Needing assistance with painting ID

RLangston · May 4th, 2008, 09:39 PM

I'm assisting my brother in trying to identify this painting. Apparently the signature was removed from this painting when it was given to the friend of a gallery manager. The painting had sustained slight fire damage prior to this. I was hoping someone might be able to identify the artist, or at least a suggestion as to a possible time frame for when it may have been painted. It is believed to have come from Georgetown University. (I have contacted people there and I am awaiting word from them). A related question: is this a common practice to remove a signature when a painting would be given to an individual? Would this be roughly equivalent to bookstores tearing off the covers of books so they can't be resold? Thanks in advance for any info and advice!

John · May 4th, 2008, 11:09 PM

I've never specifically heard of this happening, but it's imaginable that the painting had a signature on it that the university determined to be a fake.

That's the only scenario I can think of for deliberately removing a signature. Even if that area of the painting was badly damaged, the signature remains one of the most important parts of the painting. To remove it for any reason (that I can think of) except for forgery would be vandalism.

RLangston · May 5th, 2008, 04:16 PM

I'm beginning to speculate the following occurred: the painting was determined to be a forgery. The gallery manager was actually starting to burn the painting, when the friend said he'd like to have it. The gallery manager allowed him to take it, except that he removed the signature to ensure that it would not be later considered to be the genuine item. If I find that the gallery has never had a fire, this scenario would likely be what happened. I'm of course wondering if it were a forgery, was it a forgery of a specific painting or simply of a particular artist's style.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

May 4th, 2008, 11:09 PM	#2
John John Malyon, host Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 182	I've never specifically heard of this happening, but it's imaginable that the painting had a signature on it that the university determined to be a fake. That's the only scenario I can think of for deliberately removing a signature. Even if that area of the painting was badly damaged, the signature remains one of the most important parts of the painting. To remove it for any reason (that I can think of) except for forgery would be vandalism.

May 5th, 2008, 04:16 PM	#3
RLangston Junior Member Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 2	I'm beginning to speculate the following occurred: the painting was determined to be a forgery. The gallery manager was actually starting to burn the painting, when the friend said he'd like to have it. The gallery manager allowed him to take it, except that he removed the signature to ensure that it would not be later considered to be the genuine item. If I find that the gallery has never had a fire, this scenario would likely be what happened. I'm of course wondering if it were a forgery, was it a forgery of a specific painting or simply of a particular artist's style.