Chrissy's Blog

ARt articles

Chrissy Lackey — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 12:03:17 +0000

Warhol authentication battle moves closer to trial
Both sides claim upper hand after federal judge’s ruling
By Jason Edward Kaufman | Web only
Published online 28.5.09
NEW YORK. The long-simmering controversy concerning the authentication of works attributed to Andy Warhol moved closer to trial on 27 May when a federal judge issued an opinion that allows parts of an anti-trust, class-action lawsuit to proceed against the late artist’s foundation and related entities.
The plaintiff in the case is a London-based collector, Joe Simon-Whelan, who owns a 1965 silk-screened self-portrait of Warhol that was twice rejected (in 2002 and 2004) by the Foundation’s Authentication Board. Mr Simon filed his lawsuit in July 2007 in Federal District Court in the Southern District of Manhattan on behalf of a putative class of owners whose works have been similarly denied. His complaint charges the New York-based Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, the Estate of Andy Warhol, the Andy Warhol Art Authentication Board, Vincent Fremont (a successor trustee to the Estate who is the exclusive agent for sale of the Foundation’s Warhol paintings), and others with “engaging in a conspiracy to restrain and monopolise trade in the market for Warhol works”.
The complaint alleges that the Warhol Foundation’s ongoing catalogue raisonné project and Authentication Board have for two decades fraudulently rejected legitimate works to artificially limit supply and thereby increase the value of Warhol works held by the foundation. These trade-restrictive activities violate the federal Sherman Anti-Trust Act and related New York State Donnelly Act. Mr Simon-Whelan is seeking unspecified monetary damages, but his relentless multi-year campaign against the Foundation suggests that he wants a moral victory as well.
The Warhol Foundation moved to have the entire suit dismissed, but federal judge Laura Swain has rejected one key anti-trust portion of the complaint while allowing others to move forward. She rejects anti-trust claims relating to price inflation because Mr Simon did not purchase his work from the Foundation and therefore could not have suffered from any conspiracy in which it was involved. (To mount a class action seeking damages for price-inflation the lawyers would have to find a collector who purchased a work from the foundation within the last four years, the statute of limitation for the anti-trust claim.)
However, Judge Swain allowed Mr Simon-Whelan’s anti-trust claim that he was prevented from competing with the Foundation as a seller in the Warhol market by the Authentication Board’s allegedly fraudulent rejection of his piece. (The Board twice stamped “DENIED” on the reverse of his canvas.) Mr Simon-Whelan’s claim can proceed against the defendants for unjust enrichment, fraud and violation of the federal Lanham Act, which prohibits false or misleading statements that can confuse commerce.
The lawsuit also seeks to invalidate the Authentication Board’s requirement that owners submitting works relinquish their right to sue the Board, a waiver that Judge Swain deems unenforceable: “A party may not invoke such an agreement to insulate itself from intentional wrongdoing.” Her opinion removes an obstacle that may have hindered owners of rejected works from joining the suit for fear that they would be charged with violating the submission agreement.
“Mr Simon-Whelan has battled this organisation for a long time, and is pleased that the court’s decision now gives him the opportunity to obtain monetary damages and an injunction for the benefit of himself and others because defendants unjustly benefited from their antitrust conspiracy and fraud,” said his lawyer, Brian Kerr, of the New York office of Browne Woods and George, LLP. (Mr Kerr and New York attorney Seth Redniss are co-counsels for Mr Simon-Whelan, both working on a contingency basis.) Yet, the Warhol Foundation also characterised the court’s opinion as favourable. “We’re happy that the judge narrowed the case in a crucial way by cutting the heart out of his absurd anti-trust claims,” says Foundation president Joel Wachs. “Now we’ll proceed with the case and be able to show it is totally without merit, having absolutely no basis in fact,” he asserts.
Mr Simon-Whelan’s team plans to obtain testimony and documents from all of the defendants, and to subpoena others related to the case and to the Warhol market in general. “I’m sure we’ll be deposing individuals at a number of galleries,” said Mr Kerr, mentioning Larry Gagosian and others cited in the complaint, including Daniel Templon, Ronald Feldman, Michael Hue-Williams, Jonathan O’Hara and Thomas Ammann. “We will be making a motion asking the court to certify a class action,” he adds, though he is not certain who in addition to Mr Simon-Whelan would be put forward as class representative.
The discovery process, which could take from six months to more than a year, is expected to expose the internal deliberations of the secretive Warhol Foundation and its Authentication Board, whose policy has been not to explain the basis for rejections. “The sad thing is that what this is really doing is wasting a small fortune on legal fees which would otherwise be going to grants to needy arts organisations throughout the United States,” says Mr Wachs. But the Warhol Foundation appears to have anticipated the need for legal assistance. In March the Foundation appointed as its chairman Michael Straus, a Birmingham, Alabama-based attorney with Straus & Boies, LLP, a high-powered anti-trust firm. Ronald Spencer, an attorney for the Foundation, is confident that Judge Swain’s opinion “dismissed the guts of Mr Simon-Whelan’s anti-trust claims and, specifically, [his] claim that he was damaged by alleged price manipulation in the Warhol market. As to the remaining claims we have a very strong case on the merits and look forward to litigating the issues.”

Controversy over the authentication of alleged Andy Warhol paintings has been continueing for several decades. In May a Federal judge allowed parts of a lawsuit to continue against the Warhol foundation. in the case a London based collector, Joe Simon-Whelan, who owns a 1965 silk screened self-portrait of Warhol that was rejected in 2002 and 2004 by the Foundation’s Authentication Board filed a lawsuit on behalf of other owners whose works were denied on similar terms. His lawsuit charges the Andy Warhol Foundation and all other related entities with “engaging in a conspiracy to restrain and monopolise trade in the market for Warhol works”. His complaint states that allegedly the foundation has rejected valid works to falsely limit the supply of authentic Warhol works, to raise value of the works owned by the foundation. Mr. Simon Whelan is seeking monetary damages, as well as a moral victory.
The claim that Simon was prevented from competing with the Foundation as a seller in the market by the Board can proceed against the foundation for unjust fraud and violation of the federal Lanham Act, which prohibits false or misleading statements that can confuse buyers.The lawsuit also seeks to eliminate the Board’s requirement that owners submitting works relinquish their right to sue. Simon is happy that he is able to gain monetary damages from the lawsuit as well as unveiling the unjust fraud of the foundation. The controversy is still open, however it has been put into new light for future traders of Warhol’s works.

explication of The Heart by Stephen Crane

Chrissy Lackey — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 01:08:19 +0000

The first line is “In the desert” this may be a metaphor for the world, an example is just in the narrator’s life. He is saying that when he was somewhere he saw something. This happens to be the creature. “I saw a creature, Naked, Bestial…” may symbolize a man who was rude, mean, and careless. This could be an example of the narrators first impression of the man, who he found to be rather harsh and there for bestial. “… Who, Squatting upon the ground, held his heart in his hands…” this is just to say that the man was letting everyone know what he is thinking about. He may be shouting or acting rude towards someone. He is just acting normal.

The next part is “…I said, “is it good, friend?”…” is means the narrator is saying to the man why he is acting like that. He wants to know if the man is happy with the way he acts towards others. To justify himself the man then says “…“it is bitter—bitter,” he answered;…“But I like it…”. The man is saying that he may be mean and rude but he likes the way he is. He does not care what others think of him. He knows who he wants to be and no ones opinion can change that. The last two lines are “… because it is bitter, and because it is my heart.” The man is saying that his attitude is what makes him unique and he is happy to stay that way. Regardless of anyone’s complaints against him.

The Lottery Response

Chrissy Lackey — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 21:41:00 +0000

In “The Lottery” a tradition is carried out on June 27 of every year. Every person in this particular town enters a lottery. One person is chosen to win the lottery. The chosen person then is attacked by the towns people with stones. This tradition is brutal and seems unnecessary. However all the people continue this tradition with no ideas of changing. The people of this community continue this tradition because of fear of changing. They fear that changing anything will upset a balance and bring chaos.

The lottery is carried out by every person choosing paper from a black box in the center of town. The person with the black spot is the person who is beaten with stones. Even a suggestion of changing the box is appalling to the people. These people want to keep tradition even if it means innocent people are hurt. Tradition has worked for them and changing would bring new foreign things to the town. The people of this town treat the Lottery just as any other normal event. Even though every year people are harmed. The people only know the tradition and nothing else, so there is no will for anyone to want to change it. They do not want to know change.

“Harrison Bergeron” Response

Chrissy Lackey — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 01:50:29 +0000

In the story “Harrison Bergeron” there are three possible themes to the story. All three refer to Equality in the world. The themes show how the equality has brought peace only by making the people weak and ignorant. Equality is an added shackle to the many handicaps these people wear to be happy.

Equality comes with a price. Everyone cant be equal and still be free they are forced to be shackled to prevent individuality. The entire story shows how the price of their equality is wearing uncomfortable handicap devices. Some are the intelligence handicaps and the weights. This keeps everyone from competing. No one is better then anyone.

The mental handicap radios keep people from thinking individually. To be equal everyone must be the same. If anyone is more intelligent then someone the system breaks. They are kept happy by their inability to see that the price of equality is ignorance.

To keep equality their can be no lies. If anyone is different or cheats the handicaps they are showing individuality in thought. An example is Hazel’s suggestion to George lightening his weights. George replies “The minute people start cheating laws, what do you think happens to society.” Their society is built upon honesty and equality. If anything changes their entire world changes.

This story shows in all three themes the way the people pay for the worlds equality. they are all prisoners to the worlds idea of freedom. Even any attempt at individuality is unnoticed due to the ignorance of the true world.

“Cathedral” Response

Chrissy Lackey — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 03:34:50 +0000

During the beginning of the story the narrator is isolated and not important while his wife and the blind man talk. Carver than takes the narrator from being an outsider to the conversation to being able to talk to the man. The narrator begins to understand the man when he agrees to try some things the narrator likes. This makes him see that the man is not as different as he thought. Towards the end of the story the narrator is able to talk with the man. The narrator turns on a show that is pictures of cathedrals. The narrator realizes that the blind man cannot see what a cathedral is, the man tries to describe one to the blind man and realizes he cannot do justice to it. The blind man suggests drawing a cathedral to help him understand. After drawing the cathedral he has the man close his eyes and try to draw. The man draws than keeps his eyes close because he has learned to appreciate the mans way of sight.

The man in the story starts out with confusion about this blind man and all blind men. The narrator has a stereotype of blind people being boring and unhappy. He talks about his wife’s friendship with the blind man as if it is pointless. As the story progresses the man is able to see that the blind man is the same as a person with sight.

Response to “Everyday Use”

Chrissy Lackey — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 03:57:56 +0000

Dee is different from her mother and sister. She believes she is better than others. Her mother and sister are happy with who they are. Maggies and her mothers opinion on heritage is being thankful for what you have and respecting things passed down. Dee defines heritage as the objects passed down through generations.

When dee comes to visist she is dressed in African attire and has changed her name. she has taken interest in her peoples heritage, but not her families heritage. Heritage to dee is anything that reminds her of her family. Not her mother or sister but objects her family has passed down through generations. Dee feels that only she can appreciate them by displaying her pride for heritage. When she arrives she immediately begins taking pictures with the house being a main focus. She thens begins asking for things made by her past relatives, Like the butter churn. She is only concerned that it is an heirloom of the family. Dee asks for the quilts and says she wishes to preserve them. When her mother tells her they are for maggie dee becomes upset. She says that maggie will do something stupid and use them. Dee believes she is doing good by celebrating her heritage by displaying it.

Maggie and her mother feel that heritage are the stories and memories that are passed down through generations. The heirlooms are just aids in remembering. They are meant to be used to add memmories to the objects. Heritage is the history of family and by using the quilts and the churn they are adding history, memories to them.

A&P Response

Chrissy Lackey — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 03:05:59 +0000

During the story Sammy changes, the young girls make him realize something about his life. Sammy is a Cashier at the A&P. Everyday he does the same thing, he stands at the register and rings food up. Sammy is Nineteen. He is young and the girls unknowingly help him realize that the A&P is a trap for conformity for everyone.

When Sammy sees the girls in the bathing suits come into the store he watches them because they are not like the normal people that come in and just travel down the isles with their lists. Sammy calls the people sheep, they follow the flock. The girls are in bathing suits and have no shoes. They move through the store with no plan and no regard for the normal routine.

Sammys job is very monotonous. He has done the same thing everyday and has grown tired of the same routine. He sees that his co- worker and manager have been trapped and do not realize it. His friend and co-worker Stokesie and him are very much the same. However Stokesie is twenty two, married, and has two children, and still works at the A&P. The manager Lengel believes his job is important and is happy with the conformity of the A&P.

When Stokesie and Lengel see the girls they are upset. They are content with the Conformity of the A&P. The girls are different to them. Lengel being happy with the same routine and upset with the disturbance, corrects the girls. Sammy realizing he cannot be happy with the same routine than quits his job. He does not want to conform. As he leaves sammy sees that Lengel is content to have order he continues the work to keep the sheep moving.

Practice Post

Chrissy Lackey — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 00:26:43 +0000

Hello world!

Chrissy Lackey — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 00:16:16 +0000

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!

practice”Fairness”

Chrissy Lackey — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 01:17:46 +0000

In the story the father chooses death as the godfather. He knows that when faced with death all humans are equal. By choosing death the father sets how his sons life will be. If he chose god life would be uncertain as to his fait. If he chose the devil his life would be filled by deciet. with death his life was filled with fairness. The son broke the rules and punished as such.