August 2008
(to July 2008 )

Pietro Psaier?

During the past year or so I have had a few enquiries about an artist, Pietro Psaier, who has been linked to Andy Warhol. It is my belief that this artist never existed and certainly was never involved with Warhol. He was concocted in order to sell works which are sometimes similar to those of Warhol and may even have involved unauthorized use of some of his silk screens.

The Warhol museum has evidently been contacted in regard to this "artist" as well. Matt Wrbican, the archivist of The Warhol, had this to say about Psaier on a discussion page in Wikipedia on March 18, 2008: "Another troubling matter is the reference to Pietro Psaier. As custodian of Warhol's archives, I can state unequivocally that I have never seen any reference to this person in them. It's my belief that his alleged friendship/collaboration is a complete sham and hoax, and I would really love to have that belief shattered with indisputable hard evidence."
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?title=Talk:Andy_Warhol)

No hard evidence has ever been offered to prove that Pietro Psaier existed let alone worked with Warhol. The problem is that works bearing his name continue to be sold in the U.K. For instance John Nicholsons Auctioneers is holding an auction of works supposedly by Psaier on Wednesday, September 17th. (See http://www.johnnicholsons.com/da/56037)

A blurb on the John Nicholsons site about Psaier repeats the same unproven facts that appear elsewhere on the web, claiming that Psaier was part of the Factory and collaborated with Warhol. A photograph is also reproduced on the site which is supposed be of Warhol and Psaier.

fake photo of Warhol and Psaier

The photograph looks suspicious. The perspective is slightly wrong. Psaier is supposed to be sitting next to Warhol but he appears to be seated further back, looking not at Warhol but behind Warhol's head. A section of the black space between the two is too black. It looks like two photographs spliced together. No photo credit is offered on the website. However, even if it is a legitimate photo, it does not constitute proof that the person on the left is named Psaier or that he and Warhol had anything to do with each other.

I emailed John Nicholsons Auctioneers with my doubts on the veracity of their claims in their blurb and have received no reply. In the meantime their auction is due to go ahead on September 17th.

On July 19th I was emailed by someone named Paul Sullivan who said he was doing research on an artist by the name of Pietro Psaier who had died in the tsunami, who was "apparently an associate of Andy Warhol" and he wanted to know if I knew anything about him. I emailed him back with my doubts about Psaier's existence. I then learned that Paul Sullivan was part of a supposed film company, PSI Films who say they are doing a documentary on Psaier. Their website is at: http://psifilms.com. The executive producer of the supposed documentary is named as Jacqueline Chapman.

Trawling through the internet I found another mention of Jacqueline Chapman in regard to Psaier. After a Times article on a legal case involving the Andy Warhol Authentication Board, a comment has been posted by Jacqueline Chapman in which she touts the greatness of Psaier as an artist. The article is at: http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/visual_arts/article2093753.ece. (Scroll down for Chapman's comment. If you click on "Read all comments" you will also see that there is a previous comment by Paul Sullivan.)

Chapman writes: "The Factory produced hundreds of artworks. Collaborating with Warhol on those works were Pietro Psaier and Rupert Jasen Smith. Jasen Smith was a talented artist in his own right and known as Warhol's printer. However, Pietro Psaier was and is recognised as the superior artist of the three..."

In reaction to Chapman's comment there is another by someone who writes, "I think you're right Jacqueline, Pietro Psaier was by far the best artist yet his art makes nothing compared to Warhol's. At John Nicholson's last auction Psaiers were going for as little as £100! I can't wait for their next auction on 27th September."

This seems to be a not very well disguised effort to hype Nicholson's auction of Psaier's supposed work. Coming as it did in reaction to Jacqueline Chapman's comment (who works for PSI Films who are making the supposed documentary) I wondered whether there was any relation between PSI and Nicholson's auctioneers. I obtained the registration details for both John Nicholsons and PSI's websites. Both websites are registered in the same town - Haslemere, Surrey.

Nicholsons is not the only outlet selling work by Psaier. A gallery in Northern Ireland called Coloured Rain has sold numerous works by him which they have listed on three pages of their website at: http://www.colouredrain.com/category.asp?CatID=136&Offset=6.

This is an image of one of the works they credit to Psaier:

Fake Psaier painting

The blurb about the work notes "THIS WORK IS A PROOF and believed unpublished on wood. THE STUDIO PSAIER WORK IS FROM A FACTORY ADDITIONS SCREEN, COST IN 1981 $3700. Signed."

But there is no "Studio Psaier." If it was made from a Factory Additions screen it was done so without permission. I emailed the gallery on July 19th and have received no response.

Another work is being sold by a company called Qui Arte titled Cover-up in Dallas which is supposedly signed by both Warhol and Psaier. It is listed at: http://www.quiarte.com/15201.html?*session*id*key*=*session*id*val*

This is the image of it from their web page:

fake warhol psaier

It is of course impossible to see the signature from the image. In the blurb for the work, Qui Arte notes the following:

"In the seventies, Andy Warhol worked with Pietro Psaier (1936-2004) in New York at his studio “The Factory”. The present work is a Proof Factory 1975 edition.

LITERATURE: Feldman & J. Schellmann, Andy Warhol Prints A Catalogue Raisonné 1962-1987, 4th Edition, 2003; A. Boatto Warhol, 2002; Europa Press Pietro Psaier, 2005"

I sent an email to the company objecting to the work as a collaboration and also pointed out that it is not mentioned in the prints cat. rais. as they seem to indicate. In regard to the second literature citation I have been unable to find any trace of it and the publisher listed, Europa Press, folded in 1939. I have received no response to my email and the company is still listing the work as for sale.

The above are only some of the companies selling work by this supposed artist. Currently on Ebay is a work with the heading "Pietro Psaier Original Clarice Cliff Art Deco" and is described as an "Artist's proof with Clarice Cliff as the subject." The description goes on to note that the work was "obtained recently from the estate of Pietro Psaier." Pietro Psaier did not have an estate because he never existed. Clarice Cliff is very popular in the U.K. and I suspect that this is an effort to include her name in a work so that people searching Ebay for Clarice Cliff on Ebay will be directed to the listing. I have informed Ebay and they are investigating.

Much of the information regarding Psaier is included on a Wikipedia page that someone has concocted without any basis in fact. Reading it carefully the people and places they refer to no longer exist in most cases. Wiki has tagged the article with the notation "This article does not cite any references or sources. (May 2007)" but they continue to display it. The article is at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pietro_Psaier.

There is one reference included at the bottom of the page: The Independent Sept. 11, 1997. I have managed to find that article online although have not checked with The Independent to see if it actually did appear in the newspaper. It is rather strange and does not include any biographical details at all. Here it is:

Science Museum buys Warhol's Old Sparky

An electric chair once owned by pop artist Andy Warhol yesterday sold at auction for pounds 4,800. In a few minutes brisk and tense bidding, London's Science Museum secured the chair over an anonymous telephone bidder from California in the sale at Bristol Auction Rooms.

The all-steel chair was once owned by California's Department of Penal Correction. It was the main item in more than 30 lots of pop art memorabilia associated with Warhol. It had a guide price of pounds 2,000-pounds 4,000.

The 61-year-old chair was in the prison system, including the infamous Alcatraz, St Quentin and Chino. Its role was more of a visual deterrent than of lethal purpose. Warner Bros used it as a film prop in the fifties. It featured in Inside the Walls of Folsom Prison, Crimewave, and Alfred Hitchcock's I Confess. Warhol acquired it later and was said to have used it to watch horror films at home. His associate, Pietro Psaier, included it in a 1970s joint exhibition of their work when it was christened Rest in Peace: Pax. Two frock-coated characters from the London Dungeon Museum of Horrors - Mr Death and his assistant - had hoped to bid for the chair, with their bidding card appropriately numbered 666. But Mr Death - Peter Osborne, 29 - never got a bid in as his top price of pounds 4,000 was the starting point for the bidding. Science Museum curator, Neil Brown, said that it was hoped to exhibit the Warhol chair within six to ten months in the medical collection. He said: "We understand it was used in at least one American institution for executions. It is part of history and the Science Museum deals not only with the nice things but the nasty bits as well. And the electric chair was certainly one of the nasty bits." Some American states still rely on an electric chair for their executions.
(http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_19970911/ai_n14132287)

As far as I'm aware there never was a joint exhibition of the work of Andy Warhol and Psaier in the 1970s. The article does not say where the information came from and cannot be used to legitimise the existence of Psaier as it does not give the source of the information. I have not been in touch with the Science Museum to verify the purchase. The article is as nebulous as the Wiki entry. No author is listed for the news item. In any case it is a far stretch from a short unverified article to the claims made on the Wiki page.

Psaier's works have only started appearing since Psaier supposedly died in the tsunami (his body was never found). Some of the sites which include his work refer to him as one of the greats of the 60s Pop Art movement, but how could he have been if there were no exhibitions of his work? It is highly suspicious that his work is only appearing now. And why, if he was a Pop Artist in the United States, is most of his work appearing in the U.K.?

to July 2008