Friday, April 11, 2008

Morrisseau History Detective Stories (Part I)

-

Once upon a time...

-


THE COGHLAN ART VIRTUAL GALLERY
original paintings
-


NORVAL MORRISSEAU
April 2005


Coghlan Art proudly presents available work by this great Canadian artist. Norval was inspirational in the creation of our studio and continues to work closely with us. His presence is a reminder of what an artist really is.


Norval's work is in museum and private collections around the world. The work featured here is guaranteed original and authentic. Our available Morrisseaus were obtained from the artist or authenticated by him.
-
-
click pic for larger version
use your back button to come back

-
Original Paintings
--
...
-
Water Spirts, 1979

acrylic on canvas - 54" x 46"

/http://www.coghlanart.com/ original file name: nm72.jpg/

-


Upper and Lower Worlds, 1978
acrylic on canvas - 34" x 80"
-
/www.coghlanart.com original file name: nm73.jpg/
-
-...
-
The above selection of the original paintings of Norval Morrisseau was posted at Coghlan Art Virtual Gallery in May 2005. If Mr. Bryant Ross allows me I can post the rest of the images that appeared in his Norval Morrisseau Virtual Gallery at that time. If you read closely you will see the reading: "The work featured here is guaranteed original and authentic. Our available Morrisseaus were obtained from the artist or authenticated by him" (click HERE).
-
When I confronted Mr.Bryant Ross, who is the gallery director of Coghlan Art Studio/Gallery, by asking him indirectly how could he make such statements that all the paintings for sale on eBay are fakes he has replied to me with quoted comment below:
-
"Hi, my name is Bryant Ross and I am the director of Coghlan Art Studio and Gallery. I am the individual you refer to. My warning on E-bay is not meant to scare anyone. It is meant to inform the public about the status of the Morrisseau paintings on E-bay. I am doing this at the request of the artist himself. Out of all the paintings that I have displayed on my web site you had no trouble picking out the 2 fakes. I bought these 2 paintings from a dealer from Winnipeg. When Morrisseau told me that they were not his I realized that I had been ripped off and I took them off the market. I have since donated them at my own expense to the Norval Morrisseau Heritage Society to use as example of the fake paintings. It has never been stated that all the galleries in Canada have fake paintings. But there are many fakes in the marketplace. You seem to think that the motivation in this is money. The fact is that Norval Morrisseau does not want his legacy to include these fake paintings."
-
--
The same painting: Water Spirts; 1979; acrylic on canvas - 54" x 46" (see below) was offered for sale on eBay in October 2005 even Mr. Bryant Ross in communication with me stated that he donated this painting, together with the other posted above, at his own expense to the Norval Morrisseau Heritage Society to use as example of the fake paintings. I believe Mr. Bryant Ross did not tell the truth.
-

Water Spirts, 1979

acrylic on canvas - 54" x 46"

/eBay posted original file name: 4140_0125_1_md.jpeg/

--

Note that this painting posted on eBay was shown removed from the stretcher bars (see above). Also, this painting had inscription on the back of the canvas: Signature in English, Copyright symbol, Year and a Title - all painted with black paint in a fashion of the many paintings from the period of the 1970s.

-

- An anonymous commented for this Blog's posting: "Open Letter to the Norval Morrisseau Heritage Society" (posted 2 days before Norval Morrisseau's passing) as follows:

"Bryant Ross claims to have donated the 2 supposedly fake paintings to the NMHS. Am I missing something or did I see at least one if not both of them up for auction just after they came off his website?? Does anybody else remember these pieces - I think they were then up for auction on one of the Live ebay auctions from a seller out west - the one with the fish didn't sell if I recall - Am I missing something or has the untouchable Bryant Ross been caught selling what he considers fakes to the unsuspecting public??? Someone please correct me if I am wrong." 07 December, 2007 15:39

/To anonymous posted this comment: Please, contact me at spiritwalker2008@gmail.com /

-

- A comment of one of the Norval Morrisseau apprentices (Ritchie "Stardreamer" Sinclair) regarding to this painting: "And a beautiful Morrisseau it is - so embued with Vision!" 24 December, 2007 01:58-

--

"How could paintings Norval Morrisseau once authenticated be proclamed fakes and at a later date be offered for sale on eBay as authentic paintings?... How could paintings once considered authentic without any question at a later date considered to be questionable?"

Spirit Walker

--

* Detailed information about the painting at the beginning of this posting unknown: "Salmon", © 1996 Norval Morrisseau /Private Collection/

Posted by at

75 comments:

Anonymous said...

The bllue painting with the thunderbird sold at a BC auction in June 05 for over $3000. The green one with the fish was offered at auction at the same BC auction house in Nov 05 but did not sell. The auction house that sold these still today has both listed in previous auctions section with dates and final selling price. This auction house also posts all offerings on ebay as well.

This raises questions around creditabilty but it does not help to authenticate these paintings.

AP

11 April, 2008 10:16
X-Ray said...

It was at Seahawk Auction in BC.

Auction search on "Morrisseau" at the auction dates June 18, 2005 and November 5, 2005 at http://www.seahawkauctions.com/

Results:
June 18, 2005
"Lot # 83 : Original Norval Morrisseau Painting "Upper and Lower Worlds" 84"x 35" Good Condition with Some Cracking Estimate: $ 10000.00" was sold for Sold For CAD$: 3200.00

November 5, 2005
"Lot # 125 : Norval Morrisseau Original Painting on Canvas "Water Spirits" 56"x 48" Good Condition with Minor Crack Estimate: $ 10000.00" was not sold.

This text is posted here and in the Blog's posting: "Open Letter to the Norval Morrisseau Heritage Society" (December 2, 2007).

X-Ray

13 April, 2008 16:14
Anonymous said...

I have just returned from a trip down to California to find that the friendly Blog Master is slagging me on the blog again. I guess he thinks if he can dis-credit me, that it some how gives creditability to these questionable paintings from the 70s.
I am some what confused. Is Spirit Walker saying these paintings are real or not. If he thinks they are real, then what does it matter what I have done with them. If he thinks they are not real then why does he think so many in this style are real.
These two paintings. Titled “Water Spirits” and “Upper and Lower Worlds” are FAKE. I can call them what they are because I own them. These paintings were put up for auction around the time that I became aware of their status. “Water Spirits” was pulled from the auction because of this and “Upper and lower Worlds” was returned by the buyer for a full refund. I then gave them to Morrisseau and Vadas to be forwarded to the Norval Morrisseau Heritage Society. The society did not have storage space for them so Morrisseau kept them. After he passed on they were returned to me. I still have them and will be using them in a forensic analysis of Morrisseau’s work.
My hope is that forensic study can shed some light on what is happening here. This process will take considerable time to complete so do not except any instant information. I will make these findings public when I have them. This is at my own expense and is being done by an un-biased third party.
Speaking of un-biased, Spirit walker has said a number of times that he is not affiliated with any gallery or dealer. While this may be true, He owns many of these paintings that I question and has a substantial financial vested interest in them. When he proclaims that he is an expert and that these paintings are real it is a blatant attempt to manipulate the secondary market into accepting these paintings. Paintings that Morrisseau himself dis-avowed. Paintings that every legitimate ``expert`` questions.

13 April, 2008 23:07
Anonymous said...

Eric says

and people question the ethics of Mr Ross?
he sounds about as credible as it can get?

14 April, 2008 08:40
Anonymous said...

I will buy from Bryant any day of the week.

Correct me if I am wrong - Spirit Walker you may not own a gallery but have you not in the past offered your Morrisseaus on eBay, to other collector and on an online gallery???? I think so....

14 April, 2008 09:30
Spirit Walker said...

Yes, I am eBay member and I sold few Norval Morrisseau originals there… Is there anything wrong that if I own a painting to sell it if I wish?

14 April, 2008 13:22
Anonymous said...

So, Norval himself said these paintings were fakes? I hate to ask the obvious but:

Why is there any debate on this when Norval himself claimed these were fakes? From my understanding he was still pretty sharp intellectually but had trouble communicating due to his illness.

14 April, 2008 13:31
Anonymous said...

Was that Norval Morrisseau stating or Gabe Vadas said that?

"thinblacklines"

14 April, 2008 13:32
Anonymous said...

please find your own "handle" your attempt to use a handle very similar to mine is offensive.
I don't want people to confuse the two.

thank you
are we still playing the "delete comments" here.
one more omission, I and others will simply post elsewhere.
your choice.

14 April, 2008 13:42
Anonymous said...

thickblacklines always posts as a logged in member.
never attempting to mascarade as someone else. again this site appears to be all about smoke and mirrors.

14 April, 2008 13:46
Anonymous said...

To “thichblacklines”: If you believe that this site is all about smoke an mirrors why don’t you go to “KRG” blog and see for yourself which smoke is thicker and which mirror is clearer?

“thinblacklines”

14 April, 2008 13:55
Anonymous said...

I have heard from more than one source, that Norval indicated these were not by his. It's hard to dscount multiple sources. Of course, in and of itself that doesn't mean anything except there is no connection to Norval anywhere in the historical evidence and no provenance at all. I mean, how did people come to won these? They lived next door to Norval? Did drugs with him? What? There shoud be some history with every piece. It's all these questions together ON TOP of the fact that the techniques are completely different and Norval denied they were his that makes them of questionable authenticity.

It's not one thing, it's all of them together. But I gotta tell ya - when Norval says it himself - it's hard to make a case.

You can say Gabe aid this or that but these aren't the tpe of paintings Pollock solf for Norval either and he was the main dealer before Kinsman Robinson.

I look forward to Spirit Walker's posts and to more information being provided.

This is a very interesting debate.

14 April, 2008 14:51
Anonymous said...

Its of my opinion the Bryant Ross has NO credibility. His only objection is to control his "own" Morrisseau market. He does not like/understand/know the 70's market, for these reasons:
1. He has never viewed a painting by Morrisseau during that time period. EVER.
2. Gabe has controlled what/when/how/ Morrisseau for the past 20 years, for his own personal GAIN.
3. Bryant is on the same team for his own personal GAIN
4. GABE has never viewed Morrisseau paint during the 70's.

For these reasons and the total CONTROL of Morrisseau's thinking, belief, speaking, breathing and eating, I believe we are ALL asking the wrong individuals for guidance

14 April, 2008 15:14
Anonymous said...

Perhaps Gabe and Bryant never have seen Norval paint a painting from the 1970's but the fact still remains that there are plenty of pictures of Norval with his brush on the canvas painting images of the quality of a genuine Morrisseau. There are no pictures of him painting a painting similar to the questionable ones. This is a bigger concern rather then if Gabe or Bryant were there or not. Not to mention the same facts brought up time and time again...paintings documented in The Art of Norval Morrisseau etc all have genuine Morrisseaus and pictures of questionable ones....

14 April, 2008 15:51
Anonymous said...

In regards to Bryant and 70s Morrisseaus... His website has a video on it showing the public a sample of paintings done by Norval dated from the 70s which makes it clear how Norval painted in the
70s.

So when you are able to locate genuine Morrisseaus, with provenance and proof of authenticity, dated in the same period and compare them to these "questioned" paintings, all supposedly from the 70s and they are nowhere near any semblance to one another - it doesn't take much of an education in art or acrylic techniques to see they were not by the same hand.

By extension, if I know which are genuine, then I know those that are not.

This supports the suggestion these paintings thought by some to be authentic (these debatables) are in fact not authentic. This alone would not bother me unless I paid a Morrisseau price for them.

I actually like many of these supposed Morrisseaus in debate - I just wouldn't pay Norval prices for them.

As these ones have no provenance, I suspect those who own them didn't pay anything near Norval prices anyhow.

I am willig to listen to both sides but at this stage, the arguments support those who suggest they are not genuine.

I am still open to more facts and arguments however. Sayign Gabe did this or Bryant did that means nothing. It's all about the paintings. They are what they are independant of what anyone does.

I look forward to more arguments!

14 April, 2008 16:23
Anonymous said...

So your statements suggest that GABE/BRYANT/KINSMEN are in no way manipulating the market for their own gain? Should the money made by these individuals not be given to the estate? Should these people live off the painter? IF THE SECONDARY market does not bring in a dime for them, what would you expect them to state? THEY ARE REAL? LOL.
I personally feel the "fake 1970's" paintings are of better quality, and show the painters real feelings.Why do many people feel these paintings are from a genuine artist? The strokes are of Morrisseaus hand, the colors are vibrant, the paintings are CREATIVE. Many of the 90's paintings are in my opinion not good at all. WHO REALLY PAINTED THEM!?

14 April, 2008 18:08
Anonymous said...

the truth is a lot people who have submitted their fake Norval Morrisseau's to the Norval Morrisseau Heritage Society are in a pickle and are being threatened now by genuine works.These people will have to face up to the day when their works that have been submitted to that bogus committee will be in question.The stuff that came out in the late eighties and nineties are the most questionable pieces because that's when Gabe Vadas entered the picture...pun intended.
Here's a question for Bryant Ross.If you witnessed Morrisseau painting pictures in the late 80's when you and him were side by side,why wouldn't you have suggested that he sign the pieces on the back of the canvas? Don't you know anything about art Ross? It kind of helps when the artist signs his or her own work doesn't it? The paintings from the questionable nineties will reveal the true rats in this sordid picture.Hey Ross what do you think about the paintings that BEARCLAW Gallery and ARTWORLD of SHERWAY GARDENS sell? Do you think they are fakes too? lol

14 April, 2008 18:12
Anonymous said...

How do you know if the paintings in Bryant Ross's video are from the 70's? Just because he says they are with out proof means nothing.I too could make a video or textbook with any painting group I choose and say whatever I want to say about them.The media of choice (video/textbook) does not determine proof.

14 April, 2008 18:16
Anonymous said...

I agree I find out odd that these circumstances have occurred: GABE meets Morrisseau in Vancouver in the 80's. He then takes "CARE" of Morrisseau over the years. He then is generally called as his caregiver. Then the manager status kicks in. Morrisseau is in an incapacitated state (early to late 2000's). Paintings from the 90's MAGICALLY appear in massive quantities. GABE owns homes, cars, trucks and many "paintings". Hmmm. get the picture here folks? And you people are discussing secondary markets and FAKE paintings? COME ON! This is from a "caregiver" making... what... $45,000 per year?

14 April, 2008 19:12
Anonymous said...

Who really painted Morrisseaus from the 90s? Come on, be serious, Morrisseau of course! Photos of him painting are posted all over KRG's blog. Where's the photo proof the other way? The same questions get asked and we never see any proof--except from KRG! Sounds like someone is jealous of Bryant? The man is honest, was associated with the artist, and only had Norval's best interest at heart. Come on man. Stop the trash talk and give us some theory--or shut up for the sake of SW's blog!

-Collector/buyer (CB)

14 April, 2008 20:46
Anonymous said...

collector/buyer-Why would anyone be jealous of an individual who is taking advantage of an artist? This type of theivery happens all the time.
Morrisseau painted ALL of the 90's paintings? I DOUBT IT. You may want to inquire as to the huge amount of oil/canvas sold at Gallery 223 during the past few years..That may give you an answer as to WHO is doing these "1990's" paintings

14 April, 2008 21:09
Anonymous said...

I might prefer to call all of those so-called "secondary market" sales thievery since Morrisseau never saw a penny from those. C'mon, you guys are pumping up the family foundation to legitimize a bunch of phony paintings. It's pretty obvious to me who the "thieves" really are! Again, I ask that you stop all of this nonsensical finger pointing--if not for me than for SW! His blog is under fire from having all of this nonsense discredit the genius behind it all. Keep up the good work SW--but watch out for this trash talk--it'll bring you down as people like myself will start to wonder why you allow it all as Blog Master?

-CB

14 April, 2008 22:39
Spirit Walker said...

Does anyone has any proof for your statement(s)?

Is there anyone to assist me to find a truth by providing me with some material: text, detailed images of the paintings, provenance/authentication documents, images of Norval Morrisseau painting or next to his painting(s) and so on?

Can anyone show me more than just words?

Do you realize that I am the only one on this blog (an exception to this statement would be Michael R. Moniz with posting titled: "Justice for Norval Morrisseau") trying to find the truth by using real examples of his works (from mostly other people's collections) as a path to find the truth.

Can you please assist me to find the truth?

And, please be more respectful to others and try to find less offensive words to express yourself or otherwise I will be forced to delete comments that are inappropriate.

Megweetch

14 April, 2008 23:32
Anonymous said...

I find it very interesting how quickly the greed card is thrown around on this blog. If I may point out to those using the term and pointing accusatory fingers - both sides of this argument have money to gain. All those "fake" paintings (some say real) are being sold all over the place. I am certain they are being sold for money. So let's call a spade a spade.

Now we have gone from one accusation to another. Now Gabe is the painter.

All I can say is that the evidence of some arguments is scant and the evidene for otehr arguments is strong. If you wish to prove these paintings are real - Gabe and KRG could not possibly control all media. All photos. All provenance and all galleries in Canada. Where are the sales receipts from the 70s? Where are the photos of Norval painting this style or even exhibiting this style?

Mr. Ross made sure to say that he coudl provide evidence of the paintings. I am sure he can. I think he's been rather forthcoming despite all the attacks and I welcome his posts.

If you wish to question his choice of paintings - then why not examine the collections owned by galleries around the world? For example, feel free to visit the Thunder Bay Art Gallery Permanent Collection. They show some pieces online. If you go to this link, you can scroll through some items from their collection, one is a painting by Norval Morrisseau titled "Spiritual Self Looks Beyond" and it is dated 1976.

I believe the painting further validates those who question these paintings and weakens your argument that people like Ross are using any paintings and making up dates.

With all these "questionable paintings" out there - is it not reasonable to wonder how come NOT ONE has any provenance. Since Gabe was not in Norval's life in the 70s - how was Gabe able to mastermind the destruction of the past and all Provenance which existed prior to his meeting Norval? That suggestion is simply silly.

Gabe could not take back every photo anybody took of Norval with any sucvh painting anywhere! And Gabe has not stated that all paintings not purchased at KRG are fakes. Just some. ANd NOrval said that too. And KRG said that. ANd Bryant Ross sdaid that. ANd the art community - anybody worth their salt with a reputation and experiene -would not bet on a complete lack of provenance and documentation. These "70s" paintings were not done by someone blind drunk, living on a street corner in an alcoholic fog. SO there goes that argument.

What's left. Only theories. I still see no evidence. Only accusations unsupported by anything other than an aggried party seeking to increase the value of their paintings.

If this was so obvious - why not take the matter to Court? Sue Gabe and KRG. Of course, that woudl require evidence.

I am just trying to explain in a simple manner, the problem you have authenticating such paintings. I am open to hearing all this cause I want to know what to buy and from whom. I also respect NOrval and what he did.

BUt I simply won't buy into an argument because people get angry when I don't or because I won't accept a weak argument and ignore a strong one as well as documented evidence.

In the court of public opinion, you need to do better than this.

I look forward to more arguments. Could we simply tone them down to a civil nature?

Thank you.

14 April, 2008 23:44
Anonymous said...

Spirit Walker, You are using paintings from others but the problem is they are not considered authentic and there is no proff any onf there are. So they don't bolster your arguments at all.

Others have provided evidene to the contrary. You just refuse to accept it. KRG have posted pictures of Norval painting. I'm sure they have video too! Their paintings are not debatable. These questionable ones are.

All my relations.

14 April, 2008 23:47
Anonymous said...

Thunder Bay art gallery link:

http://www.theag.ca/pages/collections.php

14 April, 2008 23:48
Anonymous said...

SW: With all due respect to you and your blog, I'd like to defend KRG. These dealers represented Morrisseau. They have real facts supported by a relationship with the Shaman Master himself. Unless you guys can show me proof positive, I'll rely on dealers that were associated with Morrisseau--Pollock, Kinsman, Coghlan etc... That's where my money is these days. The logic presented here seems flawed and without substance. Good luck to SW. Continue to seek the truth! To others, be careful who you bad mouth. When you point the finger, three point back at yourself!!!

-CB

15 April, 2008 00:02
Anonymous said...

well, I see that my posts are being censored. Nothing offensive. I just don't agree. So I am out. If you were authentic - you woudl not pick and choose what gets posted. You're clearly the fraud.

15 April, 2008 01:37
Spirit Walker said...

To the "anonymous" above...

If you really respect Norval Morrisseau and his place in Canadian history and Canadian art history join me for conversation at "Skype" (user name: spiritwalker2008)... Do you really have strength to do that?

Megweetch

15 April, 2008 02:51
Anonymous said...

why do people need to "Skype"?
what is the point of the blog if you just want to talk offline with your facts?
put the info here for all to see and debate.
AA.

15 April, 2008 08:39
Spirit Walker said...

"AA", whay don't you share with me "facts" that are believable by all?

It seems to me that "Battle for Justice for Norval Morrisseau" has just began...

What kind of facts can you present on this platform?

15 April, 2008 09:00
Anonymous said...

AA has no facts, I know nothing..
I have waited to see you post facts, any facts to support your position.
I'm fully aware of other blogs and the facts presented there.
I am also one of a dozen or so who participate in the invite only online chats.
you might be surprised at the details talked about behind the scenes and the facts which are disclosed.

NO galleries participate, just collectors and those with a real intrest in Norval's work.
please help your position by providing anything positive to support your position.

15 April, 2008 09:21
Spirit Walker said...

Unfortunaly, those that know the truth and people would believe in what they have to say are silent.

Just be patient and I will present more to support my position in all of this - all for the benefit of recognition of the genuine art of Norval Morrisseau.

Megweetch

15 April, 2008 09:59
Anonymous said...

Spirit Walker.

It has been since Nov. 07 you have been talking about presenting your facts and that we need to patient as it takes time. When are you going to start this process so we can stop asking you.

Re: the silent knowledgable people....Do you know the truth -have these people shared with you the truth?

15 April, 2008 10:06
Anonymous said...

Regarding Bryant's video - these are all well documented Morrisseau paintings. Documented means the date they were painted is known. They are not paintings that Bryant has in his own collection or that his gallery is trying to sell.

Here is another example of a fine 1970's painting.

http://www.mcmichael.com/collection/firstNations.cfm

As the site shows it is a 1975 painting owned by the McMichael Gallery. Style is in line with the paintings in Bryant's video. Once again - not one painting like these questionable ones exists in the McMichael collection. Another fine example exists on this blog added by SW himself showing paintings exhibited at the Glenbow - mind you they are likely paintings from the early 80's but the artistic quality/style is in line.

Re: the secondary market and KRG, Coghlan etc living off the painter. I would presume that exists with any artist who has work in the secondary market. You can not single out KRG or Coghlan in this - any gallery selling work by Morrisseau coming from the secondary market is not paying the artist a dime. Perhaps KRG and Coghlan are the only galleries in recent years that have actually taken the artists needs in to consideration as they represented him. KRG does not only represent Morrisseau paintings from the 80's and 90's...they also consistently have offered earlier works of quality from the 60's and 70's. I recall seeing the large painting of Victoria offered at KRG about three years ago or so that was done in the 60's or 70's. Have a look at their website and see the years of paintings the offer.

Perhaps you feel the paintings from the 90's are not good but look at the shape Morrisseau was in. He had his moments when he picked up a brush and to the amazement of many could paint a colourful and bright picture - do you think they would be executed to the same quality of those done in the late 80's when his health was better. To me - this is only a sign that they are authentic and painted by Morrisseau at the end part of his artistic career when his health was poor and fine motor skills not at the best.


3-0

15 April, 2008 10:37
Anonymous said...

I GUESS if you lived in the same town for years and was in the centre of this controversy, you would know MUCH more than the average citizen from Toronto or Winnipeg. This would give you more knowledge of what is REALLY going on. The fake 1970's paintings are REAL. Believe it or not.

Nanaimo Anon

15 April, 2008 11:57
Anonymous said...

Nanaimo Anon...big statement. Do you know more? If so, please share.

AP

15 April, 2008 12:08
Anonymous said...

B

so tell us, I keep hearing soon, if you only knew,... and so on.
make your statements...
this applies to both sides.
all of the "big secerets" which I suspect are nothing..
spill it?
or is this just a way both sides like to create and stir it up?
neither of you are doing anything positive. lets hear it, and debate.
???????????????????

15 April, 2008 13:11
Anonymous said...

B would like to know..

if SW know's and will reveal in good time, I ask why not now?
this would be the perfect time to show that KRG and Mr Ross and Gabe and others are behind some scam?
this would also show us that your works have credability?

15 April, 2008 13:23
Anonymous said...

Spirit Walker,

You are desperately pleading for proof of certain paintings, of a certain style all through this blog. Though I am relatively new to it I have read many early entries.

You said "Unfortunaly, those that know the truth and people would believe in what they have to say are silent."

I believe the reason your people with the answers you want won't step forward is simple. You have asked and asked them for months to step forward with provenance. They only step forward with accusations, as someone said "pointing fingers at others." Are they not trying to put the focus somewhere else? Trying to get people to look at other things, everything but the fact cetain paintings don't have any history?!

I recently acquired as a present the National Gallery of Canada's Morrisseau catalogue from their incredible show, which came to the McMichael last year. It includes all periods in its very broad look at Morrisseau's career, late 1950s to last drawings in 2003. Non of the work in this catalogue matches the so called 1970s paintings.

Spirit Walker, the evidence for them is.. not there! If I can not prove a horse's pedigree... it has non! Forget these redirects and their false accusations of others! Look at the facts in your face, they are there.

with great respect,
Hugh

15 April, 2008 14:00
Anonymous said...

B. would just like to know if you have any facts?
these questions and critics will not go away. ever...
I have seen only tough questions, rude comments and no answers?
show them...if you have them.. just like poker..
my bet.. someone if bluffing.
lets see who.
please no redirect, just an answer.
now is the time.

15 April, 2008 14:32
Anonymous said...

Shame on all of the individuals on this site that are doing nothing more than giving Spirit Walker a hard time. People usually don't attack others unless they fell threatened. That's what I observe on this site. Mr. Ross( Ill use that term very losely) Kinsman Robinson Gallery, and the select others that have nothing better to do with their time than bad mouth the owner of this blog and his paintings that he posts on this site. I thought Id let you all in on something interesting. I can personally say I have seen Kinsman Robinson Gallery discredit a painting of Norvals, say it was a fake, then purchase it and re sell it. They can deny this accusation. I have seen it first hand. Im sure all the little deciples of KR will run to their aid here. Truth is I personally witnessed this years ago. This is the reason I stopped collecting these paintings. Too much corruption in this art world at the moment. Its sad really. These galleries say its not about the money. Then way does KR have a store house of hundreds of paintings as well as Mr. Ross. How much of this money stays with the family. Not Gabe, but his REAL family. Not someone that jumped on the bandwagon to get rich. I also remember KR telling my years ago when I was there that they gave Norval a bottle of booze and kept him drunk and he painted masters so to speak for them. Im sure this will be denied. But this was my first introduction to KR and Mr. Morrisseau. I had just stopped in the gallery after seeing one of the wonderful works of Norval through the gallery window. I remember the painting had a price tag on it of $15 000 and it was a huge shaman. Great price for what it was to become! Anyways, the focus of this comment is this. When Susan Kinsman told me this, she smirked and I remember my father couldn't believe it. The way a gallery talked about one of their artists. Take it for what you will, but I was there. Its burned into my head and gives me just an opinion on this gallery that supposedly loved Norval. Its just a shame that their cash cow passed away. Maybe they can move on now and exploit the next generation of Morrisseau children.
Keep up the great work Spirit walker. What you do is truly inspirational. I bet Norval would have tipped his hat to you.
Yours,
FOUR OWLS

15 April, 2008 16:12
Anonymous said...

I personally sold a 1970's "Fake" painting on EBAY in 06. Bryant emailed me and told me it was a fake. Someone Bryant knew bought it and claimed to "know" it was a FAKE. That individual then sold it as a ORIGINAL MOSSISSEAU and made money! That person also bought off of Bryant and left a positive for him but a negative for me. What does this tell you?

15 April, 2008 16:26
Anonymous said...

All this tells me is that you continue to poitn fingers at the behaviour of others which in actual fact have no bearing on whether these paintings are fakes or not. I don't know if your accusatiosn are truthful or not but een if they were - that only makes me sad for Norval. It doesn't make your paintings authentic. There is stil no evidence. Only accusations and conspiracies.

I woudl have thought that this blog woudl have been made only after one had the facts. Why the mad scramble for facts now? I woudl get evidence before I started making public accusations and, quite frankly, slanderous statements.

I know you will suggest you are being slandered by them calling your paintings fakes but unless you can prove they are real - you have no standing.

Show us facts. We are all still reading!

15 April, 2008 17:54
Anonymous said...

Spirit Walker initiated this blog by claiming paintings were authentic and other were fake which started this debate on the blog. He has constantly claimed he can prove that they are original but has yet to do so. He has opened the door for the questions that are coming his way. I have not and will not attack him and I respect his knowledge and understanding of paintings and have learned from him and his interpretation of paintings (real or fake).

As for your story - perhaps their is truth to it but only you know as you were there. Once again this is attacking the creditability of others not the paintings that they offer! That is the big question hear.

15 April, 2008 18:12
Anonymous said...

I woudl get evidence before I started making public accusations and, quite frankly, slanderous statements.

My experience has NO slanderous statements. I personally have saved every email that Bryant sent me stating the "fake" 1970's painting. THEN I saved the emails from the buyer and can show his sale on EBAY showing the statement showing it as AUTHENTIC. The BUYER then bought a trivial purchase off of Bryant and gave him a positive feedback. I know where the buyer lives and can show the connection to BRYANT ROSS and his "BUYER". The BUYER corresponded with BRYANT ROSS on many occasions,as the buyer sent me all the correspondence with BRYANT ROSS. This scenario gives me evidence that the 2 are on the same team.

15 April, 2008 18:33
Anonymous said...

I really do not know who you are talking about. I have talked to many people by email over the last few years about these paintings. I get many inquiries to sell these paintings from people all over Canada. When they ask me why I am not interested in their painting I have to tell them that I do not think it is authentic. What these people do with their paintings has nothing to do with me. I probably told this person to ask for his money back from who ever he bought it from. I certainly did not tell him to sell it on ebay to another unsuspecting person.

15 April, 2008 19:00
Spirit Walker said...

1. "How come that numerous galleries across Canada have been selling this kind of paintings for years without anybody stopping them to do so?"

2. "Why would galleries like Maslak McCleod Gallery in Toronto, ON; Bearclaw Gallery in Edmonton, AB and Qualicum Frameworks Gallery in Qualicum Beach, BC risk their reputation spanning several decades being involved in selling non-authentic art pieces of Norval Morrisseau?".

Does anyone has answers to these questions? SW

15 April, 2008 22:26
Anonymous said...

SW: I don't know about you, but there's still a lot of nonsense being tossed around here. "Nanaimo Anon" Please, just because someone (JW) hires a private detective to investigate someone's personal behavior and violate their right to privacy, it doesn't give you the right to pose as a fellow AA member. (Must be JW or JM writing this nonsense???) As far as KRG being dragged through the mud in all of this, your stories would only convince the "greenest" of collectors. You're talking about some of the most respected/published art dealers in the country. Call me a disciple if you will. Get on with the proof and stop the redirect. Your techniques are as transparent as your deception. Proof for SW and the sake of this blog--please!!!

-CB

15 April, 2008 22:50
Anonymous said...

SW: The art world is largely unregulated in Canada. To put it bluntly, the police don't easily get involved. Why are the 3 galleries risking all? For money of course. They're commercial galleries driven by profit. They make more money selling these "70s paintings" then they would if they represented the artist, no doubt. Ask any one of them--or better yet, ask JW, the man supplying the network!!! (You asked for the truth.)

-CB

15 April, 2008 22:55
Anonymous said...

In regards to the comment that your remarks are likely slander - I was not referring to your argumetns about what is fake or not. You shoudl confer with a lawyer, show him/her your posting and ask him to explain to you the definition of slander from a legal perspective. For example, when you take a statement made by a person whom you choose to publicaly identify, and take it out of context for your own purpose and cause the public to question a person's reputation - you may be liable. A better example would be when you proclaim that the owner of a gallery made a statement which you cannot prove was said and which can be shown to have damaged a reputation - even if in one single instance. Galleries rely heavily on their reputation and intergrity, when you question these openly, you shoudl be cautious as to the liability you may be incurring. Don't take my word for it, confer with legal counsel. THis is only advice. There are a lot of claims on this blog which are directed at personal reputations. Those which attack the autenticity of the paintings without provenance are fine because the owners cannot (or so it appears) defend against such statements as they have no evidence to demonstrate the comments aren't anything other than an honest opinion based upon expertise and factual evidence.

15 April, 2008 23:08
Anonymous said...

Why don't we just let Spirit Walker present his case. Im sure he will bring something substantial to the table. Lets give him a bit to compose his thoughts. I would like to say one last thing on this topic. I was just as shocked as some of you will be about KR comments about how they treat Norval. Like I said, believe what you want. No problem. We are all allowed to make comments. As for slander. Not hardly, just hard facts. Let my thoughts on here just be something you keep in mind when dealing with so called reputable galleries. There is are some very shady galleries out there and collectors as well. There are also great galleries out there as well and great collectors. I think we need to just sit back now and wait on SW to respond. Till then, be well.
FOUR OWLS

15 April, 2008 23:36
Anonymous said...

B states
Have we not waited long enough?
what could SW share? spill it.
I have to wonder what is the point of not telling us? by stalling he and others are only hurting the market?
I suspect there is nothing to share.
SW, if you have info to help bolster your point, say it now...
people seem to still post here as "anon"
this goes to all, say what you will, no one will sue.

16 April, 2008 08:53
Anonymous said...

SW - you ask two questions that really are one. Your questions do not authenticate the paintings unfortunately. You know what needs to be done to authenticate them and that is get information on table. Use the resources you have that are in the know to assist in this process with hard facts.

16 April, 2008 09:59
Anonymous said...

Again, why don't we just let SW present his case. He obviously is composing his thoughts. A wise man does this if he has a good case. A great lawyer does the same when they prepare a case. They just don't go in unprepared. Again, great work SW, I can't wait to see the evidence come forward and silence the doubters.
FOUR OWLS

16 April, 2008 11:44
Anonymous said...

There is nothign to prepare. THis is not a legal debate. THis is black or white. THe paintings are real or they are not. End of story. Show us Norval painting this style. Show us documented Provenance that leads back to Norval. Show us a photo of one of his exhibits of this style of painting - just one. All that has been put forward thus far is conjecture, conspiracy and allegations. Not one ounce of evidence. If these were authentic, it would not take months of secret meetings, secret chats, allegations and the rest. It would take SOMETHING - ANYTHING - that links Norval Morrisseau to these paintings. That continues to elude those arguing the point.

Other than the fact that these paintings were done in Woodland style and use acrylic paints - there is no other evidence. Not brought forward anyhow.

I believe the little old lady in the notable commercial said it best:

"Where's the beef?"

Looking forward to the ongoing debate and hopefully authentication (or not).

16 April, 2008 12:00
Anonymous said...

Agree with the above - where is the beef?

Regarding giving SW time - he has had since Nov. 07 to figure this out and nothing yet. Will it be coming. When will it be coming. Why has it not been presented in the last five months. Is there anything to be presented.

There is evidence to question these paintings ie - no picture of norval painting one, no print, no picture of a painting in any book etc... IF they are fake - why has no one disclosed where they are coming from. That question is directed more towards the non-supporters of the 70's questionable paintings.

16 April, 2008 12:30
Anonymous said...

Where these paintings are coming from is not of any concern if they are fake. That falls into the world of law enforcement and civil law for aggrieved parties.

If they are genuine - then it is very much of concern to any collector of Norval's because it removes completely the foundation of trust built with reputable galleries and those closest to Norval.

If they are real - I care greatly why some have tried to devalue them. If they are fake - I don't care where they come from because I don't own any of these. That woudl only be af concern to those who bought them thinking they were authentic. And given the lack of provenance, those parties are partialy responsible for the purchases themselves.

In terms of who actually painted them if not authentic? ALl I can say is that that party is a pretty good painter and I like some of his work. I would even consider buying a piece or two - but not at Morrisseau prices.

16 April, 2008 13:04
Spirit Walker said...

Anonymous is asking: "Where is the beef?"

There is going to be "lots of beef that will come with potatoes". Currently I am growing some potatoes:-)

Stay tuned...

16 April, 2008 13:23
Anonymous said...

The point above to my question on how pointed them is an excellent and intelligent comment. Thank you for helping me see it that way.

16 April, 2008 13:58
Spirit Walker said...

Please, sign your name/nick-name after your comments or otherwise they will be deleted regardless of their content. Thank you. SW

16 April, 2008 14:07
Anonymous said...

B states..
all major collections contain works with questionable histories.
in the world of collecting, such as with stamps.
Some fakes are more valuable then the original..
the point is , many collectors have no problem owning one or two of these works, just be aware of what they are, pay accordingly.

enjoy it either way..
issue solved..

thank you.. thank you......no applause. please,.... please...

16 April, 2008 14:53
Unknown said...

B,

I have great respect for all of your previous comments. The fact is in the world of fine art fakes they are not collectable they are fraudulent. The difference is that the painting is claiming to be done by one man not another verus a stamp which comes from a post office or mint for coins.

So any amount for the works in question is too much!

BMS

16 April, 2008 18:03
Anonymous said...

B replies

agree.... mostly.
I would maintain that forgeries are collectable to many.
clearly these can never match a documented work by a master, my point here was more along the lines that these works are as controversial as the artist himself and as such, could be of intrest to some?

17 April, 2008 08:51
Anonymous said...

and how do the Morrisseau children feel about these works?
TJ

17 April, 2008 17:54
Anonymous said...

Spirit Walker.

This entry shows a comment made by Stardreamer. I am not sure if Stardreamer still keeps an eye on this blog. To shed some light on this issue it would be interesting to hear his perspective on the issue of fakes. As an apprentice of Morrisseau that worked with him during the 1970's he must have some insight related to Morrisseau painting them or not (is it his style even if different then others that are authenicated and did he actually sign paintings on the back etc....). What about other apprentices that have worked with him in the past. What would Brian Marion think of them.

AP

18 April, 2008 11:40
Anonymous said...

I have seen pictures of art work created by the Thunderbird School of Art and the images are very different then the paintings in question from the 1970's. Have a look at the link to Stardreamers website...
http://stardreamers.com/archive/cg050006.shtml
The picture of the paintings completed are very different in style and quality. It is stated elsewhere on his website that the background of the larger blue painting was completed by Stardreamer and the rest by Norval Morrisseau. His archives show a mix of questionable and genuine pieces.

B/C

18 April, 2008 11:58
Spirit Walker said...

Stardreamer's archive shows genuine Morrisseaus ONLY!

Do you believe Stardreamer would include paintings of Norval Morriseau that are not authentic in his archive?

He has so much respect for the Master that he would have no reason to put them in archive if he considered them questionable...

18 April, 2008 12:05
Anonymous said...

Says you...

But why did Norval himself not support these paintings. It is fine that Stardreamer has them in his archive but Morrisseau himself openly stated they were fakes. Who do you trust?

Perhaps Stardreamer can produce some hard evidence (pictures of Norval painting these etc) to help your case or perhaps he will want to stay silent other then the one posting he has made.

B/C

18 April, 2008 12:49
Spirit Walker said...

To "anonymous" visitors to this blog: "Unsigned comments will not be posted"!

"Thank you for your support to the Blog initiated in Honour of the Mind, Body and Spirit of Copper Thunderbird better known as Norval Morrisseau - Grand Shaman of the Ojibway... Blog dedicated entirely to the preservation of the legacy of his people as well as to the preservation of his artistic legacy."

Megweetch, SW

02 May, 2008 11:33
Anonymous said...

I am the person who posted the comment/question in December 07 regarding the two allegedly fake paintings Bryant Ross tried to auction off - thank you to those who did the research to confirm this. The way I see it is this: Coghlan Art director Bryant Ross tried to sell (and successfully sold one)paintings that he believed to be fake!!!! He has been spouting from his high horse about unscrupulous dealers when he himself has been caught being one himself. He has lied about his actions and tried to rip off the unsuspecting public. I also believe where there is smoke there is fire. Bryant Ross, we don't believe anything you say or claim Gabe says or claim Norval ever said. Please crawl back into your hole - we aren't listening to you anymore.

signed: the devil's in the details

02 May, 2008 13:26
Hugh said...

Bryant Ross isn't the question here!

The paintings are!

As for comments by Mr. Anon, above, you could be in your basement doing them as we write! Who knows who you are. Who cares!

The paintings are the question. Proof of authenticity is the only answer you need to give.

BMS

As for your accusations, well the old saying is
"THE THIEF IS THE FIRST TO SUSPECT THEFT."

02 May, 2008 17:08
Anonymous said...

The devil is in your details, because they are not correct. You have hidden behind an anonymous name to try to dis-credit me, thinking that this would add credibility to your paintings. If you are going to call me a liar you could at least state your name.

As I have already stated, I still have these 2 paintings. I do not believe that they are authentic and I have no intension to sell them.

03 May, 2008 22:58
Anonymous said...

I don't own any paintings and I do not paint - You did try to sell them Bryant - we don't care if you admit it because we saw you do it - you have proven yourself a liar!!

signed - the devil's in the details

12 May, 2008 16:51
Anonymous said...

To BMS,

Get it straight there son - the cops put the thieves in jail!

the devil's in the details

13 May, 2008 13:19

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)