Long-lost van Gogh masterpiece 'discovered' by NYC collector

[left-of-center2012]

The art collector and luminary who founded the New York Academy of Art with Andy Warhol in 1979 says he’s rediscovered a long-lost Vincent van Gogh masterpiece at an obscure country auction. New York collector Stuart Pivar says the painting, “Auvers, 1890” — in its original condition and signed on the back by “Vincent” — is a “once-in-a-lifetime find.” And the van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam has requested he send it to them for immediate authentication.

The piece, if authentic, was likely painted in the last two months of the famed artist’s life. Van Gogh shot himself in a wheat field in July 1890 — possibly in one of the fields that appears in the painting, Pivar believes. Van Gogh obsessively painted more than 70 works in the last two months of his life in Auvers, on the outskirts of Paris.

Pivar said, “This is what we are considering to be the greatest art find in 100 years. It’s the biggest painting van Gogh ever made [and] the only one he ever made in a square format. It is on its way to the van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam because they have requested to see it and authenticate it.

“We consider this to be the find of the century. What is amazing is this painting has never been touched: It is still in its original stretcher. You would never ever see a painting from this period that hasn’t gone through some kind of restoration. The painting, signed and dated 1890, is a square panorama of the valley of Auvers, showing its mosaic of wheat fields bisected by a railway line.

https://pagesix.com/2021/05/20/stuart-pivar-claims-hes-rediscovered-a-long-lost-van-gogh/

[dweller]

1. What an unusual perspective

painted from above and at a distance
🤔

✌🏻

[questionseverything]

2. Space ship

[dweller]

4. now see, I would have said

hot air balloon ... but I can’t think of another painting by Vincent that is from this perspective...
it’s totally imaginative, I cannot see how he could have ‘seen’ this view, he could have seen all of the area in sections in person, but not all at once.
Thus it is purely imaginative on his part in its perspective.
Most if not all of his paintings have depicted subject that is on the artist’s plane of view, before him, and is regaled in the depiction of color, line and fantasia of his unique eye ...
this stands alone, afaik, in the perspective... above and at a distance, totally imaginative

✌🏻

[meadowlander]

7. Or he climbed a hill.

[dweller]

9. That would be a very high hill

if you look at the foreground or bottom of the painting... it’s almost straight down
Vincent was known for wandering the countryside for his material for landscape painting


✌🏻

[csziggy]

19. There is some geologic formation there with high cliffs

On Google Maps, I could not get to the top, but following the roads, there are some high, maybe chalk, cliffs that go straight up. At one point, pas a wall and gate and through vegetation, there was a pretty nice view - not as clear as in the painting but other than the immediate vegetation, very clear across a valley.

There is also a castle on top of one of the areas. Again, I couldn't get to it on Google Maps, but that would give a great view.

[ShazzieB]

10. That was my thought, too.

The next question is whether there is a hill in the right location to provide such a view. Probably not difficult to answer if one knows the area. I'm sure the Van Gogh Museum will be able to find out.

[Baitball Blogger]

17. Or saw it from a hot air balloon?

[Hoyt]

3. Must have used a drone. Seriously nice. Hope it withstands authentication.

[CaptainTruth]

5. Beautiful!

[KatK]

6. Stunning!

[Hekate]

8. Lovely. I love Van Gogh, and hope this is the real deal. nt

[SleeplessinSoCal]

11. I don't think it's his.

Something about the rail road tracks.

[canetoad]

12. And the sky

Too wishy washy and unformed.

[edhopper]

15. I agree

stylistically, it is not quite his. Especially like his late paintings, where he painted with thick strokes.
They will have to show a provenance to prove it is Van Gogh.

[Meowmee]

13. I am sure Vincent did not paint this eom

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

14. I like it, no matter who painted it.

Love the colors.

[edhopper]

16. For comparison

here is a painting he did of the train at Auvers in 1890.

[left-of-center2012]

18. I'm surprised at the number of 'art experts' here ...

I'm surprised at the number of 'art experts' here who can look at a photo on an internet forum and declare:

"That's NOT a van Gogh !"
when the van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam has requested it be sent it to them for immediate authentication.

[edhopper]

20. Us "art experts",

I happened to have 40 years experience in the art world, think this is suspicious. We don't take the persons word for it. So yes, sending it to Amsterdam is the proper thing to do. If the Van Gogh Museum was not unsure, they would not of requested to see it.

The collector is not saying where he found it, and it is curious that the largest painting Van Gogh had ever painted was hidden for 130 years.

[left-of-center2012]

24. "If the Van Gogh Museum was not unsure, they would not of requested to see it"

They would not validate it unseen.

[edhopper]

25. Not true

if this was from another collection with full provenance, they might not be suspicious. As is, they want to see what is what with this painting.

[left-of-center2012]

26. we disagree

They would not validate it unseen.

bye

[edhopper]

27. They don't need to validate.

There are many Van Goghs out there that don't need to be validated by the Van Gogh Museum.
But they have requested to see this one.
Doesn't mean it is or is not a Van Gough, their inspection will resolve that.
Are you saying we should take this person's word for it, given all the suspicious things about the painting and how untypical it is for a Van Gogh?

[left-of-center2012]

28. When I said 'Bye' ...

[edhopper]

29. So you are saying

your mind's made up, it's a Van Gogh and you don't care what others have to say about it. Even some with expertise.

Okay, buh-bye.

[left-of-center2012]

31. Nope

I don't care
Now I'll put you on ignore.

[edhopper]

32. Then you miss me telling you

you are one of the most stellar members of DU and your contributions make it a better site.

[elias7]

34. very graceful of you

I aspire to maintaining that demeanor in this Age...

[edhopper]

35. What would be the point on insult someone who put me on ignore

I get more satisfaction in him not ever seeing my compliment.

[ananda]

21. That doesn't really look like a Van Gogh to me.

It's too controlled and rectilinear.

[Goodheart]

23. My thoughts exactly.

[Goodheart]

22. I'm quite skeptical, for two reasons

1) It doesn't look like a Van Gogh
2) I"ve seen the documentary "Made You Look" about fraud in the art world (available on Netflix, highly recommended)
1

[mopinko]

33. yeah, me too.

[mahina]

30. 10$ that it's fake

Biggest ever, first square, never restored, looks weird.