Continuing our series of interviews with leading experts of Russian art-рынка. Questions on AI meets the biggest expert on Russian and Soviet art of the twentieth century by Julia Rybakova

ARTinvestment.RU from Time to time we read and hear that experts disagree about a work of art. Therefore, there is a perception that the work of the expert subjective — say, each sees-своему and make their own conclusions. In fact, it is based on scientific research, vast knowledge, experience — on them based even intuitive ideas. How the expert came to the decision, and how difficult then it is no doubt?

Yulia Rybakova: Usually just look and understand that this works fine. Insight, and then question — is not always good.

the Examiner is required to make decisions, he can't waver and be indecisive. But at the same time, the expert should not only focus on one version, there's always a danger that subconsciously you start to make the evidence fit a specific idea, ignoring the inconsistencies. I try to learn a thing comprehensively, although, of course, there are cases when a stylistic analysis and knowledge of the biography of the artist.

for Example, see the great work of Minas Avetisyan signed 1958. Recognizable Mature style and flavor, but in the late fifties, this Armenian artist was just learning, to develop individual style, creating a more realistic or impressionistic stuff. Such an inconsistency simply does not occur...

But it happens. I recently brought a work by Boris Grigoriev: old cardboard, genre scene, very "Grigorevsky" composition. At first glance everything is fine. Thing published in a reputable book about Grigoriev. Our research — comparison of x-ray and chemical analysis — doubts about the authorship is not caused.

I have sat down to write the conclusion, but decided just in case to double check yourself. Grigoriev all-таки troubled artist, many copies. Began methodically to look through all the old periodicals and on the cover of the literary art magazine "Lukomorye" (published in Saint-Петербурге/Petrograd in the years 1914-1917. — AI.) saw a reproduction of the same scene. In the job I was holding, was that-то elusive, which caused a slight confusion: a strange turn of his hand, a bit unnatural curved shape. And on that reproduction was evident that it was not just hand in my work and the lace of the dress, where the hand hits. We together with expert Olga Glebova (Olga Glebova — expert, a specialist in Russian drawing XIX — first half of the twentieth century. — AI.) came to the conclusion that on the cover of — original, and I have, sadly, no copy.

In the above case, it was possible to make a mistake and give a positive opinion, especially that colorful pigments, certain chemical study, were not contrary to the intended time of creation.

AI: as far As chemical analysis is effective when dealing with works of the twentieth century?

Yu. R.: Any solid thing of the twentieth century requires a chemical test, is our support. Before chemical analysis was mainly used for the attribution of old masters, as even 15 years ago could not identify all impurities, synthetic additives. It has now become possible. There are new, modern instrument research and new methods.

Sometimes paint pigments to perfectly match the time, but Supplement alarming. The expert is also necessary to engage in this process — for example, if you know what work needs to be no later twenties of the twentieth century, mention to narrow it down and not miss what-то important. Another thing is that the analysis process is expensive and long, and good chemists — rare.

In respect of the examination of the paintings and drawings I am a patriot. In Russia today, in my opinion, very strong, even unique, comprehensive expertise, and level of chemical studies of the paintings are often higher than abroad. In Europe usually separate lab, separate experts-искусствоведы who are not always able to correctly assess engineering data.

we Have the same expert can style to perform, and radiographs to compare, and the paint layer when viewed in a microscope to evaluate, and sometimes even samples for chemical research myself to take.

AI: however, the European experts and art-институции from time to time organize exhibitions, publish catalogs, which, in fact, legalized counterfeiting, or, to put it mildly, questionable things masters of the Russian avant-garde. Suffice it to recall the exhibition of the collection Toporovskaya in Ghent in 2017 or a release in 2010-м 2011-м years the books of Natalia Goncharova, compiled by Anthony Parton and Denise Baseto.

Yu. R.: the History of Ghent and a collection Toporovskaya (see forum AI: "Strange "Russian avant-garde" at exhibition in Gent". — AI.) arose largely due to the fact that experts from Russia, and Russian art in General are in Europe, to put it mildly condescending. There are old masters and there are the Impressionists, there are Picasso, Matisse, van Gogh and so on. Our masters at the periphery, with the exception, perhaps, Kandinsky and Chagall, Jawlensky partly. And that is because they do not think Russian authors. Others, even Goncharova and Larionov, which now so much interest is, it is still not so important. Director MSK Catherine de Zeger even thought to do that-то to check. She was fascinated by the role of the revealer of the whole layer of "unknown masterpieces of the avant-garde." Why else would someone-то to consult, to bother with the examinations? All the same it is clear. I don't think-либо of the most respected Russian experts could consider this work authentic. Don't want to involve our experts — go myself in Russia, look at paintings in museums, but in principle and in Paris is where to look. Read at least research about them. And here's a snobbery!

And this is not an isolated case. Recently, I flew to Milan to watch a collection which has invested a lot of money, even where-то the exhibition was held. Again, Klyun, Popova, Tatlin — any of this stuff. They even just the level of performance is below any criticism. But who is-то is bought and who is-то then in the Museum were exposed.

with regard to the publication of the British Professor Anthony Parton (author of the book "Goncharova: The Art and Design of Natalia Goncharova" containing a huge number of fakes and questionable things and therefore prohibited for sale in Russia. — AI.), it quite a long time I fell into the hands of the work of Larionov with his confirmation. I had the opinion that it is the work of Goncharova and Larionov not. I wrote the Professor a letter, sharing doubts. He replied that he assumed the authorshipGoncharova, but watched the picture by the pictures. And asked them to send me a photo back, so never saw it. In my youth I was in shock: how can you give an opinion of authenticity based on photos, not examined work!

AI: What can I do to Russian experts began to appreciate abroad?

Yu. R.: More publicity, discussions, open discussions, presentations at international conferences, and articles. And probably, if the Western auctions will return money for the sold work of dubious Russian art, based on the conclusions of our experts (but now it's quite rare and a long history), the more likely that Russian specialists and art in General will be treated carefully.

Remember Vekselberg with Kustodiev (see AI: ""odalisque" against "Christie". Who's the best?". — AI.). Understand why it is so many years sued Christie's. There was a difficult situation, a mixed picture. But of course, when a person pays a lot of money (sale price of £1.7 million, the buyer sued £3 million — AI.), he wants to have a flawless performance. His right.

AI: unfortunately, often works of Russian art are present in different directories, auction or exhibition, without specifying the history of their existence (provenance). Today, fortunately, has almost disappeared objective reasons which led to this sad situation. However, the impression is that these few decades are not the only things lost its history, but also our compatriots have ceased to understand what is provenance and how important it is.

Yu. R.: In art of the twentieth century, in addition to the stylistic features of the biography of the artist, technological expertise, a mandatory thing — provenance. And with that in Russia the most difficult. Often have to check the work and not saying where it came from. Maybe you don't want to give access to the owners or the family or the origin of things is questionable. When it is impossible to trace the chain of authorship is necessary to confirm by circumstantial evidence. For each of the investigations can take huge amount of time.

As-то I brought a lot of vertical work, depicting a standing Nude. While the figures were cropped the top of the head. There's no signature on the back the inscription: "Victor Bart@20 semicolon-е years in Paris; 4 sisters Bruises." All. And this thing must be as-то to work. Indeed, there was an artist-авангардист Victor Bart, who in 1910-х were in the midst of artistic events, was friends with Mayakovsky, Larionov, Burlyuk, organized the exhibition "Jack of diamonds". After the revolution, was in Paris, and then foolishly in the thirties back in the USSR. Don't arrest him, they simply forgot about it.

Professionals who are involved in Mayakovsky, Kruchenykh, the futurist, usually know Bart, but just as a creative person, maybe as an artist-иллюстратора and its painting, but a couple of the works is unknown. Left no books, no exhibitions, no heirs.

the Starting point of my research has been the inscriptions on the stretcher. Sisters Sinyakova really well known, they were called "Kharkiv Muse futurism". "Sinakevich five sisters. Each of them-своему beautiful. Their house was futurism. Allthem was in love with Khlebnikov, Nadia — Pasternak, Maria — Burliuk, Oksana married Aseev", — wrote Lilya Brik. After spending several months in archives and libraries, I found out that the artist Maria Sinyakova-Уречина supported Bart after his return to the Soviet Union. Then he turned to those who knew her researcher Burliuk and Mayakovsky Alexander Parnis, who confirmed that Bart and Maria Sinyakova hung out with, her house was the artist's work.

At that point I was sure the painting was created after returning to the Soviet Union, not in 1920-е years, as written in the subframe. In Paris, the style of the works of Bart was different. But no information about this specific work, I find I could not. And when you're desperate, I accidentally found the memoirs of the artist Konstantin Edelstein, who worked with Bart in the monumental Studio of Lev Bruni in 1930-е years. He remembered Bart, and also describes several of his works, citing several comical story about the creation of Nude large format, which the author why-то couldn't fit his head in the song and it was cut off. The reason Bart couldn't explain and innocently replied, "Yes, that does not fit the head, not enough space". Here are all the pieces of the puzzle finally fall into place, and I understand that this is the work, which I have.

With the attribution of art need to be as an investigator, to study different variants. I often even exhibitions walking difficult (now, I like to give mono-блокбастеры) in museums. I have a professional deformation: look and try to understand that that thing where, as it is written, can it then be based in the expertise which the typical techniques of the artist. It is just contemplation and enjoyment of a fine painting.

AI: what you need to pay attention to when the purchase of works of art?

Yu. R.: the number one Rule — to pay attention to all the smallest details, nuances, and inconsistencies. The necessary technological studies to make mandatory. Of course, it all depends on the value of the proposed work. But it is better to obtain several independent opinions-экспертиз. It is also important provenance and even then, who is it, and how you sell the job. It often happens that I start to rush with paying to leave a Deposit, pay urgently, give the work just for the day. The buyer is nervous, starts to rush myself and rush the expert. Usually nothing good comes out. In General, such a rush, especially with expensive items avant-garde, should alert.

the Russian buyers are often blind faith, to put it mildly, adventurers from Europe, who are juggling with the names of celebrities and the names of the aristocrats, talk about dinner parties and VIP-вернисажи, and then casually offered a dubious Kandinsky and Jawlensky. Malevich, incidentally, is not so frequently counterfeited, usually occurs Popov. But even if you get caught the work of Malevich, which is in the publications, were at the exhibitions, you still need to check. Every detail is important. The old attribution is not a panacea. The expert may receive other information and change their opinion one way and the other way. At the same time, you have to understand that attribution and expertise help you now not to make a mistake, buy the real thing,way to invest. But leave expert paper inherited the family will not work. In 10-15 years today's expertise will begin to double-check. There is nothing eternal.

the Questions asked Maria Ghanians, especially for the AI