$2M Eskimo Masks Debut at Winter Show

Complex Mask (Donati Studio Mask) Yup’ik; Kuskokwim Region, Alaska , c. 1890-1905. Image courtesy Donald Ellis.
By Mackie Healy, Art Market Views, Contributor
Canadian dealer Donald Ellis will offer two rare 19th century Eskimo masks from the estate of Surrealist artist Enrico Donati at New York’s Winter Antiques Show, running Jan. 21-30.
Among the most important Native American objects to come to market since the 1940s, the masks are slated to sell for around $2 million apiece, according to Ellis.
The ceremonial yu’pik masks, made of wood, animal pigments, feathers and fibers, influenced the group of Surrealist artists who fled Paris for New York during World War II. One of the two masks hung in Donati’s atelier for over 60 years.
The masks are consigned to Ellis directly from the Donati estate. They were originally acquired in 1905 by Adam Hollis Twitchell, an explorer who traveled Alaska during the gold rush. Twitchell purchased the series of 12 weather masks directly from Alaskan natives. They were then sold to George Gustav Heye, and moved with his collection to New York’s Museum of the American Indian in 1916.
After the museum deaccessioned the works to noted New York dealer Julius Carlebach in 1944 due to financial woes, Carlebach sold the masks to the Surrealists, including Donati and André Breton. Breton’s mask, believed to be by the same hand as the Donati, is now on display at the Louvre. Donati’s is said by Ellis to be the last of its kind in private hands.
“Breton’s mask is the Michaelangelo’s David of our field,” said Donald Ellis. “That the Donati studio mask relates so closely, it is destined to do well.”
Enrico Donati died in 2008. A longtime collector, works from his studio were auctioned in a sale in a May 2010 sale at Sotheby’s, fetching $1 million. Donati’s Picasso Cubist painting, Arlequin (1909), estimated at more than $30 million, was abruptly withdrawn from Sotheby’s Impressionist and Modern sale in 2008. At the time, dealers suspected the estate was wary the sale might suffer due to the financial crunch.






great masks, but only few are able to afford these…
Why not? If an ugly 18th century Chinese pot can bring $82 million?
When a society can’t afford to keep its cultural heritage, is it still culture?
Or is our definition of society to restrictive?
reminds me somehow of a cobbler who couldn’t afford to shoe his children.