Art Historians Can't Agree If This Sketchbook Belonged To Van Gogh (HBO)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 жов 2024
- A 126-year-old notebook thought by some to have belonged to Vincent van Gogh has resurfaced and caused a major controversy inside the art community.
“This is history,” author and art historian Bogomila Welsh-Ovcharov told VICE News correspondent Mary H.K. Choi. Not everyone in the art world is as confident of the notebook’s provenance as Welsh-Ovcharov, however.
“There are so many differences,” Van Gogh Museum senior researcher Louis van Tilborgh said. “The format is different than what he normally does, the paper is different than what he does, the ink is different than what he does.”
Subscribe to VICE News here: bit.ly/Subscrib...
Check out VICE News for more: vicenews.com
Follow VICE News here:
Facebook: / vicenews
Twitter: / vicenews
Tumblr: / vicenews
Instagram: / vicenews
More videos from the VICE network: www. vic...
Poor Van Gogh died unappreciated and heartbroken. Sometimes you want to believe that heaven exists and the souls of the past visit the earth once in a while. Hope Van Gogh is watching his art being celebrated and his genius being applauded.
Actually that is false. He was getting recognition at the end of his life. A work was sold. Work was included in at least two major exhibitions and a very relevant art critic wrote about his admiration for van Gogh’s work. Vincent even replied to him about the article.
No Fvd... True that he'd sold one painting, and had even discussed with Theo what coming success would do to his life, ie, being famous wasn't anything he wanted: his work famous, yes, but not the personal fame, he did jot look forward to that part of it.
But the man * did * die heartbroken... Just read his letters to Theo, how they progressed, how hard Vincent always wanted to do work that was valuable to mankind, and this he had * not * seen when he died. Remember the last words on his lips, his last words: "La tristesse... La tristess..."
Maybe my French gender is wrong, but "sadness" overwhelmed him.
Interesting, when you read his letters, how much the opinion of the common man meant to him, his confusion qt the antagonism if the peasants/ townspeople in Arklles, for example.
I beieve understanding these people would be his primary concern in his next life, sort of a "sacrifice" life as far as art was concerned, but the cost of understanding humanity better.
Vincent did not have an accurate view of himself. He didnt see himself, his value, clearly. I think he probably got it his next time around... At great cost, understand the Truth about the Common Man.
He is.
"I don't think they're very good," is what they said about him at the time.
You're an idiot!
@@Simonjose7258 You're an idiot!
@Heyzyen You're an idiot!
@@maipa2056 You're not an idiot!
@@patataondkeyboard5923 You're not an idiot!
She knows tey're fake but she's getting rich off her book. Smh..
Provenance is very important, VERY. Where did it come from & where has it been. Color me skeptical right now. 🌈
Someone trying to look like him... He was popular among other artists at the time, you know: his work hadn't sold yet, but he was very well known and even then, many tried to copy him. Interesting that this "expert" from Canada doesn't mention this...
Not his. These are someone's sketches of his painting's style. The sketches we have from him are studies for paintings, not the other way around.
Gelezinis Vilkas Would it hurt to examine the sketch book at least?
None of the sketches are studies. Simply ink renderings of existing paintings.
I don't even care about this topic but, I would love for them to be real; just because it would be hilarious if Tilbourgh said this:
"I mean, I don't think they're very good... I would describe them as average",
about van Gogh's work.
That would be an absolute shocker for him.
+Supahfly634 Don't worry, it won't happen!
the joke is already there you moron - this PhD idiot woman has described a very average chicken scratch as the original "Van Gogh" - THAT's the hilarious joke that you are totally missing.
RequiemFor America Who are you talking to?
I think the reverse is funnier Requiem.
Atleast she's making a load of money on the book she's put together.
@@Supahfly634 There is a humorous irony when art experts are proven mistaken, but there are already thousands of documented examples of that to chuckle at. However, I don't think swindling through forgery is very humorous, neither to whoever is getting swindled, nor to the muddying of the historical record or character of the artist.
The point of a sketchbook is stylistic experimentation. So its very normal to see differences in someones main work and a sketchbook. I'd also like to note that the man took a very realistic draft to compare to the sketch, just look up other drafts. Many have a similar vibe to the sketches. Though I will say the lines are quite different. I'm not 100% certain either, but everyone needs to stop commenting like they're an art historian. You watched one vid, calm down.
DC but if you’ve seen many of van goghs sketches, he doesn’t normally do a full page sketch, he sketches out certain parts like the self portrait of his head. the page from the van gogh museum clearly shows two drawings of his head (from the side and the front) on the same page, these are quick sketches.
It's not he.
Always trust the person who does not benefit from their standpoint.
She has a lot of money riding on this being seen as legit.
If the Van Gogh museum owned this notebook it would of been declared authentic by them. Art experts are very arrogant and jealous and petty.
It looks so fake. You can see it's a very modern take on his style.
Has anyone actually tested the skechbook itself? And sampled anything from the paper? I mean granted, that won't help a lot, but maybe experts could get an estimate for how old the sketchbook and paper actually is? Maybe a time or year could be obtained and then more research could done upon what is found out? Just a thought.
That would not help much at all. Famous master forgerers of the past, such as Eric Hebburn has explained that he forged renaissance period sketches by procuring old, worthless paper from books and manuscripts from around the correct time period and drawing on them with ink made by hand from earth pigments and flowers. He would chemically oxidize the ink before applying it. The result passes any sort of dating test you can think of. And the Renaissance was several hundreds of years ago. Imagine how many ledgers and periodicals from just 120 years ago are still in cellars and libraries all over Europe. Anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of the art materials used at the time could have forged this. All we are left with, are the comparisons of The known penmanship and style by Van Gogh, against this supposedly miraculously found sketchbook.
"Few, 50 of the 63"!!!!? How language is being abused nowadays...
*Somebody call fake or fortune*
Disliked for the nose ring.
MLKKK - Or they just like the way it looks. Y'know.
They always remind me about cattle.
(They have the same ring, so that the farmer can control them better)
don't "feel" right to me
... most valuable comment here, and best reflection if the books "truth".
I like how people in the comment section are eager to judge as if they 1. Have examined the sketchbook themselves 2. Have the expertise in this matter like the 2 in the video.
lol well done vice, a great advert...
Well I'm not buying it.
it's not like she studies him as a hoby, she's a prof at the top university in Canada (ranked 20th in the world)....not some two-but community college
It's so amazing that all these fresh works are coming out so long after his death
/s LOL
I dont know wtf im talking i dont know shit about art.
If in 500 years they found my sketch pads, people would be horrified
As an artist myself, those styles are radically differnet. Using differnet supplies isnt to uncommon. But the differnet styles are disconcerting. Its not my place to say if its fake or not, but ill keep an open mind.
they are fake
final fantasy 15 > all of van Gogh's work
Lol :D
MLKKK - final fantasy over warcraft all day every day.
There has got to be a way to solve this in a more scientific way. You can identify a person based on how they write, even on a computer so surely they should be able to identify 65 paintings.
How can you know that it's real you can't even say his name in the good way.
I think a lot of Dutch aren't even able to do so knowing which part of the country he came from.
As much as I love van Gogh, I kept thinking about Mary H.K. Choi. Most if not all of Vice staff are rather modest, to be generous. Mary H.K. Choi is just plain wonderful. We need to see more of her.
The problem is: Who has the right to MONOPOLIZE Vincent Van Gogh artworks and paintings.
That book, before everyone decided to fondle it, would be a forensic gold mine, but we have historians so eager to scan it and publish it that it has been handled to death, thereby destroying or contaminating said evidence. People, if you ever discover anything like this, immediately and very, very, very gently and slowly wrap it in a clean sheet of paper, run crystal clear tape over the fingers you touched it with, attwch that to the paper, and call a pallinologist.
I'm not claiming to be an art historian or Van Gogh expert, but I draw.. and look up other contemporary artworks too, of course. And it is true that most artists, especially those who work on canvas create a preliminary sketch/doodle just to get the rough idea. Many times a lot of details are added much later, sometimes we might infuse a lot of elements that previously didn't occur to us on the nearly finished work. Every base sketch differs. Many times its a basic outline, stick figures even, with random ideas thrown around that we organize much later. The anatomy, facial sculpture, etc. are decided a little later. And it could be on low cost materials with different tools, so I don't see why the materials used is a problem here.. Which is why I won't outright dismiss the experimental sketches.
Van Gogh left his sketch book at the cafe? Yeah right
It's interesting but indeed looks rather fake, the sunflowers have a perspective that is too straight for Van Gogh as well. I read in an article there is a sketch of a landscape featured in this book that omits the Asylum of Saint-Remy which would be a very grave mistake for someone like Van Gogh. It's not so surprising considering that around half of the paintings circulating through auction are forgeries.
Of course shes going to say its real, she might lose millions
I'm 59 and have studied Vincents work since I was around 14 or15. When I saw the book cover drawing previously, not realising there was a big art critic argument over it, and despite it being described as a "van gogh" had the gut response....not his work...
Mary Choi looks like Mulan ^_^
now where did I put my notes
The Dutch art historian may as well be in contact with the artist's work everyday but that does not mean he knows exactly what sort of man he was. I have visited the museum a few times and I have noticed the artist manages to surprise his audience with his unpredictable evolution. He experimented quite a lot with his brushwork, one of the reasons he is was a pioneer. The Amsterdam staff could have given the drawings a shot and investigated them better. Then again, what else is to be expected in such and elitist douchebag subculture..
Van "Go"? At least try to say Van "Gog".. I'm Dutch so I know how it should be pronounced.. Say "gog" like you would say "goggles".
That's not how you say it either. Lol
I'm sorry but no English speaker will say it the correct way. It's an unnatural sound and you know what we're like with foreign languages :)
ADGO I'm from England and found it annoying when these VICE peeps said it wrong. It is not an unnatural sound.
"g" is pronounced VERY differently in dutch haha English people wont get that right.
Aaron V It's closer to the proper way though.
obviously fraudulent
This is what happens when you have a society of art people, they worship individuals which is pretty pointless. You chase art, you don't chase a person. Evans and soft murmurs gathering doesn't make you appreciate art any more than someone who can sit and watch the bark of the tree run up and then down in the most capturing pattern.
How can you judge something as fake, yet you won’t even examine it. That seems suspicious AF.
who the hell is van ghoe ?
I guess the lady had some outstanding bills to pay
how are these all experts but none of them pronounce his name correctly
Because Van Go is easier than saying Van Gogh and they're on TV and they don't want to attempt to say his name correctly.
I see no reason to think they are fake
It's not Van Gogh, but drawings are nice.
this is his story :)
I have studied Van Goghs art since I was 11 years old. I am now 55. He was, and still is, my greatest hero within the Art world, as a human being and as an Artist. This sketchbook is NOT by Van Gogh. They are just simply very poor immitations and not worth the paper they are drawn on.
I can relate! I am aged 59, BIG fan of Vincents work since I was 14 or 15 at school. I saw that cover drawing recently and thought nah that's never his work (and I didn't know there was a critics bun struggle over its "authenticity"!
SAY IT WITH ME
VAN HOH
Not Van go.
Jesus fucking Christ, he was Dutch.
hoh? thats wrong too lol
+Fear Me It's pretty close. It is hard to write how it's pronounced phonetically for English speakers.
Fear Me What Aaron said, the guttural G of Dutch is hard to write in english.
Because in English it is van "Go" not van "Ho." He said it his way because he was trying to use to the English version while knowing the Dutch pronunciation. Thus he got something in between.
But who cares.
Al Wong Whatever El Vong. :^)
Gogh is spelled Goch
how can you call yourself a historian if you won't examine evidence in person when you have the chance. it's just negligent.
She literally said, they´ve seen 50 high res images. Why bother with anything more, if it´s obviously fake anyway?
Jeeru1987 You should always examine something in person.
Why should you if something is obviously fake? It's just a waste of time at that point. They already even knew it was the wrong paper and ink type. What other advantage would they have seeing it in real life?
50 out of 65 is a few, huh? O_o
"van Goh" OH COME ON ITS "VAN GOGH" that second G is hard, not soft
***** yeah, the hard G. Van goh is not the way to say it.
I wish people would at least try to pronounce his name correctly.
I'm in no condition to say the sketchbook is real, BUT I'm an artist myself and I LAUGH at the fact that that dude used the difference in style as an argument...because as we all know Picasso always painted in his cubist style for his entire life right (aka go search his earlier drawings and sketches)?
Not his. I really don't think so.
"They are drawings ilof someone who is sketching, who is experimenting"... in trying to look like Van Gogh! These are NOT Van Gogh, they don't look or feel at all like him.
They are too juvenile and sloppy, Van Goghs work was impressionistic yes, but the precision and accuracy is there within the looseness of the style. These lack Van Goghs relentless capturing of reality in his own style, it's not the mark of a man who spent his whole life observing and recording in his very own unique way that Vincent did..
Exactly.
shrugs
Who knows if it is real or not, but artist can have different styles. So, I wouldn't be shocked if they were his. Keep in mind a complete drawing looks totally different from the sketch.
stop, just STOP taking advantage for your own personal gain!!! Enough!!! People would destroy another person just to get what they want, im sick and tired of this
Any.way.skatches.are.found.
It's. Worthy.
If.it.is.drawn.by.
Vincent.
Than.its.tresure.
If.it.is.not.skatch.by.vincent.
Then.the.unknown.artist.work.should.be.find.
Anyway.i.am.a.artlover.
I.really.wanna.see.the.art.
...Have.a.enjoyfull...
Buy.
The.effort.done.by.
Resercher
Certainly fake. The drawing has a contemporary cartoon like feel to it.
Anyone can try to prove the originality of any work, for whatever reason. But you only have to LOOK and you can see that they are fake.
Fake and she knows it, poor sketches
She's clearly being deceptive if you understand body language at all
DON'T OPEN IT!!!! IT'S A MYST BOOK!!!
No provenance. No analysis of ink and paper. Some drawings looked legit to me. That portrait though, no se bueno amigo. Random ink scratches on the hat.
That is NOT Vangogh! No Way! This is unbelievable! No way! People don't suddenly write or draw differently unless it's a completely different style. And yes. They're ugly! None of his work are ugly!
I dont know why i dislike Van Gogh. I prefer paint that eternalize the past people and their culture ie. Rembrandt's Nightwatch.
Ananda Nanda I mean liking kitsch isn't a bad thing, but it kinda means you've got bad taste fam.
Maybe this person was a fan or Van Gogh's work, a copcycat.
My back side looks like a Van Gogh sketch then these sketches
Didn't they carbon-date the papers?
IMHO, They are below average.
hahahahaha vice whyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!! you are done
peace
They are average! Anyone who can't see that needs to sit down!
Anyone can see that these drawings are NOT by Vincent Van Gogh. The draughtsmanship is bad to say the least, they do not have the greatness of Van Gogh at his finest hour, and they just look like very bad copies of works already in existence. How can any one possibly believe that these drawings are by the late, great Vincent Van Gogh. They are simply appaling.
The sketches are obviously fake. I don't buy it for a second. It pretty obvious. The lines are graceless and haphazardly placed. They read like someone imitating van gogh poorly.
in art you just don’t look and say this looks like van gogh than it is you should look for the history.the time period of the artist life some info that make you believe that it by him this could be someone studying his work back then or it’s just facked by someone
We used to like you vice. But you sold out.
I think he was born without one ear and the 'cut it off' thing is a myth (?)
He or Paul Gauguin, his friend he was living with in France at the time, cut it off. Either during a fight between them, or Vincent accidentaly did it while on prescribed medication that gave him hallucinations.
ExopMan it was said he got into a fight. it was myth he cut his own ear. forgot where I heard/read it
No one is sure. If you read his diary he sometimes had problems where he injured himself while on medication, and it is probable he cut his earlobe aswell during on of these episodes.
He was born with both ears, otherwise we wouldn't have self portraits with a bandage over it. There are two possibilities that we can infer from self portraits, letters, and diaries. The first is that it was cut off in an altercation with Paul Gaguin, the second is that he cut it off as a gesture of unconditional love and sent it to the woman he was in love with. Either could be true or false as far as we know.
people don't actually have ears. ears themselves are a myth. wake up sheeple
If the book has vast differences than its probably a fake(no shit)😑
Vincent van GO
"Art historian' opinions," are meaningless. The only opinion that counts, when it comes to Van Gogh, is the Van Gogh museum's opinion.
This all smells extremely fishy.
The media, may be impressed by the hyphenated name, and purported European blue blood, but that doesn't make the drawings right.
Who cares. Unsubscribed.
The real knuckle brawl is going on in the comments lmao.
Obnoxious smh
Definitely fake. Van Gogh was a genius.. those sketches are the chicken scratches of a greedy old lady. Regardless, I'm sure that millions of people will still rush out and by the book since people are pretty stupid.
Torgo you do realize everyone practices right? So why is it crazy to think it's possible that's where he practiced a few drawings?
maybe thats why he gave the book away though? It was just his low effort sketches he did while having coffee, his doodles
Fake
literally anything > Canadians
Nose rings on already attractive women make them less attractive. 😩
Oh wait! I think I just discovered a genuine Van Gogh in my dad's garage.
So fake! LOL!
>Canadians
Look at Van Gogh's real drawings. So many of them are absolutely breathtaking. Then compare them to the lackluster sketch book drawings. The "magic" is just not there.
Ya im going to go with the guy who looks at real Van Gogh everyday. Although Van Gogh was a nut job so who knows.
I would believe her if she wasn't making money from them. plus if it's really his sketchbook, then how the hell she has the right to make money from someone else's work??? how did people accepted that and bought it?? this is really annoying in all cases
Question:
Who is Vincent Van Go ?
What the f#%k ... you can’t even pronounce his name properly.
Of course it’s not a sketch book ledger of Vincent’s drawings. This is a fantasy. Anyone can see by comparison this drawings are not by the hand of Vincent Van Gogh.
This seems to be all about the money.
Ps.
Why does the interviewing female journalist who keeps mispronouncing Vincent’s name as ‘Van Go’ have a ring in her nose ?
The moment they can't even say his name correctly they shouldn't be taken seriously
Why can't Americans pronounce his name right? Why do they have to butcher the pronunciation of all foreign words?
Looks nothing like Van Gogh, looks more like a mediocre teenager's sketches. There is nowhere near the discipline of line and hatching and nothing like the 3D form of Van Gogh
Hillary Clinton, is that you?