At any rate, Enjoy :)

As to the Russian one - if DH were awake he could identify the Russian letters, but I don't know that alphabet. It's a beautiful painting, but almost immediately it disturbed me. Then it came to me - that is the black cloud of the Russian Revolution sweeping over the land, about to destroy the upper classes in general and the royal family in particular. The delicate china and the jewelry symbolize great wealth. It would be stunning in the office of a Russian history specialist, but would bother me in my own home!

Yes, that "Lammert" does remind me of Italy--I usually lean more toward earth tones but I really did like the brush strokes on it. So maybe it's just that it's such a typical scene...although even DH thinks he's seen it somewhere before...

Your reading of the Russian one is really interesting. It's *so* well done -- the brush strokes are almost invisible (except for a few places, and for the odd brush hair bit still stuck in the paint -- maybe three of them) -- and the shading is amazing. It struck DH as almost Dali-like. Your explanation makes a LOT of sense -- it's hard to read on which side the artist comes down, since the jewelry and the cup/saucer are beautiful, but what's destroying them is a force of eternal nature that made the beautiful mountains in the background (to which my eye is repeatedly drawn) , not a horrible manmade cataclysm, as I'd expect if the artist were anti-Communist. It was painted in '93, too (as I read it -- or it could be '73?), after the fall of the Soviet Union...but now you've given me more to think about. I was reading it much less specifically/allegorically.

My DH the artist, says that it is not painted in 1993, but he feels it is 1893. Have it appraised.

He does not recognize the painter of the other painting, but says it's a lovely painting in the impressionist style.

He would like to shop where you do. :)

Would you consider having it identified and appraised, as Homemaker suggested? If you're in an urban area, you could take it to a museum, or the art history department of a university, or to a good auction house (we had some of my parents' oils auctioned by Butterfield's, in San Francisco). The least they could do would be an "in the style of" ID.

Using nature as a metaphor for human events is very common in both art and literature (I know that you know that!). In The Plague, Albert Camus wrote about a North African city quarantined because of a devastating outbreak of bubonic plague; in reality, he was writing about Paris under Nazi occupation.

I have some ideas about the specific items of jewelry, but I'd better stop blathering now!

Sable, I know what you mean about the Bierstadt -- I love his work (saw a whole exhibit of it maybe a decade and a half ago at the Brooklyn Museum) and it definitely has that vibe in the upper left corner. I do wonder about actually placing it in the 19th c., though -- there just isn't enough age on the paint surface, iykwim. But I guess I could be wrong...but it just doesn't seem right to me. I think the Bierstadt-look is being invoked, or referenced, in the context of a more 20th c. commentary. Surrealism wasn't around until the 1920s. I think of Dali or DeChirico, invoking classical architecture and very 'painterly' techniques in their modernist images. I *could* be wrong and I'll be trying hard to find a local person who might know about Russian art enough to tell me what the heck this piece actually is!

Homemaker, please tell your husband thanks very much for his thoughts and knowledge. There's actually a lot of good work at thrifts around this time of year, btw, if he's really interested. This is when older folks move (and other folks too), rather than just people donating 'stuff' to Goodwill for the writeoff, as in the end of December.

So what are you thinking about the jewelry, sable?

IMO it does belong on the Antiques Roadshow.

About the jewelry - assuming that the painting is mid-twentieth century. I printed it out and spent some time studying it just because it got under my skin. So - the heavier ring symbolizes Czar Nicholas. It's a signet ring, which he would have used as a stamp. The simple band is the wedding ring of Czarina Alexandra and the ornate one is her favorite, a cabochon ruby. There is only one earring, never a good sign. She lost its mate at some time between her arrest and execution. The artist may truly be a White Russian, mourning the loss of the Romanov dynasty. Or he/she may simply have a sense of loss for Mother Russia.

One nice thing about retirement is that one has plenty of time to take a magnifying glass to a printout and let the imagination run wild. But it's a good story, isn't it?

The problem with finding something at Goodwill is that artists really don't want to have it known publicly that something of theirs ended up there. I have found some amazing things at local GWs here, including something by Zarina Hashmi (an artists' proof definitely by her, her signature, no two ways about it, very expensively framed, and enthusiastically acknowledged by an NYC gallery worker until I asked her to find out from Ms. Hashmi anything she could about the piece--suddenly she disappeared), an original oil by Bernard Ardouin (the one dealer I could find who represented him wouldn't reply when I sent pictures), two oil pastels by someone who disavowed knowledge of her works (she works in oil pastel and the signature was identical, well framed, etc.--but she's not well-enough known that it would be worth it for someone to try to forge her work)...we talked about it on a thread once and someone linked to the movie about a woman who came into possession of what very well may be a Jackson Pollock (although *that* would be worth forging) and the art world blew her off because of class prejudice. I think class prejudice is just a smokescreen for a very understandable fear concerning the relationship of price and 'aura' of original works of art, which also explains how provenance has come to be a prerequisite for value.

But I may just get up the nerve to take it in anyway. I can't find any Russian artists with the initials BP online (except Boris Pasternak LOL -- not the right 'art').

....?

I never thought about artists being embarrassed that their work might end up at Good Will! It makes sense, though.

DH and I did see Where in the H*11 is Jackson Pollack? and loved it. We cheered on the owner from the beginning. I found Thomas Hoving, ex-director of the Met, to be thoroughly obnoxious, rude, classist, and insulting. That's what so nice about Antiques Roadshow. They explain the importance of provenance very well, but also listen to everyone's story seriously.

Interesting how works of art inspire different "readings". I see that painting as tragic. Nicholas and his wife were not especially corrupt or cruel, they were stupid and uninterested in their people. They did not deserve their fate IMO, particularly considering what followed them. Exile - yes, savage execution - no. So if I look at the "Bierstadt aspect" of the picture, I see a very dark side of nature obscuring its light beauty. The force that is coming is punishing.

Have you (or anyone else here) ever watched the fine BBC series, The Private Life of a Masterpiece? On each program, three or four "masterpieces" of painting or sculpture are examined, with beautiful music and photography accompanying the experts' explanations. It's a exceptional series, enjoyable for anyone who's ever looked twice at any painting. Even DH, who is not an art person, was captivated. Rent it from Netflix or buy it on Amazon.

To complete this ramble: There's a neat scene in an episode of Law&Order: Criminal Intent. Goren and Eames are in a gallery, looking at a Monet (fake). Goren says "Too pretty." Eames says "Yes, but I could hang it on my wall." Goren replies "But I don't want to hang it. I want to think about it." In a later episode, looking at an un-pretty picture done in rusted metal (a clue to the killer), Eames says "Is this some of that art that you want to think about?" and Goren just grins. So I'm going to think about your picture, maybe hang the printout in our laundry room. Thanks for sharing it!

Send the photos to any auction house--they'll give you some idea as to origin, etc. The non-Russian one looks sort of pointillistic, but more like a student. The Russian one is very intriguing, and you might uncover a great story.

Bonhams here in LA is very helpful.

And yes, it is interesting about different possible readings of the same image. To my mind, N&A's ignorance/lack of care is criminal, as in "criminal neglect", when one is in a position of power and fails to take action for the betterment of those over whom one has claimed power. All that said, I'd believe my interpretation a whole lot more if the painting were dated '23 rather than '73 or '93 (unless it's 1893, but again there's not enough age on the surface, e.g. crazing, to make me think it's 1893), as it was still possible to hold the Revolution as an ideal rather than as the disappointment and betrayal it turned out to be.

lazygardens, I'm such a bad liar...but I'll take your advice under consideration :)

idee, Bonhams does look promising, although would they be interested in helping someone who's just asking about one painting? Don't feel like incurring the Snob Effect again...something interesting, at the website, I noticed that all the featured sales were from 2007. Wonder when we'll be heading back up toward those heights again...

(and I'm sure you're aware of how exclusionary, classist [or other 'ists'] behavior works -- Hoving could definitely be "terribly nice" to those whom he's not trying to exclude/whom he's trying to cultivate. The true test of anyone is how one treats people from whom one has nothing to gain, IMO.)

I will send the photos somewhere, maybe even Bonhams--thanks again for the link.