“I have deduced that the child cannot possibly be mine, as I was at Lo Ling Nan’s opium den at the time. By virtue of logical deduction, I suggest that the father must be…….”
Click-to-enlarge image can be found here, or at Mr. Melcher’s blog entry (no cursor).Yes is privately owned. Two versions exist; but, when sold at auction, garnered vastly different prices.Sadly, neither the auction records of the first nor second include an image. Both were dated, the first as 1877, the second as just 77. According to the records, the first has a signature, but not the second.I haven’t been able to spot a date or signature on neither this painting, nor in the image of the other version, found here (along with many other works, with descriptions of some), nor in the many different colorations available online.Both versions start at 6:09 into this video of the artist’s works (fullscreen is active):
The artist’s Wikipedia page and collection (more under Subcategories at each level).Fourth, of the 9 works, by this artist, that have, so far, appeared in Mr. Melcher’s blog, to also appear here.P.S. If like me, you hadn’t heard the word macking before (guess I’m getting old), the Urban Dictionary has a definition that dates back to 2002, as well as several other forms/uses, listed in the left margin.
BE THIS GUY almost 11 years ago
Some friend!
tattooedcyberidiot almost 11 years ago
That’s the Baskerville Cursor
zero almost 11 years ago
Mary, Mary where you going to…
Last Rose Of Summer Premium Member almost 11 years ago
Not going well, she doesn’t look interested.
watmiwori almost 11 years ago
Dirty old monks need love too! Especially if not all that old.
orinoco womble almost 11 years ago
Looks like Watson may be getting a “Dear John” letter…
PICTO almost 11 years ago
No,no silly girl, it’s only ten inches, I said the game was a foot…
pcolli almost 11 years ago
“I have deduced that the child cannot possibly be mine, as I was at Lo Ling Nan’s opium den at the time. By virtue of logical deduction, I suggest that the father must be…….”
J Short almost 11 years ago
This wasn’t the first time Sherlock hounded Susie Baskerville.
Enoki almost 11 years ago
He’s just her drug dealer and trying to get a fix…
jack fairbanks almost 11 years ago
Sherlock dear, now that we’ve tried the “alum-entry”, you’re not going to insist that I return to men’s clothing are you?
puddlesplatt almost 11 years ago
But I’m telling you, I’m Gay!
Reality,really? almost 11 years ago
All my bags are packed I’m ready to go…. PP&M
mabrndt Premium Member almost 11 years ago
Click-to-enlarge image can be found here, or at Mr. Melcher’s blog entry (no cursor).Yes is privately owned. Two versions exist; but, when sold at auction, garnered vastly different prices.Sadly, neither the auction records of the first nor second include an image. Both were dated, the first as 1877, the second as just 77. According to the records, the first has a signature, but not the second.I haven’t been able to spot a date or signature on neither this painting, nor in the image of the other version, found here (along with many other works, with descriptions of some), nor in the many different colorations available online.Both versions start at 6:09 into this video of the artist’s works (fullscreen is active):
The artist’s Wikipedia page and collection (more under Subcategories at each level).Fourth, of the 9 works, by this artist, that have, so far, appeared in Mr. Melcher’s blog, to also appear here.P.S. If like me, you hadn’t heard the word macking before (guess I’m getting old), the Urban Dictionary has a definition that dates back to 2002, as well as several other forms/uses, listed in the left margin.Perkycat almost 11 years ago
I had never heard the work ‘macking’ but I looked it up and now I know.
katzenbooks45 almost 11 years ago
Rerun?
orinoco womble almost 11 years ago
“Ce n’est pas une pipe.”
Snoopy_Fan almost 11 years ago
“HOLMES! WATCH OUT FOR THAT ARROW!!!”
mabrndt Premium Member almost 11 years ago
Here is another work by this artist.