Powered by Bravenet Bravenet Blog

Phonecam

journal photo

Tuesday, August 11th 2009

2:50 PM

New York Museums fight to keep two Picasso's

Tuesday, August 11, 2009 in Lewiston, Maine  http://www.sunjournal.com/node/101639

Writing below in bold print is by vanrijngo on this date of 8/11/09, and who ever the writer was who happened to Published this article below on Dec 09, 2007 5:00 am

New York Museum fights to keep two pictures painted by Picasso.

NEW YORK (AP) - The two Picasso paintings have been in prominent New York museum collections for decades. But now the institutions are asking a court to declare them the lawful owners amid a Jewish scholar's claims that the works were the rightful property of a relative persecuted in Nazi Germany.

Vanrijngo;  These decades of ownership, not really given the amounts of decades, gives the Museums the full right to keep these Picasso's and what ever else in their possession. Lordy be,... where the hell are all the relatives and descendents of all the Chiefs of all the Indian Tribes and their lawyers? I'd say that these Jews with all their money are literally barking up wrong trees!  Everything worth a shit in the MFA world of ours has belonged to someone else before, and has always seemed to fall into someone else's hands, sometimes legally and most times not,... if you can catch the drift.

The Museum of Modern Art and the Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation said they took the step Friday to fend off an expected lawsuit from Julius H. Schoeps, a German who has been waging a legal fight to recover artwork and property once owned by his great-uncle.

Yep, it is always good to be prepared when it comes to the courts and when protecting such high priced items to stay in the possession of such hard to prove ownerships. One would alway hope that the old saying of possession is nine tenths of the law holds true for these defendents.

Schoeps demanded on Nov. 1 that the museums hand over "Boy Leading a Horse," which is in MoMA's collection, and "Le Moulin de la Galette," in the Guggenheim's collection.

Now this you would think would have to be two different lawsuit since it involves two different museums.

MoMA Director Glenn D. Lowry and Guggenheim Foundation Director Thomas Krens said they are confident the paintings were not obtained under Nazi duress.

Confidence is alway a good thing when presenting their side to the courts.

"The Museum of Modern Art and the Guggenheim Museum take the issue of restitution very seriously," they said in a joint statement. "Evidence from our extensive research makes clear the museums' ownership of these works and also makes clear that Mr. Schoeps has no basis for his claim."

Just maybe this could cause a counter claim when all said and done. Say for instance if they win their case from Schoeps, this partial German Jew who is causing them a lot of stress over the possible loss of these Picasso's. Acording to Schoeps there is a possible chance the museums will lose and if this should happen it would be the end of this lawsuit.  

Schoeps' lawyer, John J. Byrne, declined to comment on the museums' suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan. Both paintings were originally owned by Paul von Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, an aristocratic German banker and descendent of the composer Felix Mendelssohn. Mendelssohn-Bartholdy died in 1935, two years after Hitler came to power.

Well at least we know that Hitler's right hand man, Herman Goring, didn't stumble in and take them, and it indicates he did die of natural causes after Hitler came to power.

Before his death, Mendelssohn-Bartholdy engaged in a series of maneuvers that Schoeps said were intended to protect his estate and an incredible art collection. Besides the Picassos, it included nine paintings by Vincent van Gogh.

Well, I'd say possibly depending on what he died from and if at the time their was a possible chance for a cure, that he more than likely sold them to possible save his own life. As most of us know, these two artist's works of art were not all that high priced at that particular time and it more than likely took that many sales of the works to possible bring in enough money to save his own life.

The family sold the two paintings at issue in the lawsuit to the Jewish art dealer Justin Thannhauser in 1934 or 1935.

It ain't like they were sold very cheaply to a German art dealer just before heading off to the gas chambers and ovens.

Thannhauser fled Germany and spent much of the war in Switzerland. He kept "Le Moulin de la Galette" until 1963, when he gave it to the Guggenheim museum. He sold "Boy Leading a Horse" to former MoMA chairman William Paley in 1936. Paley gave it to MoMA in 1964, according to the museum's Web site.

Sounds to me like this art dealing Jew Thannhauser had a halfway smart head on his shoulders,... and knew when to leave Germany.

In a recent lawsuit involving a third Picasso, Schoeps argued that his great-uncle parted with the paintings only because he expected his estate to be plundered by the Nazis. He consigned five Picassos, in all, to Thannhauser.

Sound like a lot of speculations going on around here, and for sure this collection of his was not sent out of Germany to Switzerland by him for safe keeping.

Schoeps' attempts to reclaim the works have not gone well. He filed a federal lawsuit in 2006 attempting to stop Picasso's "Portrait de Angel Fernandez de Soto" from being auctioned off, but a judge threw out the case for lack of jurisdiction. An identical claim was tossed last month by a state judge in New York. The judge said Schoeps hadn't yet taken the proper legal steps to have himself declared the rightful heir to the Mendelssohn-Bartholdy estate.

It looks to me that this guy Schoeps is just a trouble maker that can't prove much of anything, other than being a big ass thorne in their sides. If he can't prove that he is the rightful heir to Mendelssohn-Bartholdy estate, then it seems to me he will not be able to prove anything other that he has a lot of money he might just be throwing away in frivolous law suits.

Christie's auction house predicted "Portrait de Angel Fernandez de Soto," also known as "The Absinthe Drinker," could sell for $60 million.

I can't believe this,... "Portrait de Angel Fernandez de Soto," also known as "The Absinthe Drinker," could sell for $60 million, and they don't even bother to tell the readers who the artist was,..... like we are all supposed to know!

Schoeps is the director of the Moses Mendelssohn Center for European-Jewish Studies at the University of Potsdam.

Just maybe like the name of the university, there was to much use of something which sometimes causes minds to wander.

Over the years, he has also tried to recover the family's country estate in Brandenburg. It remained in the hands of his great-uncle's Christian wife for most of the war, only to be seized by the advancing Soviet army.

That sounds to me like this guy didn't really know when to quit or when enough was enough.  I do wonder what had become of those two Picasso's.  Cheers!

vanrijngo 

0 Comment(s).

There are no comments to this entry.

Post New Comment

No Smilies More Smilies »