A Chardin bargain?
October 31 2016

Picture: Christie's
Here's a puzzle; two pictures by Chardin which sold for $533,000 in New York in 2010 at Christie's were re-offered last week, also at Christie's, and made just $38,750. The difference? The all-important 'attributed to' in the cataloguing, suggesting uncertainty over the attribution.
In 2010 the pictures were sold as by Chardin in full. But this time around there seems to have been doubts, though these are not explained in any satisfactory way in the catalogue entry. The estimate was $80k-$120k, but a note in the catalogue said they would be sold 'without reserve', so evidently there were no bidders at the suggested estimate. The catalogue also stated that they belonged to Christie's itself. So perhaps something happened between the 2010 sale and now to make the previous buyer unhappy.
I'm no Chardin expert and couldn't begin to say if they look 'right' or not. But 'attributed to Chardin' is still better than, say, 'after' or 'studio of', and at a 92.7% discount on the former price, they begin to look like a rather attractive bet. I did ask for photos before the sale, but was never sent any.