Discerning Eye: Frederick Mulder
January 2008
WHY IS THIS PRINT SO SPECIAL?
If you ask most museum curators what they would pick if they could only have one original print in their collection, I expect most would plump for Picasso’s "Minotauromachie." (Some might say Rembrandt’s "Three Crosses.") The impression I sold was one of a very few signed ones likely to come on the market now. Picasso didn’t give the whole edition to a dealer, as he did with most of his prints. He tended to give the "Minotauromachie" to friends, and he often signed them when he gave them away. He had only disposed of half of the edition by the time he died, so only half were ever signed. Most people would prefer to have this great subject signed rather than unsigned; an early signature near the time the print was executed is better; and a cast-iron provenance is even better. The provenance of this impression is as good as you can get: It was given by Picasso to Jacqueline Apollinaire, widow of Picasso’s great friend Guillaume Apollinaire, the modernist poet, shortly after it was made, and she was sufficiently proud of it that she loaned it for an important exhibition at the Petit Palais in Paris in July 1937.
WHAT CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT THE SUBJECT AND TECHNIQUE?
Technically there are more interesting prints, this one doesn’t use a lot of different techniques—mostly etching with some engraving. Pictorially, though, it’s very complex, there’s a lot going on in it. It contains many of the themes of Picasso’s paintings and drawings of the 1930s: the minotaur, as well as some things that get reprised in "Guernica"—for example, the illuminating lamp and the dying horse.
HOW DOES THIS SALE REFLECT ON THE PRINT MARKET?
A museum director put it to me very well: If you lined up all Picasso’s great images, this print would be ahead of many paintings and drawings. It stands to reason that a handful of the great subjects will be bought by people who otherwise would only buy paintings, and there will probably be a widening division between these great works and all the others.
The great subjects will increase in value at a higher rate than the rest. It’s the same as most fields, actually. In the last downturn in the art market in the early 1990s, much of the secondary material didn’t recover at the same rate as the best material did. I think a concentration of interest in the great material will continue whether or not we have a another shakeout.
The classical, pre-1960 print market has certainly moved upward in the last few years, and although the real action has been in the contemporary print market, I think that material is overvalued now, and that won’t always be the case. I think the classical field is much more stable and a much, much better value.


email this article
print this article
digg this
del.icio.us
RSS