Art Knowledge News
Rembrandt Painting Sold at $33,210,855 ~ A Record Price at Christie's Weak Old Master Sale |
 |
 |
| Written by Harmon Casey |
| Thursday, 10 December 2009 02:12 |
|
The last time this 1658 Rembrandt painting was sold at auction was in 1930 when it fetched 18,500 pounds. It later went into a series of private collections in the United States and was last seen in public at an exhibition in Detroit in 1970. The record for a Rembrandt previously stood at 19.8 million pounds (then $29 million) in December 2000 for "Portrait of a lady aged 62." The Rembrandt was the star lot in Christie's auction of old masters and 19th century works, which have stood up relatively well during a financial downturn that has hit much of the rest of the world art market. Christie’s inaugurated the Old Masters week with a £68.3 million, or $112.4 million, sale that says everything about the desperate search for great art by eager buyers and the equally desperate attempt by departmental heads to fill their catalogs with enough works to build up economically viable auctions. Two key works loomed large in a way that would have been inconceivable three decades ago. The most talked about, a black chalk sketch of a woman seen head and shoulders, was hailed as the work of Raphael. Estimated by Christie’s to be worth £12 million to £16 million plus the sale charge, it was the object of a furious contest pitching a great connoisseur dealer “retired” in Italy, Luca Baroni, against an anonymous telephone bidder. The “Head of a Muse,” described as a preparatory sketch for the third muse on the right of Raphael’s fresco depicting the “Parnassus” in the Vatican, ended up at a phenomenal £29 million, the highest price ever paid for a drawing from any school. Commissioned by Pope Julius II, “Parnassus” was painted between 1510 and 1511. If the link between the painting and the drawing is as direct as is generally accepted, this dates it with great precision, giving it additional importance. Generations of scholars and connoisseurs have expressed admiration for the sketch, going as far back as Thomas Lawrence in the early 19th century. The famous English painter was also a passionate collector. Curiously, little attention has been given to the considerable differences between the sketch and the painted head in the fresco. The similarity of the posture in the drawing is evident. But so is the abyss separating the features sketched in black chalk from those painted in the fresco. There is a surprising sentimentality about the drawing that is missing in the painting. Future research will no doubt clear up the mystery.  This lack of enthusiasm was striking in a room filled with the world’s
leading dealers in Dutch masters, from Otto Naumann and Alfred Bader in the
United States to Johnny Van Haeften of London. A glance at the actual work makes
it less surprising. The portrait obviously suffered when it was relined about 60
or 70 years ago. This resulted in the flattening of the paint surface and the
loss of its texture. Moreover, the picture may have been cropped in the lower
area. That impression is reinforced by comparison with Rembrandt’s admirable
self-portrait of 1658 in the Frick Collection in New York, or the even greater
self-portrait of 1652 in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna, which
Christie’s imprudently reproduced in the catalog. In both, the sitter strikes
the same frontal posture as in the Christie’s painting and Rembrandt allowed
some space between the hand and the lower edge of the composition — in contrast
with this week’s portrait, where the tips of the fingers are cut off by the
lower edge of the canvas.Even more worrying is the decayed varnish, which will need to be removed. There is considerable uncertainty as to what the result may turn out to be. As the sale ended, I overheard Mr. Van Haeften, the leading connoisseur dealer specializing in Dutch and Flemish masters, discussing the picture with a colleague. He wistfully remarked that it was “a bargain.” Why didn’t you try to go for it? another dealer asked. “I could not be sure about what will come out after the cleaning,” came the reply. Judging from the lack of any attempt from the other leading professionals to bid on it, Mr. Van Haeften’s view was widely held. These two star lots aside, the sale was incredibly thin. Few pictures stood out. A scene featuring riders stopping by a fountain in open countryside by Philips Wouwerman was a rare exception. “It is not signed,” one dealer (who did not question its authorship) objected, arguing that an unsigned Wouwerman would be difficult to sell. Not in this case, though. Among the publications dealing with it, Christie’s cites the catalog of Philips Wouwerman’s oeuvre illustrated with engravings published in Paris between 1737 and 1762. Most important, the picture retains a marvelous giltwood frame, probably of the Régence period (1715-25). That points to the high esteem in which it was held at the time. The beautiful Wouwerman scene was worth every penny of the £361,250 that it cost this week, and more. The difficulty of obtaining enough Old Master gems to fill a catalog was spectacularly underlined by the pathetic inclusion of watercolors by Turner, Constable and lesser artists such as Paul Sandby. French paintings of the 19th century, such as an 1870 landscape by Charles-François Daubigny that sold for £85,250 or another by Théodore Rousseau (£121,250) seemed equally out of place. Most incongruously, a kitsch scene, “The Decameron” by Raffaello Sorbi dated 1876 had somehow slipped into the company of Raphael and Rembrandt. It crashed far below a hopelessly optimistic estimate of £120,000 to £180,000. Nor was it the only failure that evening. Of the 43 lots offered, 15 were unsold, because they were unsalable at the suggested estimates. Scraping the barrel is a thankless task. Sadly it is a problem to which there is no solution other than further limiting the number of sales. Click on logo below to add this article to your favorite Social Website ~ |
Related Articles :
