll have 20 of this person and 40 of that person.”

His take on the role that he and his wife play is modest. “Frequently, work that we’ve had in our home has been the first work that museum curators have seen and then decided to put in museum shows. Dealers do not become wealthy in the course of dealing with young artists, so it’s a pleasure to support the dealers and the young artists and then help the work find its way into museums.”

·Taylor-Wood says

Tony Podesta is someone who has intrigued me for a long time, partly because he is a very passionate and brave collector of art, partly because he’s constantly travelling. I wanted to read about him because I admire his spirit – not to mention his resilience to jetlag’ . . . .”

READ ORIGINAL

Thousands of Artifacts Seized at Rural Indiana Home

I don’t have the whole story or all the facts. That said, if this article is true: they haven’t charged the man, there is no offered evidence as to reasonable suspicion, and there is no explanation given as to what precisely he did wrong. Instead they have taken items worth immeasurable value from a 90 year old man that will take more than his life for them to “catalog.” Just imagine the potential threat to all museums and private owners if it is considered acceptable for officials to take collections just to “verify,” without probable cause for suspicion.  It’s incomprehensible.   ** DB

“Thousands of Artifacts Seized at Rural Indiana Home”

by Diana Penner via “IndyStar”

inidc5-6eovpgs4v7o1427r8c1g_original

“FBI agents Wednesday seized “thousands” of cultural artifacts, including American Indian items, from the private collection of a 91-year-old Rush County man who had acquired them over the past eight decades.

An FBI command vehicle and several tents were spotted at the property in rural Waldron, about 35 miles southeast of Indianapolis.

The man, Don Miller, has not been arrested or charged.

FBI agents are working with art experts and museum curators, and neither they nor Jones would describe a single artifact involved in the investigation, but it is a massive collection. Jones added that cataloging of all of the items found will take longer than “weeks or months.”

“Frankly, overwhelmed,” is how Larry Zimmerman, professor of anthropology and museum studies at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis described his reaction. “I have never seen a collection like this in my life except in some of the largest museums.”

The monetary value of the items and relics has not been determined, Jones said, but the cultural value is beyond measure. In addition to American Indian objects, the collection includes items from China, Russia, Peru, Haiti, Australia and New Guinea, he said.

The items were found in a main residence, in which Miller lives; a second, unoccupied residence on the property; and in several outbuildings, Jones said. The town originally was Iroquois land.

The objects were not stored to museum standards, Jones said, but it was apparent Miller had made an effort to maintain them well. (more…)