21st October 2005 at 01:00
Fakes in art can be an interesting topic for critical studies discussion.

Consider how painting pigments and methods have changed since the Renaissance and why faking these works is now so difficult. Will modern acrylic pigments and materials be as difficult to reproduce convincingly for forgers in the future? Does a fake of an old master that goes undetected have the same artistic merit as a work by the original artist? If it is then detected as a fake does it then have less merit? It would certainly be worth far less than before even though it had deceived so many - is this logical? Is there a connection between the monetary value of a work, and aesthetic merit? Which works of art would be easiest to fake, given that modern technology makes it so difficult to copy old masters without detection? Carl Andre's pile of bricks perhaps? Or some minimal art? How difficult would it be to fake a Jackson Pollock?

Subscribe to get access to the content on this page.

If you are already a Tes/ Tes Scotland subscriber please log in with your username or email address to get full access to our back issues, CPD library and membership plus page.

Not a subscriber? Find out more about our subscription offers.
Subscribe now
Existing subscriber?
Enter subscription number


The guide by your side – ensuring you are always up to date with the latest in education.

Get Tes magazine online and delivered to your door. Stay up to date with the latest research, teacher innovation and insight, plus classroom tips and techniques with a Tes magazine subscription.
With a Tes magazine subscription you get exclusive access to our CPD library. Including our New Teachers’ special for NQTS, Ed Tech, How to Get a Job, Trip Planner, Ed Biz Special and all Tes back issues.

Subscribe now