MONDRIAN - Case Study

THE SECOND LIFE OF COMPOSITION No. II - Composition er Rouge Bleu et Jaune 1930

Contents

1 - INTRODUCTION

2 - THE STORY

2.1 - Execution of the painting (B217 - B219 - B222)

2.2 - Sketch in gouache on cardboard (B219a new addition 2006)

2.3 - Similar works, never identical

2.4 - Paris - Stockholm - Basel - Copenhagen

2.4.1 - PARIS

2.4.2 - STOCKHOLM

2.4.3 - BASEL AND VARIATIONS TO THE PAINTING

2.4.3a - A brief analysis of the variations

2.4.4 - COPENHAGEN

2.4.4a - Mondrian in Scandinavia

2.5 - Only one photo of (B219) Composition No. II from 1930 to 1951 and many reproductions

3 - PROVENANCE FROM 1930 TO 1950

4 - CONCLUSIONS

by FRANCESCO VISALLI

The history of the painting (B219) “Composition No. II - Composition en rouge, bleu et jaune, 1930” is quite singular, a true adventure dense with pathos and mystery that made this painting unique and priceless.

A key stage in the whole affair is the post-Cubist Art Concret exhibition held on the occasion of the 1930 Stockholm Exhibition. The research has focused more on this event as the failed outcome and subsequent developments probably prompted Mondrian to make some fundamental changes on the painting, making it one of the most iconic works of his production. In a sense, it can be said that Otto G. Carlsund, unknowingly, was the cause.

(Titles and Coding of works discussed refer to Robert Welsh and Joop Joosten’s 1998 Catalogue Raisonné)

The research, which was conducted in several stages between 2019 and 2022, achieved two main results: the first concerns establishing that Mondrian altered the painting; the second concerns the “gap” in Provenance for the period 1938 to 1950. The research also involved another work, the title of which is very similar to the previous one, (B222) “Composition II, with Red, Blue, and Yellow, 1930”, in that from 1930 to 1937 it traveled in tandem with (B219) “Composition No. II - Composition en rouge, bleu et jaune, 1930”; then in 1950, according to the Catalogue Raisonné, both were acquired by the Sidney Janis Gallery (perhaps at the same time or a short time apart); subsequently, on same occasions, they were exhibited side by side (Fig. 1).

However, as we shall see in the chapter on “Provenance,” the work (B219) most likely in 1950 was not acquired by the Sidney Janis Gallery, but by the Rose Fried Gallery.

Very important is the first result: the work (B219) “Composition No. II - Composition en rouge, bleu et jaune, 1930” has been modified. Originally the lines were thicker.

It all started by analyzing the image reproduced in the catalog of the 1930 Stockholm “Art Concret” exhibition - the first time the work was photographed - compared with the second photo in chronological line, taken at the 1951 “Some Areas of Search” exhibition at the Rose Fried Gallery (Fig. 2 - Fig. 3)

In magenta the reduction of the lines

Inevitable is the question: what happened in the long period between 1930 and 1951? It is probably the question that no one had ever asked until now, and simply because of a trivial oversight, the change in the painting went unnoticed.

Having ascertained the transformation, historical reconstruction and contextualization of events also made it possible to determine the period in which the change is presumed to have occurred. More daring, perhaps, is the attempt to interpret Mondrian’s action: why did he modify the painting?

This question is not easy to answer. History has taught that with Mondrian absolute assertions should be avoided. Some fixed points, historical cornerstones, have been disproved even many years later. Somehow Mondrian always finds a way to surprise.

As we shall see later, the case of (B219) Composition No. II can be considered exceptional, to the extent that it makes this work unique. However, it should be pointed out that the identification of the period when the painting was altered, however plausible, is based on interpretations and deductions drawn from various documents and historical references.

It is certainly nothing new to find variations in Mondrian’s paintings. It is a creative process that on many occasions - all documented - he applied. In most cases one can speak of “changes in progress,” that is, transformations performed on works that had remained in Mondrian’s studio, “on the easel,” even though the changes were made after a time lapse.

More rare are the cases in which a work had begun a “public life”, through exhibitions or had already been consigned for sale. Emblematic, for example, are the cases of the so-called “Transatlantic Paintings”.

Two main chapters are outlined below: the historical reconstruction, with some intermediate evaluations and the investigation inherent to Provenance.

2.1 - Execution of the painting (B217 - B219 - B222)

In late 1929 and early 1930, Mondrian made two very similar paintings, (B217) Composition with Red, Blue and Yellow 1930 and (B219) Composition No. II - Composition en rouge, bleu et jaune, 1930.

They differ only in size (46 x 46 the former and 51 x 51 the latter) and in the balance of compositional proportions.

The first painting (B217) was made at the request of architect Alfred Roth, after an amiable correspondence that began in September 1929 and a down payment of 800 Francs on the agreed price of 1,500 Francs. Roth had asked for a small work, maximum 40 cm on a side, so that it could be easily transported. The work was finished on January 30, 1930, but Roth did not pick it up at Mondrian’s studio until the end of February. In March Alfred Roth traveled to Sweden taking the painting with him. In Gothenburg (Stora Gärda), as early as 1928, he had opened his first studio in partnership with Arch. Ingrid Wallberg, the Swedish sister-in-law of Le Corbusier’s brother whom he had met in Le Corbusier’s office in Paris. He would stay here until mid-November, at which time Roth finished his work and decided to return to Switzerland (detailed narrative contained in “Begegnung mit Pionieren” by Alfred Roth, 1973 and “Alfred Roth - Amusante Erlebnisse eines Architekten”, 1988).

The second work, made almost simultaneously with the first, remained with Mondrian.

These two works are the obvious evolution of an earlier very similar composition (even in title) made between August and October 1929: (B212) Composition II, with Red, Blue, Black, and Yellow 1929 (Fig. 5). A 45 cm square canvas already exhibited in Barcelona at la Galeries Dalmau between October and November 1929, on the occasion of the exhibition “Expositió d’Art Modern National i Estranger”. In 1931, the painting arrived at the “Narodni Muzej Beograd” as a donation from the Committee for the Propagation of Knowledge of Dutch Art in Yugoslavia (now Serbia), where it is still kept today.

This is a compositional scheme that Mondrian applied with some insistence in those months, varying the color distribution and slightly changing the position of the lines: for example in B207, B214, B216. Completely different works in aesthetic result, but when purged of color, the “graphic” basis is the same. A pattern to which he would return again during 1930 and in 1932, with two more works: B220 and B235.

In the same period he also worked concurrently on another composition based on a vertical pattern: (B222) “Compostion II, with Red, Blue, and Yellow, 1930” (Fig. 6). This is an evolution of an earlier composition, (B201) “Large Composition with Red, Blue, and Yellow, 1928”, larger in size and with more vertically accentuated proportions.

Overall, these are compositions generated from a pencil sketch he had worked up in early 1929 (Fig. 7)

In the three compositions, B217 - B219 - B222, Mondrian’s desire to use black lines with a greater thickness than usual is evident. The proportional relationship between the thickness of the lines and the size of the canvas, provides a more pronounced visual impact.

2.2 - Sketch in gouache on cardboard (B219a new addition 2006 - Fig. 8)

Of fundamental importance is the small drawing Mondrian gave to his friend Jean Xceron, in which a work quite similar to B217 and B219 is depicted. This is a rare example, better said the only example, of a well-defined sketch as opposed to the usual pencil study sketches that Mondrian used to make.

According to Hans Janssen (Mondriaan in het Gemeentemuseum Den Haag, 2008, p. 244) the gift of the sketch to Xceron was in thanks for an article dedicated to Mondrian that Xceron had written on August 12, 1929 in the Chicago Tribune newspaper (Who’s

Who Abroad – Fig. 9)

By 1927 Xceron had moved from the United States to Paris, where he wrote articles for the Boston Evening Transcript and the Paris edition of the Chicago Tribune to support himself. He would return to the U.S. in 1937.

Xceron probably visited Mondrian’s studio in the summer of 1929 while he was preparing his article. On this occasion it is likely that they also talked regarding the composition represented in the sketch. According to Janssen, this sketch is a rare example of the colorful sketches Mondrian made to prepare new compositions and series of works.

The text “Rot, Gelb und Blau” written at the top suggests that it was written before Mondrian applied the colors, as if to record an appointment with a German-speaking client. It could have been Swedish painter Otto Carlsund, who organized an exhibition, or architect Alfred Roth who wanted to purchase a work. Probably Mondrian only signed the drawing when he gave it to Xcéron. Not only did he affix a signature and dedication in cursive, but he also affixed the usual ‘PM’ followed by the year in the drawing itself.

However, Roth expressed willingness to purchase a Mondrian painting with the first letter dated September 6, 1929, and Carlsund organized the exhibition in June 1930. Thus, assuming that this is a preparatory sketch, it is likely that the German text refers to a possible meeting with Roth (by the way, both Roth and Carlsund spoke perfect French).

Undoubtedly the gouache painted sketch is a unique example in Mondrian’s creative process. It differs markedly from the usual pencil sketches that he prepared (as an example the one in Fig. 7).

If you look closely, you can see that the basic drawing was traced very precisely, using a ruler and not freehand. There is also meticulousness in the calculation of proportions evidenced by the presence of the numbers 3 and 10 at the top and in the color composition with color annotations (in French): bleu at the bottom left, rouge at the right, blanc at the left.

It seems to be the most advanced stage of an initial idea; it is a more defined step, a kind of evolution of an already realized composition.

A key element is the thickness of the lines. On the whole, they appear thin compared to the proportion of the drawing; they differ markedly from the thickness of the lines that Mondrian used for the painting intended for Roth (B217) and also from the First Version of (B219) Composition II.

If this is a preparatory sketch, it means that initially Mondrian was thinking of adopting thinner lines, more similar to the work B212 (Fig. 5). A work was made between August and October 1929.

Roth expresses his desire to have a composition in red, with some blue and some yellow, in his letter of September 17, 1929. It is likely that Mondrian made the sketch somewhere around the second half of September.

If, as Janssen surmises, Mondrian added the initials PM 30 at the time he gave the sketch to Xceron, he must have given it to him subsequent to the creation of works B217 and B219 (both dated 1930). It is not unimagineable that Mondrian gave the sketch as a gift on the occasion of the Cercle et Carré exhibition in April 1930. In the second issue of the magazine, in addition to Mondrian’s introductory essay (l’Art Réaliste et l’Art Superréaliste - la Morphoplastique et la Néoplastique) there is also a statement by Xceron. Furthermore, Jean Xceron, despite not having participated in the exhibition, probably attended the opening. In the historic group photo (Fig. 10) the third one on the left should be him. Or it could be in 1931 when Mondrian attended the opening of Xcéron’s exhibition at the Galerie de France. In the same year, Xcéron wrote an important article on Neo-Plasticism for The New Review (Neo-Plasticisme or Elementarist Art).

Mondrian and Xceron would meet again in New York for example in 1942 at the famous “Master of Abstract Art” exhibition in Helena Rubenstein’s gallery.

About the thickness of the lines, which in paintings B217 and B219 are thicker than in the sketch, remains an unknown of difficult interpretation.

2.3 - Similar works, never identical

The case of pairs of very similar paintings (however, never perfectly identical) is not fortuitous and isolated. This was an artistic signature that repeatedly characterized Mondrian’s path. In some cases he repeats the same composition, both in line and color distribution. Most obvious examples: B136 - B138; B256 - B267, as well as the aforementioned B217 - B219. In other cases there is only a slight difference: B203 - B206 (albeit mirrored); B171 - B174; B183 - B189; B204 - B213; B208 - B236; B223 - B224; B251 - B253.

Then there are cases where a series of works are based on the same compositional scheme (line drawing), within which the color composition and alternating thickness of lines and segments varies. The most obvious case is the pair B204 - B213: between 1929 and 1932 Mondrian returned to this composition ten times (B215, B221, B225, B227, B228, B230, B231, B232, B233, B234). A “therapeutic overkill”, a kind of almost obsessive creative delirium in search of the absolute. Each variation always leads to the same result: “dynamic equilibrium.”

But even in the naturalistic period, on several occasions, he had moments centered on the same subject. The most striking case is the “Farm at/near Duivendrecht”: 17 works including oils, charcoals, pencils and chalks, made between 1905-1908 and 1916-17, all depicting the same subject observed from the same position.

The Romantic interpretation highlights the correlation with the seriality of the naturalistic period: the figurative succession of the landscape at different times of the day and night, or the alternation of the seasons with their chromatic variations of light and shadow, is transposed into the abstract vision. It seems that behind each composition of the 12 mentioned above are hidden as many versions of the farm represented through the different compositions of the colored planes alternating with the white surfaces.

This analysis, repeatedly addressed in the past, for example in 1968 with John Coplans’ “Serial Imagery,” aims to extrapolate the exceptionality of (B219) Composition No. II. This is the only work, among the very similar “serial” works, that Mondrian modified at a distance of time.

2.4 - Paris - Stockholm - Basel - Copenhagen

2.4.1 - PARIS

For Mondrian the period of his second stay in Paris (1920 - 1937) were not exciting years in terms of feedback and exhibitions.

His fame had crossed the Atlantic Ocean and was spreading more and more in Europe. Especially in Germany, he had found admirers and a thriving market for his art: in Private Collections, Museums and Galleries. Not in the last thanks to the considerable support of Sophie Lissitzky Küppers.

In contrast, in Paris he “made do” with even short-lived less-than-exciting exhibitions in order to show his work. At the same time he adhered to, or simply participated in, the initiatives of the various artistic groups and movements that were forming at that time: “Cercle et Carré,” founded in 1929 by Michel Seuphor and Joaquin Torres Garcia; the rival group “Art Concret,” founded by Theo van Doesburg at the turn of 1929-1930; “Abstraction Création,” also with van Doesburg and Herbin the following year. Or almost forgotten associations such as “Association Artistique 1940” at the turn of 1931-32, as well as the “Cercle Artistique de Paris” created by Léopold van Oijen around 1931 at the Galerie Bonaparte (Mondrianpapers.com, Special correspondents: Mondrian and Leopold van Oijen by Wietse Coppes)

So it was that between April and May 1930, (B219) Composition No. II, along with (B218) Composition No. I: Lozenge with Four Lines 1930 and (B205) Tableau-poème, were shown for the first time at the Cercle et Carré exhibition at Galerie 23 in Paris (Fig. 11 - Fig. 12)

In the catalog contained in the second issue of the journal Cercle et Carré dated April 15, 1930, the works are listed as (B218) no. 69 Composition néoplastique, (B219) no. 70 Composition néoplastique, (B205) no. 71a Tableau-Poème (work B218 was purchased by Hilla Rebay for 6,000 Francs).

It was on this occasion that Sidney Janis saw Mondrian’s works for the first time. It was a premonitory encounter: (B219) Composition No. II would be purchased by the Sidney Janis Gallery in 1950. But it will be a radically transformed painting.

At that same time Theo van Doesburg, who had refused to join the Cercle et Carré Group, founded the small “Art Concret” group with five other artists: Jean Hélion, Marcel Wantz, Léon Tutundjian, Wladimir Shwab and Otto Carlsund. At the same time as the Cercle et Carré exhibition, they published the first (and only) issue of the magazine Art Concret, financially supported by Carlsund and with Hélion as editor-in-chief. The group wanted to unite the different abstract directions in an art that could interact with architecture and urbanism. It was, in essence, a kind of continuation of the De Stijl movement.

Through the participation of artists of pure abstraction, it stood as a bulwark against the impetuous Surrealism. Although it had with the Cercle et Carré group many affinities and Surrealism as a common enemy, the rule “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” in this case was not applied. A position very fundamentalist that led several critics to call Art Concret a group of fanatics.

2.4.2 - STOCKHOLM

Meanwhile, in Sweden the “Stockholmsutställningen 1930” (Stockholm Exhibition), which went down in history as the modernist turning point in Swedish architecture, was being staged. This gave rise to “Funkis” (Functionalism), which found its main expression mainly in architecture and design. Later with the term “funkis” will be connoted mainly the products of maximum simplification, as an almost offensive term.

In June, a few days before the opening of the exhibition, Carlsund was urgently summoned by architect Gunnar Asplund to create an abstract mural in the “Lilla Paris” room, one of the four in the Park restaurant - “Parkrestaurangen.”

A temporary building, built in an idyllic waterfront location in the Källhag grove, which was intended to offer a cheaper product than the main restaurant (Paradiset) located close to the parade square. The second floor housed four rooms organized around the service core: Ellida, Böljeblick (Wave view), Puck and Lilla Paris (Little Paris). Fig. 13 - Fig. 14

While working incessantly on the realization of the mural (Fig. 14a), Carlsund had the idea of organizing a modernist exhibition in the Puck room, where the Art Concret group would play a central role. The space was designed as a kind of winter garden, a long tunnel-like corridor completely glazed (walls and vault). The Stockholm Exposition had now begun, so action had to be taken quickly. He returned to Paris and sought support for his exhibition idea. The response was overwhelming. A large number of established artists wanted to participate, many of whom had already taken part in the Cercle et Carré exhibition (which ended May 1). These included Léger, Ozenfant, Hans Arp and his wife Sophie Täuber, Serge Charchoune, Laszlo Moholy-Nagy, Antoine Pevsner, Vantongerloo, Vordemberge-Gilderwart and Franciska Clausen to name a few. A good portion of works that had already been exhibited in Paris in Cercle et Carré were sent to Stockholm. Altogether he had embraced 31 artists, thanks in part to his polyglotism and the dense network of contacts he had in Paris through the circle that gravitated to the studios of Fernand Léger and Amédée Ozenfant. The artists included 17 internationals almost all based in Paris, 14 Swedes of whom, however, some were in Paris (Berg, Grate, Knutson-Tzara, Lundström, Erik Olson). Also participating were 4 of the 6 members of the Halmstad Group (the aforementioned Olson, Mörner, Thoren, and Jonson), as well as Gosta Adrian Nilsson.

Mondrian had met Carlsund as early as 1927 through Franciska Clausen (by the way, they had all participated in the large l’art d’aujourd’hui exposition international in November 1925). He had also invited him to his studio, where Carlsund, in early May 1927, went in the company of Erik Olson (both together with Clausen were working in Fernand Léger’s studio). Olson was very impressed with Mondrian’s studio and, while appreciating and admiring his work, could not help commenting, “Perhaps it is not so strange that Mondrian is not married - he has never found a woman with square breasts.” History later showed that despite the unpleasant comment, Olson remained Olson and Mondrian became MONDRIAN.

Carlsund’s idea of involving multiple artistic currents came into conflict with the more radical concept of van Doesburg, who was pushing for a selection of artists from the Art Concret group and an openness to related artists such as Mondrian and Vantongerloo. He basically felt that Carlsund’s idea would generate an unclear and confusing picture. The disagreement led to a breakup and van Doesburg withdrew his participation. Carlsund would however still show a picture by Van Doesburg in the exhibition, “counter-composition XII” from 1924, that he had bought shortly before, in January 1930.

In fact, by the time of the Stockholm-exhibition, the Art Concret group had been practically reduced to four members, Carlsund - Hélion - Tutundjian - Wantz. Shwab had also by then defected.

The exhibition organized by Carlsund was to open on August 19, so Mondrian, quickly, on August 13 responded to the invitation. He writes in his letter to Carlsund: “Votre lettre m’a fait beaucoup de plaisir, j’ai envoyé le meilleur que j’avais en ce moment et je suis content que vous les trouviez interessants” (Fig15). The two paintings Mondrian send to Sweden, (B219) “Composition No. II” and (B222) “Compostion II, with Red, Blue, and Yellow”, were hung between the other 107 works in the exhibition and almost suffocated in the dense arrangement that crammed the restaurants wall about 25 meters long.

In the catalog the works are listed as: (B219) - 59 Composition I, Olja 1930; (B222) - 60 Composition II, olja 1930. (Fig. 16)

In his letter Mondrian adds: “quant à la reproduction, si necessaire je veux bien payer les frais du cliché et photo. Je n’ai pas des photos de ces ouvres” (From this it can be concluded that the photograph must have been photographed in Stockholm, shortly before the exhibition opened). Mondrian did not have high expectations for the sale, prices too high and a 30 percent return. He was comforted, however, by the possibility of popularizing abstract art: “Mais c’est toujours bien que la neoplastique soit montrée”, he had written on August 3 informing his friend Roth of Carlsund’s invitation.

The disastrous outcome of the exhibition is now a landmark in Swedish art history. Even more so for the human and artistic history of Otto Carlsund, which has been widely covered and reevaluated to the point of making him a national hero.

What Carlsund envisioned as a great success turned out to be a complete disaster. The reasons for the “fiasco”, known in Sweden as the “Konkretistfiaskot”, can be attributed to various causes ranging from Carlsund’s poor management of the event to the negative reception by Swedish critics and audiences who, oriented toward figurative artistic expressions, did not conceive of schemes that broke with objective reality.

The result was that no works were sold and even most of the catalogs remained untouched.

The result was that Carlsund fell into depression and retired to his parents’ summer residence in Södermanland, abandoning everything to his fate. Almost an escape, although he had shown tremendous courage in conceiving an exhibition that for those years was a great challenge at least for the Swedish mentality. In Sweden over the years the exhibition organized by Carlsund has been analyzed, hailed and honored many times. The first to approach the subject was Oscar Reutersvärd shortly after Carlsund’s death (July 25, 1948) with the publication of “Carlsund och neoplasticismen” in Konsthistorisk Tidskrift Volume 18-1949 (republished: in “Impressionister och purister” 1976; in “ICSAC Chaier 5”, April 1986; reproduced in facsimile in “Hommage à Carlsund”, Konstmuseet i Skovde - Skissernas Museum i Lund, 1997).

Reutersvärd will repeat more or less the same story on many other occasions. To name a few, e.g., in the magazine Art d’aujourd’hui October-November 1953; on the occasion of the first commemoration of the 1955 exhibition at Samlaren Gallery (AC Konkretistfiaskot 1930 ett tjufemårsminne); in the 1976 book Impressionister och Purister; in Arkitektur Form Konst of 1980 with “Otto G Carlsund och hans postkubistiska expo”; in the 1988 book Otto G Carlsund.

Many other authors have dealt with the subject, the most significant being Inga Chambert, Eva Rudberg (albeit marginally), Viveka Bosson (Erik Olson’s daughter), Gert Marcus in 2000, Jan Torsen Ahlstrand on the occasion of the second commemoration of the exhibition at the Mjellby Konstmuesum in 2004; more recently Anders Wahlgren (Carlsund’s biographer) and Andrea Kollnitz.

Generally speaking, although they have different keys to interpretation, all have set forth an unambiguous account about the history of the exhibition and its immediate aftermath. However, the two books that offer a careful reconstruction, particularly on the implications the exhibition had and the immediate aftermath, are those by Inga Chambert and Gert Marcus, “Carlsundstudier” from 1982 and “Vantongerloo Marcus, brev och anteckningar” from 2000, respectively.

The failure of the exhibition had many repercussions until the works were seized by investors who had supported the organization’s expenses. Mondrian’s works were also seized among them. An ammount of SEK 600 was named, but it remains unclear whether this was indeed the sum for which one or both paintings were seized.

There are conflicting opinions. There are references in the literature in which some authors claiming that in fact some works were sold during the exhibition, others, such as Anders Wahlgren, say that at least 15 works were not returned. Still others that only works by Léger and Vantongerloo were not returned.

According to Jan Torsen Ahlstrand, the oft-repeated issue of seizure of works is actually an event that has never been substantiated. In his essay published in the catalog of the “Otto G Carlsund” exhibition at the Mjellby Konstmuseum in 2004, he states that such an event can be conclusively dismissed. However, a letter from Carlsund to Gregor Paulsson dated December 8, 1938, shows that Carlsund had actually promised some paintings as collateral for a loan. There was a triangular agreement between Carlsund, Paulsson and Asplund, whereby Carlsund obtained a loan of 3,000 kroner from Skandinavika Banken and they were the guarantors. A loan largely repaid as early as the fall of 1930 with an outstanding balance of 650 kronor. As collateral Carlsund had pledged two paintings by Ozenfant and two by Léger, declaring that those paintings were his property and that he wanted them back as soon as he had paid off his debt to the two directors of the Stockholm exhibition.

In short, the period immediately following the exhibition is rather hazy. The only certainty we have is that Mondrian’s works, for a long time, seem to been held up in Stockholm perhaps locked in some storage facility or who knows where.

It was a troubled and turbulent time for Mondrian, due to the insecure fate of his works and the disappointment he had with his friend Carlsund. Despite his reminders, he never received a response. He protested, but always in his own delicate style: “Cher Carlsund, vous nous avez promis nos oeuvres Je 15 nov. ici de retour, et parce que j’en ai besoin, je se rais très con tent de les recevoir bientôt. Est que l’exposition a bien réussi? Mes salutations cordiales” he wrote to Carlsund on November 29, 1930. It seems likely he wanted to send them to the exhibition organized by Arp at Kunstsalon Wolfsberg in Zurich with the title “Werke der Malerei und Plastik : Produktion Paris 1930” held between October and November. Mondrian was then forced to present two other works, B212 and B220 (see previous images).

The exhibition in Zurich was the last attempt to represent “Art Concret”. Van Doesburg thought they would have a room in which to place the group’s works exclusively. However, although Carlsund participated, the unsuccessful experience in Stockholm had by then broken up the group; in fact, Wantz and Tutundjian were not represented.

An earlier attempt, just before the Stockholm exhibition, had been the second exhibition of the Association Artistique les Surindépendants in June 1930. An exhibition in which only Carlsund, van Doesburg and Tutundjian participated. It turned out ot be a quiet futile attempt to present the Art Concret group, considering there were 560 works on display in that exhibition. Once the short-lived experience of “Art Concret” was over, van Doesburg together with Auguste Herbin, in early 1931 gave birth a new group, which they named Abstraction-Création.

A letter to his friend Alfred Roth, dating from 7 September 1932, confirms that the works were at that time still in Stockholm: “Quant à mes tableaux à Stockholm depuis quelques mois Ozenfant s’en occupe pour nous tous et il a tous les documents. Après les vacances j’en aurai peut-être des nouvelles. De sorte que, en ce moment, moi je ne peux rien faire et je crois donc mieux faire d’attendre”.

This letter is the last reference tracked down about the fate of the works.

The 1930 Stockholm exhibition and its epilogue, represent a key moment in the historical reconstruction of (B219) Composition No. II

Regarding the question of the seizure or detention of Mondrian’s works, the only reference that clarifies quite well what happened is found in Inga Chambert’s book, “Carlsundstudier - Otto G. Carlsund 1924-1930” - Norrköpings Konstmuseum 1982.

When no response came from Carlsund, his fellow artist, Amédée Ozenfant, became angry and took matters into his own hands. He formed a committee that he himself chaired and that was occupied with retrieving the works from Sweden and met a couple of times in 1932 and 1933. The artists also sought help from Swedish Consul Raoul Nordling, who advocated for their rights.

From a letter from Ozenfant to Vantongerloo dated July 5, 1933, it appears that “all” of the foreign artists’ works returned to Paris that year, except for the works of Léger and Vantongerloo.

In the same letter Ozenfant states that the transport company TEKA intends to open a case against Carlsund to get the works back. However, TEKA demands that all artworks must be taken back upon payment of costs before a trial begins.

It was during this period that the artists received support from the Swedish consul in Paris, Raoul Nordling, and Greta Knutson-Tzara left a contribution, 100 francs, for the penniless artists to redeem their works at TEKA. Three years after the exhibition, in June-July 1933, the artists were able to recover their works in Paris. These included the works of Mondrian.

Undoubtedly Inga Chambert’s book, “Carlsundstudier”, is the one that gives a well-defined overview of the whole story (a book, in Swedish, that unfortunately has never been translated).

The story of the discovery of the two Vantongerloo sculptures that had been given up for lost, and the subsequent legal action, give a clear representation of what happened at the end of the exhibition.

Marcus’s book, quoted above, transcribes the judgment of the Södra Roslag district court at the Stockholm court office of December 11, 1957:

“When the exhibition was closed, Carlsund’s creditors tried to seize the paintings and sculptures that belonged to the exhibiting artists. Carlsund then approached a lady named Ingrid Rydbeck-she had served as program secretary and exhibition clerk-and asked her to take care of some of the works and among them were the two sculptures by Vantongerloo. At that time, Ingrid Mellin was employed at Aktiebolaget Ramboden in Stockholm, then owned by Svensk-Franska Konstgalleriet but a few years later taken over by herself. It could be assumed that Carlsund’s intention was to secure the artists’ works in relation to Carlsund’s creditors until a time when it would be possible for Carlsund to return them to the claimants”

From this it can be concluded that, for a long time, the works remained locked in the storage room of a frame store.

An in-depth analysis of the subject of Vantongerloo and his sculptures, had already been set out by Chambert in her 1982 book, also with the reproduction of some articles that appeared in newspapers of that period.

2.4.3 - BASEL AND VARIATIONS TO THE PAINTING

The fact that both paintings were shown by Mondrian in 1937 at the “Konstruktivisten” exhibition at the Kunsthalle Basel confirms that by that time he had recovered the works from Sweden (the archival documents relating to this exhibition have been traced thanks to the support of Giulia Ficco, Archive and Photoarchive Kunsthalle Basel).

Mondrian is represented with a substantial number of works: 18 (Fig. 20)

Almost all works came from private collections. In particular the work (B222) Compostion II, with Red, Blue, and Yellow, 1930, (Fig. 6 - Fig. 6-b) was loaned by Jean Arp (Fig. 20 - Fig. 21).

It remains completely unknown how and when this painting came into the Arp collection. Assuming that this is the painting that was seized in Stockholm, it can be assumed that Arp had redeemed it.

Regarding this work it should be noted that for many years, until 1998 when the Welsh/Joosten Catalogue Raisonné was published, the title was “Composition with Blue, Red and Yellow”. It is not known where it is currently located. It was last seen at Christie’s “Impressionist and Modern paintings Drawings and Sculpture” auction on Nov. 2, 1993. The last exhibition was in 1989 “Wege zur Abstraction”, Galerie Beyeler.

In the Christie’s auction catalog, the work B222 has the title “Composition avec bleu, rouge et jaune”. Note that the Stockholm 1930 exhibition is not mentioned and indicates in the Provenance: Arp – acquired from the artist In the catalog of the Galeria Beyeler exhibition, the work B222 has the title “Composition mit Blau, Rot und Gelb 1930” - Privatsammlung.

B219

Staatsarchiv Basel Stadt, PA 888a N 6 (1) 321, 1937/1

Konstruktivisten (16.1.-14.2.)

Works B263 and B268 were sold during the exhibition

At the Basel exhibition only three works were sent directly by Mondrian, including (B219) Composition No. II (Fig. 20 – Fig. 22 - Fig. 23).

Now we can formulate a hypothesis: most probably the painting had already been modified.

When it was recovered in the second half of 1933, the work was most likely damaged due to its long time in the frame store’s warehouse (or perhaps it was damaged during transport operations).

In any case, it seems that Mondrian has restored it between 1933 and ‘34. One of the most striking differences is the thickness of the lines, adopting the solution of sketch B219a in which the lines are thinner. This resulted in a change of the dynamic balance and a more harmonic relationship to the overall composition.

It was perhaps also an opportunity to make the painting look less like B217 (Roth). This made a huge difference in the perception of the painting, for Mondrian at least. For Alfred Roth however, this was not the case.

Letter from the Basel Kunsthalle sent to Mondrian, informing him of the return of work B219

Staatsarchiv Basel Stadt, PA 888a N 6 (1) 321, 1937/1

Konstruktivisten (16.1.-14.2.)

From Roth to Lichtenhan - February 1, 1937

Alfred Roth had also lent his work (B217 - Fig. 4) for the Basel exhibition. When he went to visit, he did not recognize the work and believed that the painting on display was his. Instead it was the work modified by Mondrian. Roth writes to director Lukas Lichtenhan protesting briskly about not seeing his name next to the painting, threatening to withdraw it. Lichtenhan responded by saying that they had chosen to exhibit Mondrian’s version because it was of “a little bit better” and also because it was the policy of the Kunsthalle to prefer the work in the artists possession over another, in the case of similar works (Fig. 24 - Fig.25).

This statement suggests that the painting might have been “fresher” than Roth’s, as it was restored and varied at most three years earlier.

2.4.3a - A brief analysis of the variations.

Looking at the image in Fig. 3, the variation in line thickness practically forced Mondrian to completely repaint the work. His technique was to remove the color by scraping it down to the base of the canvas. A method he certainly used to reduce the thickness of the lines. This operation also resulted in the elimination of color from much of the surface.

The red area was repainted with at least three layers of color. So were the white areas and the small yellow rectangle, for which he must have applied at least five coats of color. The blue area will have required even more coats being a less opaque color and it is likely that near the lines he intensified it. The black lines were also obviously repainted.

In the blue area the signature was probably partially erased, especially the “30” placed almost close to the black line. However, blue being a more transparent color, the letters “PM” remained perceptible. When he re-signed the work, he traced the letters PM still visible, but he must have made a mistake when writing the year. He probably remembered that it was “29.” Then he corrected the “2” into “3” and probably erased the leg of the “9” to turn it into “0.” This seems to turn out if one looks at the detail of the signature (Fig. 25).

The whole intervention is comparable to having made a new work. This is why when the painting arrived in Basel, Lichtenhan considered it “a little bit better” than Roth’s.

The first image concerns the comparison of the detail of the signature between the photo of the Rose Fried Gallery of 1951 and the photo reproduced on the catalog of the Stockholm exhibition AC 1930 (Reference Fig. 2). The different thickness of the vertical line is also clearly noticeable. The following images concern the detail of the definitive signature in color with the enlargement of the number “30”

Now, before proceeding to the other stages of the story, further verification is needed regarding the similarity between the work in the possession of Roth (B217) and the similar composition in Mondrian’s possession (B219).

As Mondrian indicated in his letter to Alfred Roth dated August 3, 1930, Roth met Carlsund during preparations for “Stockholmsutställningen 1930.”

Roth was in Stockholm as he had designed a part of the pavilion of the real estate association

HSB (“Begegnung mit Pionieren” by Alfred Roth, 1973 and “Alfred Roth - Amusante Erlebnisse eines Architekten”, 1988).

This event might lead one to speculate that the work on display was Roth’s, given the close resemblance to (B219) Composition No. II. To remove any doubt, further verification was needed.

As the following image (Fig. 26) demonstrates, a comparison of the painting reproduced in the catalog with Roth’s work (proportioned with the same dimensions as the other) shows clear differences. Moreover, the image in the catalog is clear enough to read Mondrian’s signature. This comparison also shows a clear difference.

In Inga Chambert’s book (Carlsundstudier) cited above, on pp. 181-182 is transcribed a letter (in German) from Roth to Chambert dated Sept. 29, 1976 in which he expressly states that although he met Carlsund on the occasion of the Stockholm exhibition under no circumstances did he make his painting available. This makes clear that the work displayed in the Carlsund exhibition was the painting that belonged to Mondrian.

2.4.4 - COPENHAGEN

A few months after the Basel exhibition, Mondrian participated in a short exhibition in Copenhagen, “Liniens Sammenslutning”, September 1-13, 1937. An exhibition in which various styles converged, “Efter-Expressionisme, Abstrakt Kunst, Neoplasticisme, Surrealisme”. On this occasion Mondrian was present with only one work: (B219) Composition No. II. In the catalog listed at No. 65 - Piet Mondrian: Composition en rouge, bleu et jaune. Pris: fr. Frcs. 4000

In 1929 six Swedish artists from the city of Halmstad formed the well-known “Halmstadgruppen” with the common vision aimed at establishing modern art in Sweden. These are Sven Jonson, Waldemar Lorentzon, Stellan Mörner, brothers Axel Olson and Erik Olson, and Esaias Thorén1 .

In 1933 three Danish artists, Vilhelm Bjerke Petersen, Ejler Bille and Richard Mortensen, visited an exhibition at the Malmö Art Museum where several works by the Halmstad group were on display. It was that visit that inspired the three Danes to form the “Linien” group1 Shortly thereafter, in January 1934, they presented their first exhibition and the publication of the first issue of the magazine devoted to the group. This was a small exhibition held at the “Den frie Udstillingsbygning” in Copenhagen with works by Petersen, Bille, Mortensen, Ollgard and Henry Heerup as a guest.

Later that year, Bjerke Petersen wrote to Stellan Mörner and asked the Halmstad group to participate in an upcoming major exhibition he was planning in Copenhagen1. The exhibition will take place in January 1935 under the title “Kubism = Surrealism” also at the “Den frie Udstillingsbygning,” presented as the first international surrealist exhibition in Scandinavia. Also participating from Sweden were Gosta Adrian Nillson, Bengt Osterblom and Christian Berg, the latter two counted in the Halmstad group even though they were not part of it. In all, a substantial number of works were presented: 272. Among them many were by international artists such as Arp, Dali, Ernts, Giacometti, Klee, Magritte, Miró, Ray, to name a few. Some Norwegian and of course Danish artists including Petersen and Franciska Clausen. However, in 1932 at the Swedish Nationalmuseum in Stockholm an exhibition entitled “Paris 1932 - 10 nationer, 24 konstnärer” had already taken place, announced as the first international Surrealist exhibition outside Paris with 158 works: Arp and Sophie Taeuber, Braque, Carlsund, Chagall, De Chirico, Ernst, Kandisky, Klee, Léger, Picasso and others. The exhibition “Kubism = Surrealism” was a dealbreaker for Ejler Bille and Richard Mortensen, who did not participate. A rupture bitterly consummated in the pages of the magazine “Linien” with exchanges of mutual accusations. From then on, the “Linien” group would continue without Petersen. 1 https://oregaard.dk/aktuel-udstilling-3/

The group’s magazine was published in 10 issues during 1935, then was discontinued and resumed in September 1937 (only one issue) when the exhibition “Liniens Sammenslutning” was organized in which Mondrian also participated (in this issue of the magazine another work by Mondrian B254 “Composition B / (No. II), with Red, 1935” is reproduced). Publication was further interrupted until the only issue in December 1939 on the occasion of the Linien Group’s last (small) exhibition held at the Copenhagen Student Union (Studenterforeningen), with works by Ejler Bille, Richard Mortensen, Egill Jacobsen and Sonja Ferlov Mancoba.

The catalogs for the first exhibition in ‘35 and last exhibition in ‘39 were published in the respective issues of the magazine. Only for the 1937 exhibition was a special catalog produced. Meanwhile, Vilhelm Bjerke Petersen organized another exhibition that seems to be a counterpart to the ‘37 Linien Group exhibition. Between September and October 1938 the exhibition “International Nutidskunst - Konstruktivisme, Neoplasticisme, Abstrakt Kunst, Surrealisme” was held at the Artists’ Association (Kunstnerforbundet) in Oslo. This was a smaller exhibition with 56 works, including those by the ubiquitous Arp, Ernst, Kandisky, Klee, Magritte, Miró, Tanguy, Dali, Doméla, van Douesburg, Schwitters, Vantongerloo and others. Strangely, Mondrian was not invited. The impression is that in the 1930s in Scandinavia everyone was exhibiting everything! However with poor results in terms of criticism and sales. There is a sort of common thread between Carlsund’s 1930 precursor exhibition and those of the Linien Group in 1937 with the latter by Petersen in 1938.

2.4.4a - Mondrian in Scandinavia

Regarding Mondrian, his works were coolly received in Scandinavian countries. In fact only two works were shown between 1930 and 1937 (B219 and B222). A third work (B79), “Compositie 10 in zwart wit (Composition 10 in Black and White) 1915,” would only be shown in 1946 in Copenhagen and Helsinki but in a series of exhibitions titled “Moderne Hollandishe Kunst” that started in Switzerland. Never a work was sold until the 1960s when Gerard Bonnier in 1965 bought (B240) “Composition with Blue and Yellow, 1933” and in 1988 donated it to the Moderna Museet in Stockholm. In 1968 Philip Sandblom purchased the work (B262) “Composition (A) en rouge et blanc, 1936,” but it is now in a private collection in the United States (Jeffrey Gundlach). For a brief period from 1961 to 1964 the Moderna Museet owned the work (B250) “Composition with Double Line and Blue (unfinished), 1934,” which was previously in the Svensk Franska Konstgalleriet in Stockholm (the work is now in the MUMOK in Vienna). From the abstract period only two other works are in the Moderna Museet collection: (B63) “Ocean 1, 1914” from 1970 and (B320) “Picture II. 1936-43, with Yellow, Red, and Blue, 1937/1943” from 1967. Regarding exhibitions dedicated to Mondrian, throughout the Scandinavian countries, to date there are two. One between March and June 1996 at the “Sara Hildénin taidemuseo” in Tampere (Finland), the other “Piet Mondrian - Vejen til Modernismen” between August and November 2007 at the Ordrupgaard Museum in Copenhagen (Denmark). However, both exhibitions were promoted by Kunstmuseum Den Haag with works from their collection.

In a few other cases Mondrian was represented, but never with original works. For example at the 1951 exhibition “Neoplasticism” at the Samlaren Gallery in Stockholm, where two copies were exhibited, one of which was made by artist Olle Bonniér (B270). This copy, by the way incorrect or reinterpreted, appeared in the auction, “Ny realitet,” from the collection of Art Historian Hans Eklund at Stockholms Auktionsverk in March 2006 (reproduced in the catalog).

A repeat of the “Neoplasticism” exhibition, where Bonniér’s copy was presented under Mondrian’s name, was held in 1986 at Gallerie Bel’Art in Stockholm.

A further Samlaren Gallery exhibition is the 1955 “AC Konkretistfiakot 1930” to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the Carlsund exhibition. Here Mondrian was represented by a copy of B219 and a reduced sketch, both made by artist Bengt Österblom. Finally, Mondrian was presented at the exhibition “Otto G. Carlsund” in 2004 at the Mjellby Konstmuseum, with 10 silkscreens.

The organization of the 1937 “Linien” exhibition is well represented, in terms of the chronicle, in the two editions of Gunnar Jespersen’s book, “De Abstrakte - Linien, Helhesten, Høstudstillingen, Cobra” in 1967 and “De Abstrakte - Historie om en Kunstnergeneration” in 1991.

In March 1937, Richard Mortensen, Ejler Bille and Hans Øllgaard went to Paris to recruit artists and works. They visited various studios.

Introduced by Sonja Ferlov Mancoba, they went to Giacometti. Then, while Mortensen went to Max Ernst’s studio, Bille and Øllgaard went to Arp’s studio.

On this occasion, Bille refused Arp’s invitation to go to Mondrian’s studio and expressly said “If I had been more of a critic than a painter, I would have gone along... Arp made sure that Mondrian would still participate with a picture in the exhibition”.

Jespersen’s books also publish three photos of the exhibition installation, in which, unfortunately, Mondrian’s work does not appear. Despite further extensive research, no other images could be traced.

The exhibition assembled by the Linien Group includes about 280 works by 36 artists. These include 10 international artists who, out of duty of hospitality, are represented in the first numbers: Sophie Taeuber Arp, Hans Arp, Theo van Doesburg, Max Ernst, John Ferren, Kandinsky, Paul Klee, Juan Miró, Piet Mondrian, and Yves Tanguy. This was followed by the other 26 Scandinavian artists including the entire Linien Group of 11 artists.

In the exhibition catalog, Mondrian’s work is reproduced on page 31; it almost seems as if it was added at the last minute. In fact, it is on the last page next to the advertisements and not next to the list of works as for the other international artists. Mondrians painting is already mentioned on page 8, as number 65 in the exhibition (Fig. 27)

The image depicts the painting still in its early version (the one with the thicker lines). A photo of the work was probably not available, so the image reproduced in the 1930 Stockholm Art Concret exhibition catalog was used as a cliché.

In the Mortensen archive of the National Gallery of Denmark (SMK Statens Museum for Kunst), it was possible to trace some documents of the exhibition (Thanks to contributions from Dorthe Aagesen and Sarah Pihl Petersen). These include a list of addresses of international artists (Fig. 28) and a list with the works that were collected (Fig. 29).

In the address list, Mondrian’s also bears the inscription [1 billede] = 1 painting. Corrected the question mark next to the house number, in fact it was not 273 but 278 Bd. Raspail.

In the list of Mondrian works it is indicated with “Composition en rouge bleu et jaune” price in French francs 4,000

It is not clear whether these lists were compiled in March 1937 on the occasion of the trip to Paris or later.

From Ejler Bille’s story, contained in Jespersen’s book, Mondrian was not contemplated among the artists to be exhibited, but it was Arp who allowed his participation. This suggests that Arp provided the address of Mondrian’s studio where to collect the work for subsequent transport.

Regarding the title of the work “Composition en rouge bleu et jaune” it appears that it is also noted on the back of the painting transcribed on the stretcher along the bottom (see CR, pag. 352). This suggests that the list of works was compiled after picking up the work, as a sort of catalog checklist. So just before September 1937.

When Mortensen, Bille and Øllgaard went to Paris (March 1937), the “Konstruktivisten” exhibition in Basel had just finished and, as can be seen from the letter from the Kuntshalle in Basel sent to Mondrian (Fig. 23), the works had returned to respective owners for a few days. Probably around March 10th. Basically, when Bille went to Arp, it can be assumed that he saw the Mondrian work B222 which was in the Arp collection.

As stated by Bille, Arp provided for Mondrian’s participation with 1 painting. This suggests that the work exhibited in Copenhagen is that of Arp: (B222) “Composition II, with Red, Blue, and Yellow, 1930”.

Even the value of 4000 Francs seems to correspond. In the transport documents of the Basel exhibition, Arp’s work is insured for 4000 Francs (Fig. 21), while in Mondrian’s entry list the painting “C – Composition rouge, blue, jaune et blanc” is indicated with the value of 2500 Franks (Fig. 22).

Regarding the reproduction contained in the catalog of the Copenhagen exhibition, as mentioned, it seems that it was added at the last moment using (perhaps) the photo from the catalog of the 1930 Stockholm exhibition. It would not be an isolated case that the work reproduced in the catalog does not match the one shown.

Regarding this topic Jens Tang Kristensen in the book “På frontlinjen” (on the front line), dedicates an in-depth passage to the Liniens exhibition and underlines how common it was in pre- and post-war Denmark to reproduce works in catalogs that did not correspond to those on display. This was also confirmed by email (from Kristensen to Visalli, November 29, 2022).

However, we have to ask ourselves: could it be possible that in the Copenhagen exhibition it was not possible to photograph Mondrian’s painting for reproduction in the catalogue? Is it possible, however, that it was photographed and still had thicker lines? If so, it means that the modifications had not yet been carried out in September 1937. And again, is it possible that after a few months Mondrian changed the value of the work from 2,500 to 4,000 francs? Unfortunately, in the absence of a photo of the exhibition installation featuring Mondrian’s work, it is impossible to answer these questions.

This exhibition is the latest reference in terms of historical chronology. From this moment begins a long period of silence of 14 years, until 1951 when the painting reappears in New York at the Rose Fried Gallery exhibition “Some Areas of Search”, as a loan from the architect Armand P. Bartos. (Fig. 30 - Fig. 31)

Another aspect to highlight is the total absence of photos of the painting until 1951, other than the first taken in 1930. We have previously seen that in 1930 Mondrian did not have photos of the two works sent to Stockholm. However, it was customary for Mondrian to have his work photographed. The fact that he never photographed the painting, even after modifying it, appears at least singular.

B219 photo from the exhibition “Some Areas of Search” 1951 (Archives of American Art – Rose Fried Gallery Records – Box 5 Folder 32)

2.5 - Only one photo of (B219) Composition No. II from 1930 to 1951 and many reproductions

The first version of (B219) Composition No. II has been published several times.

Considering that it seems to have been photographed only in 1930 on the occasion of the Art Concret exhibition in Stockholm, it is plausible to hypothesize that this image was used as a cliché for the other reproductions, which makes it likely Mondrian received one or more coopy prints of the photograph. .

Shortly after the Carlsund exhibition, the painting was published in the first issue of the magazine “Abstraction création art non figuratif” of 1932 on p. 25. Surely some copies of the Stockholm catalog must have arrived in Paris.

An interesting copy (Fig. 32), is conserved in the Anna Bergman Archive at RKD (Netherlands Institute for Art History). In this copy there is also a pencil sketch which seems to represent the other work sent to Stockholm (B222) even if it does not correspond entirely. Perhaps someone was recounting what had happened and explaining which works were sent (remember that Mondrian did not have photos of these two paintings). In the upper part of the sketch the inscription indicates the year ‘31.

The period of publication coincides with the letter sent to Roth on September 7, 1932 already mentioned above. It should be noted that in the same issue of the magazine, on p. 40, one of the Vantongerloo paintings that was exhibited in Stockholm is also reproduced (the painting appears in the installation views of Fig. 17 and Fig. 18 immediately above the work by Mondrian B222).

Then, in 1934, the work was again published in the June issue of the magazine “L’Amour de l’Art” on page. 405 (Fig. 33). The image is rotated 90 degrees counterclockwise and partially cropped. With a careful analysis it was possible to associate it with (B219) Composition No. II.

In 1937, as we have seen, the painting was reproduced in the catalog of the “Liniens Sammenslutning” exhibition.

In 1944 Carlsund made a color drawing of B219 first version (Fig. 34). This drawing is published in Anders Wahlgren’s recent 2021 book. After Mondrian’s death (1944) the work was reproduced again in “Konsthistorisk tidskrift, Volume 18, 1949” on p. 23, in the essay by Oscar Reutersvärd together with other works depicted in the 1930 AC catalog (Fig. 35)

In the book “Om och Av Otto G. Carlsund” (Brunius/Moberg) of 1989, the entire catalog of the AC 1930 exhibition is reproduced.

More recently, the painting in the first version was published in the book “Recognizing European Modernities - A Montage Of The Present” by Allan Pred of 1996, on page. 115 and p. 146 (Fig. 36). Also in the catalog of the “Otto G Carlsud” exhibition of 2004 at the Mjellby Konstmuseum, on p. 151 there is a reproduction (Fig. 37). In the same catalog, on various pages, Mondrian’s work is obscenely reproduced even in the final version. Carlsund’s small drawings depicting the two works by Mondrian, B219 and B222, were also shown in this exhibition.

Up to now all the reproductions originate from the photo in the AC 1930 catalogue.

Regarding exhibitions, the work (B219) “Composition No. II - First Version” was photographed only twice, both in 1930: Cercle et Carrè, Paris (Fig. 11); Art Concret, Stockholm (Fig. 17 - Fig. 18 - Fig. 19)) These images have been reproduced countless times. Those relating to the Stockholm exhibition, to simplify, have been reproduced in the following publications.

In the magazine “Byggmästaren 1930” (Fig. 38) on page. 136. This is a very significant photo regarding the initial conception of the installation (in this regard, note the substantial difference between Fig. 18 and Fig. 19. Furthermore, the initial absence of the works of Franciska Clausen can be noted). It is a photo published very rarely afterwards: The Architecture of Erik Gunnar Asplund by Stuart Wrede, 1980 on p. 143 (Fig. 39); Erik Gunnar Asplund - Escritos 1906-1940 - Cuaderno de viaje 1913, El Croquis Editorial 2002, on p. 164 (Fig. 40).

The other frequently used photos, in addition to the aforementioned books - magazines - catalogs with texts by Oscar Reutersvärd, Inga Chambert, Jan Torsten Ahlstrand and Anders Wahlgren, have also been published in:

- catalog of the 1982 Léger et l’Esprit Moderne exhibition, p. 491;

- Halmstad – Berlin – Paris by Viveka Bosson, 1984, p. 276;

- Formens rörelse, Eva Rudber, 1995, p. 114;

- Nordisk Arkitekturforskning magazine, No.4, 1997, p.65;

- Stockholms Utställningen 1930, Eva Rudber, 1999, p. 133;

- catalog of the exhibition Utopia & Reality – Modernity in Sweden 1900-1960, 2002/03, p. 76;

- the magazine EGA Expresion Grafica Arquitectonica, No. 16, 2010, Antonio Millán-Gómez, “Espacios públicos, arquitectos silenciosos en torno a la exposición de Estocolmo 1930”, pag. 60;

- catalog of the exhibition Electromagnetic – Modern Art in Northern Europe, 2013/14, pag. 147;

- Reconstructing the Stockholm Exhibition 1930, Alti Magnus Seelow, 2016, p. 101;

- A Cultural History of the Avant-garde in the Nordic Countries 1925-1950, Andrea Kollnitz, “Universal Language on National Ground, Otto G. Carlsund and Art Concret at the Stockholm Exhibition 1930”, 2019, pag. 311.

Among the many successive reproductions, namely those with the work (B219) “Composition No. II - Final Version”, a significant error results. On the occasion of the exhibition “Delaunay und Mondrian” Galerie Beyeler 1970, the work of Roth B217 was exhibited, but the work B219 is depicted in the catalog.

Even the online Catalogue Raisonné repeats the same mistake, probably as a typo of the previous one.

- PROVENANCE FROM 1930 TO 1950

(Mondrian - Jack Kouro - César Domela – Sidney Janis Gallery/Rose Fried Gallery)

For now, the result of the research concerning this topic and this period ends in mystery. If we exclude the initial loan to Carlsud, which lasted overdue, the work was certainly owned by Mondrian from 1930 to 1938.

After the Copenhagen exhibition of 1937, there is no more sure news of the painting. Mondrian will leave Paris to emigrate to London on September 21, 1938.

We do not know how the painting belonged to a “Parisian Private Collection” in about 1938. According to Joosten, with a question mark, it could be that of the Polish-born collector Jack Kouro (short for Kuropatwa). The painting remained in this collection until 1949. Again according to Joosten, through a brief acquisition by César Domela, the work arrives in New York in 1950 at the Sidney Janis Gallery and in the same year enters the collection of Armand P. Bartos.

The following year it was exhibited at the Rose Fried Gallery on the occasion of the exhibition “Some Areas of Search”, as a loan from Armand P. Bartos. It is only on this occasion that the painting is photographed for the first time in its definitive version (Fig. 30 - 31)

There is an inconsistency between the provenance indicated by Joosten and that indicated by Sotheby’s on the occasion of the recent auction of 14 November 2022. Sotheby’s inserts a further change of hands with Rose Fried Gallery, between Domela and Janis. It cannot be excluded that there was an economic partnership agreement between Sidney Janis and Rose Fried for the acquisition of the painting. It was a formula that happened frequently in those years. Even the catalog of a previous Christie’s auction, of June 27, 1983 Paintings from the collection of Mr. and Mrs. Armand P. Bartos, indicates (exclusively) César Domela - Pinacotheca (Rose Fried).

With reference to this catalogue, Joosten must have investigated thoroughly to reconstruct the previous provenance, i.e. loan to Carlsund and subsequent Parisian Collection identified in Kouro, albeit with a question mark.

What seems certain is that Armand Bartos bought the painting from the Rose Fried Gallery. This acquisition is also declared in a letter sent by Celeste Bartos to Inga Chambert, dated New York 13 September 1976. However, Bartos indicates 1953 as the year of purchase. (Carlsundstudier by Inga Chambert, 1982, page 181, note 58 page 202).

The research did mainly concentrate on the most uncertain period, 1938 - 1949, which involved “a Parisian Collector” and the artist César Domela.

In a letter from Domela to Joop Joosten dated 9 September 1983, preserved in the Joosten archive at RKD, Domela states that around 1950 he came into possession of the painting by trading it for one of his works, which happened with “a person” who had visited him , but he does not remember who this person was. He later sold the painting for $3,000 to the Rose Fried Gallery.

In Maria Tyl’s essay published in the catalog of the exhibition “Art Abstrait Géometrique - des origines aux réalités nouvelles - autorur de la collection Kouro”, Galerie Le Minotaure 2017”, she expressly declares that she has received some photos from the family of the Kouro heirs, where Kouro is portrayed seated surrounded by many works, among them there is also a work by Mondrian (Pag. 24).

In the same catalogue, on p. 29, a letter from Domela to Kouro is also reproduced, dated June 6, 1950, where he writes: “Un de mes amis de passage à Paris qui savait que j’ai été un ami de Mondrian m’a demandé si je ne connaissais pas un Mondrian à vendre. Je me demande si vous êtes peutêtre intéressé de vendre un de vos tableau”. The sentence ends with “one of your paintings”, this suggests that Kouro owned more than one Mondrian.

However, through a long exchange of e-mails with the owner of the Le Minotaure Gallery which took place in December 2020, Benoit Sapiro declares that in reality there is no photo of Kouro where the Mondrian painting appears (disproving Maria Tyl), while confirming that in Kouro collection there was only one painting by Mondrian. He also states that Domela had made a drawing depicting the Mondrian from the Kouro collection. This drawing was later donated by Domela to Christian Derouet.

In César Domela’s archive at the RKD, in a letter from Sidney Janis to Mrs. Ruth Domela dated October 7, 1949, after concluding the purchase of a Mondrian sold by Domela for $1,000 (B270), Janis confirms having received it and adds: “We are interested in another Mondrian of similar quality and size (larger if possible). Do you know of any available? If so will you let us know either by air or cable our expense. We would like something between the years 1928 - 1936.

Mme Sonia Delaunay told me when last in Paris she knew of a Mondrian but I have heard nothing further of it”.

This letter seems to be in connection with the one sent by Domela to Kouro mentioned earlier. However, it cannot be excluded that through the interest of Sonia Delaunay, Janis acquired the other work by Mondrian, B222, which was in the Arp collection. Also this painting, as indicated by Joosten in the Catalogue Raisonné, entered the Janis collection in 1950. This acquisition is also indicated in the Christie’s auction catalog “Impressionist and Modern paintings Drawings and Sculpture” of November 2, 1993.

In a subsequent November 2022 email exchange, Benoit Sapiro, after receiving the image of work B219, stated that the drawing made by Domela depicts a Mondrian work from the 1920s and in no way corresponds to (B219) “Composition II”.

It was not possible to obtain an image of Domela’s drawing. However, based on another parallel research and other documents, it is possible to hypothesize which is the “alleged” Mondrian of the 1920s depicted in Domela’s drawing. But since it is a controversial work, exposing it in this context would be misleading.

So the mystery remains: where was (B219) “Composition II” in the period 1938 – 1950?

What has been stated so far demonstrates without any doubt that the painting has been modified, while the timing of the modification is the result of hypotheses. However, each assessment is strictly based on documentary evidence.

Regarding the variations of the painting, it is advisable to carry out every possible analysis, X-rays and others, in order to obtain irrefutable proofs.

Regarding the Provenance, further research needs to be done to definitively find out who owned the painting immediately after Mondrian. This is an extremely important topic given that the work was recently sold at a Sotheby’s auction with a significant “gap”: who got the painting from Mondrian and how?

These two actions are absolutely necessary to complete and clarify the rich historical path of the work.