Sale commissions and recovery fees: how much is too much?

September 29th, 2011

I am reliably informed by my well-placed spies in London and China that the Qing Dynasty porcelain vase bought by a Chinese bidder at Bainbridge’s Auction Galleries in the London borough of Ruislip almost exactly twelve months ago (left), has finally been paid for. Many people in the art market (and indeed the mainstream media) had begun to doubt whether the £51.6 million bill for ‘The Ruislip Vase’, as it has become known, would ever be settled.

The delay in resolving that seemingly epochal transaction prompted a number of European auction houses to initiate new regulations at their sales of Asian art, requesting Asian bidders to pay a deposit prior to the sale. Whether those requirements will now be relaxed in the light of the apparent settlement of the Ruislip account remains to be seen.

The sticking point for the Chinese buyer who bought the vase at Bainbridge’s was the auctioneer’s commission. The hammer fell at £43 million but once the commission and VAT had been added, the bill soared to £51.6 million. On paper at least, that staggering buyer’s premium (which includes VAT) made the auctioneer Peter Bainbridge an instant millionaire. But it now seems that the Chinese buyer only agreed to settle the account after re-negotiating the auctioneer’s fees.

The hammer price for the vase was extraordinary in itself, but arguably even more bizarre is the idea that an auctioneer can suddenly find himself almost £10 million richer simply on account of having been fortunate enough to receive instructions to wield the gavel for an object about which he knows next to nothing. Nice work if you can get it, but how fair and reasonable is that?

There are no rules and regulations on auction fees, nor indeed on an art dealer’s commission. It is widely known that dealers in contemporary art generally take up to 50% of the sale price of works they sell on the primary market, with the other 50% going to the artist. These percentages may change in favour of the artist as his or her reputation grows. That traditional arrangement — often open to negotiation — is regarded as broadly fair given the risk the dealer takes to promote the artist — the cost overheads of running a bricks and mortar gallery, catalogue publishing, and so on. But it has also encouraged some artists — Damien Hirst perhaps most famously — to demand a larger slice of the cake once fame and celebrity has properly kicked in.

The academic Olav Velthuis, who conducted extensive research on the the economic and social structures of the art market (Talking Prices: Symbolic Meanings of Prices on the Market for Contemporary Art), found that some dealers considered their own 50% cut to be too much once an artist had reached a certain price point. From that moment it suddenly seemed disproportionate — and unfair to the artist — for the dealer to be taking such a large percentage of the transaction.

Today, vendors consigning high-value goods to auction can often negotiate the auctioneer’s sales commission right down, sometimes playing one auction house off against another to do so. Auctioneers are prepared to cooperate because they know they will gain on the buyer side through the premium set out in the conditions of sale, and which is generally non-negotiable.

And yet, in the case of the Ruislip vase, the Chinese buyer has indeed finally succeeded in negotiating a more favourable premium. Presumably Bainbridge’s were only too willing to cooperate given the alternative of continued delays and perhaps even the possibility of not being paid at all (the spectre of the Yves St. Laurent/Pierre Bergé Chinese rat and rabbit still haunts the market).

As prices continue to rise, are we likely to see more of this kind of thing? Will auctioneers come under increasing pressure to put a cap on their buyer’s premium? Somehow £10 million seems an unreasonable amount to levy for a few minutes work. And so it has indeed proved.

From here, the next logical question concerns the not unrelated issue of recovery fees for stolen or looted art. Can anyone explain why it cost Michael Bakwin $3.1 million to get his stolen pictures back (including his Cézanne, shown right)? Exactly what is the cost breakdown behind that sum? Understandably, Bakwin is suing for recovery of those costs. But is he suing the right people?

When it comes to recovery fees and commissions, how much is too much?

 

 

Dr. Tom Flynn

[TOM+IN+UMBRIA+2011_2.JPG](Dr. Tom Flynn is a London-based writer and Art historian and is frequently blogging about interesting issues in the Art business. He has published books and  written journalism at numerous magazines including The Art Newspaper, Art & Auction, ARTnews, Art Review, Art Quarterly, Apollo, The Spectator, Museums Journal, The Sculpture Journal, etc.)

Visit his blog

Tesco: Homeplus Subway Virtual Store

September 25th, 2011

The British supermarket chain Tesco has launched a new way of grocery shopping in Korea. As statistics say, Koreans are the second most hard working people in the world. Therefore they do not have any time to go grocery shopping and if, they are not willing to spend a lot of time browsing. With an interactive smart phone advertising campaign Tesco has revolutionized the concept of a supermarket into nowadays society. It is working very well, also due to the well organized postal service in Korea. Ordered goods will be sitting infront of your door in 24 hrs in a specific time you have scheduled. It will take its time to implement in London, as there isn`t even reception on the underground yet.

Kleine Wundertüte

(Kleine Wundertüte is a collection of all wonderful things that we come across in our every-day life. The project is based on the idea to document, connect and share interesting information from different kinds of media.)

visit “Kleine Wundertüte’s” blog

Hervé Léger SS2012

September 17th, 2011

picturecredit: style.com

 

As New York Fashionweek kicked off the past days and as I was in a private hurry which didn’t let me browse through the world wide web for longer than 10 minutes a day (what a record of myself), I’m a little delayed with all that commenting on different shows. Therefore I thought about giving my favourites the only go and so here we are with my ever keeping love to Hervé Léger by Max Azria.  It’s no secret that I’m completely in love his bodycon dresses, which are so well known that I doubt you wouldn’t identify one once it passes your way wherever you are.

 Azria’s simple but sexy mixture of creating those bandage dresses without letting them appear cheap by any means always kept me looking out for a more inexpensive version (which I’m still looking out for today – I guess there’s just a little chance to copy those masterpieces in an acceptable way).  However, it will be hard to find a Hervé Léger-like piece of next year’s spring/summer collection since they appear to be unexpected as expected.

Surely, the bandage body consciousness was kept as we expected. But the details and elements changed. From simplicity we come to glamourous twists made out of shiny details and golden/silver colours. It seems as if Azria went into the more luxurious way while keeping it powerful and sexy. As another unexpected detail, some quilling-like ends for some of his dresses were added, which (to me) let them appear even more feminine. The symbiosis of slight S&M like details underlined with simple black and a leather-like appearance together with those playful quillings bring a new, vibrant and interesting attitude into the whole collection. Bear in mind that all those dresses are made of one specific material and still they all look different while presenting its own attitude. Consequently the darker colours to the point of black demonstrate the fierce, rock-alike chic while warmer shades like golden glitter represent a glamorous way to style yourself up. Cold silver and white combined together with golden embellishments stand for an innocent but reserved snow princess and tribal ikat-prints are more the edgy and casual version of a woman who knows how to dress herself but doesn’t want to go into more styling.

One of the best parts of the collection? The way the girls were styled beside from putting on those master pieces. The minimal make up and a strict, pure hair-do…I just LOVE it. There is no better play between feminine sexy and pure strictness!

The only questionable thing? The shoes. Those gladiator like things give the impression that all the models had a bad car accident that led to some serious leg injuries.  But beside this (and I guess we are all able to ignore those mistakes on their feet) there is nothing left to tell than Meenal Mistry’s comment on style.com:

No one ever said that being tough precluded luxury.

So true.

 

Anna Theresa Winkler for Pulcinella

(Anna Theresa Winkler is an independent fashion blogger and has worked for a major german fashionblog ‘lesmads.de’, while attending fashion shows all over the world. Her attitude to fashion is: “classy, fury & puristic”)

Visit her blog

 

Culture of silence and intimidation surrounds Degas sculpture trade

September 15th, 2011

A fascinating piece by Bloomberg’s William D. Cohan yesterday (here) throws light on the disturbing industry of questionable Degas bronze casting that has become a multi-million dollar business for those involved.
Tellingly, it seems to have been a couple of rich collectors who allegedly kick-started what looks increasingly like a wholesale cashing-in on the Degas legacy after “discovering” a cache of plasters purportedly by the French artist in a Parisian storeroom in 2001. For the original source of this story, see Judd Tully’s piece for Art Info and Art + Auction here.

Nothing could be more illustrative of the extent to which money is dislodging traditional connoisseurial expertise in today’s art market than the news that a rich collector and his wife have been allowed to ascribe a cache of previously unknown plasters to Degas — one of the most academically problematic “sculptors” of the modern period — without the involvement of recognised Degas experts and scholars. Indeed, according to Cohan, Degas scholarship has suddenly descended into Trappist silence.

At the heart of this story is an issue that warrants further scrutiny — namely the willingness of the Degas heirs to rubber-stamp the suspect process of authentication in return for a share of the proceeds.

But Cohan’s piece is really about the omertà that has descended among museum directors and Degas scholars who, despite deep reservations about the authenticity of the plasters from which the new bronzes have been cast, are reluctant to express their doubts to journalists for fear of being sued. Here is yet another eloquent symbol of the power of money to corrupt due process in the art market.

Sadly, it is by no means unusual for an artist’s hears to authorise posthumous bronze casting. But is it right to do so, just because the artist in question left no explicit prohibition on such activities? As Cohan notes, Degas had his own reservations about it:

“Before his death in 1917, he repeatedly expressed concern that charlatans might highjack his legacy by casting his sculptures in bronze and selling them to collectors, and is said to have told his fellow painter Georges Rouault, ‘What I fear most is not dust but the hand of man.’”

That hand, it seems, is proving more grasping than even Degas might have imagined. Nor is the dead hand of acquisitive opportunism by any means unusual in the sculpture realm.

Not long ago, at the opening of an exhibition of recent casts of works by an important late British sculptor, one prominent UK museum curator confided to me his serious reservations about whether these “new” works ought to have been made at all, particularly when many of them had been cast from models that were never intended for translation into bronze. But it’s one thing to murmur such concernssotto voce over a glass of cheap white wine at a private view and quite another to express them on the record for publication.

As for the ability of expensive lawyers to foreclose disputes before they can be properly explored, this too is becoming almost endemic in the art market. Last year, we heard how Joe Simon-Whelan had to retreat from his dispute with the Andy Warhol Foundation after being engulfed by a tsunami of legal costs. In an email to Bloomberg, he said, “I am deeply saddened that I was unable to reveal the truth in court, but when faced with threats of bankruptcy, continuing personal attacks and counterclaims, I realized I no longer stood a chance of proceeding further.”

It’s coming to something when disputes might be resolved the wrong way just to avoid onerous legal costs, but when differences of opinion don’t even make it to the level of open public discussion, that is a lot more worrying. One of the Degas scholars Cohan spoke to expressed hope for a “litigation-free zone” in which to air the issues properly and without redress, a notion promptly scorned by Delaware law professor,Ann Althouse.

Meanwhile, elsewhere, a similarly glaring mismatch between corporate muscle and the broader public good is playing out in the realm of public sculpture. A case currently developing in California is pitting the intimidating financial reach of an oligarch against not only an artist, but against a local arts-commissioning authority cowed by the threat of lawsuits. Watch this space.

As threats and personal attacks rain down from wealthy, bullying collectors and foundations, the experts scuttle for cover, lips firmly sealed. Whither the artist’s rights?

Dr. Tom Flynn

[TOM+IN+UMBRIA+2011_2.JPG](Dr. Tom Flynn is a London-based writer and Art historian and is frequently blogging about interesting issues in the Art business. He has published books and  written journalism at numerous magazines including The Art Newspaper, Art & Auction, ARTnews, Art Review, Art Quarterly, Apollo, The Spectator, Museums Journal, The Sculpture Journal, etc.)

Visit his blog

Bugge Wesseltoft / Henrik Schwarz – New Album – Duo

August 15th, 2011

 

When some collaborations occur, it feels like Fate has been paying close attention, planning something special. Wesseltoft comes from a jazz background and has moved towards electronic music. He started on the ECM label with Jan Garbarek, and later collaborated with club music legends like Laurent Garnier and Francois Kervorkian on stage. Schwarz comes from the Chicago/ Detroit techno culture, and performs at music festivals and in clubs on all continents. He has been moving towards the jazz and improvisation. Henrik: “Bugge and myself are moving towards each other, there are these energies.” Their first album called Duo was just released worldwide on Jazzland Recs/ Universal Music.

Kleine Wundertüte

(Kleine Wundertüte is a collection of all wonderful things that we come across in our every-day life. The project is based on the idea to document, connect and share interesting information from different kinds of media.)

visit “Kleine Wundertüte’s” blog

Fake Art in Public Places

August 12th, 2011

I recently wrote an article for The Art Newspaper (here) on what appears to be an industry of sculpture-faking which has emerged as a result of the Art in Public Places scheme in California.

Many of the works in question — unauthorised copies (left) by Chinese craftsmen of an original 1992 work by the Californian sculptors Don Wakefield and Chick Glickman — are situated in the grounds of the Olen Property Corporation’s buildings in Newport Beach and Brea, California and have benefited from the Art in Public Places policy used in many US cities. This is how the Public Art scheme works:

Under the current Art in Public Places Policy, developments with a total building valuation of 1.5 million dollars ($1,500,000) or more are required to integrate publicly visible sculptures into their development projects. The artwork is regarded as an on-site amenity, a fixed asset on the property.

Developers are responsible for selecting an artist, commissioning the artwork, and maintaining the artwork. Each developer submits their proposed artwork for review by the Art in Public Places Advisory Committee, which reviews the artwork application based upon policy-defined criteria, such as the artist’s qualifications and the durability of materials. The developer is required to put one per cent of the total development budget towards the art.

The Olen Corporation is owned by the Florida-based billionaire property developer and convicted tax felon Igor Olenicoff who has real estate holdings in California, Arizona and Florida. He acquired the ‘fake’ sculptures in China during the Beijing Olympics in 2008 and subsequently instructed the craftsmen there to adapt one of them from Wakefield’s original design (image right shows Don Wakefield making the original work in a photograph date-marked 18 June 1992). The copies are now distributed around Olenicoff’s corporate properties in Newport Beach and surrounding areas, including the City of Brea.
In the first instance, if these works are indeed unauthorised copies — and all the available evidence seems to suggest that they are — and if a craftsman (Chinese or otherwise) has been prepared to adapt the work of another artist without that artist’s consent, this would likely constitute a breach of copyright under the Fair Use application. This would represent a breach of Mr Wakefield’s moral rights as an artist which would have serious legal implications.

More importantly, the City of Brea seems to be failing to collect the comprehensive information on the artist, which is required under the regulations of the Art in Public Places scheme. Olenicoff has also declined to reveal the identity of the Chinese craftsmen. If the City of Brea is failing to collect the necessary information from the developer, it is, by default, encouraging the abuse of the scheme, in this case by allowing developers to use Chinese craftsmen to copy works at a fraction of the cost of the original. Whether this is a way for corporate developers to save money remains unclear, but it is in everyone’s interest to ensure that the rights of artists are not abused by corporations.

I approached a Beijing-based stone-carving company and requested an estimate to make a single copy of Don Wakefield’s 1992 sculpture based on a photograph. I was quoted $1,250, with the price dropping to $950 per unit for three. According to Wakefield, to make an original, unique work today of the kind he and Glickman made in 1992 would cost around $35,000. As they say in the States, do the math.

There is also the critical issue of how many other works might have been copied from original sculptures by other artists without their original creator’s consent. The City of Brea appears to be turning a blind eye to this by not demanding comprehensive biographical information about the artists whose work is used in the Art In Public Places scheme. I have requested clarification of this from the City of Brea and from the Public Art authorities in Newport Beach, but have received no response.

We need to know the exact source of the sculptures acquired by Olen Corp. and the identity of the craftsman from whom Olenicoff commissioned the copied and adapted works. It would also be interesting to know how many other sculptures from the Chinese source have been used by Olen Corporation in Newport Beach and Brea. All this information ought to be on file under the Art in Public Places scheme.

Dr. Tom Flynn

[TOM+IN+UMBRIA+2011_2.JPG](Dr. Tom Flynn is a London-based writer and Art historian and is frequently blogging about interesting issues in the Art business. He has published books and  written journalism at numerous magazines including The Art Newspaper, Art & Auction, ARTnews, Art Review, Art Quarterly, Apollo, The Spectator, Museums Journal, The Sculpture Journal, etc.)

Visit his blog

The Art Loss Register: “The Rene Russo character” of real-life art crime? I think not.

August 4th, 2011

“We’re sort of the Rene Russo character in the real-lifeThomas Crown Affair,” Christopher Marinello, Executive Director of The Art Loss Register recently told the New York Observer (here). If it weren’t so serious I’d probably have died laughing.
Marinello wants us to believe that the Art Loss Register is the dashing art crime hero fighting the bad guys. But real-life art crime is a lot less glamorous than film fiction and the Art Loss Register is no Hollywood heroine.

If the Art Loss Register wants to boast that it represents the interests of the good guys against the bad guys, as Rene Russo’s character did in the 1999 re-make of The Thomas Crown Affair, why did it choose to represent Nevada-based art dealer Jack Solomon in his title dispute against Steven Spielberg over ownership of Norman Rockwell’s Russian Schoolroom (right), (and later against Jody Goffman Cutler of the National Museum of American Illustration after she took Spielberg’s place in the dispute)?

Marinello has been all over the news wires recently, telling anyone who’ll listen that his organisation is a force for good in art disputes. He has just told CBC News (here) that “legitimate dealers will research the authenticity of a piece in a process known as provenance.” But should they use the ALR for that research?

Authenticity and provenance are different matters. Provenance checking — confirming an object’s ownership history — does not necessarily confirm its authenticity. Such subtleties are lost on those with little or no experience of the art world, but let’s not be too pedantic for the moment as there is a broader issue here.

You might ask why a legitimate dealer would use the ALR to check provenance when a short while ago the ALR’s own chairman Julian Radcliffe admitted in court to “misleading” a dealer who had made (and paid for) a provenance enquiry over paintings he wished to buy (see links to my earlier posts on this below).

More recently, the Art Loss Register failed to conduct its own “provenance” research into Jack Solomon’s previous connections with the Russian Schoolroom painting before representing him in the doomed lawsuit against Mrs Goffman Cutler. Mrs Cutler won the case in April 2010 and the Art Loss Register is now suing its former client, Jack Solomon. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t recall seeing Rene Russo’s character doing anything even remotely similar. She went after the bad guys; she didn’t represent them.

I may come across as a stuck record on this ALR topic, but there is a serious issue here and it is about the need for organisations involved in title disputes and art theft resolution to demonstrate good judgement. Representing a guy in a title claim when even the most low-level due diligence would have confirmed the folly of such representation is poor judgement. Due diligence checking by the ALR would have demonstrated (as was later confirmed in court) that Mrs Cutler had a superior claim to Russian Schoolroom. Did the ALR, like its erstwhile client Jack Solomon, see a potential pot of gold lurking in the corner of the Russian Schoolroom (“I’m sure in two calls I could turn it over for x million dollars before the sun goes down.” — Solomon quoted in Riverfront Times, 2 March, 2007).

To many people, the ALR comes across as a pioneering crusader for a more ethical art world. Some of us have been working in the art world for decades and have slightly longer memories. The ALR “misled” Michael Marks when Marks sought to make a provenance enquiry; the ALR allegedly “fell out” with Gisela Berman-Fischer over her attempt to win restitution of a Pissarro painting Le Quai Malaquais, Printemps (left) taken from her family during the Holocaust (story here); and now it is locked in a sordid lawsuit with Solomon, whose title claim toRussian Schoolroom was baseless and who was found to be “not credible” by a Nevada District Court judge.

The ALR, poorly managed for decades, needs root and branch reform. But does it have the financial resources to undertake that reform and do the big three auction houses and the insurance companies who are its major shareholders have the guts to stand up and demand change?

One thing is for sure, the ALR has a way to go before the world sees it as “the Rene Russo character” of real life art crime.

Dr. Tom Flynn

[TOM+IN+UMBRIA+2011_2.JPG](Dr. Tom Flynn is a London-based writer and Art historian and is frequently blogging about interesting issues in the Art business. He has published books and  written journalism at numerous magazines including The Art Newspaper, Art & Auction, ARTnews, Art Review, Art Quarterly, Apollo, The Spectator, Museums Journal, The Sculpture Journal, etc.)

Visit his blog


More of my blog entries on this topic and ALR-related issues:

Nevada judge rules in title dispute over Norman Rockwell’s Russian Schoolroom

Unanswered questions in Rockwell’s Russian Schoolroom case

Art Loss Register sues Solomon over Rockwell’s Russian Schoolroom case

Art recovery: another can of worms prised open (Pissarro Holocaust restitution case)

‘Due Diligence’ is just a “ruse” (Michael Marks provenance case)

The Art Loss Register: A Correction

Clement Valla – Postcards from google earth

July 24th, 2011

Initially coming from an architectural and especially programming background, Valla turned his interest in processes that produce unfamiliar artifacts and skewed reality into art. He aims at exploring tensions between the creativity of individuals and the influence systems and networks have on them. With “Postcards from google earth” the artist presents the actual reality of google earth. What appears to us as almost perfect illustrations from streets, rivers, cities or landscapes is, after having a closer look, not so perfect anymore. The uneven roads and wavy bridges arise because google builds its bird’s eyes view out of only two datasets, the satellite image, which is later laid above the map. Thereby, the program is lacking information of the height of the transport infrastructure. As long as google hasn’t found a solution to this problem, Valla uses these images to add a surrealistic comic to well known sights, such as the golden gate bridge in San Francisco.

Kleine Wundertüte

(Kleine Wundertüte is a collection of all wonderful things that we come across in our every-day life. The project is based on the idea to document, connect and share interesting information from different kinds of media.)

visit “Kleine Wundertüte’s” blog

When is a ransom not a ransom? Why, when it’s “a fee for information leading to recovery”, of course!

July 23rd, 2011

One senses that National Portrait Gallery director and former Tate employee Sandy Nairne might have been wiser to leave the case of the stolen Turner paintings alone instead of writing a book about it. The two pictures (left), stolen from the Kunsthalle Schirn in 1994, were eventually recovered in a shady deal engineered by the Tate with a little help from its friends on both sides of the ethical divide.

Art critic Waldemar Januszczak wasn’t the only one casting a jaundiced eye over the Tate’s deft recovery of the paintings in 2002 when they clipped the ticket on the insurance side and then paid a ransom to Balkan gangsters for recovery of the paintings. Oh, sorry, did I just say “paid a ransom”? I meant to say, “paid a fee for information leading to the recovery of the paintings.”

But this is semantics. Everyone knows that a ransom was paid. It’s just that neither Sandy Nairne, nor Nicholas Serota, or anyone else involved in the case, could possibly step up and admit that. It would be tantamount to encouraging further art thefts. And yet that’s the exact outcome of the whole affair. Gangsters from Oldham to Odessa will have looked at that deal and thought “Yes, art theft DOES pay after all.”

To pretend otherwise is not just disingenuous, it’s downright stupid. He may have been vilified for it, but at least Henri Nannen had the guts to admit that he’d paid a ransom in 1962 to recover the stolen Riemenschneider Madonna.

Meanwhile, art crime publishing is the gift that keeps on giving, with everyone from former FBI cops to museum directors cashing in on the enduring public fascination with the genre by writing their “memoirs”. And yet it’s instructive that very few art cops (with the exception, it seems, of Messrs Ellis and Hill) have ever succeeded in recovering any of these really high-profile stolen pictures, while it seems that of those pictures that HAVE been recovered, more than a few (whisper it) were recovered through clandestine payments to the criminals or their representatives.

The brilliant BBC2 investigative documentary about the recovery of the Tate’s Turners left some of us in no doubt that the Tate had paid a ransom to Balkan gangsters. Sorry, did I just say “ransom to Balkan gangsters”? What I meant to say was: “fees for information openly paid to shady international lawyers who then passed it to the Balkan gangsters.”

Pull the other one; it’s got bells on.

Dr. Tom Flynn

[TOM+IN+UMBRIA+2011_2.JPG](Dr. Tom Flynn is a London-based writer and Art historian and is frequently blogging about interesting issues in the Art business. He has published books and  written journalism at numerous magazines including The Art Newspaper, Art & Auction, ARTnews, Art Review, Art Quarterly, Apollo, The Spectator, Museums Journal, The Sculpture Journal, etc.)

Visit his blog

OMG! MGM! Models Gone Mad

July 19th, 2011
Normally, I don’t care about that whole model-issue (who’s in, who’s out blahblah) except it has something to do with a pure excitement of my aesthetic feeling (e.g. “Asia’s Hottest”).
Either the moving hallstand is extraordinary,worthy-to-mention beautiful or it isn’t. (what a great metaphorical outburst of myself).
However, when it comes to little chill-out minutes in life, you might click through rubrics you normally wouldn’t care at all. And so did I. This time, it was that “fresh faces”-rubric offashiongonerouge.com and I just decided to go on and all of a sudden those few pictures hit my eyes and triggered two kinds of excitement. The one letting my “aesthetic feeling”-heartbeat go faster and the one letting my honest feeling of disgust come out.
We were all told once in a while that “beauty lies in the beholder’s eye” and I agree to some extent, but let’s get real and look at the pictures. Like those of Kelly Mittendorf. Where is the beauty? Where? If someone finds it, please let me know and possibly explain why every at least 1,80 m tall bitch can call herself a professional model (seriously, you tall people heartlessly destroyed my little-girl-dream of becoming a superdupermodel ;) ). Not that I’m in a bitchy mood on Mondays but she seriously reminds me of those sphynx cats. The eyes and all. I just feel like eww-ing all the time I go over the pictures.
And what about Nadiia Shapoval? A liittle biit masculiine iin her face.
Leaving those two aside, I also found some pretty people. Such as Aygul Galimullina (what a last name… :D ) and Ilva Hetmann. Ilva is German which surprises me since I haven’t seen much beauty (coming from my second homecountry) after Toni Garrn Superstar.
Overall I’m asking myself what some agencies are thinking when employing examples like Nadiia or Kelly. Maybe it’s THE look. Too good I will never see those faces covering ELLE, VOGUE or anything else. Because let’s be honest: A beauty editorial wouldn’t be very coaxing…

Nadiia Shapoval

Kelly Mittendorf

Anna Theresa Winkler for Pulcinella

(Anna Theresa Winkler is an independent fashion blogger and has worked for a major german fashionblog ‘lesmads.de’, while attending fashion shows all over the world. Her attitude to fashion is: “classy, fury & puristic”)

Visit her blog