Ingimundur Kjarval: The report done by Baldur Guðlaugsson attorney for the family sept. 21. 1982

Back to index here

This is the report Mr. Guðmundur í Klausturholum had done by Mr. Baldur Gudlaugsson on behalf of my family. In my opinion Mr. Gudlaugsson let's the family completely down.
Anything blue is my writing

13.4.2022 ConfidentialMemorandum.

Because of an investigation into: if the things the late painter Jóhanness S. Kjarval (here after J.K.) handed over to the City of Reykjavik the 7th of November 1968, were intended for storage or as a gift.
Minutes from meetings of the City counsel and the City government have been investigated. The Newspaper Morgunblaðið from November 1968 and April 1972 ( when J. Kj. Died).
The speech by the mayor Mr. Birgir Isleifur Gunnarsson at the inauguration of Kjarvalsstaðir in 1973.
A catalog from that opening.
A letter from Ólafur Þórðarson to Sveinn Kjarval dated 10/10 1968 (supposed to be 10th of November).
Mr. Ólaf's Þórðarson's notes and and part of his diary from the years 1968-1972.
J. Kjs estatereport.
Chapters from Mr. Guðmundur's Alfreðsson's diary.
And different written documents.

These were interviewed:
1. Mr. Indriði G. Þorsteinsson who is working on a book on J. Kj.
2. Mr. Jón Þ. Ólafsson, the son of Ólaf Þórðarson, J. Kj's. nephew
3. Mr. Páll Líndal, former chief attorney of the City of Reykjavik.
4. Mr. Guðmundur Jónsson the City judge, the son of Mr. Jón Þórsteinsson, Kj's. friend who got information from his father.
5. Mr. Lárus Blöndal, former headkeeper of City records.
6. Mr. Markús Sigurbjörnsson, deputy to the City sheriff.
7. Mr. Jóhannes S. Kjarval and Mr. Ingimundur Sveinsson both grandsons of J. Kj.(why my brother is mentioned with family name but no me is a mystery to me).
8. Mrs. Guðrún Kjarval the daughter in law of J. Kj.
9. Mr. Geir Hallgrímsson former mayor of the City of Reykjavik.(at the time of this report prime minister of Iceland).
10. Mr. Jón G. Tómasson the City attorney (when this report was done).
11. Mr. Davíð Oddsson the mayor of the City of Reykjavik (later the prime minister of Iceland).
12. Mr. Þorvaldur Þorvaldsson chauffeur.

From these investigations it seems obvious that no written documents are available on what kind of handover this was the 7th of November 1968, no written gift letter or any other document concerning this is available.

Officially there was no mention of this, no mention of any handover of things from J. Kj in minutes from the Citycouncil meetings at that time.

In a letter from Mr. Ólafur Þórðarson to Mr. Sveinn Kjarval where in Mr. Thordarson describes what happened when these things where handed over to the City as he experienced it, and nowhere is it specifically mentioned if Mr. Thordarson consider this a gift or for storage. On the other side, in one place he writes about an event the 6th of November 1968: " before we left the studio Kj. asked me what I thought about having the City museum store this stuff". I thought for a moment, looked at him and tried to figure him out and said: "why not sort this into new containers and put everything into the new house on the westside (Kjarvalshús) in one place and sort later, "no no I couldn't take that" he said.I then said: if you are pleased with this, I have nothing against it and maybe for the best after further thought. I saw it was no use trying any other solution, he was that tired and worn out, would have taken him even further down to expect him to go thru this, he doesn't have the strengh and very small things brings out memories, maybe a unopened book or a box of cigars from a gone friend. A Christmas cake, Christmas paper etc."

Mrs. Guðrún Kjarval (my mother) told me she had called Mr. Geir Hallgrímsson (at that time mayor, in 1982 the prime minister of Iceland) when she found out from Mr. Ólafur Þórðarson things were being moved to the City museum, and Mr. Geir Hallgrimsson had told her these things were being taken for storage.

In a letter the Library of City records sent to J. Kj. dated 10th of January 1969: "about things that came to the library from you (J. Kj.)"(in November 1968), and a list over these things the library of records has made with the title:" A list over things that came to the library of records from Jóhannes S. Kjarval".

In a obituary about J. Kj. in 1972 there was no mention he had given this to the city of Reykjavik. It seems the first time the City opinion that this was a gift is official, is at the inauguration of Kjarvalsstaðir in Marz of 1973(not right, a newsstory in Mogunbladid in the spring of 1972) .

Here before main reasons why this should only be considered for storage have been listed. In that vain it is obvious very few people were present when this handover occurred and therefore few knew of this first hand and what kind of handover this was. Neither Mr. Jón Þorsteinnsson, Mr. Páll Líndal fomer City attorney nor Mr. Lárus Blöndal then chiefkeeper of City records discussed this with J. Kj. But say on the other hand they always considered this a gift. Mr. Lárus Blöndal said he would never have put so much work into sorting and recording these things had he considerd this not the property of the City. He considered the heading on the list done, to be normal and usual, even if these things were considered the property of the City.
Her after, reasons will be listed why this should be considered the property of the City and what supports that view.

1. Mr. Geir Hallgrimsson then the mayor of the City (in 1982 the prime minister of Iceland), says he is convinced this was a gift, even though he does not remember how it happened. He says J. Kj. was keen his works wouldn't be dispersed more than had already happened, and that it was his wish the City of Reykjavik received these things for ownership and kept them at the museum of Kjarvalsstaðir which was dear to his heart. Mr. Geir Hallgrimsson thought the reason this was not even booked in the minutes of the city Council that J. Kj. didn't want this gift announced officially.The fact to be read in Mr. Ólafur Þórðarson's letter that Geir Hallgrímsson came to meet J. Kj. when these things where taken, points undeniably to that this was a gift and not for safekeeping.

2. Mr. Alfreð Guðmundsson head of Kjarvalsstaðir(he was not the head of the City museum in 1968 but a City employee and a very close friend of my grandfather) has made a following declaration dated 18th of Sept. 1982: " I was present the 7th of November in 1968 at Sigtún 7, when Jóh. S. Kjarval declared to Mr. Geir Hallgrimsson formally about his gift to the City of Reykjavik. I summoned Geir to the premises because Mr. Kjarval whished so, he had told me before he intended to hand over works of art and other things to the City of Reykjavik as a gift. A.G. (There is no signatures just his Capitals and no witneses)

3. It has come to my attention Mr. Guðmundur Alfredsson the son of Mr. Alfreð Guðmundsson kept diaries these years and undersigned has gotten a copy of this diary from that time.
The 28th Oct. 1968 Mr. Guðmundur Alfredsson writes he was attending last year of highschool:" school only 2 hours, slept. In the afternoon I ferried with my father 20 drawings (ink, Charcoal) by Mr. Jóh. Kjarval from Sigtun 7 to the mayor's office. Kjarval gave these artworks to the City.
And the 7th of November 1968 Guðmundur writes:"School, dance, history class canceled . Studied all day. To day at 2 o'clock pm. Mr. Johannes Kjarval handed over to the mayor Geir Hallgrímsson a few dozen drawings with old boxes from his attic where in were books, flatbread, some writings and sketches. These things are all to go to the Reykjavik museum. My father has most days and many evenings the last 3 weeks helped Mr. Kjarval to sort out of these boxes, containers and portfolios in Sigtun 7. My father enjoys this work understandably. I have dropped in once in a while. Mr. Ólafur Þórðarson, Kjarval´s nephew and some taxi drivers have helped occasionally".

4. It seems The City of Reykjavik soon looked at this as a its property. Frank Ponzi a professional art restorer was hired to restore some of the works.

5. In a catalog published for the show at the inauguration at Kjarvalsstaðir in Marz 1973, Mr. Halldór Laxness wrote in a piece: rightly expected that those works the artist (J. Kj.) gave to the City of Reykjavik before he died, and some of it in bad condition", (or in Icelandic hard to translate):"væna aðréttu að slíkum myndum ánafnaði listamaðurinn Reykjavikurborg áður en hann lést, og var sumt illa farið".
In the same catalog also is a event list of Mr. Kjarval´s live done by Mr.Valtýr Pétursson, in it says about the year 1968: "Jóhannes S. Kjarval gave the City of Reykjavik a collection of artworks (myndir)."

6. It is possible to claim the inheritors of J. Kj. by inaction accepted that the City of Reykjavik got these things as a gift. Mrs. Guðrún Kjarval tells that in the summer of 1971 Mr. Alfreð Guðmundsson showed her some drawings from this collection, that Mr. Frank Ponzi was restoring and the frames had the stamp of the City of Reykjavik, so nobody could doubt the City of Reykjavik considered this their property. The inheritors did not protest at that time.When the estate was settled, the children of J. Kj, Mr. Sveinn Kjarval and Mrs. Aase lökken delivered to the estatecourt in Reykjavik an estate report dated the first of April 1973 (and at that time it was public the City considered J.Kj. had given these things to the City of Reykjavik.), in it, the property of the estate consisted of money and drawings on the walls of a room in Austurstræti. Nothing else is mentioned, and therefore it can be interpreted that the inheritors at this time did not consider these things (with the City) the property of J. Kj. when he died.

7. Mr. Þorvaldur Þorvaldsson chauffeur , who often drove J. Kj (as a taxidriver for B.S.R. for payment) and knew him well, has told undersigned J. Kj told him when they where in Sigtún 7 ones, and spoke about it more than ones that he intended to give to the City of Reykjavik the things he stored in boxes at Sigtun 7, mostly drawings, books, newspapers and other stuff including Christmas cakes. Þorvaldur says J.Kj. had told him the City had to own these things to be able to show at Kjarvalsstaðir, and J. Kj had been happy with that building which he gave money to.
Þorvaldur says he was not present at the handover of these things, but says J. Kj. after the hand over talked about it to him and then told him he had given this to the City.
Conclusion.The conclusion by the undersigned from these arguments is for the overwhelming likelihood the courts would find it fully proven that J. Kj. gave this to the City of Reykjavik and the handover to have happened at 2 o'clock pm. in November 1968 with Mr. Geir Hallgrímsson and Mr.Alfreð Guðmundsson present, but before Mr. Ólafur Þórðarsson came on the premises. Mr. Geir Hallgrimsson's and Mr. Alfreð Guðmundsson´s testimony and Mr. Guðmundur's Alfreðsson´s Diary would be used as grounds for that. The inheritor's inaction would also weaken their position. Also likely, the City of Reykjavik has acquired this through time if the ownership is not proven (happens in ten years with money).

Reykjavik September 21. 1982

Signed
Baldur Guðlaugsson , attorney.

My observations on the report by Mr. Baldur Guðlaugsson.

This report or brief is done in the fall of 1982 and has the date 21. of September. A private meeting between Mr. Baldur Guðlaugsson and Mr. Davið Oddsson was held the 20th of September. To be noted, a meeting was held in the mayor´s office the 5th of August where a report by Mr.Gudlaugsson was discussed. According to those minutes, the oppinion in the brief done for the family by Mr. Gudlaugsson (as the families attorney), this belonged to the family, obvious by the reactions of those present(these minutes are here elsewhere).

In the report dated the 21. Mr. Gudlaugsson goes over arguments supporting the Cities ownership that were aired at the meeting the 5th of August. Therefore the conclusion has to be drawn there was an earlier brief and changed after that meeting or after the private meeting with Mr. Davið Oddsson the 20th.

In the later brief the conclusion is for overwhelming likelihood the courts will decide this to belong to the City. If Mr. Baldur Guðlaugsson was the families attorney, it doesn't add up how all legal doubts are interpreted in favor of the City. And it surly can be expected the former report was the opposite, everybody who reads the minutes from the meeting the 5th of August has to come to that conclusion. Those present at that meeting are upset and doubtful arguments put forth (at that meeting) to disagree with the outcome in that brief.

An odd thing, in the later brief, Mr. Baldur Guðlaugsson, (the families attorney), uses most of that brief to argue the case for the City, but very little on arguments for this belonging to the family. The conclusion has to be made Mr. Gudlaugsson fails completely his duties as the families attorney, and in action becomes the Cities attorney after the meeting with Mr.Davið Oddsson (the mayor of Reykjavik and later the prime minister of Iceland for 11 years).
In this contest it should be mentioned Mr. Davið Oddson and Mr. Baldur Gudlaugsson have been close friends for years. Mr. Baldur Guðlaugsson is today an executive at the Ministry of finance, a position appointed in a political manner. He is also a member of the Sjálfstæðisflokkurinn the same party as the current Prime minister (Mr. Davíð Oddson who was the mayor of the City of Reykjavik in 1982).

Mr. Baldur's Gudlaugsson's conclusion for overwhelming likelihood the City can proof it's ownership is of course total nonsense according to his own research . What is missing as said before is the brief discussed at the meeting the 5th of August 1982. I want to mention one thing, I do not remember talking to Mr. Gudlaugsson in 1982, nor does my wife, I am mentioned in this brief (it is possible I had a short phone conversation without remembering).

My mother claims today she was threaten by Mr. Baldur Guðlaugsson that fall, she a widow since the year before. He supposedly told her it wouldn't be good for her nor her children if this matter was taken up. She said she had never been threaten this way, before or since in her life.

I am not going to discuss matters in this brief at this point, but many things in it are plain nonsense. For example my mother often talked about Mr. Frank's Ponzi disrespect for this artwork and destruction of it by him, stamping on the drawings themself the seal of the City. She was not telling this to Mr. Gudlaugsson to let him know she agreed to this destruction.

One point I want to discuss, Mr. Baldur Gudlaugsson claims Mr. Ólafur Thordarson means 10th of November 1968 when he writes the 10th of October in the beginning of his letter. It does not add up, Mr. Ólafur Thordarson writes five different dates in this letter and all of them in October. This is the only document from this time, except pieces from Mr. Guðmundur Alfredsson´s Diary . But in his Diary it says Mr. Guðmundur Alfredsson ferried drawings by my grandfather to the mayor's office given to the City by Mr. Kjarval 20th of October. Also, in the report by Mrs. Steinunn Bjarman she writes the sorting out of theses boxes had begun the 6th of November. Therefore the conclusion has to be made, the date in Mr. Guðmundur Alfredsson´s diary could just as well be wrong or even not a description of current events.

I protest Mr. Ólafur Þórðarson was present there as a representative for the family, even though my mother asked him to visit my grandfather. Mr. Ólafur Thordarson was only there representing himself and did not protect family interests in any way, unless he was so convinced this was for storage only (but then he should have asked for a written declaration).

In my mind, even though I have nothing to support it, I have my doubts this letter was written few days after this event. In my heart this letter could just as well be written by an old man realizing he had been used in the worst ways and didn't want any part in it.

Mr. Baldur Gudlaugsson says in the brief he saw Mr. Ólafur's Thordarson's Diaries and memos, so they must be available.(Later his Diaries came to light and were brought to Mr. Kristinn Bjarnason the current family attorney. The diaries support the date 7th of November).

Where the brief with the date before the 5th of august 1982 is, I don't know? It is possible Mr. Guðmundur i Klausturhólum has it, I understand my brother got the later brief from Mr. Mr. Guðmundur sometime in 1982.

Mr. Baldur Guðlaugsson refused to hand over the brief when I asked him for it, he also told me it was lost. The original brief should exist unless it was eaten at this meeting the 5th of August.

In this content I would like to mention my worry that all Icelandic lawyers are insiders in the power structure of Iceland. In my own opinion the first part of the later brief is mostly original, the later part then redone after the meeting the 5th of August. Instead of a conclusion for this belonging to the family(according to the minutes from the meeting the 5th of August) a different opinion is hammered together from questionable observations set forth at that meeting.

Everybody who reads this brief is bound to walk from it with the understanding Mr. Baldur Guðlaugsson an attorney working for the family betrays my family.

Ingimundur Kjarval