Forgeries find easy access to art market
David Lister examines the rise of pastiching as a successful modern day art form
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Those who can, paint. Those who can, and want to make money, pastiche. The most overheard snippet of conversation in any self-respecting modern art gallery is: "But I could have done that." Behind the phrase is an art form.
Pastiching is widespread, both in its respectable, highly-skilled and lucrative guise and in its illegal, fraudulent and also lucrative guise that Independent investigations have uncovered. Even the name pasticheur has a borrowed-from-Montmartre feel. If pasticheurs seem to be multiplying, it could be because some 20th-century art has proved a relatively easy number to pastiche.
In the late 1960s, American researchers fed the details of paintings by Paul Klee into a computer programmed to detect patterns in shapes and colours. After analysing the paintings, the computer was able to generate more "school of Klee" originals. Prints of the genuine Klees and the machine Klees were then given to art students to see if they could tell which were which. The results showed that they could not.
When they were asked to interpret the paintings, they found no difficulty in doing so if they were told one had been produced by a human hand, but when told a picture was computer-generated, they said that no interpretation was possible. Oddly, despite that success, computers have been only sparingly used in pastiching famous artists.
Questioning art students and drawing experts, a shortlist of artists ripe for pastiching emerges. Jean Miro's flat, spodgy, childlike shapes were cited frequently. Rothko's blurred, soft discs of colour were another popular choice.
But the success of installation art means that copyists and pasticheurs are also having to adjust. Contemporary pastiche needs less of an eye for stylistic idiosyncrasies than hitherto. But it does demand contacts. If you can cultivate the chap at the local slaughter house for a deceased cow, and chat up the security guard at the morgue for a tub of formaldehyde...
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments