2013年11月30日 星期六

For Fervent Fans of the Dutch Masters, ‘It’s a Dream Come True’ 在紐約親近荷蘭畫派大師之作

For Fervent Fans of the Dutch Masters, ‘It’s a Dream Come True’

November 30, 2013
Shin-Ichi Fukuoka, center, an avid fan of Vermeer, is flanked by works by that Dutch master at the Frick Collection’s popular show “Vermeer, Rembrandt and Hals: Masterpieces of Dutch Painting From the Mauritshuis.”
Shin-Ichi Fukuoka, center, an avid fan of Vermeer, is flanked by works by that Dutch master at the Frick Collection’s popular show “Vermeer, Rembrandt and Hals: Masterpieces of Dutch Painting From the Mauritshuis.”
Damon Winter/The New York Times
Shin-Ichi Fukuoka, a molecular biologist from Tokyo, really — really — loves Johannes Vermeer. He has traveled around the world to visit 34 of the 36 paintings known or believed to be Vermeers.
And last year he accepted a visiting professorship in New York in large part to witness an extraordinarily rare occurrence: the Frick Collection’s own three splendid Vermeers and three Rembrandts joined briefly by 15 works on loan from one of the world’s best Dutch collections, the Royal Picture Gallery Mauritshuis in The Hague, including one of the most famous faces in Western art, “Girl With a Pearl Earring.”
A halo surrounds Golden Age paintings from the Northern Netherlands more than almost any period of art. The Dutch masters of the 17th century — among them Vermeer, Rembrandt, Hals, Fabritius — draw loyal and obsessive museumgoers who rival those Wagner fanatics who travel the world to hear every “Ring” cycle.
Like Mr. Fukuoka, they arrange their vacations, their business trips, their reading, their friends and a good portion of the rest of their lives around seeing the quiet masterpieces created during one of the high points in painting’s history. The Frick show “Vermeer, Rembrandt and Hals” — made possible because the Mauritshuis is loaning out its treasures during an extensive renovation — broke a single-day attendance record during the exhibition’s first weekend. But a convergence is also driving traffic to the exhibition: With four Vermeers at the Frick through Jan. 19, five in the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s collection, four at the National Gallery of Art in Washington and one attributed, in whole or in part, to Vermeer now on loan to the Philadelphia Museum of Art, the Eastern Seaboard temporarily features 38.8 percent of all known Vermeers, accessible by Amtrak. (A reported 37th painting has long been disputed.)
“It’s a dream come true,” Dr. Fukuoka said during a recent visit to the Frick, explaining that, as a young man, he fell in love with Vermeer’s work while researching the history of the microscope in Delft, the artist’s hometown. “He doesn’t try to interpret the world,” he said. “There’s no egocentrism. He just tried to describe the world as it was. I think of him as a photographer in an age before photography.”
Vermeer’s “Girl With a Pearl Earring” is on loan to the Frick.
Vermeer’s “Girl With a Pearl Earring” is on loan to the Frick.
Royal Picture Gallery Mauritshuis, The Hague
Dr. Fukuoka was so moved that he organized his own Vermeer exhibition in Tokyo last year, displaying high-resolution framed photographs of the paintings in a gallery that he rented, drawing 150,000 visitors over 10 months despite having not a single actual painting. (A show of Mauritshuis works on view at the Tokyo Metropolitan Art Museum last year, including “Girl With a Pearl Earring,” drew more than a million visitors over just two and a half months.)
The line forms early, in rain or bitter cold, for the Frick show, whose timed tickets cost $20 and include the audio guide. (Admission this Friday night and other selected Friday nights is free.)
In addition to general Dutch masters mania, the show is also benefiting from the popularity of “The Goldfinch,” the new novel by Donna Tartt; the book is inspired by a small, powerful painting of the same title, on loan from the Mauritshuis, by Carel Fabritius, a student of Rembrandt who died young. Heidi Rosenau, a spokeswoman for the Frick, said that the museum has felt the newfound popularity of the Fabritius painting: For every 1,000 postcards it sold of “Girl With a Pearl Earring,” about 800 of “The Goldfinch” have been sold since the show opened on Oct. 22.
William Thurston, a gastroenterologist from San Jose, Calif., caught a plane to New York just to see the Frick show and attend a lecture on the visiting Dutch works by the Mauritshuis’s senior curator, Quentin Buvelot.
“I wouldn’t miss something like this,” Dr. Thurston said. “The history of art and the history of Western culture are what I’m interested in, and they’re so woven together, it’s just wonderful for me to come see things like this.” His passion is not limited to the Dutch; he has flown to New York on three consecutive weekends for Frick lectures about the Italian Renaissance master Giovanni Bellini and traveled to Philadelphia, St. Louis and Washington specifically to see shows covering much of the sweep of Western art. “I organize all my travel time around things like this,” he said.
Jonathan Janson, an aficionado of Dutch painting who is behind the most popular and perhaps most obsessive amateur Vermeer website, essentialvermeer.com, said that in his experience, a love of Dutch painting tends to peak with Vermeer and Rembrandt.
“For example, there really aren’t a lot of Frans Hals people out there, besides scholars and dealers, that I’ve found,” said Mr. Janson, an American painter who lives in Rome and also maintains a Rembrandt site. “After the big two, there’s sort of a ledge.”
But that said, Dutch painting fans of all sorts seek him out as something of a high command of amateur ardor, which makes sense given that he says he sometimes spends five hours a day working on his Vermeer site.
“It might be hard to believe, but there are people traipsing around the world all the time in search of these kinds of paintings,” he said. “And I guess I hear from them because they want to find somebody else who knows why they’re doing this kind of crazy thing.”
With longing, he added, “I wish I could be in New York right now.”


Damon Winter/The New York Times
東京的分子生物學家福岡伸一(Shin-Ichi Fukuoka)從心底里喜歡約翰尼斯·弗美爾(Johannes Vermeer)。他到世界各地去欣賞弗美爾的畫作,在36幅已知或據信出自弗美爾之手的作品中,他看過34幅。
去年,他接受了一個紐約的訪問教授邀請,這很大程度上是因為他想要 親眼見證一場非同尋常、難得一見的盛事:弗里克收藏(Frick Collection)藝術博物館收藏的三幅弗美爾佳作、三幅倫勃朗以及從世界頂級的荷蘭畫派收藏之一——海牙的毛里茨住宅皇家美術館 (Royal Picture Gallery Mauritshuis)借來的15幅作品,其中包括西方藝術史上最著名的面孔之一——《戴珍珠耳環的少女》(Girl With a Pearl Earring)。
與福岡先生一樣,他們的度假、出差、閱讀、朋友和其他相當大一部分 生活,都是圍繞着欣賞這些寂靜無聲的繪畫史巔峰之作進行安排的。弗里克的這次「弗美爾、倫勃朗和哈爾斯」(Vermeer, Rembrandt and Hals)展覽——多虧了毛里茨美術館在大規模翻新期間外借了館藏,才促成了這次展覽——在開幕後的第一個周末就打破了單日參觀人數紀錄。不過這股熱潮也 是因為幾場盛事湊到了一起:弗里克博物館的四幅弗美爾的作品展出到1月19日,與此同時,大都會藝術博物館(Metropolitan Museum of Art)展出着五幅弗美爾,華盛頓的國家藝術館(National Gallery of Art)展出着四幅弗美爾,還有一幅作品被認為可能有部分或全部都是弗美爾創作的,現在借給了費城藝術博物館(Philadelphia Museum of Art),這意味着,在弗美爾所有的已知畫作中,美國東海岸目前擁有其中的38.8%,乘坐美鐵(Amtrak)就可以參觀完這些作品。(坊間曾傳出找到 了第37幅弗美爾,但始終存在爭議。)
福岡博士在最近參觀弗里克博物館時說,「這是圓了我的一個夢,」他 說年輕的時候曾在弗美爾的家鄉代爾夫特研究顯微鏡的歷史,那時他就愛上了弗美爾的作品。他說,「他從沒有試圖解讀這個世界。沒有以自我為中心。他只是嘗試 描繪世界本來的樣子。我把他看做是沒有照相機的時代的一名攝影師。」
Royal Picture Gallery Mauritshuis, The Hague
福岡博士被深深打動,以至於去年在東京自己辦了一個弗美爾畫展。他 把弗美爾畫作的高分辨率照片放在相框里,在一個租來的畫廊里進行展示,儘管沒有一幅真正的作品,這次展出還是在10個月的時間裡吸引了15萬參觀者。(去 年,東京都美術館[Tokyo Metropolitan Art Museum]展出了毛里茨美術館的藏品,其中包括《戴珍珠耳環的少女》,2個半月的時間裡吸引了超過100萬參觀者。)
除了總體上對荷蘭繪畫大師的狂熱,這次展覽還得益於唐娜·塔特 (Donna Tartt)的新小說《金翅雀》(The Goldfinch);這本書的靈感來自於一幅同名的著名小畫,是從毛里茨美術館借來的法布利契亞斯。英年早逝的法布利契亞斯曾是倫勃朗的學生。弗里克發 言人海迪·羅斯諾(Heidi Rosenau)說,博物館已經感受到一股新出現的法布利契亞斯熱潮:自從展覽10月22日開幕以來,每賣出1000張《戴珍珠耳環的少女》的明信片,就 有800張《金翅雀》的明信片售出。
加州聖何塞的胃腸病學家威廉·瑟斯頓(William Thurston) 為了看弗里克展,專程乘飛機前往紐約,並參加了一個關於荷蘭畫派的講座,主講人是毛里茨高級策展人比昆廷·弗洛(Quentin Buvelot)。
瑟斯頓說,「這樣的活動我絕不會錯過。藝術史和西方文化史是我所感 興趣的,它們是交織在一起的,對於我來說,能看到這樣的東西太棒了。」他的興趣不僅限於荷蘭;他曾連續三個周末飛到紐約,聽弗里克博物館主辦的關於意大利 文藝復興大師喬瓦尼·貝利尼(Giovanni Bellini)的講座,並前往費城、聖路易斯和華盛頓,專門去看西方藝術的展覽。他說,「這些活動是我旅行安排的核心。」
荷蘭繪畫愛好者喬納森·詹森(Jonathan Janson)創辦了essentialvermeer.com,是最受歡迎、或許也是最專註的業餘弗美爾主題網站。他說,根據他的經驗,對荷蘭繪畫的熱愛往往在弗美爾和倫勃朗兩個人身上達到頂點。

2013年11月29日 星期五

:The art of copying at the Louvre

CNN看到這短片介紹Matisse 1890年臨摩Chardin 的一幅…..:The art of copying at the Louvre - YouTube

Alain de Botton: How art can make us happier (Alastair Sooke)

State of the Art

Alain de Botton: How art can make us happier

Spring (Fruit Trees in Bloom)
(Claude Monet/Phaidon)
By thinking too much and feeling too little, we are missing out on the true enjoyment of art, philosopher Alain de Botton tells Alastiar Sooke.
Type the words “Spring (Fruit Trees in Bloom)” into an online search engine and in less than a second you will be looking at a sparkling vista of trees erupting in a starburst of pale blossom like an exploding firework. The phrase is the title of an Impressionist oil painting by the French master Claude Monet that belongs to the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York.
According to the museum’s website, the painting was executed in 1873 in Argenteuil, a village on the River Seine northwest of Paris where the Impressionist artists used to gather. Signed and dated “73 Claude Monet” in the lower left corner, it is almost 40in (1m) wide and 24.5in (62cm) high. In 1903, when it was known as Apple Blossoms, it was bought for $2,100 by the New York art dealership Knoedler & Co. The Met acquired it in 1926.
Concise, sober information like this is typical of the insights that museums commonly provide about artworks in their collections. Dates, dimensions, provenance: these are the bread and butter of scholarship and art history.
But by offering details about pictures in this manner, are museums fundamentally missing the point of what art is all about? One man who believes that they are is the British philosopher Alain de Botton, whose new book, Art as Therapy, co-written with the art theorist John Armstrong, is a polite but provocative demolition of the way that museums and galleries routinely present art to the public.
The way you make me feel
“Imagine an Impressionist picture,” de Botton tells me in his book-lined office in north-west London. “It’s a beautiful spring day in northern France and the flowers are out and the sky is blue. A lot of people might see it and say, ‘Ooh, is it a Manet or a Monet? I don’t know, I’m intimidated.’ I want to give viewers the courage to bring more of themselves to a work of art, and to ask them: what ultimately do you think? Is it a cheerful picture? If so, let’s not be embarrassed about that feeling.”
Alain de Botton
Spring (Fruit Trees in Bloom) is exactly the sort of picture to which de Botton is referring: serene, untroubled, and redolent of a simple joie de vivre that some people might describe as ‘chocolate box’. Yet the Metropolitan avoids tackling any of this, and ducks big questions about the painting such as: how does it make you feel? For me, the answer is joyous and peaceful, in a lazy, contented, snoozing-after-lunch kind of way. Yet reading the online label, you’d never guess that Monet had the power to summon pleasurable and soothing emotions such as these.
“In the art world, the question, ‘What is art for?’ makes people uncomfortable,” explains de Botton, who has since been invited to re-caption works of art in three museums around the world: the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, the Art Gallery of Ontario in Toronto, and the National Gallery of Victoria in Melbourne. (His new displays will open simultaneously next April.) “The art establishment downplays emotional or psychological readings of pictures – even though these are the principal ways in which people actually engage with art. But I think that you have to start with the emotional bond between the viewer and the object. If you say that a painting is important because it was owned by so-and-so, or because it shows that fascism is bad, or whatever – these are not reasons to love a painting.”
Does he feel, then, that art historians often get it all wrong? “Yes, absolutely,” he says. “The art-historical prejudice is that the more you know, the more you will be able to understand and feel. But I argue that while you need to know a little bit, the rewards tail off quickly. Doing a PhD [in art history] won’t necessarily bring you exponentially more pleasure or interest. Instead, art should be a form of therapy, which should be understood broadly as an aid to living and dying.”
Healthy scepticism
As its title suggests, de Botton’s book is a kind of self-help guide that explains how works of art and architecture can equip us to exist with greater equanimity and self-understanding. Each chapter is devoted to a different theme: love, nature, money, politics. Thus, according to de Botton, the plethora of precise little details in Hugo van der Goes’s The Adoration of the Shepherds (c.1475) should remind us that attentiveness to a lover’s quirks is an important part of what keeps a relationship alive. Richard Serra’s sorrowful sculpture Fernando Pessoa (2007-08) can teach us “how to suffer more successfully”, because it presents in monumental form the ubiquity and dignity of grief.
The Adoration of the Shepherds
(Hugo van der Goes/Phaidon)
Occasionally the life lessons that de Botton discovers within art seem forced or far-fetched: I am not convinced that Brazilian architect Oscar Niemeyer’s Modernist residence Casa de Canoas (1953), for instance, is “a temple to erotic hope”. Yet throughout the book, de Botton and Armstrong, who teaches at Melbourne University in Australia, retain a refreshing scepticism towards received ideas about art.
A good example of this is their attitude towards philanthropic businessmen. “Artistic philanthropy feels weird,” de Botton tells me. “The classic model is the tycoon who has been squeezing his workers, abusing legislation, poisoning water wells, and so on – and at the end of his life, with his huge fortune, he buys a tender, beautiful work of art showing the mercy of the Virgin. The painting has been funded by a life that is utterly antithetical to the values in the picture. I believe that we should try to live the values in works of art every day, rather than at the very end when you buy that painting and give it to the Met.”
What, then, does de Botton make of the world-record price of more than $142 million achieved by Francis Bacon’s triptych Three Studies of Lucian Freud (1969) at Christie’s in New York earlier this month, making it the most expensive work of art ever sold at auction? “Financial value and artistic value are separate,” he says. “Sometimes Vermeer is very valuable, and sometimes he’s not – but his paintings remain the same. So [with the price of the Bacon triptych] you learn a lot about society and economics and how taste is formed. But from the point of view of art, it means nothing.”
De Botton pauses, and a playful smile flickers across his lips. “A lot of emotional responses to art are available to people from a postcard,” he says. “This is an idea that museums are desperately resistant to, because the whole edifice immediately falls when you say that you can pick up between 80 and 90% [of what a work of art has to offer] by looking at a poster. I think we should start valuing art like literature. The original of, say, [James Joyce’s] Ulysses costs a certain amount and every other edition costs £9.99 – yet it’s considered fine to have the £9.99 copy. As punters, we are absurdly obsessed by original works of art – and we shouldn’t be.”
Alastair Sooke is art critic of The Daily Telegraph.

2013年11月22日 星期五

Jože Plečnik, Max Fabiani,


* 兩位建築大師的故事  11月22日(五)16:20
導演:阿米爾.穆拉托維切 (Amir Muratovic)
2006, 紀錄片, 片長 81分鐘



cture in Slovenia was introduced by Max Fabiani, and in the mid-war period, Jože Plečnik and Ivan Vurnik.[259] In the second half of the 20th century, the national and universal style were merged by the architects Edvard Ravnikar and Marko Mušič, Vojteh Ravnikar, Jurij Kobe and groups of younger architects.


Jože Plečnik (About this sound pronunciation ) (23 January 1872 – 7 January 1957) was a Slovene architect who had a strong impact on the modern identity of the city of Ljubljana, the capital of Slovenia, most notably by designing the iconic Triple Bridge and the Slovene National and University Library building, as well as banks along the Ljubljanica River, the Ljubljana open market buildings, the Ljubljana cemetery, parks, plazas etc. The impact he had on Ljubljana has been compared to the impact Antonio Gaudi had on Barcelona.[1]
His style is associated with the Vienna Secession style of architecture (a type of Art Nouveau). Besides in Ljubljana, he worked in Vienna, Belgrade and on the Prague Castle. He influenced the avant-garde Czech Cubism. He is also a founding member of the Ljubljana School of Architecture, joining it upon an invitation by Ivan Vurnik, another notable Ljubljana architect.


Plečnik was born in Ljubljana, Carniola, Austria-Hungary, present-day Slovenia. He studied with noted Viennese architect and educator Otto Wagner and worked in Wagner's architecture office until 1900.


From 1900 through 1910, while practicing in the Wagner's office in Vienna, he designed the Langer House (1900) and the Zacherlhaus (1903–1905).
His 1910–1913 Church of the Holy Spirit (Heilig-Geist-Kirche) is remarkable for its innovative use of poured-in-place concrete as both structure and exterior surface, and also for its abstracted classical form language. Most radical is the church's crypt, with its slender concrete columns and angular, cubist capitals and bases.
In 1911, Plečnik moved to Prague, where he taught at the college of arts and crafts. The Czech President at the time, Tomáš Masaryk, appointed Plečnik chief architect for the 1920 renovation of the Prague Castle. From 1920 until 1934 Plečnik completed numerous projects at the castle, including renovation of numerous gardens and courtyards, the design and installation of monuments and sculptures, and the design of numerous new interior spaces, including the Plečnik Hall completed in 1930, which features three levels of abstracted Doric colonnades.
Upon the 1921 establishment of the Ljubljana School of Architecture in his hometown of Ljubljana, he was invited by the fellow Slovene architect Ivan Vurnik to become one of its first faculty and moved to teach architecture at the University of Ljubljana. Plečnik would remain in Ljubljana until his death, and it is there that his influence as an architect is most noticeable.

Giving the city of Ljubljana its modern identity

Plečnik gave the capital of Slovenia, the city of Ljubljana, its modern identity by designing iconic buildings such as the Slovene National and University Library building. He also designed other notable buildings, including the Vzajemna Insurance Company Offices, and contributed to many civic improvements. He renovated the city's bridges and the Ljubljanica River banks, and designed the Ljubljana open market buildings, the Ljubljana cemetery, parks, plazas etc. Buildings designed by Plečnik were built by the constructor Matko Curk.[2]
During the Communist period of Slovene history Plečnik fell out of favor as a Catholic and his teaching role at the university was gradually reduced. He received fewer commissions, although he did complete some smaller monuments, fountains and church renovations in the 1950s. Plečnik died in 1957 and received an official state funeral in Žale.


In the 1980s, with postmodernist interest in Plečnik's work, the general interest in him has been revived, as well, after being forgotten during the 1960s and 1970s.[citation needed] Since then, Plečnik's legacy has been commemorated in various ways, most notably in 1990s on the Slovene 500 tolar banknote, with the National and University Library of Slovenia depicted on the reverse.
The unrealized Cathedral of Freedom designed by Plečnik is featured on the Slovene 10 cent euro coin. [1] Slovenska akropola is the title of an 1987 album by Slovene industrial music group Laibach. During August 2008, a maquette of the Parliament was featured at the Project Plečnik exhibition on the architect's life, held at the Council of the European Union building in Brussels, Belgium on the occasion of the Slovene EU Presidency. The exhibition's curator Boris Podrecca described the Parliament as "the most charismatic object" of Plečnik's opus.[3]
In addition, on 23rd January 2012, to celebrate the 140th anniversary of Plečnik's birth, a picture of the Triple Bridge was featured as the official Google logo (Doodle) adaptation in Slovenia.[1]

See also


  1. ^ Jump up to: a b c Jože Plečnik was for Ljubljana what Antonio Gaudi was for Barcelona (In Slovene: "Jože Plečnik za Ljubljano tisto, kar je bil za Barcelono Antonio Gaudi"), MMC RTV Slovenia, 23 January 2012
  2. Jump up ^ Kobilica, Katarina; Studen, Andrej (1999). Volja do dela je bogastvo: mikrozgodovinska študija o ljubljanskem stavbnem podjetniku Matku Curku (1885-1953) in njegovi družini [The Will to Work Is a Fortune: A Microhistorical Study About the Ljubljana Construction Businessman Matko Curk (1885–1953)]. Korenine (in Slovene). Nova revija. ISBN 961-6017-78-0.
  3. Jump up ^ Triera.com: Podreccova slovenska trilogija v Bruslju (Slovene)

Further reading

  • Prelovšek, Damjan. (1992) Jože Plečnik: 1872-1957: Architectura perennis. Salzburg. Residenz verlag. Published in English version in 1997 by Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-06953-7
  • Margolius, Ivan. (1995) "Jože Plečnik: Church of the Sacred Heart." Architecture in Detail series. London. Phaidon Press.
  • Krečič, Peter. (1993) "Plečnik, the complete works." New York. Whitney Library of Design. ISBB 0-8230-2565-9

External links

Max Fabiani, Slovene Maks, Italian Maximilian (29 April 1865 – 18 August 1962) was a cosmopolitan trilingual Italian-Austrian-Slovenian architect with Friulan and Tyrolean[disambiguation needed] ancestry, born in the village of Kobdilj near Štanjel on the Kras plateau, province of Gorizia and Gradisca, present-day Slovenia. Together with Ciril Metod Koch, he introduced the Vienna Secession style of architecture (a type of Art Nouveau) in the Slovenia.[1]


Fabiani was born to father Antonio Fabiani, a Friulian latifondist from Paularo of Bergamasque ancestry, and mother Charlotte von Kofler, a Triestine aristocrat of Tyrolean origin. He grew up in a cosmopolitan trilingual environment: besides Italian, the language of his family, and Slovene, the language of his social environment, he learned German at a very young age.[2]
His was a wealthy family which could afford to provide a good education for the children. He attended elementary school in Kobdilj in his father's house, and the German language Realschule in Ljubljana, then moved to Vienna, where he attended architecture courses at the Vienna University of Technology. After earning his diploma in 1889, a scholarship enabled him to travel for three years (1892–1894) to Asia Minor and through most of Europe.


The Portois-Fix Palace in Vienna
Upon returning to Vienna, he joined the studio of the architect Otto Wagner on Wagner's personal invitation, and stayed there until the end of the century. During this period he did not only concentrate his interests on design, but also cultivated his vocation as town planner and passionately devoted himself to teaching.
Fabiani's first large-scale architectural project was the urban plan for the Carniolan capital Ljubljana, which was badly damaged by an earthquake in 1895. Fabiani won a competition against the historicist architect Camillo Sitte, and was chosen by the Ljubljana Town Council as the main urban planner. One of the reasons for this choice was Fabiani was considered by the Slovene Liberal Nationalists as a Slovene.[3]
With the personal sponsorship of the Liberal nationalist mayor of Ljubljana Ivan Hribar, Fabiani designed several important buildings in the Carniolan capital, including the Mladika palace, which is now the seat of the Slovenian Foreign Ministry.
His work in Ljubljana helped him to become well known in the Slovenia, convincing Slovene nationalists in the Austrian Littoral to entrust him with the design for the National Halls in Gorizia (1903) and in Trieste (1904).[4]
Fabiani also created the urban plan for Bielsko in Poland. In 1902, these two urban plans won him the first honorary masters degree in the field of urban planning by the University of Vienna in Austria-Hungary.[5]
In 1917, he was named professor at the University of Vienna,[6] and in 1919 one of his pupils, Ivan Vurnik, offered him a teaching position at the newly established University of Ljubljana,[7] Fabiani however refused the offer, quit the teaching position in Vienna, and decided to settle in Gorizia, which had been annexed to the Kingdom of Italy, thus becoming an Italian citizen. During the 1920s, he coordinated a large scale reconstruction of historical monuments in the areas in the Julian March that had been devastated by the Battles of the Isonzo during World War I.
In late 1935, he accepted the nomination for mayor (podestà) of his native Štanjel by the Fascist regime, for the National Fascist Party.[2] He remained mayor during World War II, using his knowledge of German language and his cultural acquaintances to convince the German troops to spare the village from destruction.[8][9] He also maintained communication with local Slovene partisans. Nevertheless, the monumental fortifications part of the village, which he himself had renovated during the 1930s, were eventually destroyed in the fight between the Wehrmacht and the Slovene partisans.[10]
In 1944, Fabiani relocated back to Gorizia where he lived until his death.

Notable works

The most notable works designed by Fabiani include:
  • Mladika Palace (Ljubljana, 1896),
  • Palace Portois & Fix (Vienna, 1898),
  • Palace Artaria (Vienna, 1900),
  • Palace Urania (Vienna) (1902),
  • the Revenue Office building (Gorizia, 1903),
  • the National Hall in Trieste (1904),
  • Prešeren Square and the Prešeren Monument (Ljubljana; unveiled in 1905),
  • Stabile Palace (Trieste, 1906)
  • the urban development plan for Ljubljana (1895),
  • Villa Wechsler Vienna (1911)
  • San Germano church (Brijuni, 1912)
  • the plan for the reconstruction of Gorizia (1921)
  • the general urban development plan for Venice (1952).
  • Restoration of Gorizia duom, Gorizia (1919)
  • The general urban development plan of Monfalcone, Italia (1919)
  • Villa Bigot (Gorizia, 1921)
  • Pellegrini's home in Gorizia (1922)
  • Felberbaum's home in Gorizia (1925)
  • San Giorgio church (Lucinico, 1927)
  • Ferrari's garden (Štanjel, 1930–40)
  • Sacro Cuore metropolitan church (Gorizia, 1934)
  • "Tower of memory", memorial to the Italian soldiers who died in World War I (Gorizia, 1937)
  • Casa del Fascio (House of Fascism) (Štanjel, 1938)



  • In 1984, in Vienna Simmering (11th District), the Fabiani Street (In German: Fabianistraße) was named after him.
  • Since 2008, the Slovenian highest award for best achievements in urban planning is named after him.[11]

2013年11月21日 星期四


平成23年 9月21日更新

1920年(大正 9年) 3月17日生。
1993年(平成 5年)、重要無形文化財「鋳金」の保持者に認定。

齋藤 明氏の主要作品 上の写真をクリックして作品をご覧ください。


2013年11月8日 星期五

納粹藏畫重新浮現,藝術超越時代Documents Reveal How Looted Nazi Art Was Restored to Dealer誰保護了那些納粹劫掠的藝術瑰寶?


據新聞雜誌《焦點》週刊報導,海關人員在兩年前就對科內柳斯·利特(Rolf Nikolaus Cornelius Gurlitt)的住宅進行了清查。20109月海關人員在對一列火車的旅客進行例行檢查時,古利特引起了稽查人員的注意。之後,當局在其住宅內發現了這些令人瞠目結舌的藝術寶藏:從畢加索到馬蒂斯,從夏加爾到貝克曼以及藝術史上其他大師的傑作。
古利特收藏這些繪畫顯然已經有幾十年。它們都是其父親,1956年去世的著名藝術經銷商希爾德布蘭·古利特Hildebrand Gurlitt)的藏品。在2030年代,希爾德布蘭·古利特曾擔任茨維考博物館館長和漢堡藝術協會主席。他被視為是推動現代藝術的先驅。自從納粹開始系統地沒收被他們稱為「墮落」的藝術品之後,古利特也失去了他的工作。
在德國一家研究所任職的哈爾特曼博士(Dr. Uwe Hartmann)認為,其中一些作品可能被這幾位藝術品經銷商自己買了下來。估計所發現的1500幅作品中,也有納粹自1933年以來在國內外掠奪的一些藝術品。例如希特勒和戈林就曾大規模收集他們所喜歡的,主要是著名大師的作品。這批巨大收藏有哪些人的作品,目前只有幾位專家知道。2年來對慕尼黑藝術藏品進行研究的藝術史學家霍夫曼是其中之一。



在昏暗的燈光下,自畫像中的奧托·迪克斯(Otto Dix)咬着牙,目露慍色。抽着雪茄的他看上去怒氣衝天。依舊年輕的他彷彿是在問:「為什麼用了這麼久?」
現在又出現了約1500幅畫作,這批寶藏的價值難以估量。其中部分作品在周二德國奧格斯堡舉行的新聞發佈會上得到展示。從網上最早幾幅模糊的翻拍圖片來 看,新發現的畫作似乎包括了馬蒂斯(Matisse)、庫爾貝(Courbet)、弗朗茲·馬爾克(Franz Marc)、馬克斯·利伯曼(Max Liebermann)、馬克·夏加爾(Marc Chagall)、馬克斯·貝克曼(Max Beckmann)和恩斯特·路德維格·基希納(Ernst Ludwig Kirchner)的作品。這些畫是在一個名叫廓尼琉斯·古爾利特(Cornelius Gurlitt)的老年男子位於慕尼黑的公寓里發現的。古爾利特的父親希爾德布蘭特(Hildebrand)是納粹時期的一名畫商,收集了一批被希特拉 (Hitler)認為「墮落」的現代派藝術作品。
納粹最重要的目標之一就是:凈化德國的博物館,洗劫私人藏品。但有 違常理的是,他們囤積了自己厭惡的現代派藝術作品,為了換取硬通貨,還要將部分作品賣到國外去。希爾德布蘭特正是約瑟夫·戈培爾(Joseph Goebbels)為這一任務挑選的畫商之一。他們將部分藝術品展出是為了加以批判,但展覽後來卻引起了轟動,激怒了元首。在那之後,成千上萬件被沒收的 作品就不見了蹤影。

迪克斯也以倔強的姿態回歸了。迪克斯為希特拉所不容,不僅是因為他 的畫尖銳、粗糲、令人毛骨悚然,描繪了一戰帶來的破壞,展現了魏瑪共和國的焦慮,還因為他的作品嘲諷了德國對英勇的定義。在慕尼黑髮現的這幅自畫像是迪克 斯1919年創作的,從這幅畫中傳遞出的一種驕傲來看,迪克斯似乎已經準備好戰鬥,去打敗一個當時尚未露面的敵人。而最後,他和他的作品,生命都比那個敵 人更長。
慕尼黑髮現的這些作品是從納粹製造的廢墟中搶救出來的,像這樣的發 現,尤其令人動容的不僅是它們經歷了多年風雨得以保存,也不僅是因為它們之中可能有失落的傑作,儘管偶爾的確會有。甚至不是因為它們象徵著數百萬逝去的生 命,而是因為它們戰勝了希特拉在另一個場合曾提及的「大謊言」。希特拉當時說,假話假到「一定程度」,人們就會情不自禁地相信。
這幅畫似乎出自20世紀20年代,當時馬蒂斯住在尼斯,人稱「里維 埃拉的蘇丹」(Sultan of the Riviera)。但它卻是永恆的。經過圖案的堆疊,平淡無奇的立體派變成了繁複濃密的肖像畫,畫面以看似寧靜的家居環境和主人公的性姿態為主題。那位女 子不苟言笑,襯着面孔的是她方形的衣領,手指拘謹地握在一起,她的線條柔和卻暗藏不安,就彷彿是在等待一個秘密情人。馬蒂斯在尼斯的創作一度被人認為是他 的敗筆,不過是裝飾畫。但現在則不同。這幅肖像畫證明了畫家的優勢所在,以及他對藝術之美的恆久貢獻。


這些作品引發的第一輪輿論狂潮還在繼續,在所有的媒體不可避免地將 注意力轉向價格和來源之前,我們還是可以來感嘆命運的力量,它甚至能戰勝人類最邪惡的野心。誰能知道,這些畫作得以保存下來究竟是出於貪婪、恐懼,還是對 它們的熱愛。最終,真正重要的只有:它們倖存下來了。藝術家們在創作時往往徒勞地希望作品的價值能超越時間,這是對後人下的賭注;而對希特拉憎惡的許多藝 術家而言,藝術創作是為了阻止希特拉掌握最終發言權的一種直接努力。在華沙猶太區生活的猶太人,將成千上萬份文件藏在牛奶罐里埋在地下,也是為了同一個目 的。那些牛奶罐的發現為我們提供了大量的歷史文獻,記錄了那些不知所蹤的人留下的故事。
德國小說家W·G·澤巴爾德(W. G. Sebald) 在《異鄉人》(The Emigrants)中,回憶起一個被人遺忘的阿爾卑斯山登山者時寫道,「這樣一來,那些死去的人們,就能不斷回到我們的生活中。」在那名登山者失蹤了幾 十年之後,他的遺骨突然暴露在冰川之上。居斯塔夫·庫爾貝(Gustave Courbet)的《鄉村女孩與山羊》(Village Girl With a Goat)如今也從荒野回歸,它並不是在納粹時期消失的,而是在1949年一場拍賣會之後,成為了古爾利特的收藏。從畫面來看,這位鄉村女孩是庫爾貝作品 中常見的主人公:粗曠、性感、豐滿、臃腫,有着粉紅色的臉頰,她心不在焉地抱着一隻正在嗅聞的山羊,抓着它的腿,她的眼光望向畫外某處我們看不到的地方。
《風景與馬》(Landscape With Horses)也再度出現,這是弗朗茲·馬爾克的 一幅作品。納粹們沒收了一些這樣的作品,儘管馬爾克得到過「鐵十字勳章」(Iron Cross),並已在一戰中英勇戰死。他1914年寫信給畫家瓦西里·康定斯基(Wassily Kandinsky),說他相信這場戰爭將會「凈化歐洲」。但第三帝國(Third Reich)的男人們還是覺得,馬爾克的抽象風格超出了他們可接受的範圍。這幅風景畫不僅超越了他自己的妄想,也躲過了希特拉發起的運動。
Christof Stache/Agence France-Presse Ã

同樣地,人們還找到了基希納的《憂鬱的女孩》(Melancholy Girls)。這幅畫描繪了一個飽經摧殘的裸體女子,她的臉上布滿了疤痕似的線條,彷彿樺樹的樹皮。基希納是他那個時代的又一個犧牲品。納粹對現代藝術的攻擊令他崩潰,他在親手毀掉自己的許多作品後,自殺了。

In a Rediscovered Trove of Art, a Triumph Over the Nazis’ Will

November 06, 2013
Otto Dix, in a half-light, glowers from a self-portrait, jaw set, puffing on a cigar, looking infuriated. “What took so long?” he seems to ask, youthful as ever.
They keep coming back, these works of art lost to the Nazis, like bottles washed ashore. Three years ago, a small stash of sculptures turned up when a front-loader was digging a new subway station in Berlin.
Now some 1,500 pictures, an almost unfathomable trove, have surfaced; some were revealed in a news conference on Tuesday in Augsburg, Germany. From the first few blurry online reproductions they seem to include paintings by Matisse and Courbet, Franz Marc and Max Liebermann, Marc Chagall, Max Beckmann and Ernst Ludwig Kirchner, discovered in the Munich apartment of an old man named Cornelius Gurlitt whose father, Hildebrand, a dealer during the Nazi era, assembled a collection of the Modernist art that Hitler called “degenerate.”
Among the very first goals of the Nazis was to purge German museums and ransack private collections. Perversely, they stockpiled the modern art they hated, some to sell abroad in exchange for hard currency. Hildebrand was one of the dealers whom Joseph Goebbels picked for this task. Some art they paraded in an exhibition of shame. The show ended up a blockbuster, infuriating the Führer. After that, thousands upon thousands of confiscated works disappeared.
But as the years have gone by, art continues to be found, refusing oblivion.
Dix has returned, defiantly. He was despised by Hitler not just because he drew and painted in a spiky, gnarled, ghoulish way that decried the ravages of World War I and spoke to Weimar anxiety, but because his art mocked the German idea of heroism. The Munich self-portrait conveys a pride that seems ready to vanquish an enemy that had not quite appeared on the scene when Dix painted the work in 1919 but that both he and his art would outlast.
What’s especially moving about finds like the one in Munich, salvaged from the Nazi ruins, is not just that they survived all these years or that they might include lost masterpieces, although they rarely do. It is not even that they represent tokens of lost lives, millions of them. It is that they overcame what Hitler in another context once referred to as “the big lie,” an untruth “so colossal,” he said, that people could not help falling for it.
The big lie in this case involved the depravity of modern art. The lie was meant to turn death and destruction onto the world of art. But while paintings, drawings and sculptures are sadly fragile, the ideals they represent — the best ones, anyway — aren’t. And so the painted woman by Matisse, fan in lap, a string of pearls around her neck, a veil draped over her hair, is a testament to art’s indefatigable ambitions.
The work looks to be from the 1920s, when Matisse lived in Nice as the Sultan of the Riviera. But it’s timeless. Pattern on pattern, the picture nestles benign Cubism into a luxuriant portrait of deceptive domestic tranquillity and sexual poise. The woman, stern face framed by a square collar, fingers nervously knitted, is all soft curves and implicit apprehension, as if awaiting some secret lover. Once upon a time, Matisse’s Nice pictures were dismissed as decorative fluff. Not now. The portrait speaks to the strength of its maker and his enduring contribution to the catalog of beauty.

During this first frantic flush of publicity, before all the news inevitably turns to price tags and provenance, it’s still possible to appreciate the whims of fortune, which can trump even humanity’s most demonic ambitions. Who knows whether these pictures were preserved out of greed or fear or love? What matters in the long run is only that they made it. Artists tend to produce art as a vain bulwark against time, a gamble on posterity; and for many of the artists whom Hitler loathed, art was an explicit attempt to prevent him from getting the last word. Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto stored thousands of documents in buried milk cans for that same reason, and the discovery of those cans has provided history with the great archive of a lost people.
“And so they are ever returning to us, the dead,” as the German novelist W. G. Sebald wrote in “The Emigrants,” recalling a forgotten Alpine climber, whose remains a glacier suddenly gave up many decades after he had disappeared. Gustave Courbet’s “Village Girl With a Goat” is back from the wilderness now, having dropped off the map not during the Nazi era but sometime after an auction in 1949, ending up among the Gurlitt horde. She’s by all appearances a familiar Courbet heroine, insolent and voluptuous, fleshy, puffy and pink-cheeked, clutching the legs of the sniffing goat she absently cradles, her gaze turned to something out of the picture we can’t see.
A client, perhaps, or maybe a mark.
“Landscape With Horses” has resurfaced, too. The Nazis confiscated works like this one by Franz Marc despite the fact that he had earned an Iron Cross and died a hero during World War I. He wrote to the painter Wassily Kandinsky in 1914 that he believed the war would “purify Europe.” The Third Reich’s men still found Marc’s abstract style beyond the pale. This landscape survives his own delusions as well as Hitler’s campaign.

And so, too, does “Melancholy Girls” by Kirchner, an image of a naked, ravaged woman whose face is scarred by lines like the bark of a birch tree. Kirchner was another casualty of his era. So devastated by the Nazis’ attack on modern art, he destroyed many of his own works. Then he took his own life.
The bigger truth will out.


在第二次世界大戰進入尾聲的那段時期,一群盟軍士兵、藝術史專家、 博物館策展人和學者們,殫精竭慮地保護着歐洲的文化遺產,追回被納粹及其同謀劫掠的數百萬件藝術品和其他珍寶。這個綽號「古迹衛士」(Monuments Men)的團體為珍寶設立了一系列的臨時收藏點。他們看管的藝術品中包括115幅油畫、19幅素描和6箱物品,英國人於1945年在漢堡發現了這些珍寶。 馬克·馬蘇洛夫斯基(Marc Masurovsky)本周在美國國家檔案館(National Archives)位於馬里蘭州學院園(College Park)的分館發現的文件顯示,這些作品的登記物主是希爾德布蘭特·古爾利特(Hildebrand Gurlitt),馬蘇洛夫斯基是大屠殺藝術追索計劃(Holocaust Art Restitution Project)的創始人。
而今,在六十多年後,追索專家們表示,這些曾託付給「古迹衛士」的 藏品,有可能是1400多幅令人驚嘆的藏匿品的一部分。2012年,德國調查人員從古爾利特之子廓尼琉斯·古爾利特(Cornelius Gurlitt)的公寓里沒收了這些作品,並在本周公開了這些作品。這被認為是二戰結束以來所發現的,規模最大的一批失蹤歐洲藝術品。
1950年12月15日,當時盟軍行動的領導者,美國人西奧多·海 因里希(Theodore Heinrich)簽署了文件,把珍寶交給了古爾利特。在交還給希爾德布蘭特·古爾利特的珍寶中,有幾幅畫的名字及描述,與藏在他兒子雜亂無章的公寓里的 那些畫相吻合,其中包括奧托·迪克斯(Otto Dix)、馬克斯·貝克曼(Max Beckmann)和馬克·夏加爾(Marc Chagall)的傑作。
可以肯定的是,在1950年歸還的畫作中,至少有八幅實際上是被納 粹竊取的,而老古爾利特堅稱,他是通過合法途徑獲得這些畫的。目前這八幅畫被列入了一個被劫掠藝術品的數據庫,數據庫中列出的畫作在納粹佔領法國後,就存 放在了巴黎的國立網球場現代美術館(Jeu de Paume museum)。它們全都是法國畫家米歇爾·喬治-米歇爾(Michel Georges-Michel)的作品,納粹特工在1941年洗劫了他的公寓和畫室。

在63年前歸還給希爾德布蘭特·古爾利特的其他畫作中,還有許多德 國表現主義畫家的作品,其中包括迪克斯的作品、喬治·格羅茲(George Grosz)的《行走中的一男兩女》(Two Women and a Man Walking);埃里希·赫克爾(Erich Heckel)的作品、馬克斯·貝克曼(Max Beckmann)的《馴獅者》(Lion Tamer)和《伐木者》(Woodcutters),克里斯蒂安·羅爾夫斯(Christian Rohlfs)的《黃花》(Yellow Flowers)和《白花》(White Flowers),以及弗朗茨·倫克(Franz Lenk)的作品。盟軍歸還的藝術品當中,也有意大利、法國和荷蘭大師們的作品,其中包括瓜爾迪(Guardi)的《修道院的大門》(Entrance to a Monastery)、弗拉戈納爾(Fragonard)的《安娜和聖家庭》(Anna and the Holy Family)、卡斯帕·內切爾(Caspar Netscher)的《吹泡泡的男孩》(Boys Blowing Bubbles),以及據說作者是雷斯達爾(Ruysdael)和隆鮑茨(Rombouts)的風景畫。藏品里還有居斯塔夫·庫爾貝(Gustave Courbet)的《父親》(The Father)和《有岩石的風景》(Landscape with Rocks);馬克斯·利伯曼(Max Liebermann)的《沙丘上的馬車》(Wagon in the Dunes)和《沙灘上的騎馬者》(Two Riders on a Beach)。
Wolfgang Rattay/Reuters

希爾德布蘭特·古爾利特是一名藝術史學者,因為外祖母是猶太人,他 曾兩次失去工作;儘管如此,他有德國把劫掠來的作品送到市場上出售所需的專業知識和國際關係網。戰爭期間,他還在納粹佔領區內四處探訪,尋找珍寶充實希特 拉(Hitler)在奧地利林茨建造一所博物館的宏偉計劃。檔案文件顯示,德國和美國調查人員曾在戰後就其交易行為審訊過古爾利特。不過他堅稱,所有留下 的藝術品都是他自己的。他說,他為納粹收集的其他作品,以及他自己的記錄,都在德累斯頓1945年遭受轟炸時被毀掉了。
至於被納粹形容為「墮落」的現代作品,許多已經被丟棄,或者被第三帝國(Third Reich)的博物館賣掉了,古爾利特及其他收藏者可能合法地取得了這些作品——價錢或許低得微不足道。
Christof Stache/Agence-France Presse â

迄今為止,從廓尼琉斯·古爾利特位於慕尼黑的骯髒公寓里沒收的 1400多幅畫作中,只有一幅的來源得到了明確核實。法國知名畫商保羅·羅森堡(Paul Rosenberg)的孫女瑪麗安娜·羅森堡(Marianne Rosenberg)確認,德國官員本周公布的一幅畫的照片和她的家族擁有的畫作相符,那幅畫是馬蒂斯(Matisse)的一幅肖像畫,畫中人是一名戴珍 珠項鏈的女子。(德國官方此前已經表示,至少有一幅畫曾經屬於羅森堡,他在自己所有藏品的背面都加蓋了自家畫廊的印鑒。)
瑪麗安娜·羅森堡在一封電子郵件中說,「當然,羅森堡家族很高興看 到馬蒂斯精美作品的彩色翻拍圖,直到現在,對我們來說,這幅作品都只是家中被劫掠藝術品檔案里的一張黑白照片。」她還說,她的家族「正在堅持不懈地認真推 動追索的進程」。不過,羅森堡家族依然堅持認為,德國官方必須儘快履行職責,「提供其他所有作品的照片和清單」。

Documents Reveal How Looted Nazi Art Was Restored to Dealer

November 07, 2013
Throughout the waning years of World War II, a band of Allied soldiers, art historians, curators and scholars labored to safeguard Europe’s cultural heritage and recover the millions of artworks and other treasures plundered by the Nazis and their collaborators. Nicknamed the Monuments Men, this group set up a string of temporary collection points for the valuables. Among the art in their care was a cache of 115 paintings, 19 drawings and a half-dozen crates of objects that the British had found in Hamburg in 1945. The works were registered under the name of Hildebrand Gurlitt, according to documents unearthed this week in the National Archives in College Park, Md., by Marc Masurovsky, the founder of the Holocaust Art Restitution Project.
Now, six decades later, restitution experts said it is possible that this collection, once entrusted to the Monuments Men, is part of the astonishing stash of more than 1,400 works seized in 2012 by German investigators from the apartment of Gurlitt’s son Cornelius and brought to light this week. It is considered to be the largest trove of missing European art to have been discovered since the end of World War II.
For five years, the elder Gurlitt, one of a handful of German dealers whom the Nazis had anointed to sell art confiscated from Jews and museums and sold abroad for foreign currency, had insisted these works were rightfully his. With the European recovery effort finally winding down, officials at a collection center in Wiesbaden agreed to return the cache to Gurlitt.
On Dec. 15, 1950, the leader of the Allied unit, Theodore Heinrich, an American, signed the papers releasing the art to Gurlitt. The names and descriptions of a handful of paintings in the cache returned to Hildebrand Gurlitt — including gems by Otto Dix, Max Beckmann and Marc Chagall — appear to match those once hidden in the cluttered apartment of his son.
Since the German authorities have refused to make public a list of the seized works, it is impossible to confirm with certainty that any of the pieces returned in 1950 to Hildebrand Gurlitt are the same as those seized last year. Mr. Masurovsky, however, said he believes that at least some of the works returned by the Allies in 1950 are the same.
What can be confirmed is that at least eight of the paintings that were returned in 1950, and that the elder Gurlitt maintained he had legitimately acquired were, in fact, stolen by the Nazis. These eight are currently listed in a database of looted art that the Nazis had stored at the Jeu de Paume museum in Paris after they occupied France. Those works are all by the French painter Michel Georges-Michel, whose apartment and studio were ransacked by Nazi agents in 1941.
An Allied list of recovered art.
An Allied list of recovered art.
Mr. Masurovsky and other restitution experts said the 1950 list might help with the identification of works that the Germans recently took from Cornelius Gurlitt’s apartment.
Among the other items returned to Hildebrand Gurlitt 63 years ago were dozens of works by German Expressionists including Dix, Georg Grosz (“Two Women and a Man Walking”); Erich Heckel, Max Beckmann (“Lion Tamer” and “Woodcutters”), Christian Rohlfs (“Yellow Flowers” and “White Flowers”) and Franz Lenk. Italian, French and Dutch masters were on the Allied list, as well, including Guardi’s “Entrance to a Monastery,” Fragonard’s “Anna and the Holy Family,” Caspar Netscher’s “Boys Blowing Bubbles,” and landscapes attributed to Ruysdael and Rombouts. The collection included Gustave Courbet’s “The Father” and “Landscape with Rocks”; and Max Liebermann’s “Wagon in the Dunes” and “Two Riders on a Beach.”
Mr. Masurovsky pointed to the return as an instance when the Monuments Men let looted art slip through their hands.
“The Lion Tamer” by Max Beckmann in an auction catalog when Cornelius Gurlitt sold it, in 2011.
“The Lion Tamer” by Max Beckmann in an auction catalog when Cornelius Gurlitt sold it, in 2011.
Wolfgang Rattay/Reuters
Historians have pointed out, however, that finding the legal owner in the confusion of postwar Europe, without the aid of computerized databases and, often, documentation, was extremely difficult. France, for example, still has nearly 2,000 works in its museums that it knows were looted, but cannot properly identify owners.
Hildebrand Gurlitt was an art historian who had twice been stripped of posts because he had a Jewish grandparent; nonetheless, he had the expertise and international connections the Germans needed to move plundered works to market. He also crisscrossed Nazi-occupied territory during the war looking for treasures to fill Hitler’s grand plans for a museum in Linz, Austria. German and American investigators had questioned Gurlitt about his dealings after the war, archival documents show, but he insisted that all of the art that remained was his own. Other works that he had gathered for the Nazis, he said, as well as his records were destroyed in the firebombing of Dresden in 1945.
As for the Modern works, which the Nazis labeled degenerate, many had been discarded or sold off from museums by the Third Reich and could have been legally acquired by Gurlitt and other collectors — even for a pittance.
A newly rediscovered Matisse.
A newly rediscovered Matisse.
Christof Stache/Agence-France Presse â
So far only one among the more than 1,400 works that were taken from Cornelius Gurlitt’s squalid Munich apartment has been positively identified. Marianne Rosenberg, the granddaughter of the renowned French dealer Paul Rosenberg, confirmed that a photograph of a Matisse portrait of a woman wearing pearls that was released by German officials this week matches one owned by her family. (German authorities had previously said that at least one painting used to belong to Rosenberg, who imprinted his gallery’s stamp on the back of all his works.) 
“The Rosenberg family is, of course, delighted to see a color reproduction of the beautiful Matisse which until now had only existed for them as a black and white photograph in their archives of looted art,” Ms. Rosenberg said in an email, adding that the family “is proceeding diligently and carefully with a claim for restitution. The Rosenberg family still insists, however, that the German authorities must promptly do the right thing and provide photographs and lists of all the other items.”