So you know that Artwork of John Lennon show for the Capital Area Foodbank? The one we had on Best weekend Bets and all? According to Gary Arseneau it's a fraud, perpetrated by none other than YOKO ONO.
Ever since I heard about the Gardner Heist of 1990 on the once great CourtTV (RIP) I have been fascinated with art theft. Once I saw The Thomas Crown Affair, this fascination with art theft: what it means to assign value to a piece of art, became confused with the sexy and glamorous lifestyle of Pierce Brosnan and began romanticizing about the personalities involved in a heist from its conception, to the getaway, to secret adoration.
Art theft seems all fun and glamorous- Champange and catamarans in the Caribbean- though in real life art theft and fraud is less continental con artist and more dealer ripping off the people they represent....
BUT IN THIS CASE ART FRAUD IS REALLY AS MUCH FUN AS IN THE MOVIES, especially when it involves a dead musical and cultural legend whose memory is being exploited by his weirdo Japanese widow- who ruined everything in the first place.
GARY ARSENEAU vs. YOKO ONO
Check out the email we got....
The Artwork of John Lennon exhibition is a -fraud-... Since 1986, Yoko Ono and her business associates have misrepresented more than 35,000 posthumous black-and-white reproductions and/or colorized and altered fakes for sale to the public at $500 to $8,000 or more each as original works of visual art ie. “lithographs,” “serigraphs,” “woodcuts" and "etchings,” not to mention as the "Artwork of John Lennon."
John Lennon died in 1980. The dead don't create artwork.
Yoko Ono began this fraud sometime before 1986 when she hired chromists (someone who copies the artist's work) to reproduce John Lennon's black-and-white drawings.
Soon after 1986, Yoko Ono found out these non-disclosed black-and-white reproductions, even when misrepresented as original works of visual art, weren't selling as quickly as she liked, she had them colorized.
Eventually in the late 1990's, Yoko Ono, lost all inhibitions about John Lennon's true legacy and began authorizing not only the colorization of John Lennon's original black-and-white drawings but their alteration into new compositions that John Lennon could not have approved since he was still dead.
Then to add insult to injury, from the very beginning of this fraud in 1986, Yoko Ono authorized the posthumous application of a counterfeit John Lennon chopmark/signature to each one of these non-disclosed fakes to create the illusion that John Lennon created and approved them, much less signed them.
In other words, at best, Yoko Ono and her business associates, wants the public to suspend disbelief or just believe that John Lennon has created, approved and signed more works of visual art in the last 23 years than any living artist in the history of man and he’s dead.
How’d he do that?
For additional information on these contentious issues of authenticity, link to:
http://garyarseneau.blogspot.com/2006/09/artwork-of-john-lennon-fraud.html
http://garyarseneau.blogspot.com/2009/03/posthumous-forgeries-falsely-attributed.html
Since I'm not going to do any serious journalism I'll rip off the legwork done by a more proactive journalist at the very prestigious publication 27 East:
Rudy Siegel, director of media relations for Legacy Productions, said the short response to Mr. Arseneau’s allegations is: “Do you really think Yoko is going to perpetuate a fraud?”
Ms. Ono Lennon is up-front about the fact that she decided to add color to many of Mr. Lennon’s works to make prints, and clients are always informed before buying any serigraphs that Mr. Lennon did not color the works himself, Mr. Siegel said.
He went on to say that Ms. Ono Lennon was there when Mr. Lennon produced the originals of the serigraphs.
He emphasized that “Come Together” is one of the most highly attended and successful art exhibitions in the United States in the last 17 years, and he said 99.9 percent of purchasers have had no complaints about what they bought.
Gary Arseneau has the same hard line stance with the Degas bronzes that traveled the world a few years ago: the sculptures were made from wax cast after the artists death and regardless of the fact that they followed the same process that would have been used whether Degas had been dead or alive, they are fakes. Arseneau believes that museums and the art establishment ignore the claims behind his persistent chasing of exhibits (Degas, Rodin, and Lennon) because there is too much money at stake- no one would come out to see "reproductions".
Is a sculpture or a lithograph never touched by the hands of the artist, might still be considered an authentic masterpiece?
It would be better if along with Arseneau's unrelenting decades-long campaign crusade to plant negative press in the local media alongside exhibition openings was accompanied by efforts to create a dialogue about the issue of authenticity in art- instead it comes off as a smear campaign instigated by a guy with personal agenda and perhaps a personality disorder.
God loves a cheerful giver.
just ask thomas kinkade...
Anyone who's been paying attention realizes Yoko's been churning out this 'art' for years. Either you buy into it or don't. It's not to my liking but it's not fraud.
But what of Warhol? Through contacts in the mid 60's, Warhol hired my my dad—who in turn hired my uncle—to silkscreen something like 7 Andy self portraits. (The ones that became the stamp recently.) My uncle silk screened 9, not 7, and kept one and gave one to my mom and dad.
Warhol never touched a thing outside of the mechanicals he turned over for reproduction. Are these prints then valid?
Forgive the soapbox...but the 2 extras that were made by my uncle at the same time of the initial 7 have been deemed frauds while the 7 others went on to sell for millions and millions. So, who’s to say?
On page 41 of the Seventh Edition of Black's Law Dictionary, ad hominem is defined as: "Appealing to personal prejudices rather to reason; attacking an opponent's character rather than the opponent's assertions."
What if reason reveals the workings of a person's character via that person's assertions?
as much as i can't get emotional about aging boomers wasting their bonus money on yoko ono swill, the way Jon condenses the underlying issue is interesting.... for music there are separate royalties paid to both the songwriter and the performer of the song, but here there's not distinction between creator's work and chromist effort?
Ono should have been curbed in a botched robbery decades ago.
any retard would know that J. Lennon didn't make this shit last week. Do your homework about reproductions and prints, and you won't be disappointed. This just another chance for some fool to hate on Yoko. Let the woman do her thing.
"Is a sculpture or a lithograph never touched by the hands of the artist, might still be considered an authentic masterpiece?"
see any major artist working now - Koons, et al - that have armies of assistants making their work. It's their idea, but not their execution. Hate on the process, but it's still the artist's name on it at the end of the day.
There's another thing called an Estate Stamp. A lot of Diane Arbus' work is sold with that nowadays. The work is printed, then signed by the Estate. Are you going to tell me its no longer a Diane Arbus photograph?
i got yoko's back. forever and always....just sayin...if you think the world's loss was bad, what about hers? asses. grow a spine. kthxbye.
CAN THE DEAD CREATE NEW ART?
Since 1986, John Lennon is credited, by Yoko Ono, with creating over 50,000 original works of art ie., lithographs, serigraphs, etchings and woodcuts, all with a so-called "John Lennon" chop-mark/signature applied.
If John Lennon died in 1980, how'd he do that?
Under U.S. Customs, a lithograph, not to mention any original printmaking medium, "must be wholly executed by hand by the artist" and "excludes any mechanical and photomechanical processes."
So, for those who might think lithographs are copies and/or that the artist's living presence is not required to create lithographs, they would be mistaken. You see lithographs are original works of visual art that require the artist's physically participation and approval.
Therefore as tragic as John Lennon's death might have been in 1980, his career as an artist was over.
Now as an artist who actually creates original works of visual ie., lithographs, I can speak with authority that this labor intensive medium requires all the skill and experience just to physically create and print my edition of lithographs with no guarantee of aesthetic success, much less sales.
So, how distressful could it be for legitimate artists who create lithographs and other original printmaking mediums, who labor to create and print their edition of lithographs and the like to find others like Yoko Ono and her business associates: Legacy Fine Art & Production misrepresenting chromist-made reproductions, posthumously colorized and altered into new compositions, as originals works of visual art ie., lithographs, serigraph, etchings and woodcuts?
Then to add insult to injury, the vast majority of the news media’s lack of connoisseurship perpetuates, with or without intent, this fraud. It is not surprising since the everyday different story demands made on celebrity newscasters or newscasters who want to be celebrities leaves little time for doing their homework. In other words, if they said it on TV, it must be true.{sic}
In closing, without full and honest disclosure to these contentious issues of authenticity, how can the consumer give informed consent on whether to attend this fraud a.k.a. the Artwork of John Lennon exhibition, much less purchase one or more of the tens of thousands posthumous non-disclosed colorized and altered composition fakes?
Respectfully,
Gary Arseneau
artist, creator of original lithographs & scholar
Fernandina Beach, Florida
ONE MORE NOTE OF INTEREST: No one can’t posthumously make photographs from an artist’s negative. Someone can reproduce the artist’s work posthumously from their negative. The result, at best, will be a reproduction, with subtle to obvious differences, for -no- one can substitute their judgment for the artist, particularly if they’re dead. Under U.S. Copyright Law the Rights of Attribution dies when the artist’s dies. Otherwise, think how sublime our world would be if the dead can still come out with new work. How could the living ever possibly compete?
If the artist subcontracts the actual work to someone else, and approves it, it's legit. If the artist subcontracts 5 prints, and the printer prints 7, 2 of them are not authorized, and are fraud, theft, etc.
If the original artist dies, and someone else copies old stuff, changes it, and runs off a thousand copies drawn by an anonymous chromist, the dead "artist" did not draw it, print it, or approve the drawing or print.
Therefore, it is not an "original" work by that artist.
If someone copies John Lennon's autograph onto a cocktail napkin, and it looks like his autograph, but in a different color, but Lennon didn't actually sign it, is it still Lennon's autograph? Nope.
I BOUGHT 2X OF LENNON''S WORK FROM LEGACY IN BOULDER CO., 2 TO 3 YRS AGO----ARE MY "PRINTS" THE SAME OF AS YOU SPEAK? AND IF SO---IS THERE A CLASS ACTION IN PROGRESS?
150796 @embarrased: November 4, 2010
Unfortunately, they're back.
The so-called “Artwork of John Lennon” exhibition and sale, on November 5-7, 2010 in Boulder, Colorado, is a -fraud-.
This fraud consists of non-disclosed posthumous (after 1986) forgeries, falsely attributed to a dead John Lennon (d 1980) that were actually posthumously colorized and altered into new compositions and are being misrepresented for sale at $500 to $9,000 or more each as original works of visual art ie., lithographs-serigraphs-etchings-woodcuts.
The dead don’t create artwork.
The learn more, link to:
http://garyarseneau.blogspot.com/2006/09/artwork-of-john-lennon-fraud.html
Finally, to confirm these contentious issues of authenticity do not operate in a vacuum, link to the London Times’ published May 9, 2010 “Oh No Yoko Colours” article: http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/visual_arts/article7120692.ece
In closing, if the prior person who's comment says they purchased from this so-called Artwork of John Lennon exhibition in Boulder some 3 years ago is forwarded this email reply, I would recommend they consult an attorney immediately for advice.
The squeaky wheel gets the oil.
Gary Arseneau
artist, creator of original lithographs
Fernandina Beach, Florida