We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks. 

I haven't seen this one before. It's on eBay right now, but the description is scarce. I've seen the similar painting with blue, and less earthy tones. Would be an interesting piece if it was real.

eBay Link to the auction in question
http://www.ebay.com/itm/121970269681



Views: 515

Attachments: No photo uploads here

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Hi,

My thoughts, having just sat down.

Probably wrong paper, appears not Bowie's hand, hard lines, mess of angles by eyes and scribble for beard, mouth appears handled wrong, looks drawn from photograph, unusual "straight" composition and angle of incidence. Poorly rendered left side and background - meaningless strokes without volume or substance, over-mixed/overcooked. Usually a crooked smile or expression - none here. Bowie's signature? Only elemental palette used - blue? Correct size though. Looking over 20 or 30 of Bowie's 5,000 works this stick out as odd.

The 1$ O'Keefe is not helping...

Perhaps after this? I would collect others.

http://www.nesteggantiques.co.uk/antique-miscellaneous/david-bowie-...

Eric

PS - Been wondering when we would see this type of item.

PSS - Jacob, this is a whole different playing field with different "rules" and so on, as I am sure you know. Verifiable provenance is important here.

PS - Too formal. Lacking a certain (seemingly) naive or primitive execution/rendering. And a bit too much Schiele and Klimt structurally in the charcoal lines - not as organic as it should be IMO. Also, generally, it is not well composed and shows a lack of movement. Most of his self portraits are 1995/96, and "all" are well composed with no dead or inactive areas. In this the "focal point" is not quite...focused.

Reminds me of the image from Glass Spider Tour.

Eric

Below are some of his period self portraits C. 1995/96.

Hello again,

Wondering what others think? The gaze seems wrong to me, handling as well (haphazard background for one), but also appears from a photograph. There are one or two structural lines in the face that seem to have no meaning, such as by the jaw on our right heading to the eyes. That's understandable, but the gaze seems incorrect. Very self aware of who Bowie is in the drawing and his self portraits don't ever seem to be quite this serious...this is almost confrontational in attack.

Eric

In a sentence, it is drawn too well and not painted well enough.

Eric

Anyone else?

Eric

I'm more familiar with his autograph than his art and on that basis wouldn't feel confident with this piece. In 96 you didn't tend to get this style of his sig. Would also expect the B to look more like an R and have a dash above the date. I'm no expert though ...

"I am sure you know. Verifiable provenance is important here."

That is the key. The seller isn't even attempting to provide any provenance outside of a bill of sale which I could replicate in a few minutes. 

I'm not familiar with Bowie's work so I'll leave that analysis to others. I wouldn't touch it. 

 

Hello,

Questions of seller go unanswered - bidding now $2000 or so. I would place this at at least $10,000 and perhaps up to $15,000, perhaps a good bit more...were it genuine.

Eric

Sold at $11,000. 55 bids, 11 bidders. Not genuine IMO. I tried to do what I could. If genuine, $25,000 plus easily  ("my "perhaps more" was a LOT more) and, many more bidders. The Geordie O'keefe for $12 closed as well as the Stuart Davis for $40....

Eric

RSS

Photos

  • Add Photos
  • View All

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2024   Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service