Dag Erik Elgin
– The Obituary Phenomenon Ernst Beyeler


Wassily Kandinsky
– Improvisation No 10

Jen Lissitzky is seeking to recover the painting, Improvisation No. 10 by
Wassily Kandinsky, which had been looted by the Nazis in 1937. The colorful oil painting, executed in 1910, is considered to be a key work of 20th century art and is currently on display at the Beyeler Foundation, an internationally known private museum in Basel, Switzerland.
The Kandinsky was part of a group of 13 paintings from Sophie Küppers-Lissitzkys collection that she had loaned to the Provinzial Museum in Hannover in 1926, before she left Germany for Russia to marry the Russian avant-garde artist, El Lissitzky. In 1937, the Nazis confiscated Mrs. Küppers-Lissitzkys collection, including the Kandinsky painting, from the museum as part of the Nazi Adegenerate artcampaign. After the death of her husband in 1941 and under pressure from the Stalin regime, Mrs.Küppers-Lissitzky was exiled to Siberia, where she died in 1978.

Jen Lissitzky, the son of El Lissitzky and Sophie Küppers-Lissitzky, who
inherited his mothers collection, has been attempting to recover it for
several years. Shortly after he was able to emigrate from Russia in 1989, Mr.Lissitzky discovered that the Kandinsky work was in the possession of Ernst Beyeler, the noted Basel dealer and collector. He immediately asked Mr.Beyeler to return the painting. Mr. Beyeler says that he purchased it in 1951 in Cologne from Ferdinand Möller, one of the four notorious art dealers to whom Hitler had delegated the sale of Adegenerate art. As the Complaint notes, the reverse side of the painting still bears the Nazi inventory number. According to Mr. Beyeler, he transferred the painting to the Beyeler Foundation sometime in or after 1991.

The Complaint provides specific details concerning the suspicious
circumstances surrounding Mr. Beyeler's purchase of the painting from Mr. Müller in 1951, many of which have been admitted by Mr. Beyeler in the catalogs of his collection describing his acquisition of the Kandinsky. At the suggestion of a museum director friend, who told Mr. Beyeler that M`ller had hidden away a good deal of "degenerate art," Mr. Beyeler crossed the Swiss border into occupied Germany to meet Müller in a shabby attic apartment in the British Occupation Zone. Müller, a known Nazi dealer, took the painting from behind a cabinet, where he had hidden it. As already noted, the Nazi inventory number was marked on the back of the painting. Trafficking in Nazi-looted art was well-known in post-war Germany, and postings by the Allied Military Government throughout occupied Germany warned that it was illegal to deal in artwork. Despite all the "red flags", however, Mr. Beyeler nevertheless purchased the painting and smuggled it into Switzerland. The Complaint demonstrates that the Beyeler Foundation must now return the work to its rightful owner, Jen Lissitzky.

Quote from the Obituary of Ernst Beyeler, published in Der Tagesspiegel, Berlin, Feb. 27.2010 :

Ernst Beyeler´s life also had its darker moments, one example is the legal dispute concerning Kandinsky´s “Improvisation No 10”, purchased by Beyeler in 1951. Decades later, Jen Lissitzky, son of El Lissitzky, claimed the return of the Kandinsky painting referring to that Ernst Beyeler must have known that the artwork was so-called “Raubkunst”, i.e. property stolen by the Nazis. Finally, the dispute was settled out of court. However, a dark shadow was cast onto the swiss Collectors otherwise impeccable reputation. Mr Beyeler himself, having acted persistently in this matter, must have experienced the conflict more painful than any other of the involved.

Nachruf Beyeler, Tagesspiegel, Berlin, 27.Februar 2010 (Ausschnitt):

Und doch hat auch Ernst Beyeler seine dunklen Momente erlebt. Etwa im
langjährigen, erbitterten Rechtsstreit um Kandinskys „Improvisation Nr. 10“, die Beyeler 1951 erworben hatte. Jahrzehnte später hatte der Lissitzky-Sohn Jen auf Herausgabe geklagt, mit der Begründung, Beyeler habe damals wissen müssen, dass es sich um Raubkunst handelte. Am Ende einigte man sich außergerichtlich. Ein bitterer Nachgeschmack ist geblieben, es war ein Schatten auf das Bild des vorbildlichen Schweizer Händlers und Sammlers gefallen. Beyeler selbst, so unnachgiebig er in dem Rechtsstreit auftrat, wird das am meisten geschmerzt haben.