art by isherwood

nudes

admin — Sun, 01 Jan 2012 15:44:08 +0000

[Show as slideshow]

wigan

admin — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 17:46:34 +0000

[Show as slideshow]

seascapes

admin — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 17:34:14 +0000

[Show as slideshow]

You pay your money, you take your chance

bobw — Sun, 20 Nov 2011 16:54:49 +0000

The following is a description of a painting auctioned on ebay, item number 190585788558. It ended on the 15th October 2011, the item received 36 bids and winning bidder paid £657.77.
Potential bidders should have considered the following:
1, Does the seller know anything about J Lawrence Isherwood……….No, they admit to not knowing anything, they have just found out a little about him from the web and newspaper articles.
2, Do you have to know anything about the artist to sell one of his painting……….No
3, Are they stating that this is a genuine painting by J Lawrence Isherwood……….No, the seller is admitting they have no history or provenance for the painting and because of this reason, they are selling it as in the style or after Isherwood.
4, Is a painting sold as being in the style of, or after an artist usually a genuine painting by the artist it seems to be by………..No
5, Should the description start with………. J L Isherwood British artist, giving the impression that the painting is by this artist if it is being sold as after Isherwood.
6, Have you been misled…………Not if you read the description properly

The description………
J.L.ISHERWOOD BRITISH ARTIST (1917-1989)
THIS PAINTING IS OFFERED WITHOUT RESERVE . OIL ON BOARD.
I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE ARTIST APART FROM WHAT I HAVE MANAGED TO RESEARCH ON THE INTERNET AND FROM NEWSPAPER ARTICLES THAT I HAVE READ. IT IS CLEAR THAT HE WAS A POPULAR ARTIST IN THE NORTH WEST OF ENGLAND IN PARTICULAR IN WIGAN.
THE SUBJECT OF THIS PAINTING IS BOATS IN A HARBOUR OR AN INLET BESIDE LAND. ON THE VERSO THERE IS WRITING THAT READS FISHING BOATS THERE IS THE WORD MALTA AND ISHERWOOD TWICE. IN THE BOTTOM LEFT HAND CORNER THERE IS A SIGNATURE OF ISHERWOOD.
I HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING IF THIS IS A GENUINE PAINTING BY ISHERWOOD AS I HAVE NO HISTORY OR PROVENANCE, IT IS FOR THIS REASON THAT I MAKE IT VERY CLEAR THAT I AM SELLING THIS PAINTING IN THE STYLE OF OR AFTER ISHERWOOD.
GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR BIDDING.
DO FEEL FREE TO E-MAIL ME WITH ANY REASONABLE QUESTIONS OR SEE MY SITE FOR OTHER ITEMS FOR SALE..

Added 26th November 2011

Another couple of paintings added to ebay by the same seller using the same method of description have once again received many bids. The item numbers are 190603910632 sold for £195 and 190603912734 sold for £245, both listings finished 27th November 2011.

And yet another has gone on 2nd Dec 2011, item number 190609432028, this one is actually signed Isherwood.

On the 13 Dec 2011, another one has been listed from the same seller, item number 190614858185 . It has the same type of vague description starting with the Isherwood name and DOB etc. The painting has a signature of Isherwood, in kind of copied style, because of this, I have shown the painting below, but I am also putting in in the suspect gallery.

When thieves raided Isherwood’s home

bobw — Sat, 12 Nov 2011 23:30:29 +0000

It is well-known that throughout his life, Isherwood found it difficult to sell his paintings.
And so many were in his home in Wigan, it was impossible to discover if any had been stolen following a break-in.
The local evening paper – The Post and Chronicle – in the artist’s home town broke the story after police had made the theft public. At the time Isherwood was with Pat White, the woman he told the world he had married (he didn’t).
In a front page story (August 17, 1976) and under the heading “Mystery of the artist’s missing paintings” reporter Carl Brown wrote:
Mystery frames the fate of a top painter’s personal art collection.
The artist Jim Isherwood’s collection of the paintings he refuses to sell could have been stolen from his home while he is holding an exhibition in Malta.
But because the impressionist painter can’t leave the island to inspect his Wigan Lane home, no-one knows exactly what was taken in the raid
No-one is sure when he and his wife expect to be back in England.
Now, police in Wigan and the artist’s brother Gordon are awaiting his return to see if any paintings were taken.
Since they missed one flight back, the Isherwoods have decided to stay on while the artist works there.
For other reasons they cannot return until at least the middle of next week but Mr Isherwood is very worried about his collection.
The artist, who presented a portrait to Maltese Prime Minister Dom Mintoff last Friday is living in St Julian, Malta.
He said: “What has happened to my set of paintings is a mystery. I have refused to sell many of them. My paintings have always meant more to me than cash – some are off Old Wigan, which I have refused to sell.
The problem still facing the painter, who has been appearing on Malta TV and radio, is that there is no way of solving the mystery until he gets home.
His brother Gordon said: “I honestly don’t know what was in the house. I made it safe after the police informed me of the break-in. Now we have to await the arrival of my brother.”
A police spokesman said: “We are investigating but have no details of what, if anything was stolen.”
A follow up story did not appear in subsequent editions of the paper.
But in the edition of the Post and chronicle for October 13, 1977, a photo of Isherwood and his “wife” appeared on page 9 and a story under the headline “Artist finds home ransacked twice while on tour.
The story read
Painter Lawrence Isherwood and his wife Pat returned to their Wigan home to find thieves had stolen hundreds of pounds worth of property.
While they were abroad, the intruders broke in and stole valuable vases, a grandfather clock, small paintings and other items leaving the house “as though a bomb had hit it.”
Mr Isherwood said the house was littered and strewn with ornaments and clothing.
He said: “We are totally stunned. But the neighbours will be keeping an extra watch from now on.”
They are only two of a string of burglaries to hit the Isherwoods.
But the calamities have not marred their new life together, Mrs Isherwood said. For some time they have been touring Italy, Malta and Spain, where Mr Isherwood has held exhibitions of his impressionist paintings which he achieves with palette knife and brush. Mrs Isherwood has occasionally displayed some of her paintings which she does in an amateur capacity.
Mr Isherwood said: “My next show is at Magdalen College, Oxford, beginning November 14 for a week. But I have several other venues in mind.”
The Magdalen event is special because it is Mr Isherwood’s 200thshow and it coincides with the couple’s second wedding anniversary.
Mrs Isherwood spoke of their plans for the future. She said: “We are hoping to divide our time between Wigan and Malta eventually.”

Isherwood at Christmas

bobw — Sat, 12 Nov 2011 22:49:22 +0000

Following the death of his mother, Jim Isherwood spent some Christmas days alone. One diary entry reads: “Got up at 3. Fed the birds. Painted 11 pictures.”
At times like this, he wallowed in his own sad company.
But not all festive days were lonely as Molly Isherwood, his sister-in-law testifies.
She remembers: “When his mother was alive, we’d try to arrange Christmas Day so that all the family would be together. Jim and Mother Lily usually came, but when they did, they turned everything into chaos. The meal would be timed for 3 o’clock. Everything would be ready but they didn’t arrive. They’d no phone so we couldn’t check that they were on their way.
“Then they’d arrive after six, both the worse for drink and sometimes arguing. My job was to try and calm them down. I would achieve this by getting them more drinks. There would be presents to open, but they never seemed over the moon whatever we’d bought for them.
“By the time we sat down for our Christmas meal the air had grown merry and friendly, although I always felt on a knife-edge. Most of the time I felt like an ‘also ran’ because the conversation would between Mother Lily and her two sons. They’d become sentimental talking about Christmases past…and still the drink flowed.
“I remember the room would be very warm as the night wore on and then I’d make some sandwiches. Having arrived late, it was as though they didn’t want to go.
“Oh we’re not going yet” Mother Lily would say. “We’re settled. It’s Christmas. Nothing’s spoiling.’
“Sometimes there’s be a little argument over a silly point, not worth considering really and I would defuse the situation by saying: ‘Well I think Mother Lily’s right.” I always had to know the right thing to say and it helped make for a quieter, happier evening.
“As the day melted into the next, Jim and Mother Lily would start to nod off and I’d start the washing up, being as quiet as possible so as not to wake them.
“Eventually, they would stir into life and say they’d better get going. After one do, he drove the van along the lane and right across the main road into the hedge. He just reversed and carried on.”

1972 Letter

bobw — Sun, 30 Oct 2011 23:19:47 +0000

The following transcript is of a letter Isherwood sent to his friends Molly and Keith Routledge, below this is a copy of the actual letter in Isherwood’s hand. It gives an insight into just how Isherwood was feeling at that time.

151 W L (Wigan Lane)

28.12.72

Dear Molly and Keith

Thanks much for card and letter. Enclosed sketch. Just returned from 4 weeks in my bedroom at Ox (Oxford)

Good show planned there for May 8 1973. But feel jiggered now. Am TRYING to rest before I to my show

at Southport Scarisbrick Hotel.

You shouldn’t send me anything! please! Sorry I’ve not sent you any pictures – but will all being well.

It’s been a long weary 1972. I still feel about Mother Lily mainly. I don’t know how I’ve managed to keep

on – & on.

I’ve 3 oils in Betrand Russell Centenary Exibit open tomorrow at Rotunda Gallery Finchly Road for 2 wks

with Shann, Miro, Sutherland. Hockney etc

??? in 2 0f Mother Lily.

I should have gone to preview today but haven’t the energy (OR CASH)

Yours Jim in haste

Love Ishy

Memories of Keith and Molly Routledge

bobw — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 17:05:35 +0000

Our Memories of Jim Isherwood
I first met Jim, and his mother Lily, in 1966 during one of his shows at Trinity College, Cambridge. My first impression was of a man whose softly spoken and self-effacing character was a refreshing change to the increasingly brash and fast-pace world of the sixties that we were all becoming increasingly caught up in. My wife joined me at Cambridge in 1967 and we both got to know them both very well over the next two years. I helped him to organise his shows at Cambridge in 1968/69 and still have copies of his publicity material entitled “The Paintings of J. Lawrence Isherwood 1955-1966”. This material quotes many complimentary reviews of his work dating back to that time and some of the controversy that followed him.
Jim‟s world was his painting and his mother; they seemed inseparable. We have many fond memories of them both. Jim always insisted that Lily was his inspiration and the ultimate judge of his work, and that, in his words, she was the „power‟ behind his paintings. Jim would sometimes fuss around Lily and she would tell him off, in her quiet but determined manner. Whilst she was not an obviously dominant force behind Jim, if he did something of which she disapproved, or met someone that she did not like, maybe even a potential customer, she would tell him so.
At that time, his shows had become an annual event when he would commandeer a student’s room at different colleges to show his paintings. However, it was no ordinary show. When you walked into the room, every conceivable space would be used to prop up pictures, many of them stacked against chairs or other items of furniture for people to browse through. All of the paintings were on hardboard and on the back of each one was a price, typically 80 guineas (always guineas), which he would explain was the gallery price. His asking price at the college shows was about one tenth of his declared gallery price. His mother, Lily, used to sit and occasionally pass comment on a particular painting. Jim was heavily guided by Lily. If she thought a painting was worth more that he was asking, then it had to be sold for more. There was one painting of Lily that he would not sell under any circumstances.
Jim was a passionate and prolific artist. His sole purpose in life was to paint and everything else he did was to that end. Sometimes a painting would take several days; sometimes it would take a few minutes. I remember him saying that however long it took depended on the „power‟ or passion that he felt at the time. He wanted to catch ‘the mood’ of his subject as he saw it and sometimes it would take several attempts before he was satisfied. This is one of the reasons why you see examples of similar paintings of the same subject. He liked to experiment and produced many paintings with „rain‟ and „atmospheric‟ effects. He also painted a lot of London scenes in blue, which were very popular, and in yellow because he knew that he could sell them.
Jim sometimes spoke about the recognition that other artists had achieved but which had somehow passed him by. Interestingly, he also recognised that he would not be
able to deal with the trappings of recognition if it ever came his way and that it would impose intolerable pressures on his way of life since it was this, and Lily‟s influence, that provided the „power‟ behind his paintings. In his words, he would probably ‘drink himself silly and end up in the gutter’.
This desire for recognition became more apparent whenever he talked about L. S. Lowry, who, I believe, he met at Art College. Jim felt that his own work was as good as, if not better than, Lowry‟s. As if to prove it, he painted a small number of paintings which he „signed‟ as L S Lowry. I have a couple of these paintings, one is titled „Man after Woman‟ in black and white and another, one of his favourites, has no title but shows four children holding hands and with the L.S.Lowry name at the bottom.
Jim had a mischievous side to him that became increasingly apparent when you got to know him well. His more outrageous pictures of celebrities and nudes were a diversion for him, a bit of fun at the expense of the establishment and some publicity for him. Jim would also cheekily make it known that he was looking for nude models because of his „fascination for painting skin‟. He liked to tell people of the good and famous who had bought his pictures. However, he also confided and showed me where, out of devilment, he had added inappropriate appendages to the figures in his ‘Rain Wigan Labour Exchange’ painting. He chuckled at the thought of some well-to-do people hanging a picture on their wall which was not all that it appeared. I now have that painting hanging on our wall. It reminds me not only of Jim the artist but of Jim the man behind the artist.
I remember him telling us of an incident that demonstrates the uniqueness of the man. When he was found guilty of a traffic offence in court and ordered to pay a fine by the judge, he explained that he did not have the money to pay the fine but offered a picture to the judge instead. The judge declined but one of the other legal representatives took up the offer and bought the picture to pay the fine. Who else would do that in court?
One enduring memory of Jim was his amazing generosity. At the end of each day of his show, he would insist that all of his helpers joined him and Lily at his favourite Chinese restaurant opposite Parkers Piece where he would treat us all to the best food and wine. He would be most upset if any of us insisted that we pay our way. However, after much persuasion, Molly and I eventually managed to convince him and Lily to have a meal with us at our flat. On arrival, they made themselves at home and Jim produced a bottle of whisky out of his jacket pocket. After a very entertaining meal and quite a few drinks, Lily managed to disgrace herself, much to Jim‟s embarrassment, but it all added up to a very enjoyable evening when they could at least relax outside of their normal on-the-road environment. We had a great evening and a sore head the following day.
Our final memory of Jim and Lily was seeing them drive away in their old battered van after the final show at Cambridge in 1969 before we moved away. We kept in touch for a few years and still have a letter from him dated December 1972 where it was clear that he was still feeling the loss of Mother Lily who died in 1971. However, soon after
that we lost contact. Our lives were moving in different directions as I become one of the „faceless ones‟, that he much derided, always in a hurry and driving around in posh cars.
At the end of the day, whatever lives we choose to lead, it was his passion for painting and the humility and generosity of the man that we will always remember through the paintings that still hang on our walls.
Keith and Molly Routledge

Altered Painting

bobw — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 16:06:26 +0000

Once again the fire-damaged paintings are making an appearance but this time with a new and very disturbing twist. The picture shown here has been deliberately and materially altered from the original. The fire-damaged picture at auction had severe damage to the right hand side and cutting away this damage would have removed the original Isherwood signature.

This altered picture was offerd in exchange for a genuine painting, owned by a local collector. The collector was a friend and after seeing the original article on the web site, about the fire paintings sold at Capes Dunn in early December, brought it to us for an opinion, as the picture he had just acquired seemed to have been restored.

The painting he had been offered and which he had exchanged, even receiving a written receipt for it, had in fact been cut down and restored, removing the original signature. The size now is 10 x 10 when the size at auction was larger at 10 x 14. A fake signature and date had then been added to the left hand side of the picture and also on the left hand side, another figure inserted, which did not appear in the original painting. The legs on the dog in the centre of the painting had also been thickened. The collector has informed us, that he was not told these alterations were false, during the initial transaction.

The alteration and restoration is very well executed and has possibly been done by an accomplished artist. Without the back up evidence it would be impossible to know these alterations were not genuine.

Restoring any damaged painting is acceptable and sometimes necessary, even the ‘Mona Lisa’ has been restored, but the material alteration of a painting, by adding a totally fake signature and amending the original composition and then passing these alterations off as genuine, is not.

Cut down the painting would still have been an Isherwood without a signature but with back up catalogue evidence as to its authenticity. Admittedly, in this state, its value would have been significantly reduced but it would still be an Isherwood. Restored and framed it would possibly command a higher value than when it was damaged. Now it is just an Isherwood with a fake signature and fake figure. Anyone can do what they like to a painting they own, as long as they do not then pass it off, into the market, as genuine and without raising attention to any alterations.

Let us hope this is an isolated case of new, fake or altered paintings appearing for sale.

The increase in the number of Isherwood collectors, coupled with their memory and database records will stop thes paintings getting through to the market in the future.

We are informed, the seller in this transaction, has now fully recompensed the collector to his satisfaction. If the sale of this painting was an error, as claimed by the seller, it was a shame it was not corrected before the complaint was brought to the sellers attention by the customer, and only after he was confronted with the evidence, four days after the sale had been completed.

Both the painting sold at auction and the altered painting are illustrated below, to show and prove the differences.

To restore or not?

bobw — Thu, 10 Mar 2011 23:24:42 +0000

I suppose you can look at the restoration of a painting in two different ways. The first being, don’t, it should be left just as it is. Let the painting speak for itself. The second being, bring the painting back to its former glory.
I think I come down on the side of leave it, but who am I to say which is right. I have seen sympathetically restored paintings, that have only needed a little work to help them and I have seen what I would say have been overly restored, where in my opinion too much has changed from the original painting, almost making it a new painting.
An Isherwood was sold through auction un-restored, and not long after, came back onto the market again, only this time it was restored.
Both images have been taken from the web, so colours cannot be guaranteed. You can make your own mind up as to what you think.

. .