Sunday, February 24, 2008

Rodin: In His Own Words FRAUD, the Iris & B. Gerald Cantor Foundation's touring road show of 29 non-disclosed FAKES

Updated: August 8, 2009

NOTE: All footnotes are enclosed with { }.

Auguste Rodin
Burghers of Calais, 1st Maquette
1884, date of cast unknown, Bronze, Godard {foundry}, 5
13 3/8 x 13 3./4 x 9 1/2 in.
Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation
Photograph from www.cantor foundation.org/ Rodin/Gallery/ rvg32.html








The Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation’s Rodin: In His Own Words exhibition is “a knowing misrepresentation of the truth or concealment of a material fact to induce another to act to his or her detriment”{1} which is one legal definition of -fraud-.

In this Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation exhibition of so-called Auguste Rodin “bronzes,”{2} promoted as “by - Auguste Rodin”{3}, at least twenty-nine were posthumously forged between 1925 and 1995 with counterfeit “A. Rodin” signatures applied, some eight to seventy-eight years after Auguste Rodin’s death in 1917.

How'd he do that?

If we accept the common sense perspective that -the dead don’t create bronzes-, much less -sign and number- anything, wouldn’t the deceptive promotion of reproductions as “bronzes - by Auguste Rodin” make them “something that’s not what it purports to be”{4} which is one legal definition of -fake-?

An example of one of these non-disclosed fakes is "Burghers of Calais, 1st Maquette" listed above as “1884, date of cast unknown, Bronze, Godard {foundry}, 5.”{5}

The Godard foundry didn’t begin working with the Musee Rodin till "1969"{6} some fifty-two years after Auguste Rodin’s death in 1917.

Yet, in the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation’s 2001 Rodin A Magnificent Obsession catalogue, it is also listed as “Signed and numbered A. Rodin No. 5 and inscribed E. Godard Fondeur.”{7}

Once again, how'd he do that?

Therefore, in the interest of full and honest disclosure, this monograph will document that in violation of Auguste Rodin’s 1916 Will, a corrupt Musee Rodin: 1) does not reproduce in bronze from Auguste Rodin’s original plasters, 2) posthumously applies counterfeit “Rodin” or “A. Rodin” signatures to their second-generation-removed -FAKES-, 3) does not limit editions to twelve as promoted, 4) has allowed the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation to pick the color/patina of a bronze they in turn promote as an original Auguste Rodin and 5) falsely attributes life-casts and altered work to Auguste Rodin.


TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
BRIEF SUMMARY - WHY ARE THESE 29 RODINS FAKE?
THE TRUE CHRONOLOGY OF TWENTY-NINE FAKES

1. NOT FROM THE RODIN’S ORIGINAL PLASTERS
2. COUNTERFEIT SIGNATURES
3. EDITIONS NOT LIMITED TO TWELVE
4. CANTOR FOUNDATION -PICKS- THE COLOR
5. LIFE-CAST FALSELY ATTRIBUTED TO RODIN
6. MUSEE RODIN GIVEN REPRODUCTION RIGHTS
7. CORRUPT MUSEE RODIN
8. AMERICA IS NOT A FRENCH PROVINCE
9. CANTOR FOUNDATION’S AVARICE
10. 25 MILLION REASONS TO DEFRAUD
11. CONNOISSEURSHIP
12. ACADEMIC DISHONESTY
13. SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS
14. CONCLUSION

PRINCIPALS
FOOTNOTES
WEBSITE
ADDENDUM (Exhibition venues)

BRIEF SUMMARY - WHY ARE THESE 29 -RODINS- FAKE?











1. NOT FROM RODIN’S ORIGINAL PLASTERS
The Musee Rodin admits they do not reproduce from
Rodin’s original plaster but plaster reproductions, making
them second-generation-removed -fakes-.





2. COUNTERFEIT SIGNATURES
The Musee Rodin posthumously applies counterfeit
“A Rodin” or “Rodin” signatures to these second-
generation-removed -fakes-.

















3. EDITIONS NOT LIMITED TO TWELVE
The Musee Rodin doesn’t always limit their editions
to twelve as mandated by French decrees.









4. CANTOR FOUNDATION -PICKS- THE COLOR
The Musee Rodin allows wealthy benefactors such as
the Cantors to picked the color {patina} of a bronze that
they in turn promote as an Auguste Rodin.








5. LIFE-CAST FALSELY ATTRIBUTED TO RODIN
The Musee Rodin violates Auguste Rodin’s legacy by
attributing to him a life-cast of his hand posthumously
altered. The very thing he denied doing, -casting from life-,
is falsely attributed to him as if it makes no difference.



“Auguste Rodin, Burghers of Calais, 1st Maquette
1884, date of cast unknown, Bronze, Godard {foundry}, 5, 13 3/8 x 13 3./4 x 9 1/2 in., Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation," Photograph from www.cantor foundation.org/ Rodin/Gallery/ rvg32.html
NOTE: As documented earlier the Godard foundry did not begin working with the Musee Rodin till 1969, some fifty-two years after Auguste Rodin's death in 1917.




THE TRUE CHRONOLOGY OF TWENTY-NINE FAKES

The Rodin: In His Own Words exhibition has only seven potential lifetime reproduction/casts. The other twenty-nine non-disclosed fakes in the exhibit were posthumously reproduced between 1925 and 1995, eight to seventy-eight years after Auguste Rodin’s death in 1917.

The documentation for the enclosed was, in part, acquired from the Northwestern Michigan College Dennos Museum Center’s 2006 Rodin: In His Own Words exhibition checklist and the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation’s published 2001 Rodin A Magnificent Obsession catalogue.

These seven non-disclosed reproductions and twenty-nine posthumous fakes are listed separately below in numerical order (mine), chronologically (mine), title, “cast” dates when listed, foundries and the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation’s numbering system: “CCID #.”


1881 to 1886
1. UGOLINO AND SONS, c. 1881-82, date of cast unknown, no foundry mark, CCID #1550
2. THE SPIRIT OF WAR, 1883, Griffoul & Lorge, date of cast unknown, CCID #1454
3. WOMAN WITH CRAB, c. 1886, date of cast unknown, CCID #12500


1902 to 1952
4. HEAD OF BALZAC, PENULTIMATE STUDY, 1897, Alexis Rudier, CCID #1208
5. I AM BEAUTIFUL, before 1886, date of cast unknown, Alexis Rudier, CCID #1714
6. LEFT HAND OF PIERRE DE WIESSANT, c.1884-89, date of cast unknown, Alexis Rudier, CCID #1610
7. SMALL CLENCHED RIGHT HAND, c.1885, date of cast unknown, Alexis Rudier, CCID #2150

Auguste Rodin died in 1917.

1925
1. SAINT JOHN THE BAPTIST PREACHING, 1925, Alexis Rudier, CCID #1726

1931
2. THE THINKER, 1931, Alexis Rudier, CCID #11100

1959
3. THREE FAUNESSES, 1959, Georges Rudier, CCID #1596

1964 to 1969 or later
4. MASK OF IRIS, 1964, Georges Rudier, CCID #1506
5. ANDRIEU D’ANDRES, 1966, Georges Rudier, CCID #1497
6. BURGHERS OF CALAIS, 1ST MAQUETTE, 1884, date of casting unknown, Godard, CCID #1498

1973 to 1979
7. THE NIGHT (SINGLE FIGURE), 1973, Georges Rudier, CCID #567
8. FALLING MAN, 1974, Susse, CCID #657
9. HEAD OF POPE BENEDICT XV, 1978, Georges Rudier, CCID #1608
10. VENUS, 1978, Godard, CCID #1599
11. SMALL TORSO OF A WOMAN (TYPE ‘A’), 1978, Georges Rudier, CCID #1552
12. MASK OF THE MAN WITH THE BROKEN NOSE, 1979, Coubertin, CCID #1368
13. DANAID, 1979, Godard, CCID #1600
14. FEMALE TORSO (V & A), 1979, Godard, CCID #1609
15. TORSO OF THE WALKING MAN, 1979, Coubertin, CCID #1516

1983 to 1988
16. PAOLO AND FRANCESCA, 1983, Georges Rudier, CCID #1299
17. THE NIGHT (Double Figure), 1983, Godard, CCID #1340
18. SORROW, 1983, Coubertin, CCID #1346
19. FEMALE TORSO, KNEELING, TWISTING NUDE, 1984, Godard, CCID #1509
20. MONUMENTAL HEAD OF SAINT JOHN THE BAPTIST, 1985, CCID #1427
21. HEAD OF BALZAC, 1985, Godard, CCID #1401
22. TRAGIC MUSEE, 1986, Godard, CCID #1504
23. JULES BASTEIN-LEPAGE, 1988, Coubertin, CCID #1565

1990 to 1995
24. TEN STEP LOST WAX CASTING PROCESS OF AUGUSTE RODIN’S SORROW, 1990, Coubertin, CCID #1494
25. DESPAIRING ADOLESCENT (TORSO OF), 1992, Godard, CCID #1577
26. CLAUDE LORRAIN, 1993, Coubertin, CCID #1564
27. HEAD OF SHADE, 1995, Godard, CCID #1681
28. ECCLESIASTES, 1995, Godard, CCID #1683
29. SPINX ON A COLUMN, 1995, Godard, CCID #1684










Assemblage of two figures of Eve and the Crouching Woman circa 1905-1907 98,5 x 55 x 36,5 cm S.184 Photo: E. &P> Hesmerg www.musee- rodin.fr/ welcome.htm



1.
NOT FROM RODIN’S ORIGINAL PLASTERS

On the Musee Rodin's www.musee-rodin.fr{7} website, Musee Rodin curator Antoinette Le Normaid-Romain wrote: “Consequently, whenever it is decided to release a new ‘subject,’ a copy is first made from the old mould which can be sent without risk to the foundry where it undergoes the necessary preparations for casting. It is coated with an unmoulding agent, usually in a dark colour, and cut, before being cast again. This practice not only ensures absolute fidelity to the original but also preserves the old plasters which are obviously more valuable since they were made during the lifetime of Rodin.”

Therefore, the Musee Rodin is directly violating Auguste Rodin’s 1916 Will, which gave upon his death the State of France the “right of reproduction to objects given by him.” Auguste Rodin’s 1916 Will is further documented in Chapter 6 of this monograph.

By definition, a -reproduction-{8} is a copy of an original work of art done by someone other than the artist.

Therefore, any bronzes reproduced from these plaster reproductions would not be reproductions of an original work of art as required by the definition of reproduction but copies of copies. As a result these second-generation removed three-dimensional objects in bronze would be “something that is not what it purports to be”{9} which is, once again, one legal definition of -fake-.”

In other words, by the Musee Rodin avoiding sending the hypothetical original plasters to the foundry, they have willingly given up the authentic original surface details made by the working fingers of Auguste Rodin himself or that Auguste Rodin approved through his collaboration with his “sculpteur reproducteur habituel” Henri Lebosse. Each time the surface of one of these subjects is approximated by the necessary crude handling of the materials used in the reproduction processes, there is visible change. The resulting pieces may be interesting to look at, but it is an absurdity to pretend they are just the way Rodin would have wanted and intended for them to appear.





2.
COUNTERFEIT SIGNATURES

The Musee Rodin counterfeits either an “A Rodin” or “Rodin” signature to their second-generation removed fakes they posthumously reproduce in bronze. This fraud is confirmed in Tasende Gallery’s published 1999 Sculptures from the Musee Rodin, Paris catalogue. On page 47, it states: “All work cast under commission by the Musee Rodin includes the following mandatory inscriptions - Rodin’s signature.”{10}

The above so-called “A Rodin” signatures for the titled “Martyr”{11} clearly exposes the Musee Rodin’s capacity for fraud.

STAMPED WITH THE ARTIST’S SIGNATURE
The former Musee Rodin curator Monique Laurent documents on page 22 of her 1991 RODIN{12} catalogue that during Auguste Rodin’s lifetime, Auguste Rodin supplied a sample of his signature to the foundries for them to copy and stamp onto the bronzes they cast for him. Upon Auguste Rodin’s death in 1917, the right to stamp his signature died with him.

WHAT IS A SIGNATURE?
On page 1386 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.”

WHAT IS 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.”

Would the posthumous application of a counterfeit “Rodin’s signature” to posthumously reproduced objects be done with “the purpose of deceiving or defrauding?”

















3. EDITIONS NOT LIMITED TO TWELVE
On page 121 in Philadelphia Museum of Art’s published 1976 Sculpture of Auguste Rodin{13} catalogue, there are -eighteen- 79 inch high “The Thinkers” listed and one of them is listed as: “Cast no. 10/12” and owned by “Beverly Hills, Cantor Fitzgerald Art Foundation.”

This is the same Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation that, on their current 2007 www.cantorfoundation.org/ Rodin/Bronze/ rbrz.html website, states: “In 1956 French law limited production to twelve casts of each model. - This law was reestablished and strictly imposed in 1981.”

If the facts contradict the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation’s promotion that any of the so-called Rodins are “limit production of twelve casts,” can we truly count on anything they state?















"The last stage in the casting process: patination." (Page 34, 1998 Sculpture Review)

4. CANTOR FOUNDATION -PICKS- THE COLOR
In 1996, the Musee Rodin allowed the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation to pick the color of Auguste Rodin’s “Monument to Victor Hugo” being reproduced in bronze.

This is confirmed in the Fall 1998 Sculpture Review trade magazine published “Casting of the Monument” article by the Coubertin founders Frederic Colombier and Jean Dubo. On page 34 of this article, the founders wrote: “THE PATINATION. The last stage is patination. It is the most delicate and essential as it brings out the full richness of the metal. After presentation of samples, the Musee Rodin and the Cantor Foundation approve the color to be achieved.”

This is additionally confirmed in Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation’s published 1998 Rodin’s Monument to Victor Hugo catalogue. On page 10 of the “Forward,” the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation Executive Director Rachael Blackburn states: “Ruth Butler, professor emerita at the University of Massachusetts in Boston, who wrote the introduction to this catalogue, offered her insightful guidance and worked closely with Mrs. Cantor, the Musee Rodin, and the foundry to determine the delicate nuances of the monument’s patina.”

In September 21, 1999 telephone conversation{14} with the Musee Rodin Board of Directors member Ruth Butler, she informed this scholar that Iris Cantor had asked her to observe the casting and patina of Auguste Rodin’s “Monument to Victor Hugo” bronze that the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation was purchasing from the Musee Rodin. When asked whether there was any historical research that would document what Auguste Rodin might had selected as the patina for this bronze, Ruth Butler answered: “it would be up to the foundry.”

Finally, when asked whether the Coubertin foundry, which went into business in 1963 some forty-six years after Auguste Rodin’s death, had asked for her approval of the patina, she answered: “Well.”















www.cantorfoundation.org/Rodin/Gallery/rvg65.html

5. LIFE-CAST FALSELY ATTRIBUTED TO RODIN
The Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation’s so-called “Hand of Rodin Holding Torso” is a life-cast combined with a plaster cast and posthumously reproduced in bronze by the Georges Rudier foundry in 1968 with a counterfeit “A Rodin” signature applied.

This life-cast is confirmed, on page 210 of the Musee Rodin’s published 2004 RODIN{15} catalogue by the Musee Rodin curator Ralphael Masson and archivist Veronique Mattiussi, the authors wrote: “Shortly before Rodin’s death, {Musee du Luxembourg curator & future Musee Rodin director} Benedite asked that a studio assistant make a cast of the sculptor’s hand.”

Additionally, the counterfeiting of his signature, is backhandedly confirmed in the Philadelphia Museum of Art’s published 1976 Sculpture of Auguste Rodin catalogue by John Tancock. On page 637, the author wrote: “This composite work, made from a life cast and an original work - {was} not signed or inscribed.”

So, the moment Auguste Rodin dies, the very thing he denied his whole life doing, casting from life, is now credited to him by the Musee Rodin and others like the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation, as if it makes no damn difference.

And to think the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation’s “Mission Statement” states they “focuses on the art of Auguste Rodin.”







Auguste Rodin's 1917 funeral.

6. MUSEE RODIN GIVEN REPRODUCTION RIGHTS
In Auguste Rodin’s 1916 Will, in part, stated: “notwithstanding the transfer of artistic ownership authorized to the State of M. Rodin, the latter expressly reserves for himself the enjoyment, during his life, of the reproduction rights of those objects given by him.”

This is documented on page 285 in the former Musee Rodin curator Monique Laurent’s “Observations on Rodin and His Founders” essay, published in the National Gallery of Art’s published 1981 Rodin Rediscovered catalogue.

In other words, the State of France, upon Auguste Rodin's death, would own the right to reproduce his work.

RUTH BUTLER AND REPRODUCTION RIGHTS
These specific details of Auguste Rodin’s Will are additional confirmed on page 504 of the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation assisted published 1993 Rodin, Shape of Genius{16} biography by Ruth Butler. In part, the author wrote: “a draft of an act of donation was drawn up and signed in Meudon on April 1, 1916, in the presence of Clementel, Valention (representing the Ministere des Beaux-Arts), and Antole de Monzie, the lawyer and deputy who had helped prepare the deed. The document included a number of safeguards for Rodin: at the Hotel Biron--thenceforth to be called the Musee Rodin--he was to be in charge of personnel. He would have the right to use the building until the end of his life, and the state would install heat. All reproduction rights to his art would remain with Rodin during his lifetime.”

FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE MUSEUM OF FRANCE JEAN CHATELAIN
These two perspectives are clearly perpetuated on page 279 in the National Gallery of Art’s published 1981 Rodin Rediscovered catalogue in the “An Original in Sculpture” essay by the professor at the University of Paris and former director of the Museums of France Jean Chatelain. In part, the professor wrote: “When the twelfth copy of ‘The Burghers of Calais’ is cast, the same plaster model will be used as was used the first time in 1894, but of course different craftsmen will carry out the casting.”

As documented in Chapter 1 of this monograph, the Musee Rodin violates Auguste Rodin’s 1916 Will and does not use Auguste Rodin’s original plasters ie., “objects given by him” for casting in bronze.













7. CORRUPT MUSEE RODIN

The moment of Rodin’s death in 1917, like vultures waiting to pick his bones, his former collaborators and those administratively entrusted to protect his legacy, begin subverting it.

FIRST MUSEE RODIN DIRECTOR ALTERED RODIN'S WORK
A prime example of this subversion can be found in Albert Elsen’s 1985 Gates of Hell by Auguste Rodin{17} book. On page 148, the author wrote: “As events after Rodin’s death were to prove, Benedite did overstep his authority on certain occasions. In the matter of the final assembly of the doorway, Judith Cladel, who was dismissed by Benedite as a curator at the Musee Rodin, wrote during the years 1933-36 that workmen told her in 1917 that Benedite edited their efforts on at least one occasion in a way they felt Rodin would not have approved: “Some of Rodin’s scandalized assistants who cast his plasters made it known to me that, charged with the reassembly of The Gates of Hell, they received orders to place certain figures in different arrangement than that which the artist wanted, because “that would be better.”

Additionally, one of those “occasions,” is noted in Albert Elsen’s Footnote 17 on page 253 of his book, where the author wrote: “In 1921, during the course of a trial on charges brought by the State against a founder who was casting Rodin’s work without authorization, it was shown that Benedite had authorized the enlargement of Rodin’s La Defense after the artist’s death.”

HENRI LEBOSSE, SCULPTEUR REPRODUCTEUR HABITUEL & BETRAYER
On page 253, in Albert Elsen’s “Rodin’s ‘Perfect Collaborator,’ Henri Lebosse” essay in the National Gallery of Art’s 1981 Rodin Rediscovered exhibition catalogue, the author wrote: “From the mid-1890’s until his death, Rodin entrusted most if not all of his important enlargements and reductions to this dedicated and today unknown technician who referred to himself as Rodin’s ‘sculpteur reproducteur habituel.’”

Unfortunately, Henri Lebosse became one of Auguste Rodin’s biggest betrayers. Albert Elsen documents on page 256 of his essay that after August Rodin’s death in 1917, the Musee Rodin Director Benedite directed Henri Lebosse to increase the original scale of the sculpture “The Defense” four times. Albert Elsen wrote: “Tragically for Rodin’s “perfect collaborator,” the Verdun enlargement became part of a 1920 scandal involving fake works, marble carvers who continued to turn out sculpture signed with Rodin’s name, and unauthorized bronze casts by the Barbedienne foundry.”

The Musee Rodin’s inauspicious beginnings after Auguste Rodin’s death in 1917 has not changed much in ninety years as documented by the current Musee Rodin’s deceptive application of counterfeit “A Rodin” signatures to second-generation removed bronze fakes in editions not always limited to twelve.

8. AMERICA IS NOT A FRENCH PROVINCE
There are quite a few in the museum and academic industry{18} who will defend and have defended the misrepresentation of reproductions, much less posthumous reproductions, as “works of visual art” ie., -sculptures- by making blanket statements that these reproduced objects are originals in exhibits in American museums because they adhere to current “French Law” or that nineteenth-century standards are applicable.

Well, America is not a French province and this is the twentieth-first century.

U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW - WHAT IS A SCULPTURE?
Under U.S. Copyright Law 101. Definitions, a “work of visual art” ie., -sculpture- is defined as: “multiple cast, carved, or fabricated sculptures of 200 or fewer that are consecutively numbered by the author and bear the signature or other identifying mark of the author.”

In otherwords, since the 29 non-disclosed fakes in this Rodin: In His Own Words exhibit were reproduced between 1925 and 1995 some eight to seventy-eight years after Auguste Rodin’s death in 1917, it should be overtly obvious Auguste Rodin could not have “consecutively numbered” anything, much less applied his “signature.”

U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW - WHAT IS A REPRODUCTION?
Additionally, under U.S. Copyright Law 101. Definitions, a “derivative work” is defined as: “a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as {an} art reproduction.” Furthermore, under U.S. Copyright 106A, it states the “Rights of Attribution - shall not apply to any reproduction.”

In other words, under U.S. Copyright Law, reproductions cannot be “attributed” to a living artist, much less a dead one.

FRENCH DECREE - FULL DISCLOSURE OF REPRODUCTIONS
The March 3, 1981 French decree no. 81.255, Article 9, in part, states: “All facsimiles, casts of casts, copies, or other reproductions of an original work of art as set out in Article 71 of Appendix III of the General Code of Taxes, executed after the date of effectiveness of the present decree, must carry in a visible and indelible manner the notation ‘Reproduction’.”{19}

So, whether it is U.S. Copyright Law or a French decree, reproductions are -REPRODUCTIONS-.


www.cantorfoundation.org
Rodin, Auguste,Gates of Hell, 3rd Maquette, 1880, Musee Rodin cast 1/8 in 1991, Bronze,Cast: 1/8 Foundry: Godard,Patina: X, Dimensions: 43 5/8 x 29 1/16 x 11 3/4 in., CC ID# 1511,Iris and B. Gerald Collection, Insurance $250,000



www.stanford.edu
Rodin, Auguste, Kiss, the, c. 1881-82, Bronze,Cast: X Foundry: Barbedienne, Patina: brown with gold highlights,Dimensions: 10 x 6 1/4 x 5 7/8 in., CC ID# 1711, Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Center for Visual Arts at Stanford University, gift of Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation, Insurance $50,000

(Source: Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation’s exhibition and insurance checklists.)

9. CANTOR FOUNDATION’S AVARICE{20}
Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation is driven by money, not scholarship. This is made clear by their own words.

RODIN 101: DOCENT MANUEL
In the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation’s published “RODIN 101: DOCENT MANUEL,”{21} it asks the following question: “Is there more ‘value’ ascribed to works made by one foundry than by another?”

The answer given is: “In terms of monetary ‘value’ and interest to a collector or institution, there is a higher ‘value’ put on works produced during Rodin’s lifetime. All authorized casts made by any foundry are considered ‘originals.’ However, casts that were made before Rodin’s death in 1917 are often appraised for higher amounts and fetch larger sums at auctions.”

POSTHUMOUS REPRODUCTION $200,000 MORE THAN A LIFETIME CAST
Yet, as documented above, the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation have an insured value of $250,000 for Gates of Hell, 3rd Maquette reproduced in 1991, $200,000 more than a potential lifetime cast of The Kiss insured for $50,000?

Should an extra large -FAKE- done in the last 15 years be valued five times more in insurance value than a potential lifetime cast done with the consent of the artist himself?

Doesn’t that directly contradict the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation’s written assertions in their RODIN 101: DOCENT MANUEL that “casts that were made before Rodin’s death in 1917 are often appraised for higher amounts and fetch larger sums at auctions?”

Where did the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation ever get this nonsense that reproductions are “original?”

FRENCH DECREE - ORIGINAL EDITIONS IN BRONZE
This is in all probability answered by a French decree titled: “Article 1 of a joint decree by the Ministries of Culture and Finance, issued on 5 September 1978,” which regulates the internal administration of the Musee Rodin. In part, it states: “The reproduction of works of Rodin and the editions sold by the Musee Rodin consists of; -Original editions in bronze. These are executed from models in terra cotta or in plaster realized by Rodin.”{22}

In this 1978 French decree, the term “original” is used as an adjective to describe and separate the Musee Rodin’s posthumous “editions” of reproductions in bronze of Auguste Rodin’s terra cotta or plasters from others who legally may posthumously reproduce in bronze any of Auguste Rodin’s work that is in the public domain.

IRIS & B. GERALD CANTOR FOUNDATION’S AGENDA
The Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation’s agenda of passing off their posthumous non-disclosed reproductions and second-generation-removed fakes as Auguste Rodin “originals” ie., -sculptures- is, in part, detailed on the MUSEUM-L Archives website.

This website allows those in the museum industry to post messages. The Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation’s Coordinator of Museum Program posted on August 9, 2006 under the “Subject” subtitle the following: “Rodin Exhibition Available.” In part, it states: “The Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation organizes and circulates traveling exhibitions of Rodin sculpture. - There is no curatorial fee. Host museums are responsible for the costs of insurance and incoming shipping from the previous venue, as well as all typical installation and other local expenses.”

In other words, the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation generates revenue by renting their so-called “Rodin sculptures” to museums and as a result their posthumous non-disclosed reproductions and second-generation-removed fakes are given the rubber-stamped air of authenticity that a museum inherently bestows which perception-wise leads to increased values which leads to future windfalls such as: 1) large tax-write offs for donations and/or 2) outright sales.

AUGUSTE RODIN,
The Thinker, modeled 1880, reduced in 1903. Bronze,
14-3/4 x 7-7/8 x 11-3/8 in.
Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation, promised gift to the North Carolina Museum of Art.
www.wag.mb.ca/htmlfiles/
WHATSON/EXIBITION/Rodin.asp

10. 25 MILLION REASONS TO DEFRAUD
On November 9, 2005 the North Carolina Museum of Art announced in their Press Release{23} that the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation will donate “the gift of 23 works of art, including 22 bronze sculptures by Rodin.” The News Observer newspaper, in Raleigh, North Carolina, published in a November 9, 2005 “Museum plans major Rodin center” article by Craig Jarvis that the “Museum director Larry Wheeler estimates the value of the gift at $25 million{24}.

This so-called “gift” was the successful catalyst for gaining the funding from the State of North Carolina for the North Carolina Museum of Art’s expansion for “new galleries, which will be part of a planned $75-million expansion initiative slated for completion in 2008. As part of the expansion, the Museum will establish a Rodin study center and name a Rodin gallery and adjacent garden in honor of the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation.”{25}

Just think, if the North Carolina Museum of Art had established a “Rodin study center” before they accepted this so-called “gift,” the museum would have discovered there are absolutely no “works of art” ie., -sculptures- in this Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation’s donation. A minimum of scholarship and “connoisseurship”{26} would have disclosed this Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation donation is, at best, nothing more than -reproductions-, not sculptures. Even that generous supposition is corrupted because seventeen of these so-called -Rodins- were actually posthumously reproduced with counterfeit “A Rodin”{27} signatures applied between 1919 to 1987, two to seventy years after August Rodin’s death in 1917.

How’d he do that?

On page 434 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -defraud- is defined as: “To cause injury or loss to (a person) by deceit.” Would the acquisition of over $100 million dollars of taxpayers money, to expand a museum to house a collection of non-disclosed reproductions and fakes misrepresented as sculptures, “cause injury or loss to {persons} by deceit?”

To learn more, link to: 17 FAKE RODINS at the North Carolina Museum of Art...

11. CONNOISSEURSHIP
Independently documenting the definitions of key terms is an effective way to truly document the facts behind the misrepresentation of “reproductions” as “visual works of art” ie., -sculptures-.

WHAT IS CONNOISSEURSHIP?
In Paul Duro & Michael Greenhalgh’s published Essential Art History, -connoisseurship- is defined as: “that of the art expert able to distinguish between the authentic and non-authentic, for example between an original and a copy.”

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.”

WHAT IS A CONTRACT?
On page 381 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -contract- is defined as: “An agreement between two or more parties creating obligations that are enforceable or otherwise recognizable at law.”

WHAT IS A SCULPTURE?
On page 372 in Ralph Mayer’s HarperCollins Dictionary of Art Terms & Techniques, -sculpture- is defined as: “The creation of three dimensional forms by carving, modeling or assembly. In carving, the sculptor removes unwanted material.... In modeling on the other hand, the sculptor creates a form by building it up...”

WHAT IS A SCULPTOR?
This is answered in the J. Paul Getty Trust’s www.getty.edu website. Under their Getty Vocabulary Program the term “sculptor” is defined as: “Artists who specialize in creating images and forms that are carried out primarily in three dimensions, generally in the media of stone, wood, or metal.”

U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW - WORK OF VISUAL ART
As noted earlier, under U.S. Copyright Law 101. Definitions, a “work of visual art” ie., -sculpture- is defined as: “multiple cast, carved, or fabricated sculptures of 200 or fewer that are consecutively numbered by the author and bear the signature or other identifying mark of the author.”

U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW - RIGHTS OF ATTRIBUTION
Additionally, as noted earlier, under U.S. Copyright Law 106A. Rights of Attribution - “shall not apply to any reproduction.”

WHAT IS A REPRODUCTION?
On page 350 in Ralph Mayer’s HarperCollins Dictionary of Art Terms & 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.”

Since Auguste Rodin died in 1917, obviously anything posthumously reproduced would be, at best by definition and under U.S. Copyright Law, a -reproduction-.

WHAT IS MEANT BY DISCLOSURE?
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.”

WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF CAST?
On page 70 of Ralph Mayer’s 1999 HarperCollins Dictionary of Art Terms & Techniques, -cast- is defined as: “to reproduce an object, such as a piece of sculpture, by means of a MOLD.”

For anyone to make a “representation,” that objects in their collection or exhibit, are “sculptures” then at the end make the “disclosure” that they were “cast” ie., reproduced, as if these concepts were interchangeable, would be a -non-sequitur-.

WHAT IS A NON-SEQUITUR?
On page 1080 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -non-sequitur- is defined as: “An inference or conclusion that does not logically follow from the premises.”

In other words, by definition and under U.S. Copyright Law, you cannot call a reproduction a “visual work of art” ie., sculpture, much less attribute that reproduction to that artist whether they are alive or dead. Without full and honest disclosure to reproductions as reproductions by all museums, how can the consumer give informed consent before they chose to attend an exhibit whether they pay admission or not?

WHAT IS (INFORMED) CONSENT?
On page 300 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, -consent- is defined as: “Agreement, approval or permission as to some act or purpose, esp. given voluntarily by a competent person.”

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.”

So, would a museum’s misrepresentation of posthumous second-generation removed fakes as “sculptures,” for monetary considerations, be committing “a knowing misrepresentation of the truth or concealment of a material fact to induce another to act to his or her detriment?”

12. ACADEMIC DISHONESTY
One of the prior venues, from May 18 to August, 2007 for this so-called Rodin: In His Own Words exhibition, was at the Gibbes Museum of Art located in Charleston, South Carolina.

On the Gibbes Museum of Art’s www.gibbesmuseum.org/learn/learn_main.html website, in part, it stated: “We want to generate conversations of art and culture and we welcome all audiences - frequent museum visitors and first-time guests. - As Charleston’s only visual arts museum, the programs are designed - to generate critical conversation on art and culture.

The University of South Carolina’s “Academic Intergity“{28} code, in part, states: “It is the responsibility of every student at the University of South Carolina Columbia to adhere steadfastly to truthfulness and to avoid dishonesty, fraud, or deceit of any type in connection with any academic program. Any student who violates this Honor Code or who knowingly assists another to violate this Honor Code shall be subject to discipline.”

It further states: “This Honor Code is intended to prohibit all forms of academic dishonesty and should be interpreted broadly to carry out that purpose. The following examples illustrate conduct that violates this Honor Code, but this list is not intended to be an exhaustive compilation of conduct prohibited by the Honor Code: - 5. Intentional misrepresentation by word or action of any situation of fact, or intentional omission of material fact, so as to mislead any person in connection with any academic work (including, without limitation, the scheduling, completion, performance, or submission of any such work).”

Unfortunately, the Gibbes Museum of Art is violating the spirit, if not the letter of this academic honor code, by misrepresenting reproductions and second-generation removed -FAKES- as “bronzes by the French sculptor Auguste Rodin.”{29}

In other words, if an University of South Carolina student brought something to class they didn’t create, much less sign, and tried to pass it off as if they did but got caught, what would happen? Aside a failing grade, they potentially face “expulsion, suspension or warning.”{30} Should the Gibbes Museum of Art be held to a lesser standard than ordinary students?

Is that an acceptable academic standard to set for “current and future generations,” much less students?

13. SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS
On the Gibbes Museum of Art’s www.gibbesmuseum.org/visit/visit_main.html website, during this so-called Rodin: In His Own Words exhibition, it stated admission fee for adults was $9 each.

In the Iris and B. Cantor Foundation’s published 2001 Rodin, A Magnificent Obsession catalogue, all of the so-called “bronzes - by Auguste Rodin” in this Rodin, In His Own Words exhibition are listed as “Signed A Rodin,” despite 29 of them being reproduced between 1925 and 1995, some eight to seventy-eight years after his death in 1917.

What if any laws in South Carolina may be applicable?

SOUTH CAROLINA TITLE 39 TRADE AND COMMERCE
Under Section 39-16-10 Definitions - Title 39 - Trade and Commerce - Chapter 16, Sale of Fine Prints; Disclosure Requirements{31}, the State of South Carolina defines the following terms:

“’Artist’ means any person who conceived or created.,”

"’Fine print’ means a printed image on paper or any other suitable substance which has been taken off a plate by printing, stamping, casting, or any other process commonly used in the graphic arts and includes engraving, etching, woodcut, lithograph, or serigraph.,”

"’Reproduction’ means a copy of an original print made by a commercial mechanical process which does not require the use of a plate.” and

“'Signed print' is defined as: “a fine print autographed by the artist, whether it was signed or unsigned in the plate.”

Additionally, under SECTION 39-16-30. General prohibitions; applicability to -reproductions-, in part, it states: “An art merchant or person may not knowingly publish or distribute any catalog, prospectus, or circular which offers for sale a fine print unless it clearly and conspicuously discloses all information required by Section 39-16-40. - If a print is described as a "reproduction", the information required by Section 39-16-40 is not required to be disclosed unless the print allegedly was published in a limited edition, an edition of numbered or signed prints, or any combination of them. ”

Furthermore, under SECTION 39-16-50 Violations,: penalties, a violation of these statutes could lead to but not limited to refund, interest, treble damages, fines and other serious questions of laws.

So, aside the spirit, much less the letter of the above noted South Carolina statutes, should the Gibbes Museum of Art and the Iris and and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation be held to a lesser standard of disclosure than required by all South Carolina artists and art dealers?















1
4. CONCLUSION
What needs to be accomplished is the full and honest disclosure of all reproductions as -reproductions- by all museums, auction houses and art dealers. If the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation and all participating museums will give full and honest disclosure for all reproductions as: -reproductions- it would allow museum patrons to give informed consent on whether they wish to attend an exhibit of reproductions, much less pay the price of admission

But if these objects are not reproductions by definition, direct copies of the artist’s original artwork, but second-generation-removed (or more) -fakes- with or without posthumously applied counterfeit signatures, then serious consequences of law may come into play for those who chose to misrepresent these -fakes- for profit.

The reputations and legacy of living and past artists, present and future museum art 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.

PRINCIPALS
Judith Sobol
Director
Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation
1801 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 435
Los Angeles, CA 90067
jsobol@ibgcf.org
(310) 277-4600

FOOTNOTES:
1) Page 679 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, ISBN 0-314-22864-0

2) www.gibbesmuseum.org/learn/learn_main.html

3) www.gibbesmuseum.org/learn/learn_main.html

4) Page 617, Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, ISBN 0-314-22864-0

5) Northwestern Michigan College Dennos Museum Center’s 2006 Rodin: In His Own Words exhibition checklist from the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation

6) page 293 of the former Musee Rodin curator Monique Laurent’s “Rodin and His Founders” essay, in the National Gallery of Art’s published 1981 Rodin Rediscovered catalogue, the curator documents that the “{E.} Godard” foundry began working with the Musee Rodin in “1969.”

7) page 180, RODIN, A Magnificent Obsession, ISBN 1 85894 143 1 hardback


8) On page 350 in Ralph Mayer’s Dictionary of Art Terms & Techniques, -reproduction- is defined as: “a general term for 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.”

9) Page 617 of the Seventh Edition of Black’s Law Dictionary, the term “fake” is defined as: “Something that is not what it purports to be.”

10) Page 47, RODIN, Sculptures from the Musee Rodin Paris, Tasende Gallery, Library of Congress Catalog No: 99-072906 ISBN: 9655319-5-3

11) Ibid, page 28

12) Copyright © 1988 by Ste Nlle des Editions du Chene ISBN 0-8050-1252-4

13) 1976 Sculpture of Auguste Rodin by John Tancock, ISBN 0-87923-157-2

14) Hard copy of this telephone conversation was OVERNIGHTED by U.S. Postal Service (Tracking No. EE43307188US) on September 23, 1999 to Ruth Butler 41 Holden Street Cambridge, MA 02138-2038

15) © Editions Flammartion, Paris-Musee Rodin 2004 ISBN (Editions Flammarion): 2-0803-0445-3

16) Copyright © 1993 by Ruth Butler, ISBN 0-300-05400-0

17) © 1985 by Albert E. Elsen ISBN 0-8047-1273-5, Published with the assistance of the Cantor Fitzgerald Foundation

18) In a April 2, 2004 Buffalo News “Letter to Editor” posted on their www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20040402/ 1020607.asp website the Albright_Knox Art Gallery’s Curator of Modern Art Kenneth Wayne, in part, wrote “All works in the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation Collection are unquestionably original Rodins, cast in bronze from the artist’s sculpted clay and plaster models. The bronze casts on view were created either during Rodin’s lifetime by his own hired craftsmen, or after his death.”
In a Globe and Mail’s published June 24, 2005 “Rodin’s cast of hundreds” article by Danelle Egan, Vancouver Art Gallery curator Ian Thom did admit that “the hand of Rodin did not touch these sculptures.” However, he added, “that’s not unusual because 19th-century sculptors hired technicians to finish the sculptures.”

19) On page 281, Jean Chatelain’s “Original in Sculpture,” 1981 Rodin Rediscovered, ISBN 0-89468-001-3 (pbk)

20) “Avarice” is defined, on page 22 in the Webster’s New World Pocket Dictionary, as: “greed for money.”

21) www.cantorfoundation.org/PDFfiles/Rodin101.pdf

22) On page 281, Jean Chatelain’s “Original in Sculpture,” 1981 Rodin Rediscovered ISBN 0-89468-001-3 (pbk)

23) “NORTH CAROLINA MUSEUM OF ART RECEIVES UNPRECEDENTED RODIN GIFT FROM THE IRIS AND B. GERALD CANTOR FOUNDATION”
www.ncartmuseum.org/pressroom/pressreleases/General%20Releases/Rodin%20gift.shtml

24) www.newsobserver.com/167/story/365653.html On November 9, 2005 the Raleigh, North Carolina located Newsobserver newspaper published the “Museum plans major Rodin center” article by Staff Writer Craig Jarvis (829-4576 or cjarvis@newsobserver.com). In part, the staff writer wrote: “Museum director Larry Wheeler estimates the value of the gift at $25 million. It is the largest present of art to the museum since it received 75 works from a foundation four years after it opened in 1956.”

25) www.ncartmuseum.org/pressroom/pressreleases/General%20Releases/Rodin%20gift.shtml

26) In Paul Duro & Michael Greenhalgh’s published Essential Art History, “connoisseurship” is defined as: “that of the art expert able to distinguish between the authentic and non-authentic, for example between an original and a copy.” rubens.anu.edu.au/htdocs/teach/eah/ImageServe


27) pages 175-190, RODIN, A Magnificent Obsession, ISBN 1 85894 143 1 hardback

28) www.sc.edu/academicintegrity/honorcode.html

29) www.gibbesmuseum.org/learn/learn_main.html

30) www.sc.edu/academicintegrity/honorcode.html

“5.2 The College Committee or the Dean is the final authority for the imposition of sanctions for violations of this Code. The following sanctions may be imposed upon a student found to have violated the Honor Code:

1. Expulsion from the University.
2. Suspension from the University for a period of no less than one semester.
3. A Letter of Warning (first offense only). A letter of warning indicates that any additional violations may result in immediate suspension from the University.
4. “X” on the transcript before a grade denoting an Honor Code Violation
5. Academic Integrity Workshop. This sanction may be offered by the Office of Academic Integrity. It is a four-week workshop (meeting once per week) and may be offered twice per semester. The Office of Academic Integrity will notify the Deans and College Committees when such workshops will be available.
6. Research Project- This sanction typically should be assigned for the educational benefit of the student and should be related to academic integrity or ethics on the whole or in the discipline in which the offense occurred. They will be monitored by the Office of Academic Integrity.
7. A combination of the above sanctions.”

31) www.scstatehouse.net/code/t39c016.htm

WEBSITE:
www.garyarseneau.blogspot.com

ADDENDUM:

(NOTE: Exhibition venues, from January 18, 2004 to August 23, 2009, for the titled: Rodin: In His Own Words, Selections from the Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Foundation.)

The Hyde Collection Art Museum
Glens Falls, New York
January 18 - April 11, 2004

Federal Reserve Board
Washington, D.C.
May 1 - August 22, 2004

Middlebury College Museum of Art
Middlebury, Vermont
September 14 - December 5, 2004

Jule Collins Smith Museum of Art
Auburn University
Auburn, Alabama
January 4 - March 20, 2005

Pensacola Museum of Art
Pensacola, Florida
April 8 - June 19, 2005

University of Kentucky Art Museum
Lexington, Kentucky
July 10 - September 18, 2005

The South Texas Institute for the Arts
Corpus Chrisit, Texas
October 7 - December 31, 2005

Berman Museum of Art at Ursinus College
Collegeville, Pennsylvania
January 21 - April 9, 2006

Dennos Museum Center
Northwestern Michigan College
Traverse City, Michigan
April 29 - August 6, 2006

Whatcom Museum of History and Art
Bellingham, Washington
August 26 - December 10, 2006

Brunnier Art Museum
Iowa State University Art Museums
Ames, Iowa
January 9 - March 18, 2007

Gibbes Museum of Art
Charleston, South Carolina
May 18 - August 12, 2007

Oglethorpe University Museum of Art
Atlanta, Georgia
September 1 - November 17, 2007

Howard Community College Art Gallery
Columbia, Maryland
December 8, 2007 - February 17, 2008

Hillstrom Museum of Art
Gustavus Adolphus College, St. Peter, Minnesota
March 8, 2008 - April 22, 2008

Evansville Museum of Arts, History & Science
Evansville, Indiana
May 10, 2008 - August 17, 2008

Las Cruces Museum of Art
Las Cruces, New Mexico
September 5, 2008 - November 23, 2008

Alden B. Dow Museum of Science and Art
Midland Center for the Arts, Midland, Michigan
December 13, 2008 - February 22, 2009

Stamford Museum & Nature Center
Stamford, Connecticut
March 7, 2009 - May 31, 2009

Loyola University Museum of Art
Chicago, Illinois
June 13, 2009 - August 23, 2009

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

FREE hit counter and Internet traffic statistics from freestats.com