Monday, August 31, 2009

Artwork of John Lennon $100 MILLION FRAUD, The Dead don't create Artwork

UPDATED: October 6, 2012

NOTE: All footnotes are enclosed with [FN ].

For additional information of interest, see the London Times' published "Oh no! Yoko colours Lennon's prints" article by Cristina Ruiz and Jon Ungoed-Thomas and "[Legacy Fine Art and Production Inc.'s Artwork of John Lennon exhibition producer] Rudy Siegel's Double Talk" summary by this scholar [at the end of this monograph]  and this link to: Art of John Lennon -forgeries- at the Waukesha Cou...




107. An Egg Hatching, “Image: 11.5” x 10” Paper: 15” x 10”, Serigraphy, Stonehenge,” p. 43, John Lennon catalogue with the byline: Pacific Edge Gallery 540 S. Coast Hwy., #112. Laguna Beach, CA 92651-2479, www.lennonart.com
AFTER 1999, POSTHUMOUSLY COLORIZED FORGERY


p.196 and 197, Skywriting by Word of Mouth by John Lennon, Copyright © 1986 by The Estate of John Lennon and Yoko Ono, ISBN 0-06-091444-0 (pbk)
BEFORE 1980, POSTHUMOUSLY PUBLISHED REPRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION

The "Artwork of John Lennon" traveling road show is a "knowing misrepresentation of the truth or concealment of a material fact to induce another to act to his or her detriment,"[FN 1] which is one legal definition of -fraud-, by his widow Yoko Ono, along with her business associates: Legacy Fine Art Production, Pacific Edge Gallery and others, to cash in at the expense of the unsuspecting consumer and legitimate artists, not to mention John Lennon's true legacy.


Since 1986, Yoko Ono and her business associates have misrepresented more than 35,000 posthumous black-and-white and/or colorized and altered forgeries for sale to the public at hundreds to thousands of dollars or more each, for a gross well over $100 million, as original works of visual art ie.,  lithographs, serigraphs, woodcuts and etchings, not to mention its' deceptive promotion as the "Artwork of John Lennon."

On page 661 of the Seventh Edition of Black's Law Dictionary, -forgery- is defined as: "The act of fraudulently making a false document or altering a real one to be used as if genuine."[FN 2]

John Lennon died in 1980.

The dead don't create artwork.


Yoko Ono began this fraud sometime around 1986 when she hired chromists (someone who copies the artist's work) to forge John Lennon's original black-and-white drawings and misrepresent those posthumous forgeries as original works of visual art ie., lithographs, serigraphs, etchings and woodcuts.

Soon after 1986, Yoko Ono found out these non-disclosed posthumous black-and-white forgeries, even when misrepresented as original works of visual art ie., lithographs, serigraphs, etchings and woodcuts, weren't selling as quickly as she liked at the prices she expected, Yoko Ono began to have posthumously colorized editions of non-disclosed forgeries made by hired chromists [someone who copies another artist's work and in this case alters it].

Eventually in the late 1990's, Yoko Ono, lost all inhibitions about John Lennon's true legacy and began authorizing not only the colorized forgeries of John Lennon's original black-and-white drawings but their forged alteration into new compositions that John Lennon could not have approved since he was still dead.

To further perpetuate this fraud, Yoko Ono authorized the posthumous application of a counterfeit John Lennon chopmark/signature to each one of these non-disclosed forgeries to create the illusion that John Lennon created and approved them, much less signed them.

The dead don't approve or sign.

In other words, Yoko Ono and her business associates wants the public to believe that John Lennon created these non-disclosed forgeries before he died or to just suspend disbelief that despite being dead somehow John Lennon can still come out with new artwork.

The enclosed monograph documents the facts behind this Artwork of John Lennon -fraud-.

Caveat Emptor!

Gary Arseneau
artist, creator of original lithographs, scholar and author
Fernandina Beach, Florida


TABLE OF CONTENTS
 INTRODUCTION
1. THE DEAD DON’T CREATE ART
2. THE DEAD DON’T SIGN
3. THE DEAD DON’T NUMBER
4. THE DEAD DON’T COLORIZE
5. THE DEAD DON'T ALTER
6. JOHN LENNON CREATED ONE LITHOGRAPH EDITION
All other "Bag One" lithographs are forgeries
7. CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE
8. NEW YORK CIVIL CODE
9. FLORIDA STATUTES
10. UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE
11. UNITED STATES POST OFFICE
Fraud and Swindles
Precedent
CONCLUSION
FOOTNOTES
PRINCIPLES (*New information and quotes)























20. The Hug, 1968, “Image: 13” x 9” Paper: 22.5” x 15”, Serigraphy, Stonehenge,” p. 8, John Lennon catalogue with the byline: Pacific Edge Gallery 540 S. Coast Hwy., #112. Laguna Beach, CA 92651-2479, www.lennonart.com
AFTER 1986, POSTHUMOUS FORGERY


1. THE DEAD DON'T CREATE ART

In the 2006 Legacy Fine Arts and Production Inc.’s www.johnlennonartwork.com/shows.html website, it stated: “The limited edition artwork in this exhibition consists of lithographs, serigraphs, and copper etchings, hand-reproduced from the original drawings" with a disclaimer at the bottom of the same webpage: "All reproductions are clearly identified as posthumously created under the control and supervision of Yoko Ono Lennon.”

WEBSITE CHANGED BY AUGUST 29, 2009
As of August 29, 2009, on Legacy Fine Art and Productions Inc.'s 2009 www.johnlennonartwork. com/shows.html website, now states: "This exhibit features an extensive collection of original drawings and hand signed pieces, as well as limited edition prints," with the same 2006 disclaimer at the bottom: "All reproductions are clearly identified as posthumously created under the control and supervision of Yoko Ono Lennon."

The terms "limited edition artwork" and "hand-reproduced" were eliminated and "limited edition prints" was substituted for "lithographs, serigraphs, and copper etchings."

Yet, Legacy Fine Art and Productions Inc.'s 2009 website continues to misrepresent, for sale, these posthumous forgeries as: "serigraphs, lithographs, copper etchings and aqua tints of John Lennon’s drawings, signed by Yoko Ono including Song Lyrics and the "'Real Love' children’s drawings sketched for his son Sean."

NOTE: Sometime in late Fall 2012, Legacy Fine Arts and Production Inc.'s posted the following statement on their website:

 http://www.johnlennonartwork.com/

So, contrary to what Yoko Ono and Legacy Fine Art and Production Inc. would ever have the public believe, John Lennon -never- created serigraphs, etchings, woodcuts and lithographs (with one lifetime exception titled "frontspiece"). As with any original works of visual art, original printmaking requires the living artist's hands-on participation and can -never- be created posthumously.

U.S. CUSTOMS
That factual perspective is confirmed in a May 2006 U.S. Customs Informed Compliance Publication. In part, it states: “original engravings, prints and lithographs - means - wholly executed by hand by the artist - excluding any mechanical or photomechanical process.”[FN 3]

Unfortunately, because of the decades long and pervasive abuse of terminology, not only by Yoko Ono and her business associates, but too many to mention in the art industry as a whole, the public has been mislead and conditioned to have unwitting misconceptions on what constitutes artwork versus reproductions, not to mention forgeries.

Therefore, throughout this monograph, it is imperative to document the definitions of key terms, statutory laws and published references to empower you, the public, to understand these contentious issues of authenticity so you may decide for yourselves if there is merit to these allegations.

WHAT IS A REPRODUCTION?
On page 350 in Ralph Mayer’s HarperCollins Dictionary of Art Terms and Techniques, -reproduction- is defined as: “A general term for any copy, likeness, or counterpart of an original work of art or of a photograph, done in the same medium as the original or in another, and done by someone other than the creator of the original.”[FN 4]

So, reproductions of John Lennon's original black-and-white drawings, whether lifetime or posthumous, -at best-, would be black-and-white reproductions "done by someone other than [John Lennon] the creator of the original [black-and-white doodle]."

WHAT IS ACTUALLY IN THE EXHIBIT?
This so-called "Artwork of John Lennon" exhibition and sale usually contains. -at best-. only 3 to 4 possible original John Lennon drawings, a possible lithograph from the lifetime edition of 300 titled "frontspiece" by John Lennon and tens of thousands of non-disclosed posthumous forgeries, colorized and alter into new compositions that are signed and numbered by someone other than the dead John Lennon.

What proof is there that they are posthumous forgeries, much less that Yoko Ono is directly involved in this fraud?






 





Front Cover for the John Lennon catalogue and page 1, Published by Pacific Edge Gallery 540 S. Coast Hway., #112 - Laguna Beach CA 92651- 2479 - www.lennonart.com) 
JOHN LENNON CATALOGUE


Page 1, Excerpt from the John Lennon catalogue, Published by Pacific Edge Gallery
540 S. Coast Hwy., #112 - Laguna Beach CA 92651- 2479 - www.lennonart.com)
 
EXCERPT FROM JOHN LENNON CATALOGUE

PUBLISHED AFTER 1986
On page 1 of Pacific Edge Gallery's published John Lennon catalogue, Yoko Ono's business associate Pacific Edge Gallery published the following statement: "During 1986, Yoko Ono Lennon decided to share John's artistic genius with the public by publishing the first in a series of prints entitled, 'This is My Story Both Humble and True,' followed with 'Bag One Continued...," "Dakota Days," "Karuizawa Series" and "ai: Japan Through John Lennon Eyes."[FN 5]


"During 1986," the dead John Lennon (d. 1980) did not have anymore "artistic genius."


52. Samuari, 1977, “Image: 9” x 8” Paper: 14” x 11”, Serigraphy, Stonehenge,” p. 23, John Lennon catalogue with the byline: Pacific Edge Gallery 540 S. Coast Hwy., #112. Laguna Beach, CA 92651-2479, www.lennonart.com
AFTER 1986, POSTHUMOUSLY COLORIZED FORGERY


IF JOHN LENNON DIDN’T CREATE THEM, WHO DID?
A good majority of these non-disclosed forgeries of John Lennon’s artwork were forged by ateliers in Toronto, Canada and imported into the United States.




CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICITY

The above copy of a Certificate of Authenticity, for the titled -Samurai- listing John Lennon as the "artist," states: "This is to certify the artwork herein described is a limited edition woodcut/collagraph/serigraph - printing has been completed by hand, through the courtesy of Atelier GF, Toronto, Canada on Stonehenge paper."

Additionally, it states: "There are 300 in each edition, with 25 Artist Proofs, 6 Printer Proofs and 5 Hors Commerce. Year of publication is 1992."

John Lennon died in 1980. The dead don't create artwork.

So, in 1992, who did Yoko Ono hire to actually forged this -Samurai- edition of non-disclosed forgeries that is being falsely attributed as the -artwork- created by someone (John Lennon) who was some 12 years dead?

ATELIER GF
This is answered in a September 4, 1998 letter to this author from the Atelier GF “Fine Art Printer” Robert Game. Robert Game is a chromist (someone who copies another artist's work), who was hired by Yoko Ono to posthumously forge work falsely attributed to a dead John Lennon. In part, Robert Game wrote: “In collection of Printer’s Proofs and have many favourites, some for their artistic, some for technical solutions. For the John Lennon images, it was interesting to create the woodblocks for “SAMURAI” or the background for “HE TRIED TO FACE REALITY.”[FN 6]

Atelier GF's Robert Game devastatingly admits that he posthumously forged, -by his hand-, John Lennon's black-and-white drawing in multiple woodblocks that were used to print an edition of non-disclosed colorized forgeries titled "SAMURAI."

So, would Atelier GF's Robert Game's posthumous forging of an edition falsely attributed to a dead John Lennon, as original works of visual art ie., woodcuts, be considered "act of fraudulently making a false document or altering a real one to be used as if genuine?"[FN 7]

Remember, Yoko Ono's Bag One Inc.'s "Certificate of Authenticity" (shown above), for this so-called edition of woodcuts titled "SAMURAI," lists -John Lennon- as the artist.

The dead don't woodcut





 

Detail from The Hug [FN 8]
 [Photograph at www.artbrokerage.com/retail/ lennon/lennon_thehug.htm]
POSTHUMOUSLY APPLIED COUNTERFEIT JOHN LENNON CHOP-MARK AND EMBOSSED SIGNATURE 

2. THE DEAD DON'T SIGN
Another of Yoko Ono’s business associates Pacific Edge Gallery, on their website[FN 9], states: “In 1986, Yoko Ono, acting for the John Lennon Estate, began releasing limited editions of some of the most meaningful drawings, using only fine art printing techniques - Each limited edition fine art print is authenticated by John Lennon's embossed signature, the embossed printer and publisher's mark, Yoko Ono Lennon's hand-signature, and John's personal chop mark.”

WHAT IS A CHOP-MARK?
Additionally, on Pacific Edge Gallery’s website, it defines a “chop mark” as: “Artists in the Orient sign their works with an individual, patented stamp known as a chop. John Lennon's, which is hand-stamped in red on each edition, was designed by him to read "Like a Cloud, Beautiful Sound."[FN 10]

WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF SIGNATURE AND SIGN?
On page 1387 in the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -signature- is defined as: “A person’s name or mark written by that person or at the person’s direction.”[FN 11] On page 1386, in the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -sign- is defined as: “to identify (a record) by means of a signature, mark, or other symbol with the intent to authenticate it as an act or agreement of the person identifying it.”[FN 12]

WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF AUTHENTICATE?
On page 127 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -authenticate- is defined as: “To prove the genuineness of (a thing).”[FN 13]

WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF GENUINE?
On page 695 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -genuine- is defined as: “(Of a thing) authentic or real; something that has the quality of what it is purported to be.”[FN 14]

Since John Lennon died tragically in 1980, in 1986 his so-called “embossed signature” and “chop [mark]” could not have been “written by [him] or at [his] direction” to -authenticate- anything.

WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF COUNTERFEIT?
On page 354, in the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -counterfeit- is defined as: “To forge, copy, or imitate (something) without a right to do so and with the purpose of deceiving or defrauding.”[FN 15]

Therefore, rhetorically, would the posthumous application of a so-called “John Lennon’s embossed signature” and “chop [mark],” to non-disclosed posthumous colorized and altered forgeries, be considered “counterfeit?”




 

(Detail from The Hug photograph at www.artbrokerage.com/retail/ lennon/lennon_thehug.htm)
POSTHUMOUSLY APPLIED COUNTERFEIT EDITION NUMBER AND ALLEGED YOKO ONO SIGNATURE

3.THE DEAD DON'T NUMBER
On Yoko Ono’s business associate Legacy Production Inc.’s 2005 website[FN 16], it states: “The limited edition artwork in this exhibition consists of lithographs, serigraphs, and copper etchings, hand-reproduced from the original drawings.”

Additionally, on page one of Yoko Ono’s published 1991 Artwork of John Lennon catalogue, it states: “During 1986 Yoko Ono Lennon decided to share John’s artistic genius with the public by publishing the first series of prints entitled “'This is My Story Both Humble and True,' followed in 1988 with “Bag One Continued...” and the “Dakota Days.” On page 25, it states: “The edition size on all the prints is 300, with 25 A.P.’s, with the exception of #35 which has 150 prints with 25 A.P.’s.”[FN 17]

U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW - WORK OF VISUAL ART
Under U.S. Copyright Law 101. Definitions, a “work of visual art” is defined as: “a painting, drawing, print or sculpture, existing in a single copy, in a limited edition of 200 copies or fewer that are consecutively numbered by the author and bear the signature or other identifying mark of the author.”[FN 18]

Once again, since John Lennon died tragically in 1980, in 1986 this so-called “artwork” could not have been “consecutively numbered by [John Lennon],” much less “bear [his] signature.”

In other words, under U.S. Copyright Law, if John Lennon did not create them, number them and signed them, they would not be considered original “work[s] of visual art” by him.

TWENTY-FIVE ARTIST PROOFS
As documented earlier, in 1986 Yoko Ono also began offering for sale, as part of these so-called -limited editions-, “25 A.P.s” ie., artist proofs.

WHAT IS AN ARTIST PROOF?
On page 22 of Ralph Mayer’s 1991 The Harper Collins Art Terms and Techniques Dictionary, -artist proof- is defined as: “one of the PROOFS in a LIMITED EDITIONS of ORIGINAL PRINTS. An artist’s proof must bear the artist’s signature or mark and, since the early 20th century, is usually numbered.”[FN 19]

WHAT IS A FAKE?
On page 617 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -fake- is defined as: “something that is not what it purports to be.”[FN 20]

So, since the dead don't create original printmaking, much less sign, number or proof anything, would the promotion of non-disclosed posthumous forgeries as -artist proofs-, be "something that is not what it purports to be?"





















 52. Two Virgins, 1969, “Image: 18” x 24” Paper: 22” x 30”, Serigraphy, Antique Folio,” p. 27, John Lennon catalogue with the byline: Pacific Edge Gallery 540 S. Coast Hwy., #112. Laguna Beach, CA 92651-2479, www.lennonart.com
AFTER 1986, POSTHUMOUSLY COLORIZED FORGERY





















p. 38 and 39, Skywriting by Word of Mouth by John Lennon, Copyright © 1986 by The Estate of John Lennon and Yoko Ono, ISBN 0-06-091444-0 (pbk)
BEFORE 1980, POSTHUMOUSLY PUBLISHED REPRODUCTION


4.THE DEAD DON'T COLORIZE
On Yoko Ono’s business associates Legacy Production Inc.’s old 2002 website it states: “The OnoLennon collaborations is still taking place. Yoko has blended her art with John's in the color renditions within this collection. She personally hand-colors maquettes of the original drawings, from which the atelier reproduces the shading for the final editions.”[FN 21]



Page 28-29, Excerpt from the John Lennon's In His Own Write book published by Simon and Schuster, New York in 1964 (Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 64-3385) versus "{One of} two new releases from the John Lennon Estate display John’s artistic brilliance at capturing meaning with a minimum of lines. 'Come Together' is a plea for world peace and understanding using the unique whimsical characters that Lennon drew throughout his life. Each hand pulled serigraph measures 20" x 22" and is individually signed by Yoko Ono Lennon and limited to an edition of 375 worldwide."
(This description was acquired from one of Yoko Ono's business partner's Pacific Edge Gallery. The link is: http://www.lennonart.com/pages/newreleases.php
BLACK-AND-WHITE REPRODUCTION VERSUS COLORIZED FORGERY

"[One of] two new releases from the John Lennon Estate display John’s artistic brilliance at capturing meaning with a minimum of lines. 'Come Together' is a plea for world peace and understanding using the unique whimsical characters that Lennon drew throughout his life. Each hand pulled serigraph measures 20" x 22" and is individually signed by Yoko Ono Lennon and limited to an edition of 375 worldwide." (This description was acquired from one of Yoko Ono's business partner's Pacific Edge Gallery. The link is: http://www.lennonart.com/pages/newreleases.php
AFTER 1986, POSTHUMOUSLY COLORIZED FORGERY


 
























Page 28-29, Excerpt from the John Lennon's "In His Own Write" book published by Simon and Schuster, New York in 1964 (Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 64-3385)
1964 PUBLISHED BLACK-AND-WHITE REPRODUCTION

BLACK-AND- WHITE IN 1964
The above John Lennon black-and-white drawing, was reproduced, in his 1964 book titled: In His On Write by John Lennon on the page 28 opposite his chapter titled: "Randolf's Party" on page 29.[FN 22]

COLORIZED AFTER 1986

Sometime after 1986 some six years or more after John Lennon death in 1980, Yoko Ono decided to colorize and/or authorize the colorization a chromist-made forgery of that black-and-white drawing, title it Come Together and misrepresent that forgery as an original work of visual art ie., -serigraph-.

Yoko Ono hubris seems to know no boundaries.








The above non-disclosed posthumously colorized forgery titled Come Together was not -even- reproduced directly in black-and-white from John Lennon's original black-and-white drawing or the reproduction of it on page 28 in John Lennon's published 1964 book titled In His Own Write.

Once again to belabor a devastating fact, Yoko Ono hired a chromist [someone who copies another artist's work] to posthumously redraw by their hands and fingers, much less talent, John Lennon's original black-and-white Come Together drawing and/or the reproduction of it in John Lennon's published 1964 book titled In His Own Write.

The above photographic details of the posthumous colorized forgery vs the John Lennon's lifetime Come Together drawing and/or reproduction of it confirms that devastating fact.

Yoko Ono has no shame.

ENHANCE THE MEANING OF THE ORIGINAL DRAWINGS
On Pacific Edge Gallery’s 2005  website, it states: “Continuing a collaboration that was at the heart of their relationship throughout their life together, Yoko Ono, a world-renowned artist herself, chose colors that she felt would enhance the meaning of the original drawings.”[FN 23]

WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF COLLABORATE?
On page 66 in the Webster New World Pocket Dictionary, -collaborate- is defined as: “to work together.”[FN 24]

WORK OF VISUAL ART EXCLUDES COPIES THAT ARE COLLABORATIVE
The Visual Artist’s Rights Act (H.R. bill 5316), which amended the Copyright Act of 1976, was signed into law on December 1, 1990. In the 1995 The Visual Artist’s Business and Legal Guide compiled and edited by Gregory T. Victoroff, Esq., attorney Katherine M. Thompson specifically addresses issue of “collaboration” in the 1990 Visual Artist’s Rights Act. On page 28, the attorney wrote: “The VARA amends the Copyright Act to create a definition for a “work of visual art.” According to Section 602, -excluded are items - that generally exist in multiple copies and are collaborative in nature.”[FN 25]

In other words, a living Yoko Ono can’t posthumously collaborate with a dead John Lennon.




John Lennon real love, The Drawings for Sean, "Adapted by Al Naclerio from drawings by John Lennon, © 1999 by Yoko Ono Lennon

5. THE DEAD DON'T ALTER

In 1999, Yoko Ono published a book titled: Real Love - The Drawings for Sean that on the second page, inside the front cover, stated: “Adapted by Al Naclerio from drawings by John Lennon - Copyright @ 1999 by Yoko Ono Lennon.”[FN 26]

"Adapted from drawings by John Lennon" in 1999 by Al Naclerio-, what does that really mean?





















89. A Herd Moving, “Image: 11.5” x 10” Paper: 15” x 10”, Serigraphy, Stonehenge,” p. 41, John Lennon catalogue with the byline: Pacific Edge Gallery 540 S. Coast Hwy., #112. Laguna Beach, CA 92651-2479, www.lennonart.com
AFTER 1999, POSTHUMOUSLY COLORIZED FORGERY




Pages 62 and 63In His Own Write
published by Simon and Schuster, Inc.
Copyright © 1964 by John Lennon

1964 PUBLISHED BLACK-AND-WHITE REPRODUCTION




CUT, PASTED, COLORIZED IN ALTERED COMPOSITIONS
Sometime before 1999 Yoko Ono authorized Al Naclerio to posthumously colorized and altered John Lennon's true artistic legacy. Al Naclerio took John Lennon’s original 1964 black-and-white drawings and cut, pasted and colorized into new altered and forged compositions with a counterfeit titles applied, for example: A herd moving along with counterfeit John Lennon chop-mark/signatures posthumously applied to create the illusion he created it, signed and titled it, much less approved it.

Remember, John Lennon died 19 years earlier in 1980.

The dead don't create artwork.

Yet, in the INTRODUCTION for this 1999 John Lennon real love The Drawings for Sean book, Yoko Ono wrote: “I began finding John and Sean drawing together. John would draw something and explain to Sean what it was. - John would ask Sean what he thought John was drawing. Sean would say, ‘That’s a horsey,”’ and that would become the title of John’s drawing.”[FN 27]

LEGACY FINE ART AND PRODUCTIONS
Yet, this misrepresentation of John Lennon’s true legacy is perpetuated by Yoko Ono’ business associate Legacy Fine Arts and Productions on their website. Under the subtitle: “Real Love - The Pieces,” one of which is titled: A herd moving, it states: “These drawings were done in the last years of John’s life, with and for his son Sean, to teach him about life and to give him an appreciation for art.”[FN 28]

PACIFIC EDGE GALLERY
Additionally, this misrepresentation of John Lennon’s true legacy is also perpetuated by another of Yoko Ono’s business associates Pacific Edge Gallery on their  website. In part, it states: “‘Real Love’ Drawings for Sean {are} twenty-two new editions from John Lennon's new book of drawings released on Random House in June. These unique playful and colorful drawings were drawn for John's son, Sean, to share with him the fun of drawing and creating.”[FN 29]



96. Crabs Crabbing, “Image: 11.5” x 10” Paper: 15” x 10”, Serigraphy, Stonehenge,” p. 41, John Lennon catalogue with the byline: Pacific Edge Gallery 540 S. Coast Hwy., #112. Laguna Beach, CA 92651-2479, www.lennonart.com
AFTER 1999, POSTHUMOUSLY COLORIZED FORGERY



Page 130 and 131, In His Own Write and A Spaniard In The Works by John Lennon
published by Simon and Schuster, Inc.
Copyright © 1964, 1965 by John Lennon
 
1964 PUBLISHED REPRODUCTION


So, what was the real motivation behind the posthumous colorization and non-disclosed alterations of John Lennon’s black-and-white drawings into new colorized and altered compositions?

YOKO ONO CRITICIZED FOR ADDING COLOR
In the July 16, 1997 Detroit News “in loving color: Lennon art with an Ono flair -- comes to Ann Arbor” article by Art Critic Joy Hakanson Colby, Yoko Ono describes the actual events that led to the colorizing of the so-called John Lennon “lithographs” and “screenprints.” It first quotes Yoko as stating: “Yes, I’ve been criticized for adding color to John’s black-and-white drawings,” she acknowledges, “but when I explain why it happened, people usually understand.”[FN 30]

Did Yoko Ono really plan all along that the posthumous colorizing of reproductions of John Lennon’s black-and-white drawings to “enhance the meaning of the original drawings?”

COLORIZING LENNON’S DRAWINGS WOULD COMMAND ATTENTION
The article continues: “Ono has been touring Lennon’s lithographs and screenprints for the last 10 years, making the work available to the public that reveres him as a musician and raising money for charitable causes. Bookings are handled by a team of organizers who want to give the work as much visibility as possible. When a gallery wanted to display one of Lennon’s prints in the window to advertise the show inside, it was determined that the little black-and-white line drawing was too slight to command attention. Ono was informed that color would achieve the desired effect.”[FN 31]

YOKO ONO A PURIST UP TILL 1986?
Yoko Ono is quoted as stating: “I was shocked when they showed me a drawing that had been colored in terrible, screaming hues. I told them what they had done was sacrilege,” Ono recalls. - Up to that point I had been a purist. But I figured if some of John’s drawings needed color, I’d do it myself.”[FN 32]

In other words, the real motivation for the posthumous colorization of reproductions of John Lennon’s black-and-white drawings was because they couldn’t sell them. The bologna about “enhancing {their} meaning” is just part of a larger cover-up to sell these non-disclosed forgeries at $500 to $8,000 or more each to the unsuspecting public.

Yoko Ono has no shame.










 











John Lennon, Bag One Frontice Piece, Limited Edition Print, Lithograph on Paper, 1969, Size 29 x 22 in, Hand Signed (Lower right), Edition # 87/300, $12,000 OBO
http://www.artbrokerage.com/art/lennon/lennon_5269.php

1969, ORIGINAL LITHOGRAPH



6. LENNON CREATED ONE LITHOGRAPH EDITION
John Lennon only created one and only one authentic edition (300 with 25 artist's proofs) of lithographs during his lifetime (1969) known as the frontispiece.

ANTHONY FAWCETT, PERSONAL ASSISTANT TO JOHN LENNON
This confirmed by Anthony Fawcett’s published 1976 book titled: One Day At A Time. On page 171 of his book, the former art critic Anthony Fawcett, who worked full time as a personal assistant to John Lennon and Yoko Ono, “running their office, organizing their daily schedules, cataloging their writings and films”[FN 33] from early 1969 till May 1970, wrote: "John became more involved, in his on and off way, and came to visit Curwen Studio to see the printing process in action. While there, he created the image for the frontispiece, a simple sketch of himself crouched on the ground holding Yoko, which he drew directly onto a zinc plate.”[FN 34]

YOKO ONO CONFIRMS LENNON ONLY CREATED ONE LITHOGRAPH EDITION
This is additionally confirmed, with or without intent, by Yoko Ono in the January 11 -January 17, 1996 Tucson Weekly published “Matisse, Picasso --And Lennon?” article by Margaret Regan. In the article, the reporter wrote: “Lennon himself made only one lithograph in his life that she knows of, Ono says.”[FN 35]

ALL OTHER "BAG ONE" LITHOGRAPHS ARE NON-DISCLOSED REPRODUCTIONS
All other so-called “Bag One" lithographs are actually non-disclosed reproductions of John Lennon's drawing that were reproduced by the Curwin Studios in England.

JOHN LENNON DRAWINGS REPRODUCED
This is backhandedly confirmed on page 164 of Anthony Fawcett’s published 1976 book titled: One Day At A Time, where the author wrote: “John would be able to draw or paint in his usual manner. The images could later be transferred from the paper onto sensitized zinc plates by means of an advanced technical process, and the lithographs printed in the traditional way.”[FN 36]

As noted earlier, under May 2006 U.S. Customs regulations, a lithograph must be “wholly executed by the artist” and “excluding any mechanical and photomechanical process.”

Therefore, the transfer of John Lennon’s original drawings and paintings to “sensitized zinc plates” and the subsequent printing would be reproductions and not -lithographs- as, at best, misunderstood by Anthony Fawcett.

JOHN LENNON PARTICIPATED IN THE FRAUD
In other words, in 1969, John Lennon, for “forty pounds each or five hundred and fifty pounds each for set,”[FN 37] misrepresented over 3,000 non-disclosed reproductions of his drawings as original works of visual art ie., lithographs.

Remember, on page 661 of the Seventh Edition of Black's Law Dictionary, -forgery- is defined as: "The act of fraudulently making a false document or altering a real one to be used as if genuine."

John Lennon had no shame.























1. Bag One, 1969, “Image: 11” x 14” Paper: 19” x 22”, Stone lithography w/Chine Colle,” p. 2, John Lennon catalogue with the byline: Pacific Edge Gallery 540 S. Coast Hwy., #112. Laguna Beach, CA 92651-2479, www.lennonart.com
NON-DISCLOSED POSTHUMOUSLY TINTED FORGERY


300 OR MORE NON-DISCLOSED POSTHUMOUS FORGERIES
As documented in Yoko Ono's published in a 1986 or later John Lennon catalogue, Yoko Ono authorized a posthumously colorized and altered edition of non-disclosed forgeries from the only legitimate lithograph edition titled frontispiece created by John Lennon during his lifetime. Those non-disclosed posthumous forgeries were given a different title: "Bag One," with a overtly misleading "1969" date each with a posthumously applied counterfeit red John Lennon chop-mark signature stamped in the bottom right corner of the paper in a bogus numbered edition of 300 with an illegible Yoko Ono Lennon signature applied.

Yoko Ono has no shame.
























JOHN LENNON BAG ONE LIMITED EDITION LITHOGRAPH
 Auction #197 - Item 2599, Price: $115.00 (Includes 15% Buyer's Premium), 23.5 x 35.5" frame contains pressed board paper with screenprint/lithographed print of John Lennon art from his 1970 drawing of himself and Yoko Ono. Yoko's trademark red stamp seal in bottom right-hand corner of print area marks her approval. Print is #154 of 5,000 and has facsimile John Lennon signature below print. Released in 1986. 
http://www.hakes.com/item.asp?ListID=105&ItemNo=78732#pictures
NOT A LITHOGRAPH BUT AN [AFTER 1986] FORGERY





















Bag One -framed- Collectible Lithograph Poster (front)#1869/5,000
http://www.hakes.com/images.asp?ItemNo=78732&ImageNo=001
NOT A POSTER BUT AN [AFTER 1986] FORGERY

















Bag One Collectible Lithograph Poster (info on back) "John originally created a portfolio of drawings in 1969 which he entitled "Bag One." These drawings depicted John and Yoko's wedding and honeymoon and he presented them to her as a wedding gift. The Bag One suite represents the only hand signed prints available by John Lennon. Later editions were authenticated by John Lennon's embossed signature, the embossed printer and publisher's mark, Yoko Ono Lennon's signature, and John's personal chop mark."
http://cgi.ebay.com/4-SIGNED-SEALED-JOHN-LENNON-LITHOGRAPHS-BEATLES-BAG-ONE_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQitemZ250448942931 
NOT LIMITED/SIGNED BUT AN [AFTER 1986] FORGERY

8,000 OR MORE NON-DISCLOSED POSTHUMOUS FORGERIES
These so-called "later editions" of John Lennon's frontispiece, posthumously reproduced, misrepresent as  "lithographs" to "collectible lithograph posters" with the title "Bag One," can -never- be authenticated by a counterfeit "John Lennon embossed signature," much less "John's personal chop mark."

THREE SEPARATE EDITIONS IMPEACHES THEIR LIMITATION
Additionally, the three posthumous editions (after 1986) of John Lennon's frontispiece, now a.k.a. Bag One, are in bogus numbered editions of -300-, -5,000-, and -3,000-.

Since, John Lennon (d 1980) was dead when these three editions were posthumously reproduced after 1986, who numbered them, much less applied the counterfeited John Lennon signatures and chop marks?

In other words, John Lennon's lifetime oeuvre has been skewed by Yoko Ono in her ever expanding avarice to cash in selling non-disclosed posthumous forgeries as John Lennon "lithographs”[FN 38], much less as limited editions.

7.CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE
In the State of California under California Civil Code 1741-1745, it states: “California law provides for disclosure in writing of information concerning - whether the multiple is a reproduction” {when} “offered for sale or sold at wholesale or retail for one hundred dollars ($100) or more, exclusive of any frame.”[FN 39]

The potential penalties for violation of California Civil Code statutes may include but not limited to -refund-interest-treble damages-court costs-expert witness fees-attorney fees- and potential $1,000 fine per occurrence.

Before Legacy Productions Inc. a.k.a. Legacy Fine Arts and Productions Inc. move to West Palm Beach, Florida{14} in 2005, they operated this so-called “Artwork of John Lennon” exhibit out of the following location: “632 Third Street - Santa Rosa, California 95404.”

Another of Yoko Ono's business associate Pacific Edge Gallery is located at 540 S. Coast Highway #112, Laguna Beach, California 92651 with the (949) 494-0491 telephone number and website: www.pacificedgegallery.com .


8. NEW YORK CIVIL CODE
Under New York Civil Code 15.01 (2.) states: “Article fifteen of the New York arts and cultural affairs law provides for disclosure in writing of certain information concerning multiples of prints and photographs when sold for more than one hundred dollars ($100) - whether the multiple is a reproduction.”[FN 40]

The penalties for violation of New York Civil Code statutes under 15.15 may include but not limited to -refund-treble damages-court costs-expert witness fees-attorney fees- and not to mention potential civil fines.[FN 41]

In the State of New York under New York Civil Code 11.01, -counterfeit- is defined as: “a work of fine art or multiple made, altered or copied, with or without intent to deceive, in such a manner that it appears or is claimed to have an authorship which it does not in fact possess.”[FN 42]

Yoko Ono’s company Bag One Arts Inc. is located at 110 West 79th Street, New York, NY 10024-6402 with the (212) 595-5537 telephone number.

Therefore, the question is: “Are Yoko Ono and her business associates -alter{ing}- the so-called "Artwork of John Lennon" they offer for sale, “in such a manner that it appears or is claimed to have an authorship which it does not in fact possess?”

9. FLORIDA STATUTES
Under Florida Statutes 817.034 “Florida Communications Fraud Act” under “DEFINITIONS” (3d), it states: "Scheme to defraud" means a systematic, ongoing course of conduct with intent to defraud one or more persons, or with intent to obtain property from one or more persons by false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises or willful misrepresentations of a future act.”[FN 43]

The potential penalties for such conduct, under ”OFFENSES “(4), states: “(a) Any person who engages in a scheme to defraud and obtains property thereby is guilty of organized fraud, punishable as follows: 1. If the amount of property obtained has an aggregate value of $50,000 or more, the violator is guilty of a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. 2. If the amount of property obtained has an aggregate value of $20,000 or more, but less than $50,000, the violator is guilty of a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. 3. If the amount of property obtained has an aggregate value of less than $20,000, the violator is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.”[FN 44]

Would the sale of non-disclosed forgeries, in the State of Florida and misrepresented as the “Artwork of John Lennon for hundreds to thousands of dollars or more each,” be considered a "scheme to defraud?"

Yoko Ono's business associate Legacy Fine Arts and Productions is located at 330 Clematis Street, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 with a (561) 651-1156 telephone number and website: www.johnlennonartwork.com .

10. UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE
In September 1998 Art World News trade magazine, the attorney Paul Winick (partner in the New York office of Thelen, Marrin, Johnson and Bridges), who specializes in intellectual property law, litigation and represents galleries, publishers and artists, wrote the article "Certificates of Authenticity: Dealer Liability."[FN 45]

In his article he explains the application of the Uniform Commercial Code as it applies to the “sales of most forms of visual art.” The author wrote: “UCC express warranty arises from two sources: The description of the goods given by the seller, and the seller statements made to induce the sale.” Those statements are said to become part of the “basis of the bargain” made between buyer and seller and, therefore, a basis for legal action if the description or statements turn out later to have been false.”[FN 46]

The author also wrote: “Warranties need not depend on the sale document and can arise in statements made in advertisements or catalogues, so long as the buyer relied on those statements in formulating the bargain with the seller.”[FN 47] and that “Warranties are applicable regardless of fault or intent. It is no defense that the seller did not mean to make a misstatement, or that he thought the misstatement to be true. If the goods (the artwork) do not conform to the promise made (the warranty), the seller is liable, whether or not he knew it to be true.”[FN 48]

When it comes to “disclaimers,” Paul Winick wrote: “Disclaimers are not viewed favorably by courts and, unless there is some way to reconcile the disclaimer and the representation, the disclaimer is disregarded and the representation is given effect.”[FN 49]

REPRESENTATION VERSUS DISCLOSURE
On Legacy Production Inc.’s 2006 website, it makes the following representation: “The limited edition artwork in this exhibition consists of lithographs, serigraphs, and copper etchings, hand-reproduced from the original drawings." and then makes the folowing disclosure: "All reproductions are clearly identified as posthumously created under the control and supervision of Yoko Ono Lennon.”[FN 50]

WHAT IS MEANT BY REPRESENTATION?
On page 1303 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -representation- is defined as: “A presentation of fact - either by words or by conduct - made to induce someone to act, esp to enter into a contract.”[FN 51]


On page 476 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -disclosure- is defined as: “The act or process of making known something that was previously unknown.”[FN 52] 

For the Yoko Ono and her business associate Legacy Production Inc. to make a -representation- in the title of this exhibit “artwork” then make the -disclosure- hidden in the small print of their website that in reality the so-called “artwork” are posthumous “reproductions,” as if these concepts were interchangeable, would be, at best, “an inference or conclusion that does not logically follow from the premises”[FN 53] which is one legal definition of -non-sequitur-.

WHAT IS FRAUD?
On page 670 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -fraud- is defined as: “a knowing misrepresentation of the truth or concealment of a material fact to induce another to act to his or her detriment.”[FN 54]

So, would a Yoko Ono and her business associates Legacy Production Inc. and Pacific Edge Gallery misrepresentation of posthumous colorized and altered forgeries, much less non-disclosed reproductions, as -artwork- be potentially committing “a knowing misrepresentation of the truth or concealment of a material fact to induce another to act to his or her detriment?”

11. UNITED STATES POST OFFICE
In Section 1341, Fraud and Swindles of the UNITED STATES POSTAL INSPECTION SERVICE, it states: “Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representation or promises, or to sell, dispose of, loan, exchange, alter, give away, distribute, supply, or furnish or procure for unlawful use any counterfeit or spurious coin, obligation, security, or other article, or anything represented to be or intimated or held out to be such counterfeit or spurious article, for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice or attempting so to do, places in any post office or authorized depository for mail matter, any matter or thing whatever to be sent or delivered by the Postal Service, or deposits or causes to be deposited any matter or thing whatever to sent or delivered by any private or commercial interstate carrier, or takes or receives therefrom, any such matter or thing, or knowingly causes to be delivered by mail or such carrier according to the direction thereon, or at the place at which it is directed to be delivered by the person to whom it is addressed, any such matter or thing, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. If the violation affects a financial institution, such person shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both.”[FN 55]

PRECEDENT
In the March 17, 2004 News-10-Now’s “US Attorney’s Office investigates art fraud” story by Carmen Grant, Assistant U.S. Attorney Lisa Fletcher is quoted as stating: “What we found is that Anthony Marone and William Yager conspired with one another, since at least as far back as 1999, to post on ebay for auction works of art that they represented to be original by original famous artists, and what they actually sold was counterfeit works of art. By doing that they committed several federal offenses including conspiracy to commit wire fraud and mail fraud.”[FN 56]

Would Yoko Ono’s and her business associates Legacy Production Inc.’s a.k.a Legacy Fine Arts and Productions and Pacific Edge Gallery’s promotion and sale of non-disclosed colorized and altered forgeries, much less reproductions, as the Artwork of John Lennon through their websites be considered “wire fraud?”

CONCLUSION
What needs to be accomplished is the full and honest disclosure to these contentious issues of authenticity with the promotion and sale by the Yoko Ono, her business associates Legacy Production Inc. a.k.a. Legacy Fine Arts and Productions, Pacific Edge Gallery and others, of non-disclosed posthumous colorized and altered forgeries, much less reproductions, falsely attributed to a dead John Lennon and misrepresented as the Artwork of John Lennon.

Remember, “The act of fraudulently making a false document or altering a real one to be used as if genuine” is one legal definition of -forgery-.

In the absence of such full and honest disclosure, serious questions of law and the penalties they exact may come into play for all who participate, much less profit, from this Artwork of John Lennon -fraud-.

The reputations and legacy of living and past artists, present and future art gallery patrons and the art-buying public deserve the re-establishment of the obvious; that the living presence and participation of the artist to once again be required, as it always should have been, to create the piece of art attributable to the artist if indeed it is attributed to them, much less purported to have been signed by them.


FOOTNOTES:
1. Copyright © 1999, By West Group, ISBN 0-314-22864-0

2. Ibid

3.Works of Art, Collector’s Pieces Antiques, and Other Cultural Property * An Informed Compliance Publication * U.S. Customs May 2006 “The expression “original engravings, prints and lithographs” means impressions produced directly, in black and white or in color, of one or of several plates wholly executed by the artist, irrespective of the process or of the material employed by him, but excluding any mechanical or photomechanical process.”

4. Copyright © 1991 by Bena Mayer, ISBN 0-06-461012-8 (pbk.)

5. John Lennon catalogue, Published by Pacific Edge Gallery 540 S. Coast Hwy., #112 - Laguna Beach CA 92651- 2479 - www.lennonart.com

6. Robert Game. Susan Farquhar . Fine Art Printers, 512 Lansdowne Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M6H 3Y3, 416 588-7399

7. Copyright © 1999, By West Group, ISBN 0-314-22864-0

8.http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=20148&item=3774421395 &rd=1

9. www.lennon art.com/lennonas.htm Pacific Edge Gallery

10. Ibid

11. Copyright © 1999, By West Group, ISBN 0-314-22864-0

12. Ibid

13. ibid

14. Ibid

15. Ibid

16. www.johnlennonartwork.com/shows.html

17.  John Lennon catalogue, Published by Pacific Edge Gallery 540 S. Coast Hwy., #112 - Laguna Beach CA 92651- 2479 - www.lennonart.com

18. www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#101

19. Copyright © 1991 by Bena Mayer, ISBN 0-06-461012-8 (pbk.)

20. Copyright © 1999, By West Group, ISBN 0-314-22864-0

21.www.johnlennonartwork.com/frame.html Legacy Production Inc’s old 2002 website

22. In His Own Write, Copyright © 1964 by John Lennon, Published by Simon Schuster, Inc., Rockefeller Center, 630 Fifth Avenue, New York 20, N.Y., Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 64-3385

23. www.lennonart.com/lennonas.htm

24. Copyright © 1999, By West Group, ISBN 0-314-22864-0

25, Publisher: Prentice Hall (October 20, 1994), ISBN-10: 0133045935, ISBN-13: 978-0133045932

26. John Lennon real love, The Drawings for Sean, "Adapted by Al Naclerio from drawings by John Lennon, © 1999 by Yoko Ono Lennon,  Publisher: Random House Books for Young Readers (May 18, 1999), ASIN: B008T1NCSE

27. Ibid

28 www.johnlennonartwork.com/ popup_reallove.html

29. www.lennonart.com/newrel.htm

30.  July 16, 1997 Detroit News “in loving color: Lennon art with an Ono flair -- comes to Ann Arbor” article by Art Critic Joy Hakanson Colby

31. Ibid

32. Ibid

33. Publisher: Grove Press (1976), ASIN: B007EU6I78

34. Ibid

35. www.tucsonweekly.com/tw/01-11-96/review1.htm

36. Publisher: Grove Press (1976), ASIN: B007EU6I78

37.  Ibid

38.  John Lennon catalogue with the byline: Pacific Edge Gallery 540 S. Coast Hwy., #112. Laguna Beach, CA 92651-2479, www.lennonart.com

39. http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/CIV/5/d3/4/1/1/s1738

40.http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/LAWSSEAF.cgi?QUERYTYPE=LAWS+&QUERYDATA=$$ACA15.01$$@TXACA015.01+&LIST=LAW+&BROWSER=BROWSER+&TOKEN=27067392+&TARGET=VIEW

41.http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/LAWSSEAF.cgi?QUERYTYPE=LAWS+&QUERYDATA=$$ACA15.15$$@TXACA015.15+&LIST=LAW+&BROWSER=BROWSER+&TOKEN=27067392+&TARGET=VIEW

42.http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/LAWSSEAF.cgi?QUERYTYPE=LAWS+&QUERYDATA=$$ACA11.01$$@TXACA011.01+&LIST=LAW+&BROWSER=BROWSER+&TOKEN=27067392+&TARGET=VIEW

43.http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0800-0899/0817/Sections/0817.034.html

44. Ibid

45. http://www.artworldnews.com/

46. Ibid

47. Ibid

48. Ibid

49. Ibid

50. Legacy Fine Arts and Productions 330 Clematis St. West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (561) 651-1156

51. Copyright © 1999, By West Group, ISBN 0-314-22864-0

52. Ibid

53. Ibid

54. Ibid

55. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00001341----000-.html

56. news10now.com/content/all_news/?ArID= 12317&SecID=83




PRINCIPALS:
















Lynne Clifford of Bay One Arts. Photos by Eileen Casey

In the Hampton.com published August 28, 2008 John Lennon's 'Come Together' Art Draws Crowd At Southampton Inn" article by Eileen Casey, the reporter quoted Lynne Clifford stating: "That this exhibition can sometimes represent someone's first real exposure to art and that just makes for a wonderful feeling to see how affected someone can be by these works."

Lynne Clifford
Bag One Arts
110 West 79th Street
New York, New York 10024
(212) 595-5537



















Producer Larry Schwartz of Legacy Productions

Larry Schwartz
Legacy Fine Arts and Productions Inc.
330 Clematis St.
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
(561) 651-1156

















Curator Rudy Siegel

Rudy Siegel
Legacy Fine Arts and Productions Inc.
330 Clematis St.
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
(561) 651-1156

Additionally, in the Hampton.com published August 28, 2008 John Lennon's 'Come Together' Art Draws Crowd At Southampton Inn" article by Eileen Casey, the reporter wrote: "both Larry Schwartz and Rudy Siegel commented on how welcoming and gracious they and members of Legacy Productions had been treated by the community and the Southampton Inn."



















Yoko Ono
c/o Bag One Arts
110 West 79th Street
New York, New York 10024
(212) 595-5537

In the Hampton.com published August 11, 2010 "Yoko Ono-Lennon Discusses lennon Art Exhibition" interview by Eileen Casey, the reporter wrote: "This year's exhibition, "Come Together" - A Look Into John Lennon's Life Through His Artwork - will be held at the Southampton Inn from August 22 through August 24, and includes hand-signed pieces, as well as limited edition prints, serigraphs, lithographs, copper etchings and aqua tints – all of which are for sale, with proceeds from this exhibition to benefit the Human Resources of the Hamptons."


Recklessly, this reporter Eileen Casey repeated this same misleading statement in the Hampton.com published August 28, 2008 John Lennon's 'Come Together' Art Draws Crowd At Southampton Inn" article, where she wrote: "The exhibition, which has been touring for 15 years aligns with a local charity that benefits from the proceeds raised from artwork that is sold. This year's event was for the benefit of The Human Resources of the Hamptons chosen personally by Ono-Lennon."


Yoko Ono and her business partner Legacy Fine Art & Production Inc. donate the voluntary donations given by the patrons at the door to this so-called "Artwork of John Lennon" exhibition. The money from the sales of these non-disclosed forgeries go into Yoko Ono's pockets.



















This would have been easliy confirmed by Hampton.com's reporter Eileen Casey, if she had actually read, much less quoted what is printed at the bottom of Legacy Fine Art & Production Inc. promotional poster at the entrance to this exhibition with a transparent donation container: "We are asking for a donation to: Human Resources of the Hamptons. - Please make a generous donation. GIVING IS INSTANT KARMA."


Additionally, in the interview with Yoko Ono, the reporter asked: "Would you comment on any effect the appeal of this exhibition may have with regard to art appreciation and collectors versus curiosity and consumerism?

Yoko is quoted stating: "
You are being very tactful and that is an interesting question. We hope people will come to see the artwork and by keeping the prices low and affordable their participation will benefit charities important to the areas where they live; that the exhibition will speak out to people to discuss love and peace. We are all in this family together."

Yoko Ono and her Legacy Fine Art & Production Inc. business associates' hubris seems to have no limits.

SOURCES: http://www.hamptons.com/Around-Town-Southampton/Neighborhood/4546/Yoko-Ono-Lennon-Discusses-Lennon-Art-Exhibition.html
http://www.hamptons.com/Around-Town-Southampton/Life-Style/4652/John-Lennons-Come-Together-Art-Draws-Crowds-At.html







Oh no! Yoko colours in Lennon’s prints

YOKO ONO faces a row over significantly altered prints of artworks by John Lennon, which have been sold for millions of pounds.
Lennon, who was a student at the Liverpool College of Art, produced three books of black-and-white illustrations. Prints of these works, overseen by Ono, have been offered for sale in Britain and America.
However, some have been coloured in, issued as limited edition prints and stamped with the former Beatle’s special insignia. In some cases, it is claimed extra characters may have been added.
Gary Arseneau, a Florida-based artist and creator of original lithographs who has investigated the sales, claims that the works should not be sold under the name of Lennon, who was shot dead in 1980.
He said: “This is work that John Lennon has never seen, never created, never approved, and never signed. The dead don’t create artwork.”
Ono strongly denies that her late husband’s work has in any way been misrepresented. She has said she decided to colour some of Lennon’s drawings after his death, but buyers of the limited edition prints are told of any changes.
In the mid-1980s, Ono was anxious to gain more recognition for Lennon’s art and started to issue limited prints of his drawings. More than 50 illustrations were selected with a print run of about 300 for each one. They sell for between $225 (£150) and $9,000 (£6,000) each.
The prints are stamped with Lennon’s “chop” mark — a stamp traditionally used by artists in the Far East. Marketing material for the prints states: “Each limited-edition fine art print is authenticated by John Lennon’s embossed signature and John’s personal chop mark.”
Arseneau says the works should not even be permitted to be sold as limited prints or lithographs, since Lennon was not alive to oversee the process. He cites US customs rules which state that artistic prints of a limited number should be “wholly executed by hand by the artist”.
Arseneau also looked at some of the original drawings on which he believes the coloured versions are based. One gallery catalogue includes a colour picture called An Egg Hatching. Arseneau believes this limited edition print may have been coloured and adapted from a rudimentary drawing in Lennon’s book, Skywriting by Word of Mouth, which was published in 1986. He points out that figures appear to have been added to the picture.
Arseneau has established that an illustrator was hired by Ono to work on Lennon’s drawings. Al Naclerio worked on pictures that appeared in a book, Real Love: The Drawings for Sean, published after Lennon’s death.
Naclerio is credited in the book for “adapting” Lennon’s work, but prints of the same pictures are being sold with no apparent credit for Naclerio on the websites where the work is promoted.
One of the pictures in the book features giraffes and elephants on a plain, entitled A Herd Moving. It appears to be loosely based on an illustration from Lennon’s 1964 book, In His Own Write, but animals seem to have been added.
A Herd Moving has also appeared in a gallery catalogue promoting Lennon’s work. Again, there is no credit for the illustrator who adapted it.
Two galleries in America are authorised by Ono to sell and exhibit Lennon’s work: Legacy Fine Art and Productions in West Palm Beach, Florida, and Pacific Edge Gallery in Laguna Beach, California.
Artworks attributed to Lennon have been exhibited across the world, including shows in Britain, and sold to fans.
Arseneau’s investigations are now raising questions about whether the images can be billed as original and authentic work by Lennon.
This weekend an exhibition in Georgetown, Washington, entitled In My Life, is displaying “100 pieces of art created by John Lennon”. One commentator said it might be more accurate to refer to the works as “posters” or “altered reproductions”.
Rudy Siegel, of Legacy Productions, said clients were given full information about their purchases and “99.9%” had no complaints about what they had bought.


Rudy Siegel's -Bait and Switch-
As for Yoko Ono's Legacy Fine Art and Production Inc. exhibition producer Rudy Siegel and his pronouncements that "clients were given full information about their purchases and '99.9%' had no complaints about what they bought," this is an excerpt of WUSA 2006 broadcast story on how Rudy Siegel responds to these serious accusations of fraud with the Artwork of John Lennon exhibition and sale when the news media knows the questions to ask.
  • In a June 29, 2006 Washington D.C. station WUSA Channel 9 televised [Artwork of John Lennon exhibition in Alexandria, VA] story by reporter Bruce Leshan, the -exhibit spokesman- Rudy Siegel [in response to the reporter's questions] made the following statements: "The majority of the work on display was printed posthumously. - The artwork is coming from the Lennon estate. People aren't stupid. They know the difference between a print and an original."
Here is what Rudy Siegel says when the news media does -not- know the questions to ask.
  •  In a November 30, 2010 Atlanta Journal Constitution published "Lennon's art 'unassuming' Galleries eventually came to value work of ex-Beatle, Ono says" article by Sheila Poole, the reporter wrote: "Folks have been collecting and viewing John Lennon's work for 40 years," said Rudy Siegel, a producer at Legacy Productions, who helped put together the tour with Ono and Bag One Arts. "He was so prolific," Siegel said. "He was at home raising Sean and drawing. He wasn't doing any songwriting or recording. It was his outlet at the time to express himself."
Notice in the above statements attributed, by the WUSA television station, London Times and Atlanta Journal Constitution, to Legacy Fine Art and Production Inc.'s Artwork of John Lennon exhibition producer Rudy Siegel that he seems reluctant to admit differences in 2006, denies everything in 2010 and then spins a tangled web of deception six months later. 
Rudy Siegel has no shame.
  
On page 137 of the Seventh Edition of Black's Law Dictionary, -bait and switch- is defined, in part, as: "Most states prohibit the bait and switch when the original product is not actually available as advertised."

Caveat Emptor!
 
Gary Arseneau
artist, creator of original lithographs and scholar 
Fernandina Beach, Florida 

54 Comments:

Blogger Pamela Ewen said...

Over 7 years ago my husband, Scott and I attended an art show of John Lennon's lithographs that was held in the Eaton's Centre here in Toronto, Canada. The prices were out of reach for the pieces that I wanted but I bought the printed lyrics of Julia, not signed for $500.00 and we slowly paid for an erotic art lithograph, # 7 in red colour for $5,000.00 Canadian. It was signed by John, (supposedly Yoko had had John sign all these lithographs) and was verified etc. They told us that it would go up in value and when I tried to sell it a few years ago it was selling for less that I paid for it, much less, like $3,000.00! Now after reading you information I'm wondering if it is authentic or not. I saw another thing on the internet saying that it was worth $13,000.00 yesterday! Love to know the truth. Please could you give me some more information. Thank you Pamela Ewen

10:13 AM, September 25, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

WHAT ABOUT A CLASS ACTION SUIT?
i ALSO PURCHASED lENNON'S

1:14 AM, November 06, 2007  
Anonymous ka georgi said...

Years ago, I bought a Lennon lithograph at a thrift shop for $5. Yep, five bucks. Since then I have seen one like it sell for $4500, one is on ebay now for $5500. I also bought a "Colorized" poster of the same piece from an antique store for $75. So my total spent is $80, this is really confusing stuff. Hope others dont get reamed... what is the real deal? does BagOne ever return calls, emails, etc?

6:19 PM, November 06, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Big deal, Yoko took some liberties with her HUSBAND's artwork. She can do what she wants, she's not forcing you to buy it. How would you like it if Yoko told you what to do with YOUR wife's stuff after she died? People like yourself need to stop pretending that you have some sort of possession of John Lennon's legacy. Get over yourself, the dream is over.

8:43 PM, January 11, 2010  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose."

Source: On Bullshit - Harry Frankfurt (Princeton University) 1986

10:27 PM, January 11, 2010  
Anonymous Del.Train said...

John's sketches and drawing were always interesting,quirky and child-like. Perfect for pajamas, ties, mugs and keepsakes. It is certain that the art is for the propogation of the lines. The art lithos are an extention to that. An intellegent way of branding and all in the art show style. They are usually done in conjunction with other intersting events in town. If you think you are getting something original you have re-think. It feels Lennon or worthy of Lennon to many. That's the overiding principle and it is approved by the estate as proper. Is it worth $500, $1000, $5000. It's clear that many of the works are inspirational.

1:10 AM, January 14, 2010  
Blogger elaine holestine said...

I have been watching & wanting to buy a piece of lennon art for years, I`ve ben to an exibition in my hometown & they were selling pieces ( from 500.+ up)I wondered about them then& am so glad I did not purchase any then,only thing is this is going to make it very hard to verify originals, especially with the new ruling on sig. authentication.
elaine,winnipeg,mb,canada

5:34 PM, January 23, 2010  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I bought two lithographs in 1996 at the Marlborough Gallery on Newbury Street in Boston.

I am presently in a very dire predicament, and need to sell them.

How can I sell them or be reimbursed for them?

1:10 PM, September 06, 2010  
Blogger Ekat said...

I bought "frontispiece" artist's proof in 1996, and a coloured lithograph of Sean, "Baby Boy."

How can I sell or be compensated for these two pieces? I live i Massachusetts.

1:15 PM, September 06, 2010  
OpenID thesmokingchimp said...

what would lennon do? if i was john, i'd be rolling in my grave laughing at what a bunch of stupid monkeys we hairless apes truly are... thanks for your great article. i'm certain the world is not ready to accept this. but i love it!

p.s. what happened to your other page link? http://garyarseneau.blogspot.com/2006/09/artwork-of-john-lennon-fraud.html
tsc

12:42 PM, October 11, 2010  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What does H. C. XXV/VL mean? It is in the bottom left corner of a BED IN "litho" purchased in 1981. We were told it onced belonged to Alan Cline (given to him from Lennon).

4:59 PM, October 27, 2010  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@anonymous

25/45 in roman numerals.

1:39 PM, November 01, 2010  
Blogger Gary Arseneau said...

November 1, 2010

H.C. is an abbreviation for Hors de Commerce.

Hors de Commerce is defined as: "Prints not equal in quality to the edition that may have minor flaws. These usually aren't signed and are canceled in some way, such as a hole in a corner or a stamp indicating they are not for sale. These prints are used by sales people to show to potential clients."

Any so-called edition of 55 hors de commerce, for the titled "Bed in" attributed to John Lennon, are at best non-disclosed reproductions.

All so-called editions of "Bed in" -lithographs- attributed to John Lennon, being offered for sale by Yoko Ono and others, are non-disclosed reproductions, if not posthumous forgeries.

Here is an online example of this deception: "John Lennon Bed In For Peace Lithograph Limited Ed #390 -
This Fine Limited Edition John Lennon-Bed-In-For-Peace-Lithograph is from an original ink drawing by John Lennon. Authorized by Yoko Ono on behalf of the John Lennon Estate, this hand numbered limited edition consists of 5000 American prints and 4000 Export prints. This Bed in for Peace Lithograph is 390/5000. This print commeorates John Lennon and Yoko Ono publicity for bringing light to peace by staying in bed together for days on end. This measures 30x40 inches."

Original ink drawing reproduced results in reproductions, not lithographs.

That aside the dead don't posthumously lithograph, much less number.

Remember, John Lennon only created, during his lifetime, one original edition of lithographs titled the "frontspiece."

Finally, those involved in this deception have discovered it is better than counterfeiting money. If you counterfeit a $100 bill, the most you can get is $100. If you counterfeit art, the sky's the limit.

Yoko Ono and those involved, in this deception, have no shame.

Buyer Beware,

Gary Arseneau
artist, creator of original lithographs & scholar
Fernandina Beach, Florida

SOURCES: http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/Reference/dictionary/artdictionary/h/HorsdeCommerce%20.html
http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/john-lennon-bed-in-for-peace-lithograph-limited-ed

2:20 PM, November 01, 2010  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hypothetical - what if all 14 original etchings were photo-copied. Are they worth zero or whatever someone would pay?

10:41 PM, November 12, 2010  
Blogger Ekat said...

I desperately need some money. I went through a divorce after 20 years of marriage, and I got burned,

I tried to sell my two lithographs, which I paid $15,000 for 15 years ago.
I wrote to Yoko, describing my situation. I received a letter back, explaining that she does not buy back any of the artwork.

So not only was I "taken," but the very message of "John and Yoko" was fraudulent. I feel used and very sad about this. And the thing is, I really needed the money. The letter I received was so cold, especially while Yoko is traipsing around "celebrating" John's 70th birthday.

12:41 AM, November 13, 2010  
Blogger Gary Arseneau said...

November 13, 2010

First, what are the titles for the two so-called "lithographs," attributed to John Lennon that you purchased?

Second, who sold them to you for $15,000?

Third, what documentation, if any, did you receive with these so-called "lithographs?

Fourth, did you walk out the door with them or were they shipped to you?

The answers to these questions may help determine your options.

Additionally, the statute of limitation may begin the moment you discover you have been defrauded.

My recommendation is you consult with an attorney to determine what course of action you may take.

I wish you well.

Gary Arseneau
artist, creator of original lithographs & scholar

8:46 PM, November 13, 2010  
Blogger Ekat said...

I bought "Frontispiece" AP for $10,000
and "Beautiful Boy," colourised for $5000.00. They were purchased at the Marlborough Gallery in Boston, and I walked out with them after payment. I suspected that something was wrong when the "salesman" gave me a "free" silk scarf with something or another John and Yoko printed on it. I was given a receipt, but I am unable to find it presently.

I purchased them for my two daughters when my mother passed away, as a gift for each of them from their grandmother, who loved John's music.

It is fifteen years later, and I am divorced and am going through a major illness. I tried to sell them, and I couldn't sell them for even a fraction of their purchase price. The galleries associated with this fraud won't purchase them (of course not,) nor would Yoko.

I have seen her with many celebrities, celebrating John's 70th birthday (with her tophat and glasses.) It makes me ill, watching her charade. John was duped, and I was duped. Sad.

11:32 PM, November 13, 2010  
Blogger Gary Arseneau said...

November 14, 2010

Does the "frontspiece" have a pale yellow background? If so it is a posthumous (after 1986) forgery.

As for the colorized "Beautiful Boy," it is also a posthumous (after 1986) forgery.

Were you told, by the gallery, they were posthumous and/or colorized posthumously?

Did you get a Certificate of Authenticity [sic] with any of them?

If so, is the COA's from the Marlborough Gallery in Boston or Bag One in New York?

Forgive the pain these questions may be causing you but I am trying to find some hook to assist you in getting your money back.

Finally, is the same Marlborough Gallery in Boston, that sold you these images, still in business?

I could only find a possible link to one located in New York City.

Gary Arseneau

1:43 AM, November 14, 2010  
Blogger Ekat said...

Yes, "Frontispiece" is on an antique-looking yellowish paper.

I am trying to find the receipt; things got misplaced during the divorce and I haven't been able to find it yet. I don't know if it is a COA. (I was deeply depressed over my mother's death, and I was not as careful as I should have been, as I wanted something that would remind my two daughters of that which she loved.)

The Marlborough Gallery went out of business not very long after I purchased the two pieces.

The pieces were not sent to me; I took them home in my car.

When I wrote to Yoko Ono, I described my situation in great detail. The reply (which came from Bag One) was shameful. Personally, I would be ashamed to show my face if I were her.

9:30 PM, November 14, 2010  
Blogger robertcorey said...

I RECIEVED A COUNTERFEIT JOHN LENNON LITHOGRAPH AS A PRESENT YEARS AGO. IT IS ONE OF THE BAG ONE SERIES ENTITLED THE HUG I BELIEVE RELEASED BY THE BRUCE MCGAW GALLERY. IT IS NUMBERED 1510 OF 5000 AND IS IN EXCELLENT CONDITION. I DONT WANT TO GET RID OF IT BUT HAVE ALWAYS BEEN CURIOUS AS TO HOW MUCH IT IS WORTH. CAN ANYBODY TELL ME? THANKS, ROBERT

4:16 PM, December 02, 2010  
Anonymous david said...

Hi Gary,
I also purchased a 'signed' item. A Plastic Ono Band lp. Legacy had set up in the Hard Rock Cafe in Tampa in 2005. Did I really get ripped-off by Legacy and Yoko? Really? That's rather disturbing to me if so. The other post about a class-action suit sounds about right to me.
Thanks much,
David

2:32 PM, December 15, 2010  
Anonymous Dennis said...

Hi to all: I read with interest all of the comments on this site. I should mention that I am a long time Beatle and John collector. I own many John autographs all safely locked away in a vault. I also own a 1970 Bag One Erotic. An HC print out of the edition.
I have never bought anything post 1980 in terms of art by John.
We all know you should buy art because you like it, not for an investment.

I have no comment on those who now feel they have been duped by Yoko and her partners.

I will comment on those who have a 1970. While I agree with Gary that John only ever technically did one true litho, he did indeed authorize and sign and number the rest of the edition. So they have value even if only because John signed them.

I have always been amazed that someone will pay more for a John autograph on a plain piece of paper or on a cheque than they would have paid for a 1970 Bag One signed by John.

As for any Beatle signature, you must be very carefull in that there are many many forgeries out there. I would never ever buy a John or a Beatle autograph without having it checked out by a third party expert that specializes in Beatles.

I am not an expert although I have studied the field for a long time. I still buy authentic items signed by John or the Beatles, including 1970 Bag Ones. I know they have value even though they may not fit the definition of a true lithograph. Any resale market may be less than a retail price, however we all knew that when we went in. dtoll@rogers.com

11:30 AM, February 26, 2011  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

My Mother inhereted a print/drawing (we are not sure whether its a print or orginal drawing) of "Erotic #5" from the bag one series. It is signed by John Lennon (what apears to be in pencil) but is not numbered anywhere. The curious thing about this is on the back, there is, what appears to be in pen,the "Manage Trois" drawing also signed with no number. Again both drawings are on ther same paper, which seems unusual, and they are not numbered anywhere. She has no papers for authentication and she was told that it is an original drawing. The frame is also pretty old looking. Do these sound like they are forgeries? Thanks

8:21 PM, April 23, 2011  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It sounds like the real deal. Good for you!

10:48 AM, April 24, 2011  
Anonymous man and van London said...

This is a very interesting blog, very instructive and informing in all. This post, in partucular, has been very helpful.

6:21 AM, June 28, 2011  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

For at least a year here in Sydney, Australia in the early 2000s there was a permanent "exhibition" of the kind described here, in a shop in the retail section of a very swanky hotel in an equally swanky part of town. I had seen it advertised in the newspaper, and was interested in seeing the lyric sheets, particularly those of the clearly "John" Beatles songs. I went along, expecting that the items would be original but well out of my price range, only to find that the former was false and the latter was true. I asked some pertinent questions and established early on that I was not looking at original material, but was then pursued by telephone for some weeks with various offers (still well out of my price range) for lyric sheet reproductions of songs like "Nowhere Man" and "Revolution". I eventually returned to the exhibition to try and put an end to the relentless badgering, and exited with a purchased copy of the catalogue. By the sound of it, I got off very lightly.

8:09 PM, July 19, 2011  
Blogger Gary Arseneau said...

July 19, 2011

Hello Sydney, Australia:

I thank you for your comment.

Unfortunately, this kind of chicanery seems to be the rule not the exception when it comes to those who would like to cash-in on the John Lennon estate.

For example, one of Yoko Ono's business partners in America: Legacy Fine Art & Productions Inc.'s director Rudy Siegel will reluctantly admit something when the news media know the questions to ask.

In a June 29, 2006 Washington D.C. station WUSA Channel 9 televised [Artwork of John Lennon exhibition in Alexandria, VA] story by reporter Bruce Leshan (I was the source and also interviewed), the -exhibit spokesman- Rudy Siegel made the following statements: "The majority of the work on display was printed posthumously. - The artwork is coming from the Lennon estate. People aren't stupid. They know the difference between a print and an original."

Here is what Rudy Siegel says when the news media does -not- know the questions to ask.

In a November 30, 2010 Atlanta Journal Constitution published "Lennon's art 'unassuming' Galleries eventually came to value work of ex-Beatle, Ono says" article by Sheila Poole, the reporter wrote: "Folks have been collecting and viewing John Lennon's work for 40 years," said Rudy Siegel, a producer at Legacy Productions, who helped put together the tour with Ono and Bag One Arts. "He was so prolific," Siegel said. "He was at home raising Sean and drawing. He wasn't doing any songwriting or recording. It was his outlet at the time to express himself."

Yoko Ono' and her business associate Rudy Siegel have no shame.

If you get a chance, let me know who was trying to sell these to you. I would be interested to know.

Caveat Emptor!

Gary Arseneau
artist, creator of original lithographs & scholar
Fernandina Beach, Florida

9:38 PM, July 19, 2011  
Blogger Annette said...

My husband and I bought the lyrics to "Watching the Wheels." I have documentation from Legacy Productions that this is a limited edition silkscreen of John Lennon's handwritten lyrics. It is No. 338 out of 1000. Year 1995. Are the lyrics forgeries too?

4:55 PM, August 16, 2011  
Blogger stonecrestcollectibles said...

I feel strongly learning the topic, however I need to learn more on this topic.
Carry on your updates..!!

Regards

African American art, black African art

1:43 AM, August 28, 2011  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Everyday in Everyway bought for approx $1500. framed at the Marriott Hotel in New York signed by Yoko with chop mark 17 years ago cert of auth and also have receipt Why cant I sell this also why cant there be a class action suit Oh yes 29/300 thats how this piece is marked excellent
please e mail me Capemaine@aol.com Thank you so much!

7:21 PM, September 18, 2011  
Anonymous Jim P. said...

Gary,

I purchased a serigraph titled "SELF-PORTRAIT" back in 2000 when Bag One held an exposition in New Orleans. Although I paid what, at the time, seemed like a hefty price, I did not do so as an investment per se. Nor did I buy it thinking that John had created it with his own hand. In fact, it says, very succinctly in the accompanying letter from Bag One Arts, Inc., that it was completed through Atelier GF of Toronto. There was no misrepresentation of any kind by Bag One or the salesperson with whom I dealt.

I look at this particular piece of art every day and it still makes me smile. For that, and because John Lennon was, and still is, an inspiration to me, I'm really glad I took the plunge and purchased the piece, despite your attempts to make Yoko Ono the villain.

3:00 PM, October 25, 2011  
Blogger Gary Arseneau said...

October 26, 2011

Re: "I look at this particular piece of art every day and it still makes me smile. For that, and because John Lennon was, and still is, an inspiration to me, I'm really glad I took the plunge and purchased the piece, despite your attempts to make Yoko Ono the villain."

Dear Jim:

I thank you for your comment.

If I may correct a few misconceptions you have.

FIRST, Serigraphs are original works of visual art created by a living artist.

SECOND, posthumous reproductions of John Lennon's black & white drawing would -never- be original works of visual art ie., serigraphs.

THIRD, if you acquired a posthumously colorized version of the so-called "Self-Portrait," then you purchased a non-disclosed posthumous forgery.

FOURTH, the posthumously applied John Lennon chop-mark signature is counterfeit.

FIFTH, under U.S. Copyright Law, for something to be considered limited it must not only be an original work of visual art, it must be signed and numbered by the author.

Posthumous reproductions, much less forgeries, are not original works of visual art and the dead don't sign and number.

SIXTH, the documentation ie., COA you have, in all probability, for this non-disclosed posthumous forgery, lists John Lennon as the artist.

As tragic as John Lennon 's death was, his career, as an artist, ended in 1980.

SEVENTH, only living artists create serigraphs, lithographs and other creative mediums. Yoko Ono abuses terminology to cashin big time selling non-disclosed posthumous forgeries, much less non-disclosed reproduction/posters.

EIGHTH, in a very successful attempt to legitimize their scam, Yoko Ono and her business associates use the good name and reputation of a local charities with the promise of voluntary donations given to the charity.

NINTH, the news media the majority of the time ends up promoting the sales at the show benefit the charity when in fact all sales go in Yoko Ono's pocketbook. This happens so often that it is clear, Yoko Ono and her business associates allow this misconception by the news media to be perpetuated for their profit at the expense of the unsuspecting victims.

TENTH, it is a misnomer to refer anything posthumous as -art-. The dead don't create art.

In closing, if Bag One and/or salesperson, you acquired this non-disclosed posthumous forgery, lead you to believe it was "a piece of art," then you were mislead.

Caveat Emptor!

Gary Arseneau
artist, creator of original lithographs and scholar
Fernandina Beach, Florida

9:07 PM, October 26, 2011  
OpenID Randy said...

I just discovered this site and am curious about it as I own a Bag One piece. Before I describe it, I'd like to repeat what someone earlier said about buying it because I liked it, not as an investment, and certainly not as a means to make money. I always felt if I needed to sell it, if I got back my initial price I'd be happy, and even if I lost some, I would have had the pleasure of looking at it every day for over ten years (so far). I have Erotic No. 6, with two COAs, one from Bag One Arts Inc and one from LASCO Productions, both saying the year of publication was 1970. The Atelier was / is Cinnamon Press. The LASCO COA goes so far as to give an appraised value of $13,500. Do you think I might have something that John Lennon actually signed? It sure looks like a signature, it's numbered 118 of 300. Thanks.

Randy Bailey

10:18 AM, November 04, 2011  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

FUN to read this. I have many of these art works in the penguin john lennon and the american in his own write/a spaniard in the works combined issue from around 1966/7, which may have cost me a total of a couple of dollars.

yes, i can see how one might successfully rework, enlarge, colourise some lennon doodles into a lovely ludwig bemelmans type of book, possibly with verses or some kind of lennon-derived story. or kiddie book. possibly worth buying for 25 bucks.

and that's where the buck stops.

6:10 PM, December 27, 2011  
Anonymous Cheryl S. said...

I have ten pieces of Lennon lithographs all purchased from Pacific Edge Gallery and all mailed to me. I began the collection when the tour came to Milwaukee Wisconsin many years ago with the first piece being Magic Birds. I have a COA for every piece signed by Lynn Clifford. Any recourse from Pacific Edge? They've obviously sold me pieces since this post began.

6:14 PM, February 07, 2012  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Very confused : in this collection there was also a re colored Warhol : Lennon in a cream & white. It had all the blind stamps as the rest. Except on the back it's had a Warhol/Factory stamp. Does anyone know anything about this ?

11:10 AM, February 22, 2012  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ironically, Yoko Ono owns the rights to John Lennon's works, if I understand correctly; therefore, under United States law, she can do whatever she wishes with those pieces. If she chooses to take original sketches by Lennon, modify them, and sell them as "art," she is within her legal authority to do so. This in the same vain as when she released the Lennon box set last year with enhanced versions, or "reproductions" of his original recordings. This is nothing new in our society, and it is perfectly legal...well, unless my three years in law school and my legal experience has completely lied to me in an attempt to protect Yoko Ono's name. Courtney Love owned the rights to Kurt Kobain's name at one point, and Elvis has an estate that can sign for him and make business deals under his name. How is this any different? Those individuals that buy these reproductions should know what they are getting. If any individual actually believes that they can get "original artwork" from the Lennon estate for $500-$2,000, then I blame the fool and not the estate. The information on this website is as laughable as the theories on Paul McCartney's death in the 60s. Sorry, but my legal background tells me this guy needs a better understanding of the law. Thank you for reading. -Josh-

PS - I own a few of these Lennon "frauds, reproductions, whatever you call them," and I am happy with my purchases.

1:28 AM, April 08, 2012  
Blogger Gary Arseneau said...

April 8, 2012

Dear Josh:

I thank you for taking the time to comment.

If I may inquiry, with your legal background, were you aware that under California Civil Code 1738-1745, if one sells a reproduction for $100 or more, one is required to disclose it as a reproduction. Failure to do so may included, but not limited to: refund, interest, treble damages, attorney fees, expert witness fees and $1,000 per occurrence.

Yoko Ono's touring Artwork of John Lennon exhibitions [and sales] are -not- promoted, much less disclosed as reproductions.

With your legal background, were you aware that under U.S. Customs Informed Compliance May 2006 a lithograph and other original printmaking mediums "must be wholly executed by hand by the artist [and] excludes any mechanical and photomechanical processes?"

Artwork, much less original works of visual art terms such as: lithographs, serigraphs and etchings, are being abused by Yoko Ono and her business associates and used as euphemisms for non-disclosed reproductions and forgeries.

Additionally, with your legal background, were you aware that some may argue books published from the author's manuscript is still their work and/or recorded music by an artist copied to CDs and the like is still their music [like you have in your comment] when actually, books published from a manuscript and recorded music copied to CD's and the like are, under U.S. Copyright Law, derivatives? Derivatives, by definition under U.S. Copyright Law, are reproductions. Under U.S. Copyright Law, the rights of attribution shall -not- apply to reproductions.

SOURCES:
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/definitions.html

Furthermore, with your legal background, you surely must be aware that on page 660 of the Seventh Edition of Black's Law Dictionary, -forgery- is defined as: "The act of fraudulently making a false document or altering a real one to be used as if genuine."

So, with your legal background, would Yoko Ono and her business associates selling of non-disclosed posthumous reproductions and altered & colorized forgeries as the -Artwork of John Lennon- be considered "the act of fraudulently making a false document or altering a real one to be used as if genuine?"

In closing, I am always interest in having a better understanding of the law. Next time with your legal background, I hope you might actually share some of those applicable laws.

Caveat Emptor!

Gary Arseneau
artist, creator of original lithographs & scholar
Fernandina Beach, Florida

10:54 AM, April 08, 2012  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You know I have been reading this for a while off and on with the comments. My original Purchases were bought in 2000 before much of this came to light.. The thing that you have to remember is #1 - you should always buy "Art" because you like it if you are buying for investment then you should be looking at Picasso's and things like that not Lennon Art. #2 Art is in the eye of the beholder. Granted most of Lennon's artwork was not artwork in the sense that it was accessible to the normal.

Granted the "Lennon Art" currently sold is really Yoko's Art in her vision of what John Lennon would have done using the images that she has full right to use as she is the controller of the Lennon Estate.

It is a grey area because it is a reproduction but it is a legal reproduction that has been created by Yoko Ono using John Lennon's original Sketches as a basis. Which she is entirely in her rights to do..

Now the thing with are is technically ANY reproduced lithograph, serigraph, glicee, print, anything that is in a limited series of XXX # of editions is by definition a reproduction. IT is not original regardless of if the original artist looked at it and said OK that looks good.

If the original artist of the picture actually does the printing of the original, technically it is still a reproduction of his own work.. I guess you can see where I am going.. Basically unless it is one of a kind or a hand drawn Series (in which each piece would be a one of a kind) you are not getting an original piece.

The only reason to be upset is if you thought you were getting an origianl peice of John Lennon art (which of course you could not have in any numbered edition) or if you bought your art wanting to make a ton of money which may or may not happen regardless of who's name is on it.

Think about it if it is not actually signed by John Lennon (which most of these are not) then he has never seen it. It is Signed by Yoko which means it is Yoko's Art in the spirit of John.

7:57 PM, April 11, 2012  
Blogger Gary Arseneau said...

April 11, 2012

Re: "Basically unless it is one of a kind or a hand drawn Series (in which each piece would be a one of a kind) you are not getting an original piece."

I thank you for taking the time to comment.

Lithographs are original works of visual art wholly executed by hand by the artist and excludes any mechanical and photomechanical processes. [U.S. Customs Informed Compliance May 2006]

As an artist and creator of over 10,000 original lithographs, I speak from experience and humbly as a scholar document with authority.

My above Artwork of John Lennon -fraud- monograph documents that lithographs are original works of visual art by a living artist and that Yoko Ono is falsely attributing posthumous colorized and altered forgeries for sale as the Artwork of John Lennon and not as "Yoko's Art in the spirit of John."

That is a knowing concealment of the truth or misrepresentation of a material fact to induce someone to his or her detriment which is one legal definition of -fraud-.

In closing, I hope the enclosed and my monograph above might assist you in overcoming the many misconceptions you have.

Caveat Emptor!

Gary Arseneau
artist & creator of original lithographs
Fernandina Beach, Florida

8:51 PM, April 11, 2012  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re: your recent article about the John Lennon Art shows
put together by Yoko Ono and Legacy Fine Arts, it seems that as a by-product of
the cyberspace age, anyone with an axe to grind or who's looking to make a name
for himself by drawing undue attention to his rantings can put together a blog
and have it accepted as gospel (the new millennium equivalent of the old
"everybody's a critic" lament). Frankly, the named protagonist (Mr.
Arseneau), who's been seeking an audience for years, and those he has baited
into chiming into his blog, have all got to be kidding.

I've been going to the Lennon art shows for YEARS and
aside from the (out of my price reach) original signed lithographs (yes, he
created only ONE original drawing of each, but signed MANY lithographs of
them), everything - and I do mean EVERYTHING about the items for sale and on
display was disclosed, and not sold as anything more than what they were ...
prints (or in some cases, "lithographs" or "proofs"). In my
decade-plus dealings with them, I've found the people at Legacy Fine Arts to be
knowledgeable, friendly and have integrity beyond reproach.

So, by way of example -
I got a silkscreened reproduction of the lyrics to "Real
Love". Was it hawked as an "original"? NEVER. Did I think in my
wildest dreams that John's pen went to that sheet of paper? NOT FOR ONE MINUTE. Did he draw the same exact
self-portrait doodle on every lyric sheet he ever wrote ? NOT A CHANCE. Is it
of high quality and beautifully framed and does it look great as a centerpiece
in my den - YOU BET. The same goes for
my "Borrowed Time" sketch (the one used for the posthumous
"Wonsoponatime" album) and other pieces I've bought.

John's art is really whimsical and I enjoy it very much.
The message here - consumers must educate and culture themselves. Learn about
the art, the artist, and YES, the piece you are buying. I do not feel for one
second I was ever mislead and am 1000% happy I acquired the pieces I did, including
one of the "colorized" children's drawings. Of course, Mr. Arseneau
cites those as "forgeries", as another artist worked on them after
John died, and would have readers believe he has discovered the smoking gun -
the NAME of the artist who perpetrated the act ! I never even applied to
detective school, and I knew that Al Naclerio was the artist in question - he
is, after all, credited as such in the book that collects the drawings.

7:13 PM, April 25, 2012  
Blogger Gary Arseneau said...

April 25, 2012

Dear Anonymous:

I thank you for your comment.

A lack of connoisseurship can skew one's understanding of what is what.

Your lack of connoisseurship was made clear when you wrote: "original signed lithographs (yes, he created only ONE original drawing of each, but signed MANY lithographs of them."

Lithographs are original works of visual art wholly executed by hand by the artist and excludes any mechanical and photomechanical processes. [U.S. Customs Informed Compliance May 2006]

In other words, -lithographs- versus -reproductions- are not interchangeable, much less the same.

As an artist and creator of over 10,000 original lithographs, I speak from experience and humbly as a scholar document with authority.

My above Artwork of John Lennon -fraud- monograph documents that lithographs are original works of visual art by a living artist and that Yoko Ono is falsely attributing posthumous colorized and altered forgeries for sale as the Artwork of John Lennon.

That is a knowing concealment of the truth or misrepresentation of a material fact to induce someone to his or her detriment which is one legal definition of -fraud-.

Finally, to refer to my published monographs as "rantings" is "appealing to personal prejudices rather than reason; attacking an opponent's character rather than the opponent's assertions" which is one legal definition of -ad hominem-.

In closing, I hope the enclosed and my monograph above might assist you in overcoming the many misconceptions you have.

Caveat Emptor!

Gary Arseneau
artist & creator of original lithographs
Fernandina Beach, Florida

SOURCE: p 41, Seventh Edition of Black's Law Dictionary

9:32 PM, April 25, 2012  
Blogger robert said...

I am sure that these are your own views. I hear exactly what you’re saying and I’m so happy that I came across your blog.

Vans for Sale in Australia

1:17 AM, April 30, 2012  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The question is "Are these works sold by Yoko Ono et al legal?" How is it that she has not had a "cease and desist " order by some law branch? Why has she not been arrested for forgery? Ultimately, she has violated the trust of the purchasing public and that in itself is why there is the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. These laws protect the public from this kind of fraud. Lastly, If I were to obtain an insurance policy of any work that has been sold by "Yoko Ono" et al would an insurance company insure it? If the answer is no then it would mean the art work is fraudulent, period. This would make your argument valid Gary.Otherwise , people that collect drive prices no matter if its real or not. Who wants to be holding the Bag One? I am one of those. I have two works by Lennon. Gary have you ever brought your findings to the authorities?

12:11 PM, August 16, 2012  
Blogger Gary Arseneau said...

August 16, 2012

Dear Anonymous;

I thank you for your comment.

Yoko Ono's so-called "Artwork of John Lennon" is a -fraud-. With few if any exceptions, the vast majority of the so-called artwork, attributed to John Lennon and offered for sale by Yoko Ono in her traveling road show, was posthumously reworked and altered in color and new compositions and misrepresented as original works of visual art ie., lithographs, serigraphs, etchings and woodcuts.

The dead don't create artwork.

Yoko Ono has no shame.

The Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, based on their www.uspap.org website, seems to be solely interested in value not authenticity. This is clearly and self-servingly evident on USPAP's website [page U-4] when they define -Signature- as: "evidence indicating authentication of the work by the appraiser and the acceptance of the responsibility of content, analyses, and the conclusion in the report."

In contrast, on page 1387 of the Seventh Edition of Black's Law Dictionary, -signature- is defined as: "A person's name or mark written by that person or at the person's direction."

As for insurance companies, they insure, with or without intent, forgeries all day long. For example, the vast majority of major U.S. museums have dozens to hundreds of non-disclosed posthumous forgeries in their collections that in many cases when touring in other venues have been indemnified a.k.a. insured by the U.S. Federal government.

Now you are correct the marketplace does determine value. That is why I try to warn the consumer to the non-disclosed posthumous colorized and altered forgeries, Yoko Ono and her business associates are misrepresenting for sale at $500 to $9,000 or more each as the -Artwork of John Lennon-.

That way the consumer won't have to pay twice [purchase a forgery and pay someone with USPAP to appraise value] to possibly find out they were victimized.

That would be insult to injury.

Rhetorically, as for the authorities, who would that be?

In closing, I hope you actually have "two works by Lennon."

Caveat Emptor!

Gary Arseneau
artist, creator of original lithographs & scholar
Fernandina Beach, Florida

10:42 PM, August 16, 2012  
Blogger workboy53 said...



It seems like every time you see a movie or TV show where police officers are involved, they seem to be wearing large sunglasses with mirrors on the outside. What are these shades and how did they come to be what they are today? The truth is that Mirror Sunglasses, as the sunglasses are called, are often associated with law enforcement and government officials for a valid reason.


Crystal Custom
Promotional Sunglasses
Promo Sunglasses
Personalized sunglasses
Customized sunglasses

5:32 AM, January 17, 2013  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was in San Francisco for the launch of John Lennon's art May 1989 and what was on sale was well ahead of what I could afford. I did get a piece of the art (whether its a fraud or not) when Yoko Ono met the press she showed some of the "original etchings" and I knew the person who gave it to her. I placed 14 on a photocopy and copied and have them framed. I got them because I admire Lennon and have no intention of ever selling but if whats being said is fact then maybe my photocopies are worth more. (All done on A4 paper as he used to doodle) including the alphabet done in 1969 and his signature was different. I did in 2000 buy a John Lennon cel from Yellow Submarine and met Bob Balsar who signed it for me and attached behind the cel is a certificate of authencity.

9:08 AM, February 19, 2013  
Blogger gabylan said...

interesting facts http://www.freehotmusic.org/index.php/en/off-topic/59-graphics/147-interesting-facts-about-john-lennon

9:00 AM, March 12, 2013  
Blogger gabylan said...

interesting facts http://www.freehotmusic.org/index.php/en/off-topic/59-graphics/147-interesting-facts-about-john-lennon

9:01 AM, March 12, 2013  
Anonymous Mark said...

Back in the 1980s, we had a traveling Lennon/Yoko art show come into San Diego (I think it was Pacific Edge). I bought "Suddenly 38" for about $600. They were quite straightforward that these were reproductions signed & numbered by Yoko Ono, with a reproduction of John's chop mark. I did get a COA (and still have it, just not with me now).

I knew what I was getting, and considering what I paid for it, it is probably not a big deal. I have seen this print on sale for up to $10,000 (asking), but every time I called Pacific Edge what they were paying, they declined to offer anything.

In any case, I will hold onto now just for the sake of having a piece of the controversy,and possibly something with some value!

7:24 PM, June 20, 2013  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

June 20, 2013

Mark,

I thank you for your comment.

If Pacific Edge Gallery was actually giving full disclosure to reproductions as reproductions, why do they represent for sale as the "Art of John Lennon?"

If Yoko Ono was actually giving full disclosure to reproductions as reproductions, why does she and her business associates represent them as original works of art ie., lithographs, serigraphs, woodcuts, and etchings.

If COA a.k.a. Certificate of Authenticity are given for these (posthumous) "reproductions," why are original works of visual art terms such as lithograph, serigraphs, etching and woodcut listed instead?

Then to go from the ridiculous to the sublime, these non disclosed forgeries, with a counterfeit John Lennon chop marks are numbered by who knows who but certainly not by a dead Lennon, are promoted as having "artist proofs." The dead don't proof.

So, to add insult to injury, Yoko Ono and her partners in fraud believe and act on the belief that they can abuse terminology to the point that the public argues, much less defends that original works of art ie., lithographs (for example) are interchangeable, much less the same as reproductions and/or colorized & altered forgeries falsely attributed to the dead John Lennon.

They have no shame.

Finally, no matter how it may be rationalized, Yoko Ono and her business associates Pacific Edge Gallery, Legacy Fine Art & Production Inc., and others are involved in a $100 million dollar fraud in the sale of non disclosed colorized and altered forgeries with counterfeit John Lennon chop mark/signatures in bogus editions.

In closing, legitimate artists who create lithographs, serigraphs, etchings, and woodcuts, much less those who sell fully disclosed reproductions, deserve a level playing field and not unfair trade and a poisonuous marketplace by Yoko Ono and her cronies.

Wake Up!

Gary Arseneau
artist, creator of original lithographs & scholar
Fernandina Beach, Florida

8:45 PM, June 20, 2013  
Blogger ottawa inservices said...

Its really wonderful art.really i thankful to you to share this post.Art reproduction

5:29 AM, July 23, 2013  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

WOW... "poisonous marketplace" really nailed the problem. I agree that we should appreciate a piece for its inspiration more than cost or value, which is objective anyway. But that doesn't mean the public should endure outright fraud in order to drive prices higher.Misrepresentation is wrong ethically even if quasi-legal. Personally, I passed on an opportunity to buy one of the EROTIC drawings in a Memphis Exhibition in the mid-1980's. Couldn't bring myself to buy it for $15,000 as even then it smelled suspicious. Where does one go to get an un-doctored reproduction of the original lithograph?

10:03 PM, November 04, 2013  
Anonymous Framed Paper Art said...

Hatching, “Image: 11.5” x 10” Paper: 15” x 10”, Serigraphy, Stonehenge,” p. ... framedpaperart.blogspot.com

12:14 PM, August 25, 2014  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

FREE hit counter and Internet traffic statistics from freestats.com