These men would do Roald Dahl's parson proud. Like the character in his short story Parson's Pleasure, who went scouring the English countryside persuading ignorant country folk to part for a pittance with furniture they thought was worthless, but was actually an exquisite Chippendale commode or pricelees Queen Anne chairs, a few French collectors have zeroed in on Le Corbusier's forgotten legacy in Chandigarh and made a killing out of it.
Buying heavily at routine government auctions of "junk" furniture, stalking old employees of Corbusier and his cousin and collaborator on the Chandigarh project, Pierre Jeanneret, and acquiring neglected artefacts lying with them, these collectors have bought symbols of Corbusier's heritage—from manhole covers to wood-and-cane chairs—for as little as Rs 100, restored it to pristine perfection at a workshop in Delhi and shipped it to exhibitions and sales at Paris and New York galleries.
As recently as June 5, leading auction house, Christie's New York, auctioned off around 50 lots of furniture and other artefacts designed by Le Corbusier and Pierre Jeanneret at extraordinarily high prices . They all came from the collection of Eric Touchaleaume, a French dealer who has been on an active buying spree in Chandigarh for the last few years. At the Biennale des Antiquaires held at the Grand Palais in Paris in September last year, yet another Frenchman, Patrick Sequin, proudly displayed his 'collection' from Chandigarh.
via justin
God damn French looters. (Hilarious article!) Fucking French blood suckers.
One of the dealers owns (or owned) a piece of mine. He and his partner bought a number of pieces at a non-profit gallery's benefit here in NY for the cost of raffle tickets. (Including some famous names.) I guess I don't understand what's bad about this. Isn't buy low/sell high the motto of all business? I'm not asking this just because someone had the excellent judgment to recognize that my work was a value at $100.
i would liken it to pulling down all the coke signs off a back country road. tacky and selfish. as for your art, obviously speculating on a sure thing moody investment. that would just be stupid to pass up on.
The article would have had less impact if the canny buyers were from the U.S.
I do know a few artists who refuse to donate works for fundraising shows, they will go to the fundraisers and support them by purchasing stuff, but they resent the fact that fundraisers attract rich 'smart shoppers' who want good art on the cheap.
I once got a ridiculous call from a dealer about an unsold work of mine that she saw at gallery benefit, she had a client that might be interested. I said; "it's an inexpensive work at a fucking fundraiser, why don't you just buy the goddam thing!"
I can't support that argument Bill, the dealers aren't stealing stuff. (like my mother used to do when she went 'antiquing')
i think dealers use the term "it was a steal" and mean it.
The "Delhi workshop" is the part that says to me "bottom feeders extraordinaire." We certainly wouldn't want to throw French artisans any scraps. Yet the dealers are operating at the creme of society level. Eventually these people will all be dead and there will be the rise of a new intelligence.
Here's a question back at you Bill, since you really know your stuff, what would you do if you saw a Corbusier piece at a routine government auction of "junk" furniture.
keep it or put it up at christies faster than a nyc minute. what do you think? keep it. i dont pay retail.
Ha Ha! What I would do, contingent on me actually knowing anything, would be to start bouncing off walls and shrieking "HOLY FUCKING SHIT THIS IS A CORBUSIER! HOW COOL IS THAT!!!!". (because ...deep sigh...I am retarded) but I agree that the essential argument here is about opportunism, problem is that the article seemed to condemn the origin of the opportunists more so than actually questioning the ethics of a ubiquitous business practise. (especially since so much money is made based on knowing something that your buyer or seller doesn't know)
And now that I've viewed justin's site today, I have to go out and ruin something in my house by doing a bad repair with inferior material. (damn him to hell!)
put it up at christies faster than a nyc minute, and give the profits to Corbu's heirs. (awww...)
Maybe the French dealers got the idea from this NYT article from 1982....
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=travel&res=9904E6D71E39F936A15757C0A964948260
LM: Glad you like my stuff. That's what I'm here for =]
|
- bill 7-07-2007 5:20 pm
God damn French looters. (Hilarious article!) Fucking French blood suckers.
- L.M. 7-07-2007 7:49 pm [add a comment]
One of the dealers owns (or owned) a piece of mine. He and his partner bought a number of pieces at a non-profit gallery's benefit here in NY for the cost of raffle tickets. (Including some famous names.) I guess I don't understand what's bad about this. Isn't buy low/sell high the motto of all business? I'm not asking this just because someone had the excellent judgment to recognize that my work was a value at $100.
- tom moody 7-07-2007 8:09 pm [add a comment]
i would liken it to pulling down all the coke signs off a back country road. tacky and selfish. as for your art, obviously speculating on a sure thing moody investment. that would just be stupid to pass up on.
- bill 7-07-2007 8:32 pm [add a comment]
The article would have had less impact if the canny buyers were from the U.S.
I do know a few artists who refuse to donate works for fundraising shows, they will go to the fundraisers and support them by purchasing stuff, but they resent the fact that fundraisers attract rich 'smart shoppers' who want good art on the cheap.
I once got a ridiculous call from a dealer about an unsold work of mine that she saw at gallery benefit, she had a client that might be interested. I said; "it's an inexpensive work at a fucking fundraiser, why don't you just buy the goddam thing!"
- L.M. 7-07-2007 8:34 pm [add a comment]
I can't support that argument Bill, the dealers aren't stealing stuff. (like my mother used to do when she went 'antiquing')
- L.M. 7-07-2007 8:37 pm [add a comment]
i think dealers use the term "it was a steal" and mean it.
- bill 7-07-2007 8:42 pm [add a comment]
The "Delhi workshop" is the part that says to me "bottom feeders extraordinaire." We certainly wouldn't want to throw French artisans any scraps. Yet the dealers are operating at the creme of society level. Eventually these people will all be dead and there will be the rise of a new intelligence.
- tom moody 7-07-2007 8:45 pm [add a comment]
Here's a question back at you Bill, since you really know your stuff, what would you do if you saw a Corbusier piece at a routine government auction of "junk" furniture.
- L.M. 7-07-2007 8:53 pm [add a comment]
keep it or put it up at christies faster than a nyc minute. what do you think? keep it. i dont pay retail.
- bill 7-07-2007 9:12 pm [add a comment]
Ha Ha! What I would do, contingent on me actually knowing anything, would be to start bouncing off walls and shrieking "HOLY FUCKING SHIT THIS IS A CORBUSIER! HOW COOL IS THAT!!!!". (because ...deep sigh...I am retarded) but I agree that the essential argument here is about opportunism, problem is that the article seemed to condemn the origin of the opportunists more so than actually questioning the ethics of a ubiquitous business practise. (especially since so much money is made based on knowing something that your buyer or seller doesn't know)
And now that I've viewed justin's site today, I have to go out and ruin something in my house by doing a bad repair with inferior material. (damn him to hell!)
- L.M. 7-07-2007 9:25 pm [add a comment]
put it up at christies faster than a nyc minute, and give the profits to Corbu's heirs. (awww...)
- tom moody 7-07-2007 9:26 pm [add a comment]
Maybe the French dealers got the idea from this NYT article from 1982....
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=travel&res=9904E6D71E39F936A15757C0A964948260
LM: Glad you like my stuff. That's what I'm here for =]
- Justin (guest) 7-08-2007 6:17 am [add a comment]