The evidence, the judge said, showed this was a case of imperfect memories, coincidences and mistaken identity. He said it was a different Peter Doige, who spelled his name with an "e," who created the artwork. Feinerman rejected the idea that Doig, the renowned artist, and Doige were the same person.2 Doig[e]s, painting in the same prison. That's odd! The plaintiff still thinks he's got a real Doig, and who knows how much money he can get for what he at least once believed was good for $10 million.
[Robert] Fletcher, 62, testified that he bought the painting of a desert landscape [for $100] while Doig was serving prison time in Canada's Thunder Bay Correctional Center. But Feinerman said it was Doige — who was several years older and painted at the time — who was briefly in prison.
ADDED: The quote in the headline is from a law professor, and you might be disinclined to pull it apart enough to see that it's got too many negatives, as the first 2 commenters simultaneously point out:
I think there's an extra negative in that sentence. — campy at 6:53 AM
I hesitate to say that I don't disagree with you. — rhhardin at 6:53 AM
पोस्ट्स
१२ टिप्पण्या:
""This case inspires terror in some artists who fear they could end up in court for denying that a work they did not do isn't theirs.""
I think there's an extra negative in that sentence.
denying that a work they did not do isn't theirs
I hesitate to say that I don't disagree with you.
To paraphrase Bruce Willis in Moonlighting: Art. You can't live with it and you cant leave it on the street corner when you're through with it.
It's poorly written, as is the norm with "journalism" these days, but only one of them was in prison:
"[Marilyn Doige Bovard] confirmed her brother had been in prison where Fletcher worked in the mid to late '70s.
Doig, who now lives in Trinidad, said he's never been in prison. While he lived in Canada at the time, he said he was attending school in Toronto, 500 miles from the prison. Feinerman said yearbooks proved Doig was, in fact, in Toronto when Fletcher said he was in prison."
This has something to do with Scott Adams. I just cannot figure it out without his help.
So not only does the prison guard not have a painting worth a lot, he's out the cost of the trial too.
I think I should feel more sympathy for him than I do. Oh well.
Wouldn't the police have fingerprints of the person who had been in that prison, which either would, or would not, match the defendant?
worth a fraction of the previous estimated value of $10 million
"Art world" = a load of horse pucky.
"This case inspires terror in some artists who fear they could end up in court for denying that a work they did not do isn't theirs."
Not.fair.this.early.
Why not just make it "This case inspires terror in some artists who fear they could end up in court for asserting that a work isn't theirs."
rhhardin had to go there: I hesitate to say that I don't disagree with you.
2 Doig[e]s, painting in the same prison. That's odd!
According to the article, they weren't both in the prison:
Doig, who now lives in Trinidad, said he's never been in prison.
Only Doige was in prison, unfortunately for the painting's owner.
This exposes a big problem in the art world that few will acknowledge; if a living artist has to go to great pains to show he didn't do a work attributed to him, what about all the other art that is attributed to artists with even scantier evidence?
Plus, if the value of a painting rests on an 'e', doesn't that show just how phony art prices are?
Hmmmm
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा