An outing and a quiz!
Today it was warmer than it has been for a while - up to 26C/79F and very sunny! A load of laundry (washed overnight) was put on the line this morning before I set off on the train to Charing Cross to meet up with kathyh as we had arranged to go to the Courtauld Gallery to see their small Art and Artiface exhibition (there's a really interesting five-minute video about a particularly tricky forgery/not forgery on that page).
It was a very interesting exhibition of contemporary fakery, modern fakery and genuine things that were then added to with fake stuff to make them worth more! Some examples and under the cut!
This is a contemporary fake - produced during the lifetime of Albrecht Dürer by Marcantonio Raimondi who copied this scene and changed it slightly. It became a fake once he added Dürer's AD monogram to pass it off as one of Dürer's works. Apparently Dürer was 'incensed' by Raimondi's attempt to profit from his work and filed a lawsuit over the copyright. The court decided that Raimondi could copy the work, but not add the monogram. I imagine he wasn't happy about that....
When is a Constable, not a Constable? When it's Seascape (after 1840) produced by his son (after his death) and the family is pressurised into validating the authenticity of the works even when they knew they weren't. This one was painted by one of Constable's sons.
This is a copy of the Dutch painter - Philips Wouwerman. A definite fake, but kathyh and I really liked the movement and the detail on this. Figure wading and horse rider in red chalk.
This drawing (The Raising of Lazarus - around 1650) has had an interesting past - for three centuries it was considered to be by the Flemish artist Peter Paul Rubens. In 1985 it was revealed to have an inscription saying it was by Girolamo Muziano, so it was thought to be retouched by Rubens at some point. Recently the paper was analysed and it's now thought that it couldn't be by either of them!
Still a gorgeous piece of work - detail
The world of fakes has many complications. This Mandarin Drake (after 1849) has a stamp with the initials ED at the lower right and was sold as part of the artist Eugène Delacroix's estate. However, this stamp is one of three imitations in existence and has appeared on works of various artists. It turns out that one of Delacroix's pupils inherited some actual works by the artist, but also collected lots of other works and basically added the stamp to everything (including the artist's genuine work!). Very difficult to determine what is real, and what is fake!
Compilation fakes - take a little bit of Goya's figures from one drawing, and combine them with another figure from another of Goya's drawings. This was purchased as a teaching aid to help students understand how forgeries can be made.
Then we have the mysteries - this one is very likely by William James Müller (Mountain landscape with waterfall), BUT the signature is considered to be 'wrong' as it doesn't match his signature on other paintings. Contemporaries at the time of Müller's death wrote about 'many imitations and spurious works have been brought into the market and sold as his". I still really like it and I think the way the water is painted is lovely.
The notorious British forger Eric Hebborn (1934-96) made many fakes that fooled the art world. This drawing of a Venician scene was considered to be one of his, but it was recently discovered that this is the right edge of a larger sheet by Francesco Guardi and there is photographic evidence in 1920 showing the drawing (well before Hebborn was born). Not a fake!
QUIZ! There were two chances to identify the fake or the real deal in the exhibition - I'll just give you one chance to have a go.
One of these is a genuine work by Giovanni Battista Tiepolo (1696-1770), the other is a forgery. Tiepolo skillfully used vigorous lines to endow his figures with energy, and employed wash judiciously, using blank areas of paper to great effect. He also modulated the tones of wash to effortlessly suggest variations in colour. If you want to play - put your guess in comments! Which is the fake - 1 or 2?
1: Two seated Soldiers
2: Helmeted male Head
It was a fun exhibition - we had a wander around some of the other floors at the Courtauld before we walked down the Strand to one of our favourite Greek restaurants and spent a couple of hours chatting and enjoying a delicious lunch. A lovely day!
I got back home around 3.30 pm and at 5 pm Mr Cee and I went Nordic walking with our group. It was a really nice two-and-a-half mile walk in the countryside in the sun! I was quite tired after that as I've walked rather a long way today (nearly five and a half miles) - so we are relaxing.
Today's question: 16 - Elvis Week: Are you, or were you, an Elvis Presley fan?
I was! I still think some of his bluesy work is excellent.
It was a very interesting exhibition of contemporary fakery, modern fakery and genuine things that were then added to with fake stuff to make them worth more! Some examples and under the cut!
This is a contemporary fake - produced during the lifetime of Albrecht Dürer by Marcantonio Raimondi who copied this scene and changed it slightly. It became a fake once he added Dürer's AD monogram to pass it off as one of Dürer's works. Apparently Dürer was 'incensed' by Raimondi's attempt to profit from his work and filed a lawsuit over the copyright. The court decided that Raimondi could copy the work, but not add the monogram. I imagine he wasn't happy about that....
When is a Constable, not a Constable? When it's Seascape (after 1840) produced by his son (after his death) and the family is pressurised into validating the authenticity of the works even when they knew they weren't. This one was painted by one of Constable's sons.
This is a copy of the Dutch painter - Philips Wouwerman. A definite fake, but kathyh and I really liked the movement and the detail on this. Figure wading and horse rider in red chalk.
This drawing (The Raising of Lazarus - around 1650) has had an interesting past - for three centuries it was considered to be by the Flemish artist Peter Paul Rubens. In 1985 it was revealed to have an inscription saying it was by Girolamo Muziano, so it was thought to be retouched by Rubens at some point. Recently the paper was analysed and it's now thought that it couldn't be by either of them!
Still a gorgeous piece of work - detail
The world of fakes has many complications. This Mandarin Drake (after 1849) has a stamp with the initials ED at the lower right and was sold as part of the artist Eugène Delacroix's estate. However, this stamp is one of three imitations in existence and has appeared on works of various artists. It turns out that one of Delacroix's pupils inherited some actual works by the artist, but also collected lots of other works and basically added the stamp to everything (including the artist's genuine work!). Very difficult to determine what is real, and what is fake!
Compilation fakes - take a little bit of Goya's figures from one drawing, and combine them with another figure from another of Goya's drawings. This was purchased as a teaching aid to help students understand how forgeries can be made.
Then we have the mysteries - this one is very likely by William James Müller (Mountain landscape with waterfall), BUT the signature is considered to be 'wrong' as it doesn't match his signature on other paintings. Contemporaries at the time of Müller's death wrote about 'many imitations and spurious works have been brought into the market and sold as his". I still really like it and I think the way the water is painted is lovely.
The notorious British forger Eric Hebborn (1934-96) made many fakes that fooled the art world. This drawing of a Venician scene was considered to be one of his, but it was recently discovered that this is the right edge of a larger sheet by Francesco Guardi and there is photographic evidence in 1920 showing the drawing (well before Hebborn was born). Not a fake!
QUIZ! There were two chances to identify the fake or the real deal in the exhibition - I'll just give you one chance to have a go.
One of these is a genuine work by Giovanni Battista Tiepolo (1696-1770), the other is a forgery. Tiepolo skillfully used vigorous lines to endow his figures with energy, and employed wash judiciously, using blank areas of paper to great effect. He also modulated the tones of wash to effortlessly suggest variations in colour. If you want to play - put your guess in comments! Which is the fake - 1 or 2?
1: Two seated Soldiers
2: Helmeted male Head
It was a fun exhibition - we had a wander around some of the other floors at the Courtauld before we walked down the Strand to one of our favourite Greek restaurants and spent a couple of hours chatting and enjoying a delicious lunch. A lovely day!
I got back home around 3.30 pm and at 5 pm Mr Cee and I went Nordic walking with our group. It was a really nice two-and-a-half mile walk in the countryside in the sun! I was quite tired after that as I've walked rather a long way today (nearly five and a half miles) - so we are relaxing.
Today's question: 16 - Elvis Week: Are you, or were you, an Elvis Presley fan?
I was! I still think some of his bluesy work is excellent.