Another spurious John R. Neill drawing has emerged on the market from
Rhyton Gallery - this is the third that I've seen in the past year, and
this time the artist has chosen to try replicating a drawing that I
own.
The drawing chosen is a chapter heading of Glinda, from 1914's
Tik-Tok of Oz. The other two copied drawings that the gallery offered were both based on pieces from
The Wonder City of Oz,
a much later title featuring Neill's late style of drawing - bolder and
simpler. In attempting the more delicate style of Glinda, the artist's
deficiencies are pronounced - there's really no comparison between the
original and the copy.
Aside
from the obvious visual
differences, the new drawing is on paper rather than artist's board. The artist was probably unaware
of the fact that the original of this illustration is drawn on a much
larger board than the image itself. The double ruled line beneath the drawing, something seen on most of the
chapter titles from this book, has been discarded and a nice fat fake
signature has been added - in spite of the fact that none of the Tik-Tok
drawings are signed. It's the same signature seen on the other two
drawings previously offered, and of the wrong style for this time period.
While I feel the addition of the signature makes
this an outright forgery, it doesn't stop the piece being offered. There has at least been an improvement in the style of listing on
Live Auctioneers. Rather than being listed as "attributed to"
John R. Neill, it is now listed as "in the manner of". This is a
significant change, as anyone can try drawing something in the manner of
another artist - but there’s no excuse for sticking a fake signature on the piece. The listing already has two bids - as always in collecting, Buyer Beware!
Posts
9 comments:
Thanks for posting this, Bill! You're providing a valuable public service. I'd actually bookmarked the auction with the intent to examine it closely later, as your previous post on the Wonder City art left me in a suspicious state of mind. There is an excellent documentary on art fraud on Netflix titled "Made You Look" that discusses the "in the manner of" dodge when the artwork has a forged signature, and the conclusion is that a fraud is a fraud. These people really need to be prosecuted, but the relatively small potatoes prices involved may make it very difficult to interest the authorities.
The drawing should be listed as “Unknown Artist” rather than John R. Neill. The multiple disclaimers in the listing make it clear that everyone involved knows this is not a real piece of Neill artwork. Sadly, Rhyton Gallery appears to be a chop shop of fake art, and Live Auctioneers is giving them a platform for selling their forgeries. I did point out this lack of oversight to Live Auctioneers when the last fake Neill was offered - I think that may have helped change the “attributed to” listing to “in the manner of”, which is marginally better but certainly not a firm enough action to stop the dubious activity.
As of 5/13, I see that those two bids have been deleted. Here's hoping that the word is getting out, and thank you, Bill, for your efforts in that direction.
In the end, there were 2 bids and the drawing sold for $300, plus an additional 29.9% buyers premium. I can only hope that whoever bought it realizes what it is - or isn’t!
You might be interested to see this recent listing on LiveAuctioneers:
https://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/102902697_jackson-pollock-gouache-on-paper
Note that, as with the Neills, it is "signed" as Jackson Pollock. Note also that although the $450 sale price is only a tiny fraction of the "estimate" of $18,000 to $25,000, a genuine Pollock original would easily sell in the seven to eight figure range.
And here we have the same weasel words about "rendered in the abstract style of Jackson Pollock" and the disclaimer that "In the artist's style it means: The piece can be original from the artist or from any other painter."
This appears to be becoming a depressing trend. LiveAuctioneers could easily ban such language, and perhaps it will if enough people complain.
Thanks for posting this. Rhyton has consistently tried to pass forgery as "in the manner of" or "attributed to", which is rather deceiving because often they offer several works attributed to the same artist.
They have recently tried to sell a lot of drawing attributed to Nicolas Party, which thankfully no one fell for it.
They have a well established reputation for selling forgeries of many kinds - just check the reviews on LiveAuctioneers. I don’t understand why LiveAuctioneers allows them to list on their site.
The aforementioned has four 'manner of' Alma Thomas' in their April Auction. I hope buyers are aware of what they are bidding on.
This gallery continually sells/ offers works attributed to Amos Ferguson. These are obvious fakes/ copies/ frauds. Since I have many of the originals they cannot possibly be painted by the artist himself. This gallery and Live Auctioneers should be prosecuted for selling forgeries. I have brought it to their attention but the lies continue. It is a great shame and the buyers of these fakes will be disappointed that they have been scammed. !! Laurie
Post a Comment