This exhibition of Hiroyuki Hamada’s new sculptures comprises 11 works, both sculptures free standing and wall hanging. I hesitate to term all of the latter, “bas reliefs,” while several of the major works certainly are. And those are very similar in formulation to the free standing sculptures, although they are sans the hallmark pedestals, which stand to be part and parcel with the abstract forms they support.
Hiroyuki Hamada, #88, 2016 – 20, Painted Resin, 29 x 47 x 41″
The smaller wall hung pieces are more akin to bricolage painting; as folded, bent, and twisted scraps of what looks like metal or leather are affixed to flat, subtly toned, apparently wooden substrates. The larger works impart a distinctly Japanese aesthetic in their elegant, zen-like, and graceful simplicity of pure form; as such without any backing besides the wall -or they are free standing. What appear to be natural materials such as white or black ceramic tile, rusted iron, or stone are also displayed on bases of what look to be thoroughly rusted pipes. To be clear on this point: the artist considers these works painted sculptures. They are all constructed of synthetic materials. Hamada’s masterful use of trompe l’oeil surfacing is astounding. The rusty piping is in fact p v c and the aquiline shapes they support are carved insulation foam coated with painted plastreric resin. Polystyrenes have been popular with artists since at least the 1950s and 60s when Jean Dubuffet and Nikki de Saint Phalle first explored the then new found resource. The properties of these mediums allow for direct impulsive carving and so generally disregard the conventional sculptural necessity of pre constructing an armature or so to speak, skeleton within, thereby allowing the artist an unrestrained free hand in expression.
Hiroyuki Hamada, #100, 2023, Painted Resin, 38 x 63 x 26.5″, Base: 35 x 46 x 26.5″
Notably, Dubuffet topped off his monumental works with stucco while de Saint Phalle frequently embellished her works with mosaics. More recently others have crusted the artifice with epoxies, fiberglass, urethane putties, or other substances; then painted them in order to stave off degradation resulting from exposure to sunlight. These are industrial materials often used in construction, or automotive assembly, ship building; even for making surf boards. Significantly, pragmatic considerations have enabled artists to explore and discover various possibilities. These newfound materials were lightweight, comparatively inexpensive, and easily manipulated without the need of a foundry. If Hiroyuki Hamada’s works were composed of what they convincingly appear to be they would weigh more than could be lifted in this gallery’s elevator, or hung on its sheetrock walls. Yet there are laborious old school techniques which could enable his vision with a forge and kiln. Frankly, Hamada’s mastery of faux finishes over the coated, smoothed, and refined forms is so complete that I didn’t notice until he mentioned it. The illusionistic pragmatism is not what grabbed me. I was attracted to the work purely for its aesthetics – its elegance: the simple smooth forms which reference predecessors Isamu Noguchi and Jean Arp’s exigencies, amongst many functional designers, who modeled their modernist forms in traditional materials – whilst Hamada’s tasteful combinations of industrial supplies are not what they seem to be at all, presenting a fascinatingly duplicitous conundrum.
Hiroyuki Hamada, #108, 2025, Painted and pigmented Resin, 36.5 x 55 x 13″
Hiroyuki Hamada: New Sculpture, May 6 – June 13, 2025. Bookstein Projects, 39 East 78th Street, NYC
A new gallery has opened in Toronto – Sheff Contemporary – located in a surprisingly airy basement on Danforth Ave. Given the number of commercial galleries that have closed in recent years, its opening is in itself something to celebrate. Its inaugural show highlights the work of Steve Rockwell. The gallery’s owner, Saeed Mohamed has known Rockwell many years, and has always been greatly impressed by his work.
The space, Mohamed explains, is important in the sense that he understands how art is ineluctably an in-person experience. Indeed, it the experiencing of art in the gallery setting that is a central idea of Rockwell’s work. At the same time, Mohamed is not committed to keeping the gallery in one location. Rather, he appreciates that it is the people – artists, audience, buyers etc. – who together are the essential elements of this experience. Art, he feels, is often elitist and he is keen, instead, to promote art in a way that makes it more relatable to the public, who like himself, may not be connoisseurs in the traditional sense. His hope is to foster an inclusive crowd of art enthusiasts who will facilitate this aim. He sees his role as providing the space and the opportunity to experience art. Certainly judging from the crowd who showed up for the opening reception, he’s off to a good start.
Installation view of Steve Rockwell Meditation on Space at Sheff Contemporary, 2025. Photo: Hugh Alcock
Rockwell’s show is about art. It is, one might say, second order art. Moreover it is a breed of conceptual art, based on performance of a peculiarly inconspicuous kind. Rockwell’s work invariably has some story behind it. For instance, in one of his black and white paintings, one confronts an image of the artist himself, arms fully spread, with bright light radiating from his torso, titled My Spirit Lives Here! (1996). Nearby is another image of him, titled Blackout, which in contrast to his effulgent self, has him shrouded in darkness – his features barely discernible.
My Spirit Lives Here! 1996, acrylic on masonite, 32 x 32 inches (Inspired by the January 2, 1996 visit to the Ernie Wolfe Gallery in Santa Monica, California). Courtesy of the artist
These two paintings are part of a series of five, on the theme of meditating on various spaces in galleries, that is ostensibly based on a story akin to that in the Bible of the conversion of Paul on the road to Damascus. A journey from the infidel’s blindness to the light of faith. But any such story line surmised by the viewer, it turns out, is post hoc. The order of the paintings was chosen long afterwards. Each is a record of some event he experienced while executing a performance he titled Meditations on Space. It involved him showing up in some reputable gallery in Switzerland, France, Toronto, Los Angeles or New York, announcing to its custodians that he was there to meditate on the gallery space. Most acquiesced and let him be. But part of the performance concerned his interactions with people and with the space itself. While in the Ernie Wolfe Gallery, Los Angeles, for instance, its owner shouted out to Rockwell ‘This is where I live. My spirit lives here!’, hence the title of the painting mentioned above.
Meditations on Space, 1996, acrylic on masonite, 32 x 32 inches (Inspired by the September 20, 1995 visit to Galerie Jamile Weber in Zurich, Switzerland). Courtesy of the artist
While these works are not literally biblical in derivation, they do touch on big questions – on life and death specifically. In Blackout we see a grainy barely discernible image of Rockwell’s face. It inspired by an episode while visiting and meditating on a gallery space when he was suddenly plunged into darkness, due to a power outage of course. In his depiction of this event Rockwell chose to render himself, despite the almost total darkness, as a comment on our perception of darkness. As Rockwell points out, normally – at night, closing our eyes etc., – we do not in fact experience total black. Instead we ‘see’ what are sometimes called phosphenes, namely internally generated patterns. The image of his face that we see imitates this experience. Only death leads to true blackness in this sense. Likewise, light is obviously associated with life. Hence Rockwell’s choice of painting in black and white – emblematic of pure light and darkness, i.e., life and death.
Blackout, 1996, acrylic on masonite, 32 x 32 inches (Inspired by the October 3, 1995 visit to Galerie Lahumiere in Paris, France). Courtesy of the artist
Rockwell’s performances on the theme of galleries goes back to about a decade earlier. In 1988 he decided to drop by at 64 of Toronto’s galleries, and ask their owners or administrators to fill out a form indicating in which direction their main entrance faces – north, east, south or west. Using the information he received he built a model, displayed on the wall, representing each gallery as a compartment on a square grid. A small aperture on the respective wall of each indicates the direction of the entrance. Here one is reminded of Sol Le Witt’s work, e.g., his permutations of the edges of a cube. The appearance of the material art object is entirely determined by the rules underwriting its construction. Indeed, Le Witt has been a major influence on Rockwell. This year Rockwell repeated the performance. In the updated version he struggled, sadly, to find 64 galleries in the city.
Gallery Space, 1988 (left) and Gallery Space 2025 (right) both house paint on mahogony panel and card, laser transfer text, 14 x 14 x 2 inches. Photo: Hugh Alcock
Rockwell’s original motive for this earlier gallery performance was to find a way to introduce himself to the various galleries, and learn how they operate. This kernel of an idea became an abiding theme for him. As well, it is illustrative of Rockwell’s entrepreneurship, his willingness to go out and introduce himself and his ideas, more importantly, to people. As testament to the footwork this performance demanded, he has chosen to encase, and thus preserve, the very pair of shoes he wore walking around the city.
Gallery Space (Shoes), 1988, acrylic, wood floor, shoes, 14 x 14 x 15 inches. Courtesy of the artist
Here we see Rockwell’s wit – humour and sharp intelligence – shining through. Although physically the work occupies a modest amount of space, it brims over with ideas and reflections on the nature of art itself. Clearly Rockwell loves art, both the making of it and as its cultural wealth. Not to be missed as well is an array of collages he has meticulously produced – small works on paper – that investigate the margins of pictures and images. Beautiful work altogether.
Installation view with collages, each 2025, dArt pages with oil, 7 x 8.5 inches. Photo: Hugh Alcock
*Exhibition information: Steve Rockwell, Meditations on Space, June 5 – 30, 2025, Sheff Contemporary, 1276 Danforth Ave, Toronto. By appointment only (416-792-7792).
Henry Moore (30 July 1898 – 31 August 1986) was an English artist. He is best known for his semi-abstract monumental bronze sculptures which are located around the world as public works of art. His sculpture style was significantly influenced by his experience as a soldier in World War I. Moore also produced many drawings, including a series depicting the Second World War, along with other graphic works and studies on paper.
Marino Marini (27 February 1901 – 6 August 1980) was an Italian sculpture and educator. He initially trained as a painter in Florence before transitioning to sculpture. While he continued to engage in drawing and painting, Marini focused mainly on sculpture starting around 1922. Known for his figurative sculptures, particularly the “horse and rider” theme, which he explored throughout his career. In 1929, he took over from Arturo Martini as a professor at the Scuola d’Arte di Villa Reale in Monza, close to Milan, Italy, a role he held until 1940.
Henry Moore and Marino Marini, 1970, (detail) Gelatin silver print by Yousuf Karsh
Henry Moore and Marino Marini were introduced in 1951 by the New York art dealer Curt Valentin, leading to a significant friendship that endured throughout their careers. They often met along the Tuscan coast in Italy during the 1960s and 1970s, where Marini lived and Moore had a vacation residence. Both artists sought to revisit and modernize the European sculptural tradition, which Tuscany offered many exceptional examples. They shared numerous creative interests and held deep admiration for one another. Together, they cultivated a network of friendships and professional relationships with notable artists and intellectuals, including Jean Arp, Max Beckmann, Salvador Dali, Alexander Calder, Yves Tanguy, Lyonel Feininger, Alberto Giacometti, and Jacques Lipchitz.
Marino Marini, Due Figure, 1941, oil, tempera, pen, india ink, brown ink and pastel on paper (13.5 x 10.25 inches)
It is intriguing to note that both artists subconsciously exhibited remarkably similar artistic styles in their drawings, particularly in their early drawings from the 1940s. Their drawings predominantly focused on potential sculptural figures, as demonstrated in the drawings presented here. The figures in Marini’s Due Figure from 1941, created with oil, tempera, pen, India ink, brown ink, and pastel on paper, and Moore’s DrapedStanding Figures in Red from 1944, executed in pencil, ink, wax crayon, and watercolour, reveal a striking resemblance when placed side by side. Both artists are utilizing mixed media materials on paper of comparable dimensions. It is clear that these illustrations depict figures arranged as non-objective prospective subjects in a sculptural context. The Vatican Museum contains a small drawing by Moore and features a collection specifically focused on Marini’s early works on paper.
Henry Moore, Draped Standing Figures in Red, 1944, pencil, ink, wax crayon and watercolour (15.75 x 12.25 inches)
Two talented artists who unknowingly shared a strikingly similar artistic journey in their early works. Both artists hailed from different backgrounds (Marini from Italy, Moore from England) but found their calling in the realm of art, showcasing unique perspectives and creative flair in their works on paper. From a young age, these artists displayed a natural inclination towards art, doodling on any surface they could find and immersing themselves in colours and shapes that ignited their imagination. Haunted by the war and the suffering of civilians he observed during the bombings, Moore’s artistic themes were significantly shaped by these experiences. Meanwhile, Marini’s artistic style underwent a transformation due to the war, moving away from the smoother, classical forms of his earlier works towards a more jagged, Expressionist style that reflected his anxieties and disillusionment with humanity in the aftermath of the war.
Combining the enigmatic allure of artistic expression with the intricacies of the subconscious mind, the intriguing parallels between two renowned artists’ early works have captivated art enthusiasts and scholars alike. It’s a fascinating intersection of creativity, influence, and individual style as these artists, perhaps unknowingly, manifested remarkably similar artistic techniques in their works during the formative stages of their careers. Through a journey of discovery and analysis, we can unravel the threads that connect these artists’ early artistic endeavours, shedding light on the subconscious forces at play in shaping their distinctive visual languages.
Left: Marino Marini, Pomona, 1943, oil, pastel and black crayon on paper (15.12 x 11.12 inches). Right: Henry Moore, Two Women and a child, 1940, pencil, wax crayon, coloured crayon, watercolour wash and ink (15.75 x 11.75 inches)
Despite their unique perspectives, these artists often incorporated similar elements in their compositions, from the arrangement of subjects to the harmonious blend of colours that evoked a sense of unity and cohesion in their artworks. It is intriguing to explore how unconscious influences, such as personal experiences, emotions, and cultural backgrounds, may have shaped the artists’ early artistic expressions. Delving into the depths of the subconscious unveils a rich tapestry of inspiration within their works. They collectively transformed classical sculpture into a more figurative semi-abstract style that aligned with contemporary trends.
They shared a profound admiration for Michelangelo’s sculptures, particularly David (1501-1504) and Pietà (1498-1499), the latter illustrating Mary holding the lifeless body of Jesus after the Crucifixion. Both masterpieces were crafted from marble extracted from the nearby Carrara quarries. Notably, the Pietà is distinguished as the only artwork that Michelangelo ever signed. On 21 May 1972, this sculpture, located in St. Peter’s Basilica in Vatican City, suffered damage when a mentally unstable geologist, originally from Hungary and residing in Australia, entered the chapel and assaulted the statue with a geologist’s hammer, proclaiming, ‘I am Jesus Christ; I have risen from the dead!’.
Henry Moore, Reclining Figure, 1969-1970, Bronze with brown patina
On the 15 December, 2005, a bronze statue by Moore, entitled Reclining Figure (1969-1970), depicting an abstract female figure, lying on her back with her legs raised and feet grounded, supported on one arm and resting on her hip. Valued at £3 million, was stolen from the courtyard of the Henry Moore Foundation located in Perry Green, Hertfordshire, England. The sculpture which weighed 2.1 tons and measured 3.6 metres in length was lifted using a crane and transported away on a flatbed truck. It is believed that the statue was melted down and sold for £5,000 as scrap metal. Six casts of the reclining figure were created in total.
Marino Marini, The Angel of the City, 1948, Bronze with brown patina
Marini’s sculpture titled The Angel of the City(1948) a seminal work by the Italian artist depicts a nude man sitting with outstretched arms on a horse. There are castings on display at the Peggy Guggenheim Collection in Venice, as well as the J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles. This piece was one of Fallingwater, Pennsylvania, USA’s most prominent pieces of art lost during a flood at Bear Run Nature Reserve in August 1956. The sculpture was part of the Kaufmann family collection and was lost for years until found in fragments in August 2009.
Both artists achieved global recognition during their careers, showcasing their art work at prominent museum exhibitions and receiving numerous accolades worldwide for their work. Both are in collections with works in hundreds of galleries, museums and public spaces throughout the world.
Marino Marini, Ballerino, 1954, Bronze with dark brown patina (left) Henry Moore, Mother and child, 1980, Bronze with dark brown patina (right)
The Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO) located in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, is home to the world’s most extensive public collection of Henry Moore’s art, encompassing sculptures, maquettes, and works on paper, largely donated by the artist himself during the years 1971 to 1974. The Henry Moore Sculpture Centre was inaugurated at the AGO in 1974 to showcase Moore’s original donation and has since become a landmark in Toronto.
The Marino Marini Museum, located in Florence, Italy, is dedicated to the artist’s legacy and creations. Occupying the former San Pancrazio Church, the museum displays a rich collection of Marini’s sculptures, paintings, and drawings, offering valuable insights into his artistic progression and journey.
(Republication of a dArt magazine Summer 2003 article.)
Young, attractive, and successful executive at an assets management firm in New York, Gail Rothman, is also an enthusiastic collector of art. She started collecting in 1998 and has already acquired over one hundred pieces, but she still humbly labels herself a neophyte. She approaches her “vice” passionately and hopes to follow in the steps of her two idols, Dr. Alfred C. Barnes and herbert Vogel. Barnes, a very wealthy man, collected according to his personal intuitions regardless of current trends, and was proven by time to have been astute in his selections. And she emulates Herb Vogel because he amassed a legendary collection on his postman’s salary, demonstrating that a great collection can be assembled on a limited budget.
Christopher Chambers:Do you collect current fine art exclusively?
Gail Rothman: My collecting criteria is that the piece must have been made from 1990 onwards, the artist still has to be alive, and the proceeds – these are primary sales – either has to benefit the artist or a charity that the artist has designated. I am currently not doing anything in the secondary market, so in a sense I am acting as a patron.
CC:Who do you buy from?
GR: Benefit auctions, artists directly, or through a gallery – a dealer.
CC:It seems like you really launched into collecting with a vengeance. What precipitated this? What was the impetus?
GR: A lot of white walls in my apartment. I had been a member of museum groups at the Museum of Modern Art and the Guggenheim, and I said, “Ooh, you know maybe it’s a little embarrassing for people to come over to my house and there’s no art.” I think you get to a certain point in your life and you decide, “I’d rather have something that’s an original piece.”
CC:Do you bargain with the dealers?
GR: I buy art like I buy clothes. If I see something that I like, but I can’t choose the color, then I get more than one. As with anything, if you are buying more than one, or if you are potentially going to be a customer that comes back, you get discounts. I have to work for my art vice. You try to be smart shopper.
CC:Do you have relationships with particular dealers, or do you pretty much scour the market?
GR: A combination of both. I I have a good relationship in Frankfort with L.A. Gallery. In New York with Derek Eller Gallery and Paul Morris Gallery. In California: Mark Moore Gallery.
CC:Where is your collection housed?
GR: Several places right now, depending on the kindness of friends and family.
CC:Do you fraternize with other collectors?
GR: I do fraternize with some collectors. I’d like to fraternize with more. It seems to be a small conspiracy to keep collectors away from each other. When you go to a gallery the’re always very discreet and very mysterious about who the other collectors are, so you don’t run into them too often, Slowly but surely you build up your collector’s network.
CC:Have you collected specific artists in depth?
GR: Yes, I have to say I love all my artists, but I have particularly strong crush now on Oliver Boberg (Constructed reality photos. Shows with Paul Morris, New York and L.A. Gallery Frankfort). I have several pieces of Thomas Scheibitz (figurative German painter, represented in New York by Tanya Bonakder Gallery), and Michael Reafshneider (an American, he makes abstract, heavy impasto, colorful paintings. Shows with Mark Moore in Los Angeles), Giles Lyon (young American abstract painter represented by Feigen Contemporary in New York) Whiting Tennis (innovative young American collage/painter with Derek Eller gallery, New York).
CC:How much do you usually spend for a young artist?
GR: Smaller works under $3000.
CC:Who do you listen to?
GR: I listen to my internal voice. If I love a piece it doesn’t really matter what anyone says. I listen to dealers when they have an artist that they have an artist that they think might fit my taste, and I ask other artists what they think. I have bought some pieces by the artists I just mentioned that people have pooh-poohed and then allof a sudden the artist’s career started expanding two years later and everyone said, “Oh, I can’t believe you got that artist, you were such a visionary!” And I’m thinking, “Don’t they remember what they told me two years ago? They thought it was a piece of crap.”
The art world is a realm where new discoveries occur on a daily basis. While some may argue that finding a life-changing bargain is improbable, the reality is that such opportunities do exist, often emerging unexpectedly. Artworks are unearthed regularly in the most surprising locations. One must simply open their eyes and comprehend what they are observing.
N. C. Wyeth, Ramona, Frontispiece illustration, 1939, oil on panel
N. C. Wyeth (1882-1945). A woman bought a painting measuring 25-1/8 x 16-7/8 inches in a frame 28 x 19-1/2 inches for $4 at a thrift store, primarily for its frame. This was the aspiration of a woman as she rummaged through a collection of old frames during her visit to Savers, a thrift store located in New Hampshire. This situation highlights the notion that a frame can sometimes be more valuable than the artwork it holds. Only to later learn that the painting within the frame was an N.C. Wyeth original artwork valued at around $150,000 to $250,000 USD. The identification of the painting as the work of the esteemed American painter and illustrator N.C. Wyeth was facilitated by an art conservator based in Maine.
The American painter, whose life spanned from 1882 to 1945, had an extensive career that included creating illustrations for magazines and authors over several decades. The painting found in a thrift store has been identified as one of four potential cover designs for the 1939 edition of Helen Hunt Jackson’s novel, Ramona. This story follows the life of a fictional girl of mixed Scottish and Native American heritage, who is left orphaned shortly after the Mexican-American War concluded in 1848. In this piece, Wyeth illustrates a critical moment in the story, where Ramona adopts a defiant posture in front of her adoptive mother, Señora Moreno, whose chilly disposition is effectively represented by her stark black dress.
The details regarding how this artwork came to be in a New Hampshire thrift shop are still unknown. The painting was eventually sold 19 September 2023 for $191,000 USD at Bonhams Skinner Auctions in Marlborough, Massachusetts, USA.
Rembrandt Harmensz van Rijn, The Adoration of the Kings, circa 1628, oil on oak panel
Rembrandt Harmensz van Rijn (1606-1669). The painting titled The Adoration of The Kings, an oil on oak panel measuring 24.5 x 18.5 cm (9-5/8 x 7-1/4 inches), created circa 1628 which possesses a distinctive provenance that traces back to Amsterdam. It was first recorded in an estate inventory sale on 17 May 1715, listed as lot 1. Subsequently, it was sold in London at Phillips on 2 June 1814, listed as lot 40, where it fetched 215 Guineas. The artwork was later presented for sale again in London at Phillips on 29 June 1822, identified as “by” Rembrandt van Rijn, under the title The Adoration of the Magi. On 27 March 1963, it was auctioned at Sotheby’s in London listed as lot 13, as “by” Rembrandt van Rijn, but went unsold at £3,800. The piece was eventually sold in Amsterdam at Christie’s on 3 December 1985, cataloged as “Circle of” Rembrandt van Rijn. It reappeared at an online auction at Christie’s in Amsterdam on 6 October 2021, listed as lot 7, also attributed to “Circle of” Rembrandt van Rijn, with an estimated value of 10,000-15,000 EUR, ultimately achieving a sale price of 860,000 EUR. The auction house catalogued it as a work from the “circle of” Rembrandt however the interest shown in the bidding indicated that several bidders suspected it might truly be a creation of the Old Master.
Following a thorough analysis that incorporated infrared and x-ray imaging, along with evaluations by prominent Rembrandt scholars, experts have reattributed the small Biblical painting, which had been absent from historical records for many years, to Rembrandt van Rijn. The characteristics typical of his late 1620s style are apparent in both the visible painted surface and the underlying layers uncovered through scientific methods, revealing numerous alterations made during its creation and providing new insights into his artistic process.
Sotheby’s has confirmed that the artwork is indeed an authentic Rembrandt. It was featured in the auction house’s evening sale of Old Masters and 19th Century Paintings listed as lot 11, held in London on 6 December 2023, with an estimated value ranging from 10,000,000 to 15,000,000 GBP. Ultimately, the piece was sold for a final bid price of 10,965,300 GBP.
Giorgio da Castelfranco (Giorgione), Portrait of Giovanni Borgherini and Trifone Gabriele, 1509/1510, oil on canvas
Giorgio da Castelfranco (Giorgione) (1473/74–1510). A remarkable discovery has been made by an interdisciplinary team of scholars and scientists at the Alte Pinakothek and the Doerner Institute in Munich, Germany. Comprehensive art-historical and art-technological studies, undertaken as part of a research initiative focused on the Venetian Renaissance paintings within the Bayerische Staatsgemäldesammlungen (Bavarian State Painting Collections), have validated the insights that began to surface during the exhibition ‘Venezia 500 The Gentle Revolution of Venetian Painting’ from October 2023 to February 2024.
The enigmatic double portrait, titled Portrait of Giovanni Borgherini and Trifone Gabriele, oil on canvas, 91.5 x 67 cm (36 x 26-1/4 inches) painted in 1509/10 previously showcased at the Grüne Galerie in the Munich Residenz since 2011 and currently housed in the Alte Pinakothek, has been ascribed to Giorgio da Castelfranco, commonly referred to as Giorgione.
Giorgione, an influential Italian painter of the Venetian school during the High Renaissance, died in 1510 at a young age in his thirties. Originating from the quaint town of Castelfranco Veneto, which is also the birthplace of my father, Peter Bernardi, who was born in 1935. The town is situated 40 kilometers inland from Venice. An important milestone in Giorgione’s life was his encounter with Leonardo da Vinci in the year 1500. Giorgione is celebrated for the elusive and poetic nature of his artwork. However, only a limited number of paintings can be definitively attributed to him. The ambiguity surrounding the identity and interpretation of his pieces has rendered Giorgione one of the most enigmatic figures in European art history. He is widely regarded as the first Italian to incorporate landscapes as a background for figures in his paintings. In addition to altarpieces and portraits, he created works that lacked a narrative, whether biblical or classical, focusing instead on conveying moods of lyrical or romantic sentiment through form and colour.
This attribution positions it among the rare known works of this remarkably gifted artist, whose brief career significantly transformed Renaissance painting. The research results, represent a remarkable breakthrough in the study of Italian Renaissance art.
Artemisia Gentileschi, Penitent Mary Magdalene, circa 1625/1626, oil on canvas
Artemisia Gentileschi (1593-1653). The Kimbell Art Museum, located in Fort Worth, Texas, USA, has acquired a significant work by Artemisia Gentileschi. This painting is believed to be the original of a composition that has been replicated in several copies, a masterpiece once thought to be lost. Numerous reproductions of this artwork exist, including one that was auctioned in Genoa at Cambi Auction House on 30 June 2020. This particular copy, Lot 121 listed as “After” Artemisia Gentileschi, had an estimated value of 5,000-6,000 EUR but ultimately sold for 47,500 EUR.
For years, scholars have been in pursuit of this artwork, which had been thought to be lost. The painting titled Penitent Mary Magdalene circa 1625-1626, oil on canvas, 109.22 x 93.98 cm (43 x 37 inches) was first acquired, by Fernando Enríquez Afán de Ribera, the third duke of Alcalá and viceroy of Naples, during his role as the Spanish ambassador to Rome from 1625 to 1626. It was believed in the 18th century that the duke might have commissioned Artemisia, as indicated by the references to the painting in the inventories of his collection. The painting was later displayed in his Seville home, the Casa de Pilatos, where it became renowned and was widely reproduced.
Following the passing of the Duke of Alcalá, the painting was retained by his heirs in Seville until it vanished completely. It resurfaced at Tajan Auction House Old Master Paintings sale in France 19 December 2001, Lot 7, where it was attributed to the “studio/workshop” of Artemisia Gentileschi. Bidders, under the impression that it was an original creation, ultimately purchased it for $206,441, a figure that greatly exceeded the high estimate of $11,000. Artemisia’s artwork has achieved sales figures reaching as high as $5,259,897 USD. Subsequently, it was acquired by a private collection and remained there until Adam Williams Fine Art Ltd. of New York purchased it on behalf of the Kimbell Art Museum in 2024. The artwork is displayed in the section of the museum dedicated to showcasing other masterpieces of early 17th-century Italian painting, alongside renowned works such as Caravaggio’s The Bari (circa 1595) and Guercino’s Christ and the Samaritan Woman (circa 1619-1620).
Giovanni Francesco Barbieri (Il Guercino), Moses, 1618–1619, oil on canvas
Giovanni Francesco Barbieri (Il Guercino) (1591-1666). An oil on canvas painting depicting Moses, and measuring 72 x 63 cm (28-1/4 x 24-3/4 inches), was consigned to a sale held at Hôtel Drouot in Paris 25 November 2022, which was organized by the Paris auction house Chayette & Cheval. At that time, the artwork was attributed to an unidentified “follower’ of Guido Reni from the 17th-century Bolognese school, with an estimated value ranging from €5,000 to €6,000.The catalogue of Chayette & Cheval indicated that the auction house had contemplated attributing the work to Guercino, citing the fact that a replica of the same composition by his student Benedetto Zalone was presented by the Franco Semenzato auction house in Venice in 2001. However, the catalogue did not disclose the reasons for dismissing this evidence.
The artwork evidently attracted the discerning attention of at least two bidders, who engaged in a competitive auction. Ultimately, an Italian Old Master expert emerged victorious, securing the piece for an impressive €590,000. However, this amount pales in comparison to the painting’s true worth, which is estimated to be around €2 million.
Over the following year, the astute dealer commenced the process of restoring the painting and verifying its provenance. After months of careful examination, experts announced that the newly discovered painting was actually completed bythe Italian Baroque master Giovanni Francesco Barbieri, better known as Il Guercino. A measured risk was undertaken, as acquiring a painting in a dirty condition inherently carries a degree of uncertainty.
Recent studies indicate that this artwork was created circa 1618 or 1619, during Guercino’s late twenties while he resided in Cento, near Bologna. This timeframe positions it as a quintessential representation of the artist’s esteemed prima maniera, a term that refers to the pieces he crafted prior to his relocation to Rome in 1621.
The painting of Moses was initially part of the esteemed collection belonging to Cardinal Alessandro d’Este in Rome. Following his passing in 1624, it remained within his family. It is believed that during the years 1796-97, the painting was likely seized by Napoleon’s troops in Modena and transported to France.
Guercino’s depiction of Moses has been purchased by the charitable foundation of Jacob Rothschild. The painting is set to be permanently showcased at Waddesdon Manor in Buckinghamshire, managed by the Rothschild Foundation on behalf of the National Trust.
Anthony van Dyck, A Study for Saint Jerome, circa 1615-1618, oil on canvas
Anthony van Dyck(1599-1641). An Anthony van Dyck painting, titled A Study for Saint Jerome, has been rediscovered. This oil on canvas piece measures 95 by 58.5 cm (37½ by 23 inches) and was previously left in a dilapidated state in a farm shed located in Kinderhook, New York. It was acquired for a mere $600 USD. It was not until after the collector’s death in 2021 that his family opted to auction the piece, at which point it was identified as a Van Dyck.
The portrait depicts a nude man sitting on a stool and was likely painted between 1615 and 1618 when Van Dyck was working with Peter Paul Rubens in Antwerp. This piece serves as a study for a subsequent work by the Flemish master titled St. Jerome. The completed painting is currently housed in the Museum Boijmans van Beuningen in Rotterdam.
The artwork was offered for sale at Sotheby’s Old Master Painting auction in New York on 26 January 2023, listed as Lot 110, with an estimated value of $2,000,000 to $3,000,000 USD, ultimately selling for $3,075,000 USD.
