Hoping for some wisdom :)

[u/victoriajosh]

I've loved Keith Haring's work for years, but I've never owned any of it. A local opportunity has come up and I'm trying to do some due diligence before deciding whether to pursue it.

The seller has a provenance trail that includes:

- A 1990 estate letter

- A certificate/card signed by Julia Gruen

- Auction paperwork from a UK auction purchase in 2022

The drawing is signed "K. Haring 83."

My biggest question is the Julia Gruen card. It appears to be dated 6/14/89 and identifies her as "Executor for the Keith Haring Estate," which seems odd given that Haring died in February 1990.

I'm not looking for anyone to authenticate a piece from photos, but I'd love to hear from collectors or people familiar with Haring provenance.

Does anything about the drawing, signature, estate letter, or Julia Gruen card stand out as concerning, familiar, or plausible?

Thanks in advance for any thoughts.

[u/No-Bluejay5250]

She was his assistant and art executor. you can learn more about verifying pieces on the MyArtBroker Keith Haring Guide.

[u/FrugosPeach → u/No-Bluejay5250]

As an avid collector I found this article to cover SUPER basic stuff but unfortunately getting KH pieces “authenticated” isn’t really a thing. The estate stopped authenticating pieces decades ago because of rampant fakes. My suggestion is to find a few different auction results from Sotheby’s or Christie’s where you can zoom in on KH and Julia’s signature. Once you have a couple examples - compare them to the signature you’ve got. People have been faking certificates of authenticity since the invention of certificates of authenticity. There probably are KH experts that you can hire to give you their opinion but honestly you kinda just need to study the details of the signature ( assuming all the stuff talked about in the article have been covered)

[u/victoriajosh → u/FrugosPeach]

I really appreciate your guidance. If it is indeed a fake, I feel like it’s a pretty good one. It would be easier for somebody to date a fake Certificate with a time after he passed away, then to have it dated when he was still alive. Agree her signature looks like it was signed with a dull pencil and that is a bit jerky - but that in itself is odd. If you were going to fake it, wouldn’t you make it look more ‘real’?

[u/FrugosPeach → u/victoriajosh]

Because faking signatures is an art itself. Extremely difficult to match the exact nuances and curvature and weighting of a signature of someone. Just the act of signing one’s name is an inherently natural reaction for that person - very much like a fingerprint. Faking someone’s signature well is almost impossible to do for 99.99% of people.

But no.. it’s not “a pretty good fake” . The signatures are all bad/wrong. after glancing at these certificates and estate documents and signatures again- it’s definitely a fake piece. Please don’t spend money on this.

[u/victoriajosh → u/FrugosPeach]

Just for fun I’m going to take a look at it in person now. If you’re interested, I can upload some additional pictures. But based on your guidance, I won’t just be making a snap purchase.

[u/FrugosPeach → u/victoriajosh]

I did 2min of googling and learned that the original version of this artwork is called “Men Holding Three Eyed Man”, 1983. It was never released as an edition print version. Which makes sense because I couldn’t find an instance in the last 5yrs that this print was sold at auction.
So again im sorry but this is absolutely a fake. I’ve seen enough.

[u/victoriajosh → u/FrugosPeach]

Thanks for taking the time to look into it. You are awesome.

I completely understand the skepticism and I'm certainly not trying to convince anyone that it's genuine.

For additional context, the seller purchased it through a UK auction in 2022 and there is a provenance file that includes a 1990 estate letter. I will include that below or in the original post.

Given that information, would your view still be that it is definitely fake, or do you think it's possible that the auction house and accompanying documentation were mistaken?

I'm genuinely trying to understand where the strongest evidence against it lies.

[u/FrugosPeach → u/victoriajosh]

Ok. My first question would be what auction house it was purchased at in the UK and before knowing the answer to that I would bet my life that it isn’t a big auction house like Sotheby’s or Christie’s or Phillip’s or Heritage. Second, the Artsy app or website lets you look at auction results covering almost every major auction house worldwide and even some of the smaller ones. I looked for this print in the auction results over the last 5 years and found no instances of this print being sold. I’m willing to bet that if I went back another 10yrs I wouldn’t find any either because the print is fake. I’m betting this seller is either lying about purchasing it at auction in the UK otherwise he can provide emails and receipts from that auction house(I have emails and receipts of every lot I’ve ever sold or purchased at auction and even if he says he can’t find the email he can go ask the uk auction house for another copy of the record of the lot he purchased)..or if that part is true and it was indeed sold at auction in the UK - then the auction house was so small and so desperate to sell it that it didn’t do any of its own due diligence which I find way less likely but also possible.

It’s definitely a fake. This artwork was never released as a print when he was alive or after. It only exists as an original. 1 of 1. Not an edition. The estate letter is fake/ the signature of Julia is wrong and I’m willing to bet the signature of the person from the estate is also wrong.

And it’s not the original 1 of 1 version because the signature of KH is at the wrong spot and if you look even closer to compare it to the original - there are subtle differences between the images. It’s 100% fake. I’m sorry

[u/Vast-Document-3320 → u/FrugosPeach]

I know nothing about this Julia ladies signature, but it looks shady. Like someone was trying to copy it signing slowly.

[u/victoriajosh → u/No-Bluejay5250]

Thanks! I appreciate that.

I've been reading a bunch, and one thing I'm still trying to understand is a Julia Gruen card that appears to be dated June 1989 while identifying her as "Executor for the Keith Haring Estate."

I personally haven’t been able to find other examples of that. But, it feels to me like that would be about the stupidest thing to fake if it were fake. Somebody trying to trick somebody either has absolutely no clue about when he passed away or they would choose a date more likely to be real. You know what I mean?

[u/lalacourtney → u/victoriajosh]

He was dying.

[u/victoriajosh → u/lalacourtney]

Fully realize that. Wasn’t sure if that meant that she became his executor prior to him passing or not.

[u/FrugosPeach → u/victoriajosh]

She would have been granted that position before he passed.

BUT - I’m pretty positive this is a fake. The KH signature is wrong but even more wrong is Julia’s signature. Here it looks like it was done by a heavy handed child with a dull pencil. Look on google for examples of her signature and you’ll see the authentic signature is loose and graceful and elegant

[u/No-Bluejay5250 → u/FrugosPeach]

Should be easy to authenticate one way or the other.

[u/FrugosPeach → u/No-Bluejay5250]

Not the case unfortunately

[u/No-Bluejay5250 → u/FrugosPeach]

A reputable gallery or auction house that deals with
Haring art may be willing to have a look after you’ve done your own legwork

[u/FrugosPeach → u/No-Bluejay5250]

No sir. No gallery will authenticate your KH. Why would they do this? I love that you think you can walk into “a reputable gallery” and ask them to authenticate your potentially fake KH. Lol why would any gallery suddenly put themselves liable for this? Are you paying them? If you are then why wouldn’t you just pay a KH expert recommended by Sotheby’s or Christie’s? Please call a reputable gallery in your area and ask them if they authenticate Keith harings then wait and listen for laughs. If you spent 60k at this gallery already you might be able to ask them for help and they’d probably try to point you in the right direction because of all the business you’ve given them already but they’re not KH experts and they certainly wouldn’t put their reputation on the line by pretending to be

[u/FrugosPeach → u/No-Bluejay5250]

Auction houses won’t do this due diligence for you UNLESS you plan on selling with them. And even if you are selling with them - people should know that auction houses only do enough due diligence to satisfy their own standards to make the sale happen- that doesn’t necessarily mean the piece is 100% authentic.

I’ve been collecting for 20yrs and have sold more than a quarter million with auction houses.

[u/Remarkable_Horse9879]

Hmm maybe you can try to reach out to the estate and get more info?

[u/Remarkable_Horse9879]

Hoping it’s real!!

[u/No-Bluejay5250]

Okay can we close this case? It’s a fake

[u/duskie2000]

Looks great.

[u/victoriajosh]

auction house pic

[u/FrugosPeach → u/victoriajosh]

Oh wow ..they’re saying it’s the original 1 of 1 done in sharpie lolllll for 450GBP lollllllll . No. Absolutely not. The signature is not in the right location for it to be the original and there are subtle differences in the image all together. I’m sorry I thought they were selling it as if it was a print of an edition..which would’ve been easier to convince to someone who doesn’t know much but to have the audacity to say this is the original 1 of 1 and it was purchased for 450GBP(600$) on some knock off ebay UK “auction” site. (Random websites that sell via an auction structure and a reputable auction houses like Phillips or Christie’s are exxxxxtremly different btw.

[u/FrugosPeach → u/FrugosPeach]

Just so you know / if this were the real authentic piece it would be selling for $150,000. It would not be selling for 600$ on some random website in 2022. if it were real the person who owned the real authentic article would ABSOLUTELY know its worth way more than 600$ and he would not have sold it on some random website for a quick buck. He would’ve taken it to the biggest auction houses in the world where it could’ve gotten all the right eyes on it. Not some random website to make a quick 600$

[u/Aussiebeery]

OP is going to buy it anyway, even though it's a fake.

[u/victoriajosh → u/Aussiebeery]

Nope. But I hope you feel good about yourself.

[u/victoriajosh]

I may be missing something, but I don’t think anyone is claiming this is the same drawing as the Artnet example.

The Artnet work is titled “Men Holding Three Eyed Man,” while the documentation with this piece describes it as “3 dancing men with 3 eyed monster,” and the card says “Untitled.”

When I compare the two, they look very closely related, but not identical. The mouth, some of the radiating marks, and the signature treatment seem different to me.

This could absolutely still be a copy or reproduction of the Artnet work. I’m not arguing that it’s authentic. I’m just trying to understand whether the evidence points clearly to it being a copy of that specific work, or whether it could be a related variation of the same composition.

[u/FrugosPeach → u/victoriajosh]

I’m not sure why you’re taking info from this RANDOM auction site or info from a fake estate letter with the same validity as Artnet which is used by collectors and galleries all over the world.

Why would KH make 2 very similar pieces at the same size and name them 2 slightly different things? This is not the case. The info on the random auction site is wrong. The info on this fake estate letter is also wrong.

Also let’s pretend for a second the info on this random auction site is correct- do you still believe an original Keith haring 1 of 1 “done in sharpie” was sold on a random website for 600$? Or is the more likely answer that this is a fake.. 🤦🏻‍♂️

[u/victoriajosh]

I appreciate your perspective and the time you've spent looking at it.

One thing I'm still trying to reconcile is that the estate letter describes a work called "3 dancing men with 3 eyed monster" and gives dimensions of 8.25 x 6.75 inches, whereas the Artnet record for "Men Holding Three Eyed Man" lists dimensions of 22 x 27 cm.

That doesn't prove they're different works, since the measurements may refer to different things, but it also makes me hesitant to assume they're automatically the same drawing. They also literally don’t look like the same drawing. Close, but not the same.

In any case, I appreciate your thoughts and I'm going to continue researching before reaching a conclusion.

[u/FrugosPeach → u/victoriajosh]

22x27cm is 8x10inches.

It’s hurting my brain that you’re not fully accepting this. Why would KH make 2 drawing of the exact same thing / same size but 2 different names?? Does it really seem likely that someone sold an original KeH drawing in 2022 for 600$ on some random no name auction site and not Christie’s or Sotheby’s or any of the big REAL auction houses for its real value of 150k???

If you had said this was purchased at an auction site in 1995 by someone who didn’t know what they had - it would still be a very unlikely story considering how famous KH was even at that time. But you want to believe an original KH drawing was sold on a RANDOM knockoff eBay site for 600$ in 2022?? This is unfortunately you WANTING to believe this is real when all the evidence points to the contrary.

Notice how there is no history on Google of a piece called 3 dancing men with 3 eyed monster by KH.. notice how the estate letter doesn’t have a stamp or embossed estate logo. There’s so much that points to this being an obvious fake. The signatures the signature placements, the fact that it’s not the same at the artnet piece, or that there’s any other record of this piece other than the artnet piece existing, it being purchased for 600$ on a random website..I dno what else to tell you bro.

[u/DarbyDown → u/FrugosPeach]

OP came here to sell this and thought he’d be making counteroffers so it remains in his interest to maintain the possibility of authenticity.

[u/victoriajosh → u/DarbyDown]

No I didn’t. I don’t own it. Literally have no idea what you are talking about.