ALFRED LESSING

WHAT IS WRONG WITH A FORGERY?

“This is not an unreasonable assumption when one considers that the term forgery can be
defined only in reference to a contrasting phenomenon which must somehow include the
notion of genuineness or authenticity […] It is clear, moreover, that it is a negative concept
implying the absence or negation of aesthetic value. If this were so, a forgery would be an
aesthetically inferior work of art […] Pure aesthetics cannot explain forgery. Considering a
work of art aesthetically superior because it is genuine, or inferior because it is forged, has
little or nothing to do with aesthetic judgement or criticism. It is a rather a piece of snobbery”
(p. 461).
“Perhaps the classic, certainly most celebrated, case in point was that of Han van Meegeren
who in 1945 disturbed the complacent tranquility of the world of art and art critics by
confessing that he was the artist responsible for eight paintings of which sic had been sold
as legitimate Vermeers and two as De Hooghs […] Here, for example, are some of the
words with which the discovery of Van Meegeren’s Christ and the Disciples at Emmaus was
announced to the world by Abraham Bredius, at that time probably the world’s expert on
Vermeer:
… we have here a – I am inclined to say – the masterpiece of Johannes Vermeer of Delft… quite different from
all his other paintings and yet every inch a Vermeer. The subject is Christ and the Disciples at Emmaus and the
colors are magnificent – and characteristic…

In no other picture by the great Master of Delft do we find such sentiment, such a profound understanding of the
Bible story – a sentiment so nobly human expressed through the medium of the highest art…

The reproduction (accompanying Bredius’s article) can only give a very inadequate idea of the splendid luminous
effect of the rare combination of colors of this magnificent painting by one of the greatest artists of the Dutch
School (p. 461-2)

Its is of course embarrassing and irritating for an expert to make a mistake in his field (p.
462) O comentário do crítico aponta para além da identificação errônea. Exaltação estética
em “cores magníficas” “To their way of thinking, which I am trying to show was not very
logical, they were now apparently faced with the dilemma of either admitting that they had
praised a worthless picture or continuing to do so. This was precisely the trap that Van
Meegeren had laid for the critics. It was, in fact, the whole raison d’être of his perpetrating
the fraud” (p. 462)

“The Court might, according to an ancient Dutch Law, have ordered the destruction of all the
pictures. One shudders at the thought that one could, officially, have destroyed two of the
most moving works which Vermeer has created” (ainda)
“The truth is that the difference between a forgery and a genuine work of art is by no means
as obvious as critics sometimes make out”
“The plain fact is that aesthetically it makes no difference whether a work of art is authentic
or a forgery, and instead of being embarrassed at having praised a forgery, critics should
have the courage of their convictions and take pride in having praised a work of beauty” (p.
462)
“In a museum that did not label its paintings, how many of us would not feel uneasy lest we
condemn one of the greats or praise an unknown? […] it is indeed serious and regrettable
that the realm of art should be so infested with non-aesthetic standards of judgement that it
is often impossible to distinguish artistic from economic value, taste or fashion from true
artistic excellence, and good artists from clever businessmen” (p. 463-4)
“In any case, it seems clear that […] such deliberate forgeries are condemned by us on
moral grounds, that is, because they involve conscious deception” (p. 464)
Superior x Inferior work of art… “The attempt to define forgery in moral terms fails because it
inevitably already assumes that there exists a difference between genuine works of art and
forgeries which makes passing off the latter as the former an offense against a moral or legal
law” (aindas
“It seems to me that the offense felt to be involved in forgery is not so much against the spirit
of beauty (aesthetics) or the spirit of the law (morality) as against the spirit of art.
“Forgery is a concept that can be made meaningful only be reference to the concept of
originality, and hence only to art viewed as a creative, not as a reproductive or technical
activity. The element of performance or technique in art cannot be an object for forgery
because technique is not the kind of thing that can be forged. Technique is, as it were,
public. One does or does not possess it or one acquires it or learns it. One may even
pretend to have it. But one cannot forge it because in order to forge it one must already
possess it, in which case there is no need to forge it.
Originality/style is forged. But what is originality anyway?
1) A work of art may be said to be original in the sense of being a particular object not
identical with any other object. But this originality is trivial since it is a quality
possessed by all things. Particularity or self-identity would be better names for it.
2) By originality in a work of art we may mean that it possesses a certain superficial
individuality which serves to distinguish it from other works of art. Thus, for example,
a certain subject matter in a particular arrangement painted in certain colors may
serve to identify a painting and mark it as an original work of art in the sense that its
subject matter is unique. Probably the term individuality specifies this quality more
adequately that originality.

“Vermeer is not a great artist only because he could paint beautiful pictures. He is
great for that reason plus something else. And that something else is precisely the
fact of his originality, i.e., the fact that he painted certain pictures in a certain manner
at a certain time in the history and development of art (p. 468)

“And when they succeed in achieving this originality we call their works great
because they have also unlocked, both to artists and to appreciators, unknown and
unexplored realms of beauty” p. 469
It is for this reason that the concept of originality has become inseparable from that o art. It is
for this reason too that the aesthetics has traditionally concerned itself with topics such as
the inspiration of the artist, the mystery of the creative act, the intense and impassioned
search of the artist, the artist as the prophet of his times, the artistic struggle after
expression, art as the chronicle of the emotional life of a period in history, art as a product of
its time, and so on. All such topics are relevant not to art as the production of works of
beauty, but to art as the production of original works of beauty, or, more accurately, works of
original beauty” p. 470