[MSN] Dealer changes position in dispute over Renoir-Guino bronzes

[Museum Security Network Mailing list]

Dealer changes position in dispute over Renoir-Guino bronzes

By Georgina Adam 
<http://www.theartnewspaper.com/aabout/creditemail.asp?strCredit=Georgina%20Adam> 
| Posted 23 April 2007

LONDON. Emmanuel Javogue, a US-based dealer who has opposed Renoir’s 
great-grandson Emmanuel in a long-running dispute over copyright to 
Renoir bronzes in the US, has now changed his position. He now claims 
that many pieces he believed were authentic may actually be unauthorised 
fakes.

Many “Renoir-Guino” bronzes sold on the market have authenticity 
problems, he says. “I am disappointed by how the two families are 
handling the heritage of their ancestors,” he told /The Art Newspaper/. 
“There is no respect for the oeuvre, it’s all about the money they can 
make.”

“Renoir-Guino” bronzes were made at the end of Renoir’s life when the 
artist used an assistant, Richard Guino, as his “hands”. With Auguste 
Renoir, Guino won joint copyright to these pieces, which has passed to 
Guino’s heirs. They have produced and sold the bronzes for many years, 
as well as issuing certificates of authenticity.

Mr Javogue was associated with the Guinos for some years as their US 
representative and sold some pieces. He now says that the Guinos have 
produced sculptures with the same edition numbers, claims that the 
family deny.

His change of opinion comes during a long-running series of lawsuits 
between the Guinos and Emmanuel Renoir, who is claiming the right to 
reproduce Renoir-Guino pieces in the US.

The Guinos accuse Mr Renoir and his partners of making unauthorised 
repro­ductions of the sculptures from original plasters to sell in the 
US, a charge Mr Renoir denies because he says the works are in the 
public domain in the US and so cannot be copyrighted.

In a sworn statement seen by /The Art Newspaper/, Mr Javogue says he now 
has “concerns” about a Venus Victrix he consigned to Christie’s and 
which the firm sold in New York on 5 May 2005 for $284,800; it was 
numbered EA I/IV, with a Valsuani founder’s mark. The problem, according 
to court papers filed in France, was that another sculpture with the 
same number was sold by Michel Guino to the Michido Gallery in Japan in 
1993, for FFr1.6m ($282,000). Mr Javogue’s statement mentions a number 
of other pieces which he says are problematic, as well as accusing 
Michel Guino (one of the heirs) of producing false certificates of 
authenticity.

According to the Guinos’ US lawyer Richard Morris, his clients “deny 
having made any unauthorised pieces…the owner of the copyright cannot by 
definition make an unauthorised piece. Further, [they deny] ‘double 
numbering’ or any other impropriety.” Mr Renoir has brought a suit in 
France accusing Michel Guino of making unauthorised pieces. Christie’s 
said in a statement: “We are monitoring the matter. As with all 
properties sold at Christie’s, this bronze was researched prior to sale 
by specialists, and…we also worked with an outside authority. Both 
Christie’s and the authority concluded that there were no issues with 
the work.”

http://www.theartnewspaper.com/