Authenticity and Value

Tags

art, art history, art market, artefact, artifact, authenticity, collecting, cultural preservation, museum, provenance, reproduction, value

After my last post, on forgery, I found myself still thinking about the meaning of authenticity, and the questions it raises; questions for which I have no answers. During the 19th century, it was common for art, especially sculpture, to be “restored” to make it more beautiful. Broken-off pieces like arms, feet, even heads, would be replaced with new pieces and seamlessly added to statues, with little concern for the piece’s original composition. The intent was usually not to produce an accurate restoration, but to make the piece as aesthetically pleasing as possible, according to the standards of the day. Many such pieces are now considered hopelessly inaccurate, not just because of modern knowledge, but by modern standards. In other centuries, a work of art’s great value lay in its beauty; in ours, art’s greatest value is in its authenticity.

Glossary: Forgery

Tags

art, art crime, art forgery, art instruction, art technique, authenticity, classical, copy, counterfeit, museum, reproduction, visual problems

At first glance, the word forgery seems unnecessary for a specialised glossary; it’s a common word, readily understood. The briefest definition I found was: (n.) the action of forging or producing a copy of a document, signature, banknote, or work of art. But as a strict definition, couldn’t that apply to a museum gift shop print? The next dictionary was clearer: (n.) 1) The act of forging, especially the illegal production of something counterfeit. 2) Something counterfeit, forged, or fraudulent. So it is not enough that something be a copy, it must be a copy intended to deceive. But how does one determine intent when looking at an object? The definition of forgery may be simple on its face, but in the context of art, its meaning is complex.