I don't understand why both articles bury the lead at the very bottom, namely that there's a guy who actually matches the plaintiffs' description, unlike the defendant, and he's dead. It makes me think there's something suspect about that assertion but there's no basis to conclude that.
Why would an artist cover-up a youthful criminal past? I thought that was the sort of thing one did for resume building.
In order to take millions of dollars away from some shmuck with a desert painting from 1976.
I'm still reading. I sort of hate the shmuck.
such desert wow
much cactus
good art
If I didn't have a moral objection to using my own comments as straight lines, I'd made Valerie Solanas joke now.
This is an outrageous case. I'd heard about it before but hadn't taken the time to read any of the articles about it. I hope Doig countersues for malicious whatever (lawyers, help me out here) and that the gallery owner is blackballed.
10: maybe he could sure for defamation for them claiming that he's responsible for such a crappy painting?
11 From the article he actually sounds very generous to the painter, saying he'd have been proud to have done such work at such a young age and expressing sorrow over his unfortunate life.
The only thing I don't like about 5 is that I wanted to post doge too.
/whine
12: And I'm sure he sounds handsome, too.
I have to sue 5 for the pain inflicted from snorting bubbly red wine. I did not realize there was bubbly red wine and accidentally bought a bottle at the Italian supermarket.
OP. Incredible reading, and only "zany" if you haven't had to spend millions to defend yourself against greedy liars, as Doig has.
Hold on. You people are taking Doig's side!?!
I just skimmed the article, but are there some independent experts who have weighed in about whether it is Doig's painting?
18.2: It's a painting that if it was done by Doig, it was when he was a teenager in a medium that he has never used as a mature artist. If there is an expert willing to testify that it is Doig's work, I would figure it is because this expert is being paid well.
Doesn't the controversy increase the value of the painting even more? It's the famous NotDoig desertscape!
It's certainly increased it from the original $100.
18: https://news.artnet.com/art-world/peter-doig-chicago-trial-painting-602942
Victor Wiener, an art historian and former executive director of the Appraisers' Association of America, then took the stand on behalf of the plaintiffs to appraise the disputed painting, testifying that the work is worth $50,000-$100,000 if not claimed by Doig, and $6-8 million if it is, indeed, authentic. "I would kill to own a Peter Doig," he said, adding, "no one in the art market would consider this painted by Marilyn Bovard's brother."
However another expert quoted in the article thinks it's clearly not Doig's work. The expert above probably also buys sparkling red wine with the intent to drink and enjoy it.
19
I dont really care much about the actual facts. I just want someone to have bought a painting for $100 that is now worth millions.
I dont really care much about the actual facts. I just want someone to have bought a painting for $100 that is now worth millions.
You and that someone both!
It probably isn't good retirement planning to hope that some drawings a jailed client sent me will be worth millions.
IANAZTL. Why does he have a legal obligation to authenticate or not? What is he being sued for?
29. I like, especially "...less interesting to mees."
excellent voir dire answer!
In VA, the judge then says "despite the clear bias, you can set aside that bias and fairly decide this case, right?"
Yes, here too. Except we add our customary "dude" at the end.
1: because if they put that up front the story would be clear and simple and you wouldn't read all of the article.
Dry Lambrusco is the perfect San Francisco summer wine. It's bubbles say lighthearted, unserious, and it's redness fortifies against the relentless freezing fog and howling wind. You can get a couple of pretty good ones around town these days.
Why aren't plush Dreadnoks a thing?
35: " Later, the ranks grew with the addition of Monkeywrench and Thrasher. Monkeywrench had spent his recent years building explosive devices for terrorist groups in Rhyl, North Wales, and Thrasher was a spoiled middle class kid with destructive tendencies, who built and piloted the Dreadnoks Thunder Machine.
All Dreadnoks are uncouth and violent, and usually engage their enemies with unconventional and creative (many times crude) weaponry. Most, if not all, have shown a particular taste for chocolate-covered donuts and grape soda."
These are some strange toys you are selling your kids.
The original Teddy Bear is wild, too. Not for us the tamed and transit-riding toy.
Dry Lambrusco is the perfect San Francisco summer wine.
Perverse, unpleasant, and ill-suited to human experience? (Actually I rather like SF summers, and this one has been positively dreamy, so you almost make me want to try Lambrusco again. Maybe at our local Pizza Hut.)
If I were Doig, I'd want to deny painting that too. It strikes me as basically a bad pastiche of this.
Doig didn't paint that piece of shit in a million years. How did this get anywhere near a courtroom?
40 is a very good question: given that a) he says he didn't b) it's not signed by him c) it's not in his style d) there was a painter called "Peter Doige" who was in the right place at the right time to paint it... how is the case still going?
(Doig liked the painting, FWIW.)
I'm actually a bit of a Doig fan. There was a huge Tate retrospective a few years ago.
38. I wouldn't buy Lambrusco at Pizza Hut. Back in the day the white stuff was marketed as an alcopop and its reputation was ruined for all time. The good stuff, as per DQ, is hard to find, at least over here, in consequence, but I bet Pizza Hut is still catering to unimaginative teenagers.
Trial's over but no verdict yet; the judge said he wanted time to think. Barely suppressed laughter in this writeup
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/peter-doigs-amazing-trial-ends-609389
Verdict due today! According to the peculiar Instagram account of anonymous roof-mounted air conditioning photography obsessive Loyola Condenser...
The lawyer for the unscrupulous plaintiffs sounds completely unhinged.
At this, Zieske gleefully declared that if the Judge wanted to hang the picture, he had "plenty of clients who could do that for you."
Hang the picture? Surely that's a bit draconian, even by American standards.
So the denial of the motion to dismiss says plaintiffs sought damages for Doig's (via his reps) "tortious interference with...prospective economic advantage by taking action that scuttled the auction of the painting," and also a declaration that Doig was the artist.
The interference consisted of two letters from Doig's people: one saying he didn't paint it and we don't want to hear about it any more, and the other reiterating that he didn't paint it and threatening to sue if there was an attempt to sell it as a Doig work. If Doig just refused to respond to the authentication queries, is there a case (whether or not he was in fact the artist)? Can you be compelled to attest to something merely to establish a market valuation?
Per 20, the value of the painting has undoubtedly increased due to the controversy, but in the (likely) case that it's a Doige, and not a Doig, not enough to cover legal costs I wouldn't think.
Can you be compelled to attest to something merely to establish a market valuation?
Well, could you drag the artist in as a witness under subpoena if the work's authenticity were ever disputed in court? But outside that, if you just wanted it authenticated so you could sell it, not sure how you would manage that.
Somebody get me a canvas, some oils, whatever you use to combine the two, and a process server who knows where Rembrandt's corpse is.
All the Bob Ross shows are on Netflix, so I got the skill part covered.
"Mr Rembrandt, I put it to you that you are dead."
(silence)
"Mr Rembrandt, are you considering the question, or are you just dead?"
(silence)
"I think I'd better take a look, my lord."
(opens coffin)
"No further questions, my lord."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XawAhUn9mZY
If I were trapped between two buildings, I'd be pretty angry if I had to wait while the rescue crew tried to impress a woman.
54 That's one helluva cock block.
||
Can someone explain why Clinton's emails are all being released? Are all public official's non-classified emails obtainable now? Is there some very special specious legal argument that a W- appointed hack went with?
>
The Loyola Condenser stuff is great*, see day 5 for instance.
*And reminds me of an old friend's punk band stage name: "Emerson Quiet Cool"
Hah. I used to make exactly the same joke, except I thought Emerson Quiet Cool sounded like a rapper.
While you're looking at the campus, you could stop and see the building mentioned in 54.
59 Ha, the band was actually a rap/punk Beastie Boys type fusion. Yeah, he was a white Jewish kid from Long Island.
That's what moving to the suburbs does to your kids.
This just makes no sense to me whatsoever:
Zieske finished his closing argument on this not-very-solid ground, asking for a judgment of $7.9 million dollars if the judge ruled Doig made the painting, and $100,000 if he ruled he did not. (The plaintiffs' appraiser Wiener had valued the painting at $6 million-8 million if it were by Doig and at $100,000 if it were not. Fletcher and Bartlow are asking for the difference if the judge rules it is the real deal, and for the $100,000 if he rules it is not, as they are contending that Doig interfered with the sale either way.
Just to piss them off Doig should go paint a replica and let them sue for copyright infringement.
That is a truly inspired idea.
The whole thing sort of reminds me of Trump and Trump voters.
"The world isn't working out the way I think it should and, in consequence, I will assert that the world is what I think it is more forcefully until everybody agrees with me."
65: then he should paint *another* replica and sign it "Doige".
No, wait, he should open source it. Announce that if _anyone_ paints a copy of the "Doige" painting, he will authenticate it as one of his own.
Ruling in Doig's favor. Disappointing lack of reporting on the plaintiff's response.
OT: K-Drum is all over this Twitter thing. http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/08/twitter-makes-total-sense-understand-properly
OT: K-Drum is all over this Twitter thing.
That was very good. I also appreciated his response to the latest Clinton e-mail stories.
70. Except of course, the universal response of the judicially defeated: "We will appeal."
70 They're moving on, having gotten their hands on some of Jeff Koone's early macaroni art.
They've also gotten a hold of a few of Damien Hierst's kindergarten Play-Doh sculptures. One of which is a shark. Or a dog turd. Or maybe it's a penis. With wings. Anyway they have it and it's totally a Hierst.
That Drum thing wouldn't have been better as a tweet, but I might have read it as one.
Please excuse the misplaced apostrophe in 74.
Just back from a long weekend at the beach.
Here is one Peter Doig painting I like
I had thought that the world of high-dollar art was not that big, and that personal contact was important (ie, reselling a painting from an important gallery requires consulting the gallery if the owner wants to do business again). Being this amazingly rude to the art world and legal world simultaneously puzzled me-- how are the plaintiffs making money from being deluded pariahs?
