Dislodged and looted art

An experienced, Washington-based, looted art expert of today says that during the war the art market was booming as never before. Since the end of the Cold War tracking what became of the lost work has become a more accepted subject of news and books and documentaries have been made. Some families are tracking work they can claim back (if found) although even then there are long legal disputes in the question of proof and this demands a great deal of time and funding. Generally speaking, much still remains totally unaccounted for and the many people on the trail will never do more than uncover some part of it. Within the larger framework of all works of art there was the recent phenomenon of collectors of modern work and despite the decree by Hitler that this was the product of degenerates he included such work in the category of marketable treasure and in Paris his cohorts made efforts to commandeer everything they could get hold of which had been the property of those who had fled and in some cases made offers - (that was the case in one particular collection of early German work which Hitler wanted for his planned museum). But in the case of modern work immediate trade was the aim. In Paris, designated dealers were involved in doing all sorts of deals with few questions asked and even had a watching brief for what might be coming onto the market - it was for them a question of business. Wildenstein has had to confront a lot of questions - they had a New York outlet and until America came into the war there were several years in which trading with New York was quite open although surveilled closely by the Nazis in Paris. Requisitioned collections were quite carefully listed by item and sent to a general depot at the Louvre. Switzerland remained untouched by war conditions which affected trade and many art auctions took place there. During this period Picasso purchased in Paris an important still-life of Matisse ensuring its safety (for which Matisse was grateful). Other artists were concealing work from looting and destruction and collectors were trying to do the same - one story is of a local fire-dept staging a mock fire to delay the Germans while valuable items were rushed out of a back exit. The Germans had plenty of time in occupation to trace whatever they thought would bring in money - officially and free-lance, so even collections which had been concealed in the country were found, probably via informers. A recent figure given is that 3000 works ended up in American official collections.

These works had to be got out via ship so while Varian Fry was active in Marseilles it’s safe to assume the boats which took refugees also took some of the looted art for marketing - so one must not forget that it wasn’t just the arrival of the big-name modern artists which animated the art scene in New York - it was in the process of becoming the major trading centre for Modernism. Therefore the skills which had previously been found in Paris were functioning under their very eyes and right away good money was being made. Using the presence of the in-coming avant-garde to promote the value to new collectors meant setting up the supporting functions in art - marketing of a specialist kind ; so across America the job of giving this activity validity began, This also explains why the Americans were so motivated to prevent Paris from taking back its former position as the centre. It’s hard to say which motive came first the political or the market-making.

People under duress had been selling art works increasingly throughout the 30’s at fire-sale prices thanks to the political situation, so the two tended to be inextricably mixed. London must have played its part but once the war started they were pretty well out of it for the duration, besides, those in power had been blocking Continental modernist ideas for decades. Plenty of major-names came to London and would have settled but left for the US where they had more genuine supporters - those outside the hidden hands manipulations. Some post-war London galleries were cited as passing looted art with dubious documentation... Interestingly, in these bizarre conditions there emerges immediately a much better judgement of value - normally in static conditions all sorts of false values get accepted by promotion, cronyism and the wishes of the powerful are instinctively catered for - but once the works are dislodged from that context people turn to those who judge on quality alone and the shake-up in values is instant. That could be done today but no-one wants it. Normally it can only happen once all the pressure groups have died off and the historians focus on the good stuff. Because of this students get the entirely false impression that in the past a much higher level of culture pertained. Good people often have to fight harder than the mediocre - they have a score of natural enemies in the vicinity. Many don’t make it. The unique looted art conditions allow for a snapshot of reality. But still markets had to be created.

There is much more to say on this - a leading expert is Hector Feliciano, based in France.