The painting of the ruins is by Dante (I did not photograph that signature because it is beneath the frame). I have fairly solid confirmation so far, that these paintings were all part of Hitler's documented private collection of art, scheduled to appear in his museum in Linz after his death (of course, World history dictated otherwise). I will be glad to give credit to the researcher, if he so wishes.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Hitler's Parents up for Auction
Collapse
X
-
There are no markings on the back of the Mom and Pop paintings that I can see. As for "clear title" these seem to NOT be "stolen masters" so yes, I would imagine that as the Fuhrer's personal property, there would be no legal problems owning them. If I had a missing Rembrandt on the stolen masters list, I certainly would not be putting them in the auction!
Comment
-
Good point, but not all of the items taken were Old Master paintings, there was an auction maybe 20 years ago with thousands of works by minor artists included such as landscapes-
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/10/31/ar...in-vienna.html
I think Goering was more the lover of works by the greats.
Comment
-
I agree, John. Goering was a lover of just about everything, to a greater degree of sophistication than Hitler. Goering got the best champagne, the best wine, the best art. Hitler had him beat in architecture. Of course Goebbels had them both beat with respect to taste in women (quantity and quality).
Comment
-
Originally posted by Craig Gottlieb View PostI have fairly solid confirmation so far, that these paintings were all part of Hitler's documented private collection of art, scheduled to appear in his museum in Linz after his death.
Any paintings with a belling deer in front of a lake with a mountain in the background. That might have 'potential' ...
Comment
-
You are kidding, yes?
If you think that his paintings are "internationally highly sought after and demand high prices" because of the artistic value you are very wrongly informed. They are bought because they are done by the dictator and mass murderer Hitler. If Hitler would not have made it to what he finally became, his "pictures" would not be known to anybody.
To name his "works" paintings or art is an insult to every real artist. Well, he was a painter as the famous quote from Franz Liebkind shows:
"Hitler !... there was a painter! He could paint an entire apartment in ONE afternoon! TWO coats!"
Hitler's "paintings" are devotional objects which fall under the same category as Eva Braun's underpants. Ever seen the movie "Schtonk" ...
Comment
-
Does anyone know for certain if the National Archieves is still storing several of Hitlers paintings that were confiscated afer the war? It has been my impression that along with his paintings thare are many with a Nazi theme stored there as well.
Just saw the above post:
IMO: While Hitlers artistic skills are somewhat mediocre I don't think he can be completely dismissed as an artst. Had he pursued art as a career rather than politics I think he would have joined the ranks of a multitude of artists that never became exceptional and therefore didn't have a following then and still don't today. If this had been the case he would be considered just another minor artist today.
JimLast edited by james m; 08-02-2011, 08:54 AM.
Comment
-
There is a huge difference between someone who has trained the techniques of creating a painting and a real artist. The trained people can be found as portrait artist and if you search the internet you will find a lot of sites were Chinese students of art are creating wonderful copies of the master pieces. They are not artists, they have the technique down.
Hitler did not even have the technique down, the perspectives were screwed up. But he might have learned that, I agree. But he would never ever have been more than below mediocre.
A real artist is a painter who not only has the technique down but can also transform that skill into a motive and composition which touches the viewer. The Stephansdom in Vienna painted in wrong perspectives in a small scale with watercolors does not do that. Neither does a belling deer ...
Hitler was of the opinion that he was a great painter, a great architect, a great military genius and a great leader. History has determined that his was none of that but a great debaucher who kidnapped a nation. Has happened before and will happen again.
Comment
-
So we agree to disagree - but that´s fine.
And keeping this on track and on the art sector there will always be admirers of some artists and their work while others cannot stand or do not understand aims, goals, techniques and oeuvre of one or another artist - independent from official or commercial judgement and promotion.
Regarding the example of chinese students or artists copying famous and well-known pieces of european art - mostly classical oil paintings - it is also a matter of cultural behaviour.
Copying is also their way of expressing admiration and fascination towards the initial creator of a piece of art in question.
Comment
-
Thanks Dietrich, finally someone that agrees with me!!!!
For good art from this time check for example what they called degenerated art. Yes it contained most modern art, but tons of these artist fetch huge sums today.
My favourite constallation is the Die Brucke. Has a very nice museum in Berlin.
I have a Emil Nolde myself(yes it's authenticated by the Nolde foundation). A Max Beckmann paiting. A couple of Ury Lesser also hangs on my wall, Together with many other fine artists.
Would never trade these against these so called previous AH called paintings. I assume that they could have been taken in any home in that area. If even from there.
And yes, AH brings money due to his name, NOTHING else. Saying that he was a great artist is equal to not knowing anything about art.
Comment
Users Viewing this Thread
Collapse
There is currently 1 user online. 0 members and 1 guests.
Most users ever online was 10,032 at 08:13 PM on 09-28-2024.
Comment