Landscape With Smokestacks: The Case of the Allegedly Plundered Degas

Rating:
Summary: Superb insider account of ownership of a Degas artwork
Review: "Landscape with Smokestacks" is a beautiful "monotype" created by Edgar Degas around 1890 and currently on view at the Art Institute of Chicago. Degas smeared oil colors on a metal plate in large diagonal strokes with a rag, then placed a paper on the plate and used a press to transfer the image to the paper. As Degas described it, "The result is a picture on paper more luminous than if the artist had worked directly on the paper." He used fingerprints for texture at the horizon of the scene, and then dabbed on pastel colors in little dots of yellow or pink. Green striations of monotype ink were matched with green pastel. Prussian blue pastel was smeared into the sky to suggest smoke coming from the nearly eradicated monotype chimney.

The family that owned the work of art perished in the holocaust. They had sent the art to a dealer in Paris, either for safekeeping or on consignment to be sold. If it was sent for safekeeping, it may have been stolen by the Nazis (especially Goering) who were looting art throughout the occupied countries of Europe during the Second World War. If it was sold on consignment, however, then the heirs of the family (who brought suit in the United States to recover the painting) would be out of luck. Their only recourse would be to find the Parisian art dealer and sue him for the proceeds. But maybe the painting was stolen, in which case the heirs might have a claim to get it back. After the painting left the art dealer in Paris, it wound up in Switzerland, and went through the hands of various purchasers, finally winding up in a private art collection in Chicago. The owner donated it to the Art Institute, and the real legal battle began -- between the heirs who claimed the painting had been stolen, and the Art Institute, which of course wanted to keep it (though the Institute would have returned it to the heirs if the Institute had been convinced that the painting indeed had been stolen).

Although the author, Howard Trienens, represented the defendant art collector in Chicago, I found his book exceptionally fair in its meticulous treatment of the provenance (sales history) of the Degas painting and in describing the negotiations that ensued between the heirs and the Art Institute. Like the Degas painting itself, the book is a little gem.

Rating:
Summary: Superb insider account of ownership of a Degas artwork
Review: "Landscape with Smokestacks" is a beautiful "monotype" created by Edgar Degas around 1890 and currently on view at the Art Institute of Chicago. Degas smeared oil colors on a metal plate in large diagonal strokes with a rag, then placed a paper on the plate and used a press to transfer the image to the paper. As Degas described it, "The result is a picture on paper more luminous than if the artist had worked directly on the paper." He used fingerprints for texture at the horizon of the scene, and then dabbed on pastel colors in little dots of yellow or pink. Green striations of monotype ink were matched with green pastel. Prussian blue pastel was smeared into the sky to suggest smoke coming from the nearly eradicated monotype chimney.

The family that owned the work of art perished in the holocaust. They had sent the art to a dealer in Paris, either for safekeeping or on consignment to be sold. If it was sent for safekeeping, it may have been stolen by the Nazis (especially Goering) who were looting art throughout the occupied countries of Europe during the Second World War. If it was sold on consignment, however, then the heirs of the family (who brought suit in the United States to recover the painting) would be out of luck. Their only recourse would be to find the Parisian art dealer and sue him for the proceeds. But maybe the painting was stolen, in which case the heirs might have a claim to get it back. After the painting left the art dealer in Paris, it wound up in Switzerland, and went through the hands of various purchasers, finally winding up in a private art collection in Chicago. The owner donated it to the Art Institute, and the real legal battle began -- between the heirs who claimed the painting had been stolen, and the Art Institute, which of course wanted to keep it (though the Institute would have returned it to the heirs if the Institute had been convinced that the painting indeed had been stolen).

Although the author, Howard Trienens, represented the defendant art collector in Chicago, I found his book exceptionally fair in its meticulous treatment of the provenance (sales history) of the Degas painting and in describing the negotiations that ensued between the heirs and the Art Institute. Like the Degas painting itself, the book is a little gem.

Rating:
Summary: Superb insider account of ownership of a Degas artwork
Review: "Landscape with Smokestacks" is a beautiful "monotype" created by Edgar Degas around 1890 and currently on view at the Art Institute of Chicago. Degas smeared oil colors on a metal plate in large diagonal strokes with a rag, then placed a paper on the plate and used a press to transfer the image to the paper. As Degas described it, "The result is a picture on paper more luminous than if the artist had worked directly on the paper." He used fingerprints for texture at the horizon of the scene, and then dabbed on pastel colors in little dots of yellow or pink. Green striations of monotype ink were matched with green pastel. Prussian blue pastel was smeared into the sky to suggest smoke coming from the nearly eradicated monotype chimney.

The family that owned the work of art perished in the holocaust. They had sent the art to a dealer in Paris, either for safekeeping or on consignment to be sold. If it was sent for safekeeping, it may have been stolen by the Nazis (especially Goering) who were looting art throughout the occupied countries of Europe during the Second World War. If it was sold on consignment, however, then the heirs of the family (who brought suit in the United States to recover the painting) would be out of luck. Their only recourse would be to find the Parisian art dealer and sue him for the proceeds. But maybe the painting was stolen, in which case the heirs might have a claim to get it back. After the painting left the art dealer in Paris, it wound up in Switzerland, and went through the hands of various purchasers, finally winding up in a private art collection in Chicago. The owner donated it to the Art Institute, and the real legal battle began -- between the heirs who claimed the painting had been stolen, and the Art Institute, which of course wanted to keep it (though the Institute would have returned it to the heirs if the Institute had been convinced that the painting indeed had been stolen).

Although the author, Howard Trienens, represented the defendant art collector in Chicago, I found his book exceptionally fair in its meticulous treatment of the provenance (sales history) of the Degas painting and in describing the negotiations that ensued between the heirs and the Art Institute. Like the Degas painting itself, the book is a little gem.

Rating:
Summary: It's all about interpretation.
Review: Truth is found in the details. By logically organizing the paper trail scattered through several countries, written in at least four different languages, and held by a variety of individuals, Trienens establishes the facts of the case. Whether or not readers agree with his interpretation of these facts is another issue. I don't believe anyone withholds their sympathy from the Gutmann family or anyone who suffered from the events of World War II. However, sympathy should not blind readers to the facts of the case, including the 1967 signed statement that upon payment from the German government, the Gutmanns would not pursue any further compensation. While the attention to detail can at times interfere with the narrative, in the end the author sheds light on the complicated process of Nazi-era provenance research and reparation -- and the role of the press in shaping America's ideas about this sensitive issue.

Rating:
Summary: It's all about interpretation.
Review: Truth is found in the details. By logically organizing the paper trail scattered through several countries, written in at least four different languages, and held by a variety of individuals, Trienens establishes the facts of the case. Whether or not readers agree with his interpretation of these facts is another issue. I don't believe anyone withholds their sympathy from the Gutmann family or anyone who suffered from the events of World War II. However, sympathy should not blind readers to the facts of the case, including the 1967 signed statement that upon payment from the German government, the Gutmanns would not pursue any further compensation. While the attention to detail can at times interfere with the narrative, in the end the author sheds light on the complicated process of Nazi-era provenance research and reparation -- and the role of the press in shaping America's ideas about this sensitive issue.

Rating:
Summary: Disappointing
Review: When I picked this book up, I thought it was a great find. I read a great deal of non-fiction of this type, and the opening pages were very promising. But I ultimately found it disappointing, even offensive. Trienens sinks the book in legalistic detail, focusing so much on the civil suit that he loses sight of the fascinating larger story. Worse, he seems to regard the Goodmans -- descendants of the owner who died in the Holocaust -- as little more than opportunists, and displays little sympathy or respect for their family's tragedy. And while he claims to be taking an objective view, over and over he interprets facts in a light most favorable to the defendant in the suit -- his client. This book is a badly missed opportunity. I would love to see someone else do it again.