Tuesday, June 2, 2015

Why Sotheby’s removed from the auction Aivazovsky – BBC Russian

  • June 2, 2015

Post

aivazovsky
Ivan Aivazovsky’s painting “Night in Cairo”

runs 2 June at the Sotheby’s auction in London trading blown sensation – a sale was made one of the most attractive lots – dated 1870 painting by Ivan Aivazovsky “Evening in Cairo”.

The estimated cost of the painting – 1.5 2 million pounds, the amount is very significant for the Russian art.

Remove picture at auction was preceded by numerous rumors, contradictory statements and articles in the press, is reduced to the fact that the painting is stolen.

For clarification, we asked the General Director of “Sotheby’s Russia and CIS “Mikhail Kamensky. Here is what he said:

kamensky
General Director of “Sothebey’s Russia and the CIS,” Mikhail Kamensky

“In 2013, my colleague, Jo Vickery of the Russian art department in London Sotheby’s found” Evening in Cairo “in a fairly large private collection in Europe and reached agreement on its sale at auction. Every major exhibition we will certainly and necessarily check all databases of stolen art, chief among them Art Loss Register – there’s nothing there were.

Robbery 1997

We asked the owner to give us information provenance of things. She got into the Internet in the hope that there is something to dig, and to his surprise, came across several articles in the Russian press, which described the last in the middle of the 90th series of residential burglaries in Moscow, among abductions point work “Evening in Cairo” Aivazovsky.

She herself bought the painting in 2000 in an antique shop in Europe, and it came with the expert opinion of the Tretyakov Gallery, confirming that this was the work that was exhibited at the exhibition Aivazovsky Tretyakov Gallery in 1950. We cross-checked the information and found that it’s really the same picture, and to doubt its authenticity is no reason we did not have.

The stolen in 1997 in Moscow painting belonged to the family of Nosenko, the famous Soviet diplomat, son of the Soviet People’s Commissar for transport. Himself Commissar Ivan Nosenko in 1940 bought it from a collector NI Dedov.



Queries and checks

We decided to ask just in case Russian authorities, tracking stolen works of art and applied to the Ministry of Culture. Their database is not the picture number. But in the files of the Ministry of Interior among the many stolen works by Aivazovsky was no mention of “Nights in Cairo.” But there were no photographs, no detailed references to things, only the number of the criminal case.

We have postponed the possible sale and transfer the information to the owner of the picture. On behalf of Moscow lawyer sent an inquiry to Moore, and in response she got a call in for questioning. She came to Moscow came in for questioning, along with his lawyer and filed all the documents confirming it as a bona fide owner of the painting: bank details to transfer it in 2000 at the expense of an antique shop and a copy of the appropriate amount of expertise.

She consequently asked to notify about its existence seven Nosenko, in order to establish the truth in conjunction, and also requested a written confirmation of the status of being in possession of her paintings. In response, she received a letter on the letterhead of the Ministry of Interior, which indicated that at the disposal of law enforcement information does not qualify the painting “Evening in Cairo” kidnapping.



Family Nosenko have reached full understanding, they supported our position. I believe that we have acted honestly, openly, taking into account the interests of all parties.
Mikhail Kamensky

Furthermore, the letter also stated that there is no credible evidence to suggest that at the time the painting was stolen in the apartment of the family Nosenko, just as there is no evidence to suggest that the picture is in the family apartment Nosenko was genuine. The victim Tamara G. Nosenko had not submitted the investigation, but the investigation did not become interested in the presence of supporting documents.

With this information, we found that Sotheby’s, as a bona fide agent, made all the required by the law and ethics of the actions that confirm the purity of the thing and allow you to put it up for auction. It was included in the catalog and in April of this year, posted on our website.

The son of Tamara Nosenko, who died shortly after the robbery – the large diplomat himself no longer a young man – I saw this job on our website, and rightly indignant . I troubled by the fact that, in spite of the existing criminal case and all necessary actions of both victims and heirs of victims, the investigation has not contacted Sotheby’s auction and did not warn that the work for sale could be stolen. Indignation family Nosenko was not aimed at Sotheby’s, and the inaction of law enforcement.



Requirements and exchange of letters

They began to address letters to the Ministry of Culture, Ministry of Internal Affairs by demanding from the government the action it should take. A few days before the auction, Sotheby’s received a letter from the Ministry of Culture with a request to remove the painting from the auction. A similar letter by Interpol and came to the Metropolitan Police. Both letters more informative, they do not provide any evidence, there is nothing that would allow the Metropolitan Police issued a warrant for the arrest of this stuff – it was confirmed to us by the police.

We are in the response letter to the Ministry of Culture wrote, reason to believe that the information we have to work the same one that was stolen from the apartment Nosenko not enough and that we see no reason to remove it from the auction, and we have issued a statement saying that the picture remains on the auction.

At the same time It was leaked to the media – it is not clear by whom, certainly not from the family of Nosenko. On Friday, May 29, I was able to connect with family Nosenko explained to them our position and we have established a normal human contact. I explained that we are committed not to sell this thing quietly, and to establish the truth and maintain sales solely on legal grounds, given the interests and current owner and family Nosenko.



Agreement between the parties

We have invited the parties to conclude an agreement under which the two sides have no objection to the sale of the painting at auction and which provides part of the proceeds from the sale amount. Such an agreement was signed and thus all of the claims of the family Nosenko to Sotheby’s have been removed. That is, this work is free of claims, as was announced on Saturday, May 30.

On Sunday, however, as if someone had pushed a button, and the media barrage rained false information that Sotheby’s allegedly ignores the request of Interpol and the requirement of the Ministry of Culture to make a film “Night in Cairo” with the sale.

We have provided information on the agreements reached and the Ministry of Culture and the Ministry of Interior, but the relevant messages on their sites were not . That, however, is not surprising – it happened too quickly, it’s a complex and intricate, and to understand it, you need a lot of time with the assistance of a number of specialists and experts.

Another thing is that to begin to understand this need It was back in 2013 when we sent the information that Aivazovsky painting “Evening in Cairo” is in Sotheby’s. Why this was not done then or in 2014 or, in the end, in April 2015, when the picture appeared on our site? These questions remain unanswered.



Information barrage

Despite my numerous interviews explaining our position barrage of false and tendentious information in the press did not stop. At the same time it was reported that the Russian Interpol sent to us a second request and that supposedly we again ignore. And we did not get anything. And London police received nothing.

We have the feeling that someone is fanning the scandal, trying to give it a political connotation, with emphasis on the British company ignores the requirements of the Russian authorities and neglects the interests of Russian citizens. The entire sequence of events that I have laid out, evidence to the contrary.

With family Nosenko have reached full understanding, they supported our position. I believe that we have acted honestly, openly, in the interests of all parties.



The decision on the withdrawal from the market



Taking the decision to withdraw the painting from the sale, we take into account the interests and the current owner, and possibly the previous owner and the owner’s interests future.

Mikhail Kamensky

On Monday evening June 1 general background information analyzed in its entirety, we realized that the market is scared. The market does not understand – on the one hand there is an official announcement that the “exhibition is free of all claims.” On the other – do not stop incomprehensible unconfirmed reports of statements of law enforcement bodies of the Russian Federation, is a large number of publications in the Russian press.

In this situation, spending serious money on the purchase of risky canvas it would be rash. Selling this thing – free from claims legally – we still jeopardized the interests and the current owner, and possibly the previous owner and the interests of the owner of the future.

We are also in talks with potential buyers and in the end at the request of current owner, and in agreement with the family, we decided that Nosenko picture bid withdraw in the hope that soon we will be able to argue for the potential buyers of absolute transparency and clarity of this thing “.

LikeTweet

No comments:

Post a Comment