Real Or Fake And Who Cares If It's Art?

Art forgeries continue to grab headlines: earlier this year, the oldest art gallery in New York shut its doors after allegations about the sale of forged paintings; this month a renowned imitator who fooled gallery owners and museum curators for decades is the focus of the "Faux Real" exhibit at the University of Cincinnati. Is there really any aesthetic difference in philosophical terms between originals and copies?
       This is the question posed by University of Victoria master’s candidate Rene Negrich, whose research included the review of different philosophical views, under the supervision of Dr. James Young in UVic’s Department of Philosophy.
       Negrich concludes that what’s “wrong with forgeries is the deception. Forgeries themselves can still have value and the craftsmanship tends to be quite worthy from a general aesthetic standpoint.” She cites Dutch forger Han van Meegeren, who copied Johannes Vermeer, pointing out the former’s paintings have been much valued over the years. “Forgeries do however create historical problems as there are various connections interwoven into history over time and it can take time to untangle true timelines.”
       Negrich is available today to comment on this subject.

—30—

Rene Negrich is available by cell phone today from noon onwards at 250-896-0321. She works a rotating schedule and can respond by email after today outside work hours.