Exeter 20th March from a Friend and Patron

Home Forums General Exeter 20th March from a Friend and Patron

This topic contains 42 replies, has 11 voices, and was last updated by  marlowe 9 years, 7 months ago. This post has been viewed 2748 times

Viewing 13 posts - 31 through 43 (of 43 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #10497

    gbl
    Participant

    It is true that Frank has nothing positive

    #10498

    dutchmaster2
    Participant

    What was the auction house thinking?It was my understanding that the collection had been shown beforehand in London to attract widespread interest. Although it was busy (i.e. numbers of bodies in the room) there was no "money" in attendance.It was irresponsible from the seller and the auction house to allow such a large collection to be auctioned all at once. No other artist great or otherwise would be allowed to sell in such quantities on purpose, in order to maintain the value of the artist. Artificial, yes, but that's how markets work. Increased supply only reduces the price of the commodity, other artists' work are drip fed into the market to keep the value and the mystique of the artist high. Did the auction house not brief their client before the auction. Was the seller so oblivious to this basic economic principle?And what of any pervious purchasers of Lenkiewicz works.Think of the purchaser(s) of the tempation of St Anthony or the Bishop standing from the last Foundation sale, they must be spitting feathers.On the basis of the amount of works for sale at the auction the timing or location could not have been worse. During a recession, before an election, set in a provincial town.Unfortunately, art these days is centered on the value of the work in terms of capital. Outside viewers may view the auction as a disaster, a high percentage of the works did not sell, those that were of critical value only reached their low estimates. The rest were picked up like crumbs falling from the table, an opportunity for the "Lenkiewicz fans" to pick up a work from their favourite artist at a favourable price.The seller is now in a real pickle. What to do?The remaining works cannot now be sold on at the estimated prices in a hurry. Jim the Boxer was offerd at £17000 with no bidders at all. So what is it's value? Yet Robbie sold for £10000 does that mean that Robbie is on £7000 less expensive than Jim, or £70000 less expensive than the Last Supper?And what of the image/reputation of the artist and ultimately the art work?It's not all about the money. Here is still an outstanding artist, yet to be displayed in a major gallery, still popular, apparently also in London if Bearnes are to be believed from the pre sale hype, but not achieving the heights which we all believe he should be achieving.I think the auction was a miscalculation but a valuable lesson learned.The problem now is how to move on? How does the Foundation go about convincing the great art houses of Britain and Europe/world that the artist has gravity in his work after this theatre show.George Bernard Shaw:

    #10499

    sartre
    Participant

    I think the auction was a miscalculation but a valuable lesson learned.

    I wish I could agree with you, dutchmaster, but how many times have we seen these full-on sales of Lenkiewicz paintings? And so often mixed in with bric-a-brac, posters, furniture, cheap pencil sketches etc?Here's a heretical thought: maybe the serious collectors might do themselves a favour by buying up a lot of the flotsam and jetsam and putting it all on a big bonfire. Except that some sod would probably try to flog photos and ashes from the event on eBay.

    #10500

    Christopher Raven
    Participant

    I think you make a good point here sartre, I think that Robert would have gained more acceptance if he had spent more time painting fewer paintings of great quality, à la Lucien Freud. His social enquiry work spread his focus too thin when it came to the artwork. The large volume of weaker work impacts on the general view of his excellent pieces IMHO.

    #10501

    TheWolfman
    Participant

    It is true that Frank has nothing positive

    #10502

    marlowe
    Participant

    Annie, I wouldn't take it so seriously. It's just Frank being Frank (or Kevin).

    I suspect there are four or five significant holders, wealthy bidders and market movers for quality Lenkiewicz pieces, I could name them...

    I'm sure you couldn't but go ahead.

    Any serious collector would have known of this sale, it consisted of some exceptional and important works covering a wide range of Robert’s output.

    Not in my book - name six important project paintings here.

    It’s surplus stock and he has more...

    No he doesn't - what?

    Bearnes gave ample illustration why they are a provincial bit part player in this game,

    The bit part player that holds the record for at least the top dozen most expensive Lenkiewiczs?

    Robert was producing the last supper to pay for the rent in the building it was housed, he thought it the most ironic (not iconic) thing he had worked on – That was his only interest in it !!!!!!!!!!!!!

    No it wasn't!Apart from that, spot on Frank.

    #10503

    gbl
    Participant

    Krauser: Without wanting to press the point, I think some clarification is required: Annie Hill Smith decided that she was offended by a comment made towards someone other than herself, ie; a Bearnes member of staff. She asked for it to be removed on the other person's behalf because she was offended, even though the comment wasn't remotely aimed at her. I could understand a request for its removal if the request came from the person whom it was aimed at. But not from someone doing it on behalf of someone who may not even be bothered by it - presuming they have even read it in the first place!

    #10504

    TheWolfman
    Participant

    Krauser: Without wanting to press the point, I think some clarification is required: Annie Hill Smith decided that she was offended by a comment made towards someone other than herself, ie; a Bearnes member of staff. She asked for it to be removed on the other person's behalf because she was offended, even though the comment wasn't remotely aimed at her. I could understand a request for its removal if the request came from the person whom it was aimed at. But not from someone doing it on behalf of someone who may not even be bothered by it - presuming they have even read it in the first place!

    But you are pressing the point and clarification is most definately not required. I understand the context of the remark that was made, Annie's initial offense and my own objection to it. Whether you wish for the comment to stay or be removed is really not the point. Simply commenting on a uniform is one thing, singling someone out and subjecting them to abuse quite another.As perhaps the most frequently active source of Lenkiewicz information online it would be churlish to think that there is no chance that a representative of Bearnes would at least look in here to measure feedback after the auction - and therein lies the issue. Still, the topic is the important thing and not a thoughtless remark that is most definately not deserving of any further coverage. That's just my opinion of course.My personal experience of Bearnes has always been a welcoming and informative one. Sadly I was unable to attend the recent auction which by most accounts was successful in achieving at least some of it's goals. In the face of what appears to be zero support or awknowledgement from TLF (or press?), at least publically, they appear to have done an admiral job of pulling in at least some of their intended market and 300K is really not to be sniffed at.

    #10505

    gbl
    Participant

    Krauser: I fully agree with you that insulting someone for no proper reason is uncalled for (especilay as they probably don't even post on this site - ie; an unprovoked remark).

    #10506

    WEB WEAVER
    Participant

    Maybe the TLF could have a second hand market for originals at their premisis when it opens. They could charge 15% commission. TLF don't have many original oils themselves. Having works for sale would be a win/win situation benefiting both TLF and potential sellers. Perhaps someone like Sam Adair would see this as a sound business proposal?

    #10507

    member555
    Keymaster

    The room was full of day tripping janners who registered for a paddle in order to get a free catalogue and hopeful spectator to a fizzing money exchange whilst munching on homemade sarnies.

    And here we are

    #10508

    Gypsy
    Participant

    Internet forums are historicaly easy to get offended or to give offence, its got to do with the mix of different people and therefore a mix of what causes offence to others. I am sure if I spoke one here like I really did to my friends I would be banned straight away.Anyway back on track.The Auction was designed to sell the paintings, (for reasons unknown), normally it is to sell something quickly without all the fuss of a dealer. With most of the paintings not selling is then it could be viewed as a failure, mainly of the people to judge the market and what peoplw will pay at the moment.I presume the reason for alot of people turning up but not buying may have been people wanting to pick up a bargain. You never know with sales as anything can go on the day as in the auctioneer may have instructions to get rid of the stuff.Now is a good time to buy as its obviously a dip in the market.

    #10509

    marlowe
    Participant

    I think the problem was unrealistic expectations for too many average paintings. The major surprise was the failure of the double portrait of Diogenes but then it's not a painting most people would hang above their fireplace. But nearly 100,000 with commission for The Last Supper is a price few contemporary painters can realise, especially one like Lenkiewicz who has had no national recognition. Look at lot 63, the two drawings of Mary,

Viewing 13 posts - 31 through 43 (of 43 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.