Picasso's Picassos
Sam White
Paris it is something of an irony that a major portion of Picasso's work spanning his entire life as a painter should now find itself in the hands of the French slaw as a result of a tax settlement which the facts of life have imposed on the painter's bickering heirs. Yet this is what has happened and it has transformed Paris at a stroke from impoverishment as far as Picassos are concerned to being the richest depository of his work in the world. Neither the Hermitage in Leningrad nor the Museum of Modern Art in New York nor even the Picasso Museum in Barcelona will be able to match the collection which will be housed in the Hotel Sale in the Marais from 1981 but which goes on show at the Grand Palais this week. Up Jill 1947 there was only one stateowned Picasso in France, and that was a donation not by the painter but by the widow of one of the subjects of one of his earliest portraits. Picasso himself donated ten paintings shortly after to the Paris Museum of Modern Art, but when the state itself showed a belated interest in acquiring Picassos, it was too late. Prices had rocketed to a point which no French museum could afford. Now comes this windfall of 229 Picassos, plus 149 sculptures, 85 ceramics and innumerable water colours and sketches. The collection is essentially that of the legendary Picasso's Picassos and many of them have not been shown in public before. They are the paintings that Picasso hoarded for himself, representing in many cases some technical or aesthetic triumph from which Picasso derived enormous, almost secret pleasure, and others which he had sold, regretted doing so and then bought them back from the original buyers.
The man largely responsible for securing this treasure for France was Andre Malraux who, as Minister of Culture, introduced a law enabling owners of works of art to pay their death duties in kind rather than in cash. The law was passed in 1968, and Picasso died five years later. In pushing this law through Malraux had the future of Picasso's Picassos very much in Mind. At first, following Picasso's death, there was no problem — the two heirs, the widow Jacqueline and the painter's son Paul, agreed to pay their death duties with Picassos and they went even further and made an outright gift to the state of paintings by Degas, Matisse and Cezanne which Picasso owned. Problems however arose when the circle of heirs expanded. First Paul died, leaving his two children as heirs, Then, after prolonged legal battles the courts decided that Picasso's illegitimate children should share in the fortune. They were a daughter from his liaison with Marie-Therese Walter and the two children of Francoise Gliot, Claude and Paloma. This had the immediate effect of raising the total amount payable in death duties, increasing it to roughly about a third of the estate. Apart from his many homes, Picasso's fortune consisted almost entirely of the Picassos still in his possession, and these, piled up in his various residences in empty rooms, cellars and lofts over the decades, presented a picture of indescribable chaos, Picasso had the habit of never throwing anything away, even the most trifling object down to a newspaper in which something had caught his fancy. The first task therefore was to establish an inventory of what Picasso had left behind him and then to establish its value. A court-appointed , assessor was therefore named — the famous Paris auctioneer Maitre Maurice Rheims — who in turn recruited a team of six experts to help him. The totals they reached were staggering. The total value of the work that Picasso had left behind him was estimated at over £100 million and the number of Picasso works uncovered amounted to 1,885 paintings, 7,089 drawings, almost his total output of sculptures numbering 1,228 pieces, 3,222 ceramics and over 30,000 engravings. Basing themselves on these figures the court assessors estimated the death duties at roughly £29 million.
How to pay? Clearly the best way of doing so was to make the necessary donations to the state. To sell in order to raise the money would risk lowering the value of the remaining Picassos while, on the Other hand, to place a considerable • number of Picassos out of reach of the market would enhance it. A further obstacle arose at this point, and this was as to which Picassos would go to the heirs and which to the state. Were the heirs to Choose first or the state? On this question, the authorities were firm — their experts would choose first and the heirs could diVide up the rest among themselves. The result is that the state's share represents what might be described as a scholar's choice of Picassos — comprehensive and illustrating every phase of the Painter's development.
An argument is now developing as to Whether it would not be preferable to hold over the showing of the collection until its permanent home — the Hotel Sale — is ready to receive it in 18 months' lime. Then this great event would have, it IS argued, its maximum. impact. One can understand, however, the impatience of the authorities in the matter and their understandable pride in their achieveMent — an achievement in which scholarship, patience and legal cunning have all Played their part. It is no mean feat to chave settled among other things inter'Willy disputes sometimes amounting to downright hates in the six-year period since Picasso's death. Some of the terms, the settlement were very hard indeed !.or Jacqueline Picasso to swallow. She 'lad to accept not only the loss of some paintings to which she was sentimentally strongly attached, but also the bitter pill 21: the legitimisation of children whom Picasso in his lifetime had always refused !‘a recognise, Now these matters are t)ehind her, as are her husband's various Leuds with various French governments. ,une of the most bitter of these arose 'Zorn his expulsion from his studio in the _I(.ue des Grands-Augustins in the midFifties. It was at a time of great housing shortage in Paris, and the government d.secreed the requisitioning of all unused !hits, Picasso's fell into this category, and ,ne never forgave tile French for allowing !t to be sold. To such a point that years I.ater he boycotted a retrospective showing of his work at the Grand Pa lais organ ised by Afidre Malraux and refused the Legion of !ionour. He also went .back on a promise he had made to donate a large number of his il orks to French museums. Now, involuntat
he has done just that, and on a vaster scale than he could ever have envisaged.
Previous page
