The Problem of Authenticity of Artwork and Experience of Art

Debates in Aesthetics, 2020

Since the mid-Sixties, philosophers have debated over the aesthetic relevance of authentic art-objects, perfect replicas, and restoration. In particular, a dispute has ensued concerning the cogency of our penchant for original artworks. Originalists argue that authenticity, the quality of an object being of undisputed origin or authorship, is a necessary condition for aesthetic experience, since the appreciation of an artwork presupposes its correct identification. Anti-originalists retort that we have no art-relevant reason to favour originals over visually-indistinguishable duplicates. To this extent, they claim, ‘there is no identification without (prior) evaluation’. In this paper, I re-examine the underpinnings at the core of this discussion. I argue that aesthetic appreciation does not necessarily require judgement of authenticity. However, there are instances in which authenticity does intrude upon aesthetic evaluation, namely when style recognition is involved. In these cases, I propose that errors in historical attribution reduce the impact of the object and jeopardise aesthetic appreciation altogether.

discussion about the idea of authenticity in art and architecture field

2019

Conservators seem to make choices in the light of strong theoretical assumptions. In particular, a notion of conservation as a 'truth-based' activity is currently widespread. From this perspective, conservation's main aim is to maintain or reveal an artwork's true or authentic nature. This is, however, philosophically puzzling. What is the 'true state' of an object? What material condition deserves to be considered 'authentic'? At a time when preservation of our cultural and artistic heritage is gaining increasing relevance in social discourse, I argue that aestheticians are urged to reexamine this sort of conceptual presuppositions. While the practical exploration of these assumptions is both stimulating and rewarding for philosophers, thinking about these philosophical issues might help museum and heritage workers re-evaluate the principles of their profession and eventually reformulate their codes of practice.

مجلة الممارسات اللغوية, 2014

Published by the Academy of Creative and Performing Arts Leiden University, 2022

This article was written as a lecture for the emeritus celebration of prof. Janneke Wesseling (Leiden University) in June 2022 One must distinguish between asking 'what a work (does or does not) say' (= its 'meaning') and asking 'what the work is about' (= its aboutness). The subject or issue of a work, what it is about, is not a 'message' that is said. Art is always about something, and that means that it presents something, raises something, talks about something, opens a conversation... One cannot limit the 'aboutness' of art and inscribe it in an essentialist definition of what art is. But art is indeed - retrospectively, historically and therefore factually - mainly about certain issues. History has excavated a bed in which art flows today, and which serves as a frame of reference for what art can be and can possibly do. Art concerns issues that every society faces because, anthropologically speaking, they concern basic facts of human existence and the human condition. This historical ‘aboutness’ of art concerns, schematically, three issues. First of all: art is about the image. Art still remains the only or most important place where the understanding, production and use of the image can be historically and critically framed, and discussed. Art is therefore relevant and potentially interesting, when it deals with what an image is and does. Secondly: Art is about the aesthetic gaze and the aesthetic approach of the world: that special, artificial kind of attention to the way in which reality immediately presents itself, and isolates it, abstracts it from the meaning, use and value of things. The exclusive focus on 'first appearance' places this basic condition in brackets, and places us in a hazardous and potentially dangerous relationship to things can be socially very disrespectful, cruel and disruptive. In Western culture, the aesthetic gaze has its own well-defined place and play field in the arts. Within art, it is then possible to experiment fairly freely, without great danger, with the appearance of things, and to test the elasticity of the aesthetic approach. Finally: art deals with the 'poetic'. The poetic is the effect of meaning that comes with the failure, with the not immediate succeding, of ‘reading’ the work of art, when this is experienced as an obstacle and a riddle. The poetic is in the language what the distance is in the landscape. Riddle games exercise in enduring and mastering incomprehensibility. Art is interesting when it is, in some way, about what images are and do, and thus contributes to the 'taming' of the image; when it is about experimenting with the 'aesthetic'; when it varies on reenacting the confrontation of the profoundly incomprehensible.

We seem to care a lot about authenticity when dealing with work of arts. Authentic paintings are sold for incredibly high amount of money in art auctions, museums display authentic artworks and when a forgery is discovered the painting is removed. However, an interesting philosophical question remains: is authenticity an aesthetical property? That is, is an original artwork intrinsically more valuable artistically than a copy? In this paper, I will assess various proposal for how to answer this question, but all will turn out to be unsatisfying. In the end, I will argue that authenticity is not an artistic (nor an aesthetical) property, through a case study of digital artworks and the recent developments of NFT. Authenticity, turns out, is merely a by-product of the art market.

Proceedings of the European Society for Aesthetics, 2019

Philosophers have long debated over the aesthetic value of authentic art-objects and their perfect replicas. Originalists argue that authenticity, the quality of an object being of undisputed origin or authorship, is a necessary condition for aesthetic experience, since appreciating an artwork presupposes its correct identification. Antioriginalists retort that there is no aesthetic reason to favor originals over visually-indistinguishable duplicates. To this extent, they claim, the need for authenticity is a matter of case by case evaluation. Drawing from this debate, I argue that judgment of authenticity is not a primary source for aesthetic appreciation. There are instances, however, in which authenticity does intrude upon aesthetic evaluation, namely when style recognition is involved. In these cases, errors in attribution reduce the object’s impact and jeopardize aesthetic appreciation altogether

Contributions To Phenomenology, 2015

The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.

In this paper, I argue that norms of artistic and aesthetic authenticity that prioritize material origins foreclose on broader opportunities for aesthetic experience: particularly, for the aesthetic experience of history. I focus on Carolyn Korsmeyer's recent articles in defense of the aesthetic value of genuineness and argue that her rejection of the aesthetic significance of historical value is mistaken. Rather, I argue that recognizing the aesthetic significance of historical value points the way towards rethinking the dominance of the very norms of authenticity that Korsmeyer endeavors to defend and explain.

Wassard Elea Rivista, 2017

The content (proposed as naturalness, originality, childlikeness, and authenticity) and mechanism (as an infinite rotation of maintaining, searching, re-/finding) of genuineness are described in order to firstly apply the phenomenon to the field of artistic and aesthetic experiences, and secondly to expound the interplay of style, taste, and genuineness. Two examples are drawn to illustrate the stated concepts, namely the genuinizing strategy involved in the movies of Quentin Tarantino, as well as the fashion values of Garbiele Strehle.

2022

The concept of originality as an artistic merit was at the center of a lively discussion in theories of arts from the early eighteenth century until the first half of the twentieth century. This dissertation will attempt an in-depth review of the concept. Two complementary perspectives will be offered: historical and philosophical. The historical account will reveal five distinct discourses, and the philosophical analyses will reveal three major stances. I will argue that a combination of distinct discourses of originality and distinct stances of originality can offer insights into the evolution and role of the concept of originality in theories of art.

Dialogue, 2004

A sustained challenge to the view that artworks are physical objects relates to the alleged inability of physical objects to possess representational properties, which some artworks clearly do possess. I argue that the challenge is subject to confusions about representational properties and aesthetic experience. I show that a challenge to artwork-object identity put forward by Danto is vulnerable to a similar criticism. I conclude by noting that the identity of artworks and physical objects is consistent with the insight that attending exclusively to the object's individual physical properties may prevent us from grasping the nature of the work.

2017

What is true Art? Are there any objective criteria to analyze an artwork? How can we distinguish good Art and bad Art? This paper deals with these and other related questions, through an in-depth analysis of Chagall's "White Crucifixion", according to the philosophical theories of Jacques Maritain and Etienne Gilson. It also discusses the anthropological and metaphysical foundation of Art.

2022

After the art forms of the second half of the 20th century it is not possible to define art based on the aesthetic in the traditional sense. Thus, the whole discipline has fallen into a trap, a cul-de-sac, from which there is no escape. Therefore, the aesthetic has to be redefined. This essay is an attempt to find a way out. This article analyzes the possibility of finding a definition of art and the work of art, especially the so called modern art, concentrating on visual art and specifically on painting. First, I briefly analyze some previous attempts and suggest a novel approach that would make it possible to define art as a special form of brainwork. To be able to do this, terms like beauty, aesthetic, and art and their mutual relations are first redefined, concentrating especially on the nature of aesthetic experience as the fundamental aspect of all life in general. Next, I suggest a distinction between craft and art and, based on this distinction, provide a definition of art in the traditional sense of the word, such as art was seen from prehistoric times to 19th century Europe. Thereafter, I suggest a definition of a work art as the realized intention of the artist in nonconceptual form. Finally, I analyze the possibility of interpretation of art according to this theory, concluding that while it is possible to interpret works of art, it is not possible to interpret art because art is the quality of the artwork, and that can only be experienced, not conceptually understood.

Espes Journal of Society for Aesthetics in Slovakia, 2018

Experiencing aesthetics and aesthetic experience has, for a long time, been perceived as the purpose and goal of art. The aesthetic features of a work of art have been the only criteria used in its evaluation. However, these modernist aspects cannot be applied to the conceptual and neo-avant-garde art of the 2nd half of the 20th century that has not only brought a radical change in the artistic form, but, especially, the ontological nature of the work itself. Modernist theories of art and normative rules which apply to perceptual art are no longer able to reflect the changes brought by the art of mind. The traditional history of aesthetics oriented towards the definition of art should, therefore, overlap with, for example, the history of ideas. In the text, I will thus focus on the crucial moments which stood on the border between the old, modernist traditions, and the new, which has brought radical changes into the study of aesthetics as well as the theory of art. The text is focused on three issues: ontological issues of art, the criticism of aestheticism and tautology as a possible problem in interpretation, which will be dealt with from the comparative viewpoint of the art of sense and art of mind.