Urban Art Association

Thanks for posting that. An interesting read for sure.

Simon's story certainly is legendary as the only work I know of that had both Hughes and Freemont claiming valid and the Foundation stating otherwise. Perhaps Vermin could help his cause.

Great read. Thanks!

>>>Anyone seen 'who the fcuk is jackson pollock', been a while since ive it but i think his prints were found on it and still no COA<<<

It demonstrates the power and authority any estate/foundation has as their word is all that matters to the market. Also, as its been demonstrated many times over, it's MUCH more difficult to have something deemed authentic if there is any question whatsoever after a catalog raisonee has gone to print. They are the defining catalog of works for any given artist and foundations aren't terribly interested in amendments or supplements. It's a big reason why the Warhol foundation is taking their time doing research and have already reserved a volume at the end (they're only through '69 thus far and '70-73 is due in the next year I believe) for works that were not included on the initial published volumes.

I've got the CR's for a number of artists but the 3 books that make up Warhol paintings and sculpture from '62-69 (which is well over a decade of publishing) are enormous and it boggles my mind to think how much more is to come. And once they finish paintings and sculpture through his death, they plan to try to tackle his commercial drawings from the late 40s on and his fine art drawings through his death. I suspect they will not be finished documenting his works for another 50+ years at this pace.

but nice article all the same .........

There is a film about this, it was on UK TV a few years ago, I think there was a man how was a friend of Warhol and he was given a gift by him, and these people would not authenticate his canvas. i think it was worth $10,00000 + with and jack without.

Link legwork from thugloving

>>>Do you guys think in years to come we will have problems with those early Banksy works done and printed by Eine ?
At the moment POW are not doing any authentication in gifts [prints] given to artist who helped at Cans or for street works, will this change in the future? <<<

I suppose that depensds what you mean by problem. PC has been crystal clear with what they will and will not issue a COA for generally speaking. The more clarity on this issue while an artist is living, the easier it will be for future generations to deal after we're all long and gone. I would not hold my breath for PC to reverse course on anything with your comment "at the moment." Part of their job is to eliminate confusion and bring clarity for all to understand. Therefore, I would be stunned to see them reverse course on any of their previous edicts.

>>>>Having seen the pictures in the artilce I was a bit surpised to see that the Foundation's authentication board felt they had the right to stamp the back of a piece of work they did not own. Twice! You would'd imagine they would need the owners permission to do that. It's tantamount to criminal damage and I'd be suing them for that alone.<<<<<

It's a disclosure statement on the authentication form which Simon signed when he submitted his painting. The Foundation stated (at the time, not sure if they still do) that anything that is denied will be stamped on the reverse. I recall reading many years ago that this stamp even showed through to the front of the canvas if you looked close enough which adds further insult to injury. Simon can't sue for that as he willingly entered that process but he can and is suing for the other obvious reasons. Fwiw, most people I discussed this with years ago felt he had little chance of winning.

Thanks for clarifying lee3. Figured there would be some sort of terms and conditions allowing it somewhere allong the application process. Be careful what you sign up for I guess.