Scan barcode
toniclark's review against another edition
4.0
Ooh, I really liked this book! It was so engrossing, entertaining, and provocative. Somebody said it was dry? Slow? I didn’t think so at all. In fact, it’s downright humorous in places. I kept reading passages to my husband.
The book raises many questions about the implications of forgery for art, its relationship to art, and forgery as an art in itself. Part One, which is Chapter 1, sets us up with some themes to keep in mind when reading the stories of six famous forgers. The author maintains that “art forgeries achieve what legitimate art accomplishes when legitimate art is most effective, provoking us to ask agitating questions about ourselves and our world.”
It also reminds us that, “To become a serious artist, the forger must get caught. The swindle must be exposed.” Which explains why so many forgers come forward, turn themselves in, and claim responsibility. It’s fascinating that in some times and places, they have been reviled, while in others, lionized.
Part Two, comprising the next six chapters, focuses on the careers in forgery of Lothar Malskat, Alceo Dossena, Han van Meegeren, Eric Hebborn, Elmyr de Hory, and Tom Keating — with themes of What Is Belief?, What Is Authenticity?, What Is Authority?, What Is History?, What Is Identity?, and What Is Culture? Fascinating questions, indeed.
And finally, Part Three, Forging a New Art, covers some more modern hijinks — From Duchamp’s “Fountain” and “L.H.O.O.Q.” to Warhol to graffiti artists and Internet hoaxes (e.g., a fake Vatican website where papal encyclicals were “lightly modified” to promote free sex and drug legalization).
Never dull, imho.
The book raises many questions about the implications of forgery for art, its relationship to art, and forgery as an art in itself. Part One, which is Chapter 1, sets us up with some themes to keep in mind when reading the stories of six famous forgers. The author maintains that “art forgeries achieve what legitimate art accomplishes when legitimate art is most effective, provoking us to ask agitating questions about ourselves and our world.”
It also reminds us that, “To become a serious artist, the forger must get caught. The swindle must be exposed.” Which explains why so many forgers come forward, turn themselves in, and claim responsibility. It’s fascinating that in some times and places, they have been reviled, while in others, lionized.
Part Two, comprising the next six chapters, focuses on the careers in forgery of Lothar Malskat, Alceo Dossena, Han van Meegeren, Eric Hebborn, Elmyr de Hory, and Tom Keating — with themes of What Is Belief?, What Is Authenticity?, What Is Authority?, What Is History?, What Is Identity?, and What Is Culture? Fascinating questions, indeed.
And finally, Part Three, Forging a New Art, covers some more modern hijinks — From Duchamp’s “Fountain” and “L.H.O.O.Q.” to Warhol to graffiti artists and Internet hoaxes (e.g., a fake Vatican website where papal encyclicals were “lightly modified” to promote free sex and drug legalization).
Never dull, imho.
ridgewaygirl's review against another edition
4.0
If the purpose of contemporary art is to unsettle and to cause anxiety, might forgeries then be true art? asks Jonathon Keats in Forged: Why Fakes are the Great Art of Our Age. Of course, it only achieves its goal when it is revealed to be a fake, which is usually not the goal of the forger. But some, upon being discovered, tell all, or a version of all, in which some forgeries are possibly left unrevealed and fingers pointed in so many directions that museums, collectors and experts are left scrambling.
The body of Keats' book tells the stories of several famous forgers and a history of the roots of forgery, beginning in renaissance Italy, when copies were made of coveted works, leading to arguments later as to which version was the original. In this book, forgers seem to have similar motivations; technically brilliant, but lacking a personal vision or style, these artists were rejected by the critics and art community. They found work as restorers and their dissatisfaction allowed them to justify the deception. When their forgeries were celebrated, they could enjoy a secret laugh at the gullibility of the art community. Of course, revenge is only fun when the targets know they have been duped.
My favorite story concerned the restoration of the Schleswig cathedral in 1937. It had been badly restored in the nineteenth century with significant overpainting and as Lothar Malskat began work, entire frescoes crumbled to dust. So he simply recovered the walls with his own freehand painting. The church's restoration became a Nazi success story, with Himmler having books about the project distributed to schools across Germany. With the reputation of the Nazi party at stake, the discovery of a group of turkeys embellishing a painting supposedly painted in 1300 had to be explained away, turkeys being new world animals. And so a group of German vikings who sailed to the new world and brought back the animals was "discovered", because questioning a Nazi endorsed project was too dangerous.
The body of Keats' book tells the stories of several famous forgers and a history of the roots of forgery, beginning in renaissance Italy, when copies were made of coveted works, leading to arguments later as to which version was the original. In this book, forgers seem to have similar motivations; technically brilliant, but lacking a personal vision or style, these artists were rejected by the critics and art community. They found work as restorers and their dissatisfaction allowed them to justify the deception. When their forgeries were celebrated, they could enjoy a secret laugh at the gullibility of the art community. Of course, revenge is only fun when the targets know they have been duped.
My favorite story concerned the restoration of the Schleswig cathedral in 1937. It had been badly restored in the nineteenth century with significant overpainting and as Lothar Malskat began work, entire frescoes crumbled to dust. So he simply recovered the walls with his own freehand painting. The church's restoration became a Nazi success story, with Himmler having books about the project distributed to schools across Germany. With the reputation of the Nazi party at stake, the discovery of a group of turkeys embellishing a painting supposedly painted in 1300 had to be explained away, turkeys being new world animals. And so a group of German vikings who sailed to the new world and brought back the animals was "discovered", because questioning a Nazi endorsed project was too dangerous.
siria's review against another edition
2.0
The six potted biographies of forgers or "appropriative artists" were interesting, as I mostly had not heard of them before, and many of them fell into the "truth is stranger than fiction" category. Ultimately, however, Forged is a rather tiresome work, one which is based on a series of unexamined assertions and a pretty privileged white male view of art and the art world. "Forgers are the foremost artists of our age", Keats asserts, because they subvert "art" (a word whose meaning Keats never defines, which allows him to use it interchangeably as "the modern art industry", "fine art", or "any object which is made or interpreted in a creative way"), something which since the Renaissance has increasingly focused more on authenticity, historicity, legitimacy and the artist's celebrity than it does on the piece's aesthetic qualities or skills.
There's something to be said for exploring these issues, but I think Keats fails to do so in an honest way. Those who fail to see forgers as some sort of modern folk heroes are chastised for being too literal minded, too complicit in the system, not able to see the possibilities inherent in what they produce. Keats never really engages with the rebuttals which could be made of his argument, and seems in fact to change the terms of that argument at several points—the section on Andy Warhol and in particular the last chapter seemed to belong to an entirely different book. At this point Keats' dismisses peoples' concerns about GMO plants being released into the wild as merely illustrating how people have trouble reconciling the tension between the real and the artificial, which... what?
That was baffling, but Keats' championing of "appropriative" art was downright rage-inducing. His view of the history of art is focused almost exclusively on the West, and he entirely fails to deal with any of the ways in which such appropriation has often been used to oppress ethnic and cultural minorities and to reinforce privilege—think of the "Navajo print" panties produced by Urban Outfitters this past year. Those are surely fakes, taking the name of a still-living culture and reproducing for profit prints which claimed to be authentic Navajo designs, without the involvement or the authorisation of any Navajo people or any understanding of the roles which those prints play within Navajo culture. Would Keats endorse these as a bold and necessary evolution of art, a broadening of the demographic which is allowed to create art, and if not, why not? Where are his ethical lines, or is everything okay if it's white men who are being subversive?
I'm honestly a little confused by the fact that Forged—which if anything seems to fall into a pop academic genre—has been published by OUP. Looking at Keats' Wikipedia page, however, I see that he's made something of a name for himself with provocative art works (though honestly ones which, to me, largely seem pretty eyeroll-inducing)—is his book being published, then, solely to cash in on the notoriety attached to his name? If so, that does bring an extra layer of irony to this work.
There's something to be said for exploring these issues, but I think Keats fails to do so in an honest way. Those who fail to see forgers as some sort of modern folk heroes are chastised for being too literal minded, too complicit in the system, not able to see the possibilities inherent in what they produce. Keats never really engages with the rebuttals which could be made of his argument, and seems in fact to change the terms of that argument at several points—the section on Andy Warhol and in particular the last chapter seemed to belong to an entirely different book. At this point Keats' dismisses peoples' concerns about GMO plants being released into the wild as merely illustrating how people have trouble reconciling the tension between the real and the artificial, which... what?
That was baffling, but Keats' championing of "appropriative" art was downright rage-inducing. His view of the history of art is focused almost exclusively on the West, and he entirely fails to deal with any of the ways in which such appropriation has often been used to oppress ethnic and cultural minorities and to reinforce privilege—think of the "Navajo print" panties produced by Urban Outfitters this past year. Those are surely fakes, taking the name of a still-living culture and reproducing for profit prints which claimed to be authentic Navajo designs, without the involvement or the authorisation of any Navajo people or any understanding of the roles which those prints play within Navajo culture. Would Keats endorse these as a bold and necessary evolution of art, a broadening of the demographic which is allowed to create art, and if not, why not? Where are his ethical lines, or is everything okay if it's white men who are being subversive?
I'm honestly a little confused by the fact that Forged—which if anything seems to fall into a pop academic genre—has been published by OUP. Looking at Keats' Wikipedia page, however, I see that he's made something of a name for himself with provocative art works (though honestly ones which, to me, largely seem pretty eyeroll-inducing)—is his book being published, then, solely to cash in on the notoriety attached to his name? If so, that does bring an extra layer of irony to this work.
More...