Céline Howard
Pfannstiel Lanthemann Ceroni J. Modigliani Parisot Patani Restellini Wayne
NO ? NO ? YES NO NO ?
Date 1918?
Title Nude - Céline Howard - Reclining Nude - Grand Nude
Materials Oil on canvas
Size 65 x 100 cm (in Prof.ssa Isabella Quattrocchi dossier)
Signature: Signed "modigliani" top right in red
Actual Location Private Collection, Geneva?
Provenance -?-
Céline Howard (until 1940 and then until 1976)
Guy Vincent (former agent of the office of strategic services)
Credit Agricole Indosuez (in lieu of debts from above)
Paul Quatrochi, New York (He owned a 20% share from Guy Vincent property)
Joseph Guttmann, New York
?
Private Collection, Geneva?

In process

Bibliography -?-

??

In process


Exhibitions -?-

Bonn, Modigliani, Bundeskunsthalle, 2009
Prague, Modigliani, Municipal house,Curated by Christian Parisot, 2010- 2011
Taiwan, Modigliani and his circle, Kaohsiung Museum of fine Arts, 2011, curated by Christian Parisot and Beatrice Hsieh
Vitoria, "Modigliani - Imagens de uma vida", Palácio Anchieta,Curator Christian Parisot, 2012
Rio de Janeiro, "Modigliani - Imagens de uma vida", Museu Nacional de belas Artes, Curator Christian Parisot, 2012
São Paolo, "Modigliani - Imagens de uma vida" , Museu de arte de Sao Paolo, Curator Christian Parisot, 2012
Curituba, "Modigliani - Imagens de uma vida", Museu Oscar Niemeyer, Christian Parisot, 2012
Genova, Modigliani, Palazzo Duccale, 2017 - nº 33

In process

Other
Not in D'Atri papers

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Signature:

signature

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The painting framed at the scandalous Genoa Exhibition in 2017:

framed at genova 2017

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The painting was seized by the police after a report by C. Pepi an Italian connoisseur and finally this is the conclusions of the investigation:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conclusion of the Prof. Isabella Quattrocchi (- JUST A COPY- TRANSLATE - PASTE of her report)

Oil painting on synthetic canvas, mounted on a Greek cross frame, non-Italian canvas, complete with keys of tensioning. The work depicts a female nude, designed and subsequently painted,
assembling,without any competence in the matter, anatomical elements extrapolated from the many graphic studies carried out by the artist (female nudes with both arms under the head
or alternatively one along the side and oneunder the head, both on the forehead or stretched out, the legs extended or folded down on a sofa or sommier, indispensable element in the ateliers,
used for various functions).
Attached are images of the Master's original works published in the 1972 Ceroni catalog - n. 144, 194, 324 and published in specialized magazines.
There is also a disharmony of the graphic components of the nude, accentuated by the drawing of the color that does not take into account the volumes, the chiaroscuro, the incidence of light on the
image, crushing and dilating the forms, misrepresenting the female character of the character. The figure and face are defined by an uncertain contour line of brown color, not flat colors
second, but deform the anatomical parts. The back wall is defined by irrational brushstrokes oblique that color the surface "vertical", without taking it into account. The hair looks like a cap
adherent to the head and the soft volume of the hair is chromatically highlighted by a compact brown and from black doodles that decorate it. The shapeless pillow is flattened and the sommier,
on which the nude is laid is stained painting.
The color of the complexion is altered by turning orange.
The signature at the top right is false: uncertain, grainy, messy, repainted twice with a light color and a dark one on the still fresh paint and the letters that compose it are not of the same charactere
trend of the originals.
The frame, embellished with shapeless decorations in coarse relief, gilded and with a heavy dark lacquer, it has chipped corners and comes from eastern countries.
The work due to the inconsistencies described above is considered grossly false.
Taking into account the results of the micro-scale analysis, which is attached to the CTU report (dott.ssa Marie-Pierre Etcheverry e Dr. Tiziana Mazzoni), which do not reveal substantial anachronistic elements,
yes considers it necessary to subject the work to the Carabinieri RIS core.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am not the person to say if this work is original or fake, but this report is absolutely naive & silly.
With this I do not say the work is genuine or fake, I personally don't like not even a single brush, but it does not mean that my taste make the difference.
All the experts claiming to destroy this or other works should be aware that under the same rules many of the works they present at many exhibits will also be in the same position in a future.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would only add this 3 points:

1.- Art even if false is not forged NIKE sport shoes, so to destroy it is an absurd mistake that place art even if original at the same level of value as a NIKE sport shoes.

2.- The damage to the art experts claim to solve by destroying works is in terms of market not of Knowledge, stamp it in the back as false and do not destroy nothing, just in case we are wrong.

3.- I hope the painting is finally returned to the owners, even if fake, stamp it and return it.


T Prof.ssa Isabella Quattrocchi
Consulente del Tribunale di Roma per le Opere d’Arte:

Oil painting on synthetic canvas, mounted on a Greek cross frame, of non-Italian design, complete with keys tensioning. NOTHING OUT OF THE ORDINARY, except synthetic canvas? what is that? Non Italian, didn't he painted in France?
The work depicts a female nude, drawn and subsequently painted (As usual in Modigliani), assembling, without any competence in the subject, (Agree) anatomical elements extrapolated from the many graphic studies carried out from the artist
( NOTHING OUT OF THE ORDINARY, there are plenty of sketches for the amazone and that don't make the work a fake?) There is also a disharmony of the graphic components of the nude, accentuated by the drafting of the color that does not take into account the volumes, light and dark, of the incidence of light on the image, crushing and dilating the forms, misrepresenting the female characters of the character. ( THIS IS SOOOO GENERIC THAT IT CAN BE APPLIED TO ALMOST ANY OTHER WORK MADE BY MODIGLIANI, IT´S A PERSONAL OPINION NOT A SCIENTIFIC REPORT?)
The figure and the face are defined by an uncertain brownish contour line, ( NOTHING OUT OF THE ORDINARY, there are plenty of similar brownish contours in Modigliani, in fact is his signal of identity) the spot colors do not they follow, but they deform the anatomical parts. The back wall is defined by irrational brush strokes oblique ones that color the "vertical" surface, without taking this into account. The hair looks like a cap adherent to the head and the soft volume of the hair is highlighted chromatically by a compact brown and from black doodles that decorate it.( NOTHING OUT OF THE ORDINARY)

The formless cushion is flattened and the sommier, on which the nude is reclined is stained painting.( NOTHING OUT OF THE ORDINARY)
The color of the complexion is altered by turning to orange.( WHAT DOES THIS MEANS???)
The signature in the upper right corner is false: uncertain, grainy, messed up, repeated twice with a light color and a dark one on the still fresh painting and the letters that compose it do not have the same character and trend of the originals.
(THIS MEANS SHE HAS A NORM OR LAW FOR THE PERFECT SIGNATURE IN MODIGLIANI?? THERE IS A CANON? I don't understand this, if the painting is fresh and signed while fresh, it means it's by the same author, if it is painted double with a light color and a dark color, could it be a bristle out of place or does it have a double signature... The boy in short pants at Dallas museum has a double signature and nobody think its a fake, the Alexandre portrait has a double signature because of a bristle out of place showing 2 colors and nobody think it's a forgery, the Madame Pompadour and 230 more paintings have a totally strange signature and nobody think its a fake)
The frame, embellished with informal decorations in coarse relief, gilded and a heavy dark lacquer, presents chipping at the corners and coming from the eastern countries.
(chipping at the corners, common this is hilarious, eastern countries??? what does that means??? they are polish, Russian, Moldavian? thank god they are not Chinese that would make the music of Benny Hill sound in my head)
The work for the incongruities described above is considered grossly false.
(Non Italian canvas - bad drawing - the sketches - the use or non use of light vs. volume, the doodles decoration, stained painting, orange, a non perfect signature, the chipping or the eastern -tarararararararara)
Taking into account the results of the microprocessive analyzes, which are attached to the elaborate CTU (dott.ssa Marie-Pierre Etcheverry􀀁e dott.ssa Tiziana Mazzoni), which do not reveal substantial anachronistic
elements, considers it necessary to submit the work to the tests of the RIS nucleus of the Carabinieri.
(this means that the pigments are more or less from the same period, so it do not present titanium white, polyurethane? this is not clear, that's the main point no the lousy chipping eastern carpentry)

My personal opinion as a Modigliani fan about this work is obvious, I don't like it and I consider is a bad painting and probably not by Modigliani (of course as a fan opinion, not as an expert), I don't need to see the carpentry to decide it, but a judge...
A real report should start by taking an X Ray, then an infra red and Pigments then comparison.
All the rest is crap, and I am sure my mother is absolutely capable of doing a much better report than this woman with such a nice name and dislike for the eastern countries cheap gilded frames...



  This page is a work on progress, nothing in this page should be considered as final or definitive.