The affair which unleashed the media around the famous cover of Asterix and Cleopatra contested by the Uderzo family, because it was not dedicated, will have derailed the sale of this flagship lot from the Millon river dispersion
The collectors’ appetite was not there, for fear of taking this unsaleable lot afterwards, the family having cast suspicion on the origin of its acquisition from Uderzo. Priced at 350,000 euros, the 32×17 cm gouache, dated 1963, rose to 380,000 euros, below its estimate of 400,000 to 500,000 euros, the reserve set by the seller. Obviously, no real auctions in the room or on the telephone. We are far from the success of the sale of the Pierre Tchernia collection, in Drouot, in 2017, where his original Asterix covers were dedicated “To Pierre Tchernia, the modest testimony of sympathy in homage to the spirit and the kindness of the great man of television”, by René Goscinny and Albert Uderzo. Asterix’s Tour de Gaule (1964) sold for a record price of 1,449,000 euros (with fees) and Le Bouclier arverne (1968) at 1,197,000 euros. Both were carried out, at the time, by the Artcurial expert, Éric Leroy, for the same client.
The Uderzo family will have won their case. And it’s a shame for the comic book market and all the work of this talented designer. The family had done everything to try to stop the sale of this Asterix and Cleopatra cover at Millon and to dissuade buyers from purchasing it. The designer’s daughter, Sylvie Uderzo, contacted the French lawyer, Orly Rezlan, deeming the conditions of acquisition by the seller doubtful. A complaint was filed at the end of November. But the Brussels public prosecutor’s office, at the last moment, noted “the absence of an offence” and decided, on Friday, to close the complaint, according to an email from a public prosecutor to lawyers of which the AFP declares to have been aware. This was not enough to convince collectors to take the risk, at such a price level.
Me Orly Rezlan had warned that any buyer of this original gouache could be prosecuted for receiving stolen goods. “During his lifetime, Albert Uderzo publicly declared that he would oppose the sale of any drawing that did not include his dedication,” she argued, relying on the position defended by the family – Sylvie Uderzo and her husband Bernard de Choisy as well as Ada, Uderzo’s widow -, known to step up to the plate as soon as an original not signed by the author goes on public sale. Before the sale, Bernard de Choisy did not hesitate to denounce “the croquignols of the art market”, namely “those who practice somewhat unhealthy barter to sell works whose traceability is doubtful since the artist does not specify them by a dedication. And he remained convinced of the merits of the action taken by his wife and his mother-in-law, for which the Belgian prosecutor’s office did not follow up. He had also cast suspicion on “the fact that a Frenchman holding an untitled drawing would choose to put it up for sale not in Paris, but in Brussels, the headquarters of the Millon subsidiary”, thus insinuating less reliable sales practices.
Also read: 1.7 million euros for the cover of Tintin in America, a new record for a black and white drawing by Hergé
The Millon study nevertheless advocated its good faith and was delighted with the decision of the Prosecutor’s Office, as announced when the price of the lot was set, by the study. She said she had a trace of this original drawing “acquired by the seller’s father from Uderzo himself, at the end of the 1960s and beginning of the 1970s, the work had remained in the family patrimony for more than 50 years, with complete clarity.” As proof, she took out of her boxes a few days ago a photo in which we see a man presented as the buyer of the drawing sharing a meal at the table of the Uderzo couple, in the garden of a Norman hotel at the end of the 1960s. “We showed this photo to Sylvie Uderzo to show her that the seller’s father knew her father well,” explained Arnaud de Partz, director of Millon Belgium.
As the auction date approached, tensions rose a notch, provoking a strong reaction from the seller: “For weeks we have opened the door to dialogue and, if necessary, to debate legal – in vain. Ms. Uderzo and her council saw fit, a few days before the sale, to instead take the debate to the media and the public square. They intend to attack my possession, peacefully and in good faith. The most basic rules of law require Ms. Uderzo and her counsel to provide proof of their allegations – to my knowledge, this is not the case,” he declared.
And added: “By choosing to release my name, and that of my father, to the press, Ms. Uderzo and her counsel chose to insinuate, publicly, without any proof, that my father was a thief, that I am a receiver – it is shameful, unbearable and intolerable. I can only take note of this and reserve any recourse in this regard.” Justice has ruled. The prosecutor’s decision did not reassure potential buyers and should not comfort other enthusiasts in possession of original drawings by Uderzo, not autographed, fearing a similar recurrence by the family. Sellers who have received originals from Uderzo think they are sitting on a pile of gold. But today, this remains difficult to negotiate. When it comes to price, Uderzo, however, remains behind Hergé, unbeatable to this day with his latest record at 2.16 million, at Artcurial, for an original drawing of Tintin in America, in black and white.
Contacted after its sale in Brussels, Me Alexandre Millon deplores this grotesque situation which led to the failure of the auction: “the maneuvers aborted by the courts of the Uderzo family will not have prevented the family’s potential for nuisance. This obviously discouraged the market. How can you play against your side like this. “It’s detrimental to Uderzo’s work and frighteningly absurd,” he protests. “From now on, our seller reserves the right to act. But the game is not lost, perhaps we will have after-sales offers,” he concludes. However, these will not reach the low estimate price, as is usual in the market. To be continued.
