![]() 3 Thu, 13:46:51 +0200 We are excited to announce the rewarded videos of the third tutorial challenge, featuring the tips of Rebelle users from around the world. Or there’s no proof.Announcing the Rewarded Videos of Tutorial Challenge Vol. “The only proof would be finding the real thing one day. Oles also pointed out that if Mobarak does in fact own the original but burned a fake - and even if he succeeds in making millions from the NFTs - the value of the original would be unaffected. He added that although he cannot say for certain, when he watched the video of the drawing engulfed in flames, he thought the paper looked too crisp to have been 80 years old. ![]() Oles explained that the proliferation of fakes plagues Kahlo’s legacy. Mary-Anne Martin, an established dealer who sold the drawing in 2004 and again in 2013, told VICE that she had never heard of Mobarak and called the situation “creepy.” Martin has not responded to Hyperallergic’s request for comment. (The High Museum confirmed in an email to Hyperallergic that it displayed the work in 2013, and the Nelson Atkins Museum said that it received the work in the same year as part of a traveling exhibition but did not hang it.) James Oles told Hyperallergic that “no one could tell from the video” whether the drawing was real or not. The certificate lists the drawing’s exhibition history, claiming that it was shown at institutions including Atlanta’s High Museum and the Nelson Atkins Museum in Kansas City. On the day he burned it, Mobarak attained an authentication certificate from a small gallery owner in Mexico City named Andrés Siegel. Mobarak claims that he purchased the work in 2015 from a private collector. Whether the drawing is really by the hand of Kahlo is also under investigation by INBAL. ![]() James Oles, a professor and curator of Latin American art at Wellesley College near Boston, told Hyperallergic in an interview that Mexico’s enforcement of both copyright infringement and laws protecting the destruction of national monuments is limited, and that he doubted US authorities would intervene. When asked whether he sought permission to create NFTs of “Fantasmones Siniestros,” Mobarak simply stated, “I own the painting … By burning it, I am immortalizing ” A statement on the project’s website similarly avoids acknowledging that the work was destroyed, cryptically declaring that it was “permanently transitioned into the Metaverse on July 30th, 2022.” Mobarak with the alleged Kahlo drawing Additionally, the Bank of Mexico, as trustee of the Diego Rivera and Frida Kahlo estate, owns the reproduction rights to Kahlo’s work, but according to INBAL, Mobarak did not secure permission to reproduce the drawing. INBAL also stated that, if the work is real, Mobarak’s action went against federal law: Frida Kahlo’s oeuvre has been designated a “national monument” since 1984 and its destruction is therefore illegal. Mobarak also pledged proceeds toward the Palacio de Bellas Artes, which INBAL stated that it has not and will not accept. The project’s website, where Mobarak is selling the digital tokens for 3 ETH (around $1,350 for each NFT, and $13.5 million if he sells them all), explains that “a portion of the proceeds” will support the Autism Society, the Children’s Craniofacial Association, the Fundación Origen (an organization that helps women who have experienced violence), and Mexico City’s Frida Kahlo Museum and Escuela Nacional de Artes Plásticas. “I made this profound act for children and the less fortunate around the world to receive hope,” he added, explaining that his 11-year-old daughter has Crouzon syndrome. ![]() “History was made,” Mobarak said in a statement emailed to Hyperallergic. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |