藝術(shù)大師也造假，教你如何分辨真品和贗品

如果你以為藝術(shù)大師的每一件作品都是大師的親手之作，那你就錯(cuò)了。有些作品確實(shí)是大師親手制作，有些是大師和學(xué)生共同完成，有些則是復(fù)制品。本期的《無限播客》，我們來揭開藝術(shù)作品背后不為人知的故事，教你如何分辨作品的真?zhèn)巍?/p>

Fakes， Forgeries， and Mysteries—How Experts Figure Out if Artworks Are Authentic

Dave Davies （Host）： If you had the artistic talent to create impressive paintings or sculpture， could you imagine devoting that skill to copying the work of past artists and trying to pass your creations off as authentic？ Our guest， art scholar Noah Charney， says you’d be surprised how many people have done just that over the years， some successfully selling hundreds of fakes as the real thing. You’d also be surprised， he says， at how many art 1）forgers want to get caught， so they can embarrass the art world that wasn’t interested in their original work but was too dim to tell forgeries from true masterpieces.

Noah Charney， I learned from your book that it was really only around the Renaissance that art collecting in the modern sense developed， and that before that， people cared about works of art more for what they were than for their origin. And one of the best stories of forgery involves the famous Michelangelo， who was not copied—he was the forger. Tell us what happened.

Noah Charney： It’s an amazing true story ’cause most people don’t realize that Michelangelo began his career before he was the Michelangelo， as a forger of ancient Roman sculptures. And that was at a time in the Renaissance when an ancient Roman sculpture was far more valuable than a work made a few weeks ago by this character， Michelangelo Buonarroti， who no one had ever heard of. And so he， 2）in cahoots with an art dealer， 3）contrived to make a marble sculpture called “Sleeping Eros”， and it was buried in a garden and dug up， broken， repaired and sold as an 4）antiquity to a 5）cardinal who was an expert in antiquities and should probably have known better. But the cardinal， after a few years， started to get suspicious and tried to return the sculpture to the dealer. But by this time， Michelangelo was the most famous sculptor in Rome， so the dealer was very happy to take the sculpture back. And he sold it very easily on as now a Michelangelo original.

Davies： So essentially， the forgery was discovered. Did it damage his reputation？

Charney： To the contrary， it actually 6）embellished it. And Michelangelo was the first to admit this story because in order to demonstrate his capability as a great artist， artists have always copied the art of past periods. And artists studying with a master in their studio， their job would be to replicate the master’s style as closely as possible so that you really couldn’t tell the difference. And it only becomes a problem if you try to pass off the work you create as the work of someone else， and you could commit the crime of fraud. But even to this day， there’s no crime called forgery. Forgers commit crime of economic fraud， but that’s no problem to copy， or to imitate another artist’s style.

Davies： You know， today， there are a lot of scientific tests that can help you determine at least the age of a painting and some other relevant information. But in the past， people relied on experts—art 7）connoisseurs—to help 8）authenticate works of art. What kind of expertise did they bring， and how reliable was it？

Charney： One of the odd things about the art world is that there has never been any objective determination of expertise in a specific period or artist. You could have a Ph.D.， or even two， in Rembrandt and that doesn’t necessarily mean that you can identify a Rembrandt from a copy after Rembrandt， or something done by someone in his studio. In the world of wine， you need to go through elaborate steps to become a master of wine over many years and fulfill these objective tests. The art world doesn’t have that. So expertise has always been a matter of personal opinion， and it’s been quite subjective. It’s very unscientific. And yet for centuries， expertise has been the primary way to authenticate something. The secondary way is 9）provenance research—looking into the documented history of the object. But knowing this， criminals can insert themselves into the history of the object and passoff forgeries with remarkable ease because the art world， unfortunately， is often inadvertently complicit in authenticating forgeries.

Davies： What are some of the physical things， apart from the quality of the art itself， that would you look for in a painting to help determine its authenticity？

Charney： Well， it depends on the type of painting. But if we’re talking about an oil painting， one of the things that has to be replicated in order for it to appear old is called 10）craquelure. And craquelure is the web of cracks that appears naturally in oil paint over time as it expands and contracts， and it literally looks like little webbing on the surface. And you can study that and you can determine whether it was artificially induced to make it look old quickly or whether it appeared naturally. And there’re various tricks to try to make it appear that it was old when it was artificially induced， but that’s usually a good clue for oil paintings.

Davies： How do you recreate craquelure？

Charney： Well， we actually have some accounts voluntarily presented by famous forgers for their own recipes for how to make forgeries. And a handful of the forgers in the book volunteered themselves—they were never caught because they wanted the notoriety. And one of them is Eric Hebborn—and if I’m allowed to have a favorite forger， it would be him. And he published a book called The Art Forger’s Handbook， which was literally—it was like a cookbook of recipes for how to create forgeries and artificially age them. And one of the techniques is to take an oil paint and cover it in a shortening， like Crisco or Bakelite， and you literally bake it in an oven at a certain temperature for a certain amount of time， and it artificially induces something that looks like craquelure. He also explained how you could paint on craquelure， which is very painstaking， but he was able to successfully pull it off.

Davies： What else—labels， inscriptions on frames， or on the material that it’s painted on？

Charney： Well， it’s very important to look at the back of objects， particularly paintings and prints. And there’s a lot of information on the back that people tend not to look at， things like old auction stamps. There might be stamps by previous owners. There might be information on the support itself—where the canvas was purchased. These sort of details are very important， but people tend to look at the front of a painting but not turn it over. They’re particularly loath to take something out of its frame if it’s nicely matted and framed. And this you really need to do， especially if you’re buying， for instance， 20th-century 11）lithographs. Those are the most frequently forged objects in all of art. And unfortunately， laser printers and Photoshop—you can forge these without any artistic skill， thanks to computers. And if it’s matted-up and framed， you can’t tell a lot about it. And it’s very difficult to distinguish a lithograph from something that was printed out a few weeks ago， so it’s important to take things out of the frame and look at the back and see if there are any markings that suggest age and suggest the origin of the object.

Davies： And when a forger actually paints a work of art intended to look like that of a master， can you tell a difference in brush-strokes？

Charney： Yes， you usually can. And brush-stroke analysis is one of the tools that experts will use and that scientists can use， too， although science is rather late in coming to the analysis and authentication of works of art. It tends to be more mystical than that. The great scholar， Walter Benjamin， wrote a famous article that said， we don’t understand why great art is great， but it has some sort of 12）aura that people respond to. And the shorthand is that， if we could scientifically explain away what we found beautiful or moving about it then it would sort of detract from the mysticism of it. And in terms of authenticating things， it’s a lot down to personal opinion of experts. They’ll look at brush-strokes， but， you know， within any one artist’s 13）oeuvre， their style might change. They might’ve had a funny day. They aren’t always exactly the same when they paint， and so finding brush-strokes that look a bit different isn’t a specific determination that it’s a forgery. There are lots of works that are copies after original works. There are works that were made by people in the studio of the master with the master’s supervision that are almost certainly sanctioned by the master， but they’re not originals. And it wasn’t long ago that at Museo del Prado in Madrid， they found a “Mona Lisa”that looked just like the original. And they would’ve said it’s a copy after the “Mona Lisa”， except that it had under-drawings that matched the original， which suggests that the concept of it was developed alongside the original， and it was almost certainly painted by one of Leonardo’s pupils alongside the original while he was painting it.

Davies： So in a case like that， where there’s a studio system—the master supervises students who are copying a work， that work gets out into the art world—how different is that from a work by the master？

Charney： It’s a great question because we tend to think of artists as individuals creating the work of art in their entirety， and that is not the way it has been for many centuries. That’s a very romantic notion of how art is created. And in fact， centuries-long process is the studio system， and all of the great， old masters ran art studios. And depending on how much you paid them， they would create themselves a relevant proportion of the work of art. So if you want a Rubens， for example， you pay him the maximum amount then he paints everything himself， and he designs it too. You pay him the minimum， it’s still called a Rubens， but he supervises and designs the object， but it might be entirely painted by his pupils. And in practice， it’s usually a mixture. Faces， eyes and hands are almost always done by the master ’cause they’re considered the more difficult， if you’re talking about portraits. But backgrounds， architectural elements， still lifes， those were almost never painted by the master， and yet anything coming out of the master’s studio is considered the work of Rubens. So when people get upset about artists like Jeff Koons and Damien Hirst， who design works and supervise it but they have a team of people in a factory making it for them， that’s actually in keeping with a centuries-old artistic tradition.

戴夫·戴維斯（主持人）：假如你擁有創(chuàng)作讓人印象深刻的繪畫或者雕塑的藝術(shù)天賦，你能想象將這種手藝致力于復(fù)制過往藝術(shù)家的作品，并試圖拿你的制成品冒充真品嗎？我們的嘉賓，藝術(shù)學(xué)者諾亞·查尼說，你會(huì)驚訝于多少人多年以來一直從事此項(xiàng)工作，有些人成功售賣了數(shù)百件贗品，以假亂真。他說，你還會(huì)驚訝于多少藝術(shù)偽造者想被揭發(fā)，這樣他們就能讓藝術(shù)界蒙羞，因?yàn)樗囆g(shù)界對(duì)他們的原創(chuàng)作品不感興趣，卻又太遲鈍而無法分辨真正的杰作與贗品。

諾亞·查尼，我從你的書中了解到，原來確實(shí)大約在文藝復(fù)興時(shí)期，現(xiàn)代概念的藝術(shù)收藏才發(fā)展起來，而在此之前，人們更關(guān)注藝術(shù)作品本身，而不是它們的來源。有關(guān)偽造的最佳故事之一，則是關(guān)于著名的米開朗基羅，他不是被模仿者—而是偽造者。我們來聊聊這事。

諾亞·查尼：這是個(gè)奇妙而真實(shí)的故事，因?yàn)榇蠖鄶?shù)人都沒有意識(shí)到米開朗基羅在成名之前就開始了其職業(yè)生涯：偽造古羅馬的雕塑。那是在文藝復(fù)興的某一段時(shí)期，一尊古羅馬雕塑遠(yuǎn)比幾周前由這位不為人知、名為米開朗基羅·邦納羅蒂的人所創(chuàng)作的作品更值錢。于是他與一位藝術(shù)商人合謀，設(shè)法造出一尊大理石雕塑，名為“睡著的厄洛斯”。他們把這尊雕塑埋在花園里，接著把它挖出、修復(fù)破損，并將其作為一件古董賣給了身為古董專家的一位紅衣主教—按理說他應(yīng)該知道真?zhèn)巍@位紅衣主教幾年之后才開始懷疑，并試圖將這尊雕塑退還給那位藝術(shù)商人。但那時(shí)，米開朗基羅已經(jīng)成為羅馬最著名的雕塑家，所以那位商人十分樂意收回這尊雕塑。他將其作為米開朗基羅的原創(chuàng)作品輕松轉(zhuǎn)手賣掉。

戴維斯：所以從本質(zhì)上說，這次偽造被發(fā)現(xiàn)了。他的名譽(yù)是否因此受損呢？

查尼：恰恰相反，這事反倒給他的名譽(yù)錦上添花。米開朗基羅本人第一個(gè)承認(rèn)了這個(gè)故事，因?yàn)樗囆g(shù)家總是要模仿過去時(shí)期的藝術(shù)品，來展示他作為一名偉大藝術(shù)家的才能。當(dāng)藝術(shù)家們?cè)诖髱煹墓ぷ魇依锔S其學(xué)習(xí)時(shí)，他們的任務(wù)就是盡量逼真地模仿大師的風(fēng)格，直到你不能區(qū)分兩者的差異。如果你試圖用自己的成品冒充其他人的作品，這才會(huì)變成問題，而且你可能會(huì)犯詐騙罪。但即使到了今天，也沒有一項(xiàng)罪名叫做偽造。偽造者犯的是經(jīng)濟(jì)詐騙罪，但復(fù)制或者模仿其他藝術(shù)家的風(fēng)格并沒有問題。

戴維斯：你知道，現(xiàn)今有很多科學(xué)測(cè)試至少能夠幫助你斷定一幅油畫的年代和其他相關(guān)信息。但在過去，人們依賴于專家——藝術(shù)鑒賞家——來幫他們鑒定藝術(shù)作品。這些專家?guī)淼氖悄姆矫娴膶I(yè)知識(shí)呢？這些知識(shí)又有多可靠呢？

查尼：藝術(shù)界的其中一件怪事是，對(duì)于某一特定時(shí)期或者藝術(shù)家的專業(yè)技能，從來沒有任何客觀的斷定。你可以在研究倫勃朗的領(lǐng)域擁有一個(gè)甚至兩個(gè)博士學(xué)位，但那并不意味著你就能辨別出是他本人的作品還是復(fù)制品，或是某人在他的工作室完成的作品。對(duì)于鑒賞葡萄酒，你需要經(jīng)歷復(fù)雜的步驟，經(jīng)過很多年成為品酒大師，并完成這些客觀的測(cè)試。但藝術(shù)界并非如此。所以專業(yè)技能一直都是個(gè)人看法的問題，是相當(dāng)主觀的，這十分不科學(xué)。然而數(shù)百年來，專業(yè)技能一直是鑒定事物的主要方式。次要的方式是起源研究——追溯這件物品記錄在案的歷史。但因?yàn)閷?duì)此了然于心，犯罪分子就可以把自己置入到該件物品的歷史中，輕而易舉地將贗品魚目混珠，因?yàn)楹芸上У氖?，藝術(shù)界經(jīng)常在鑒定贗品時(shí)不知不覺地串通一氣。

戴維斯：除了藝術(shù)品本身的品質(zhì)，你會(huì)在一幅繪畫中尋找哪些物質(zhì)因素以協(xié)助斷定其真實(shí)性？

查尼：這取決于繪畫的種類。就拿油畫來說，為了讓它顯得老舊，其中一樣必須要仿制的東西就是龜裂縫。龜裂縫就是油畫顏料隨著時(shí)間的流逝不斷擴(kuò)張和收縮中自然呈現(xiàn)的裂縫網(wǎng)，看起來確確實(shí)實(shí)就像表面的微細(xì)邊帶。你可以研究一下，就能斷定它是否人為誘發(fā)而迅速顯得老舊的，還是看起來很自然的。當(dāng)它是人為誘發(fā)時(shí)，人們有各種各樣的花招使其顯得老舊，不過這對(duì)鑒定油畫來說通常是很好的線索。

戴維斯：龜裂縫是如何再造的？

查尼：事實(shí)上我們有一些說法，由著名的偽造者自愿展示他們對(duì)于如何制作贗品的獨(dú)門配方。有幾個(gè)偽造者在書中毛遂自薦——他們從未被揭發(fā)——因?yàn)樗麄兿胍@樣的惡名。其中一位是艾瑞克·賀伯恩——如果允許我推薦一位心儀的偽造者——這位就是。他出版了一本書，叫做《藝術(shù)偽造者手冊(cè)》，名副其實(shí)就像一本滿是食譜的烹飪書一樣，介紹如何制作贗品，人為使其古老化。其中一個(gè)技巧就是拿一幅油畫，用酥油蓋著它，像科瑞牌或貝克萊牌的，你真的用烤箱以某個(gè)溫度烘烤一段特定的時(shí)間，就可以人為地誘發(fā)出看起來像龜裂縫的效果。他還解釋了如何在龜裂縫上繪畫的方法，那真是煞費(fèi)苦心，但他能夠成功地做出來。

戴維斯：還有哪些東西（可以協(xié)助斷定其真實(shí)性）——在畫框或創(chuàng)作油畫的物料上的標(biāo)簽、銘文？

查尼：看看物品的背后是非常重要的，特別對(duì)于繪畫作品和印刷品。背后有大量信息人們一般不會(huì)看，例如舊的拍賣印記。還可能有以往主人的印章。支架本身也會(huì)有信息——如購買油畫布的地方。這些細(xì)節(jié)都非常重要，但人們一般看畫作的正面，卻沒有翻過來看。如果物品已經(jīng)襯好邊或者裝裱好，他們特別不愿意將其從畫框中取出。這件事你真的有必要做，尤其是如果你要購買，比如說，20世紀(jì)的平版印刷畫。那些東西是所有藝術(shù)品中最常被仿冒的物品。很不幸，由于電腦的原因，憑著激光打印機(jī)和圖像處理，你就能偽造出來，不需要任何藝術(shù)技巧。如果已經(jīng)襯好邊或裝裱好，你很難看出端倪。要辨別一幅平版印刷畫是否是數(shù)周前才打印出來的是相當(dāng)困難的，所以將東西從框中取出，瞧瞧背后，看有沒有一些記號(hào)顯示年份和物品的起源，這是很重要的。

戴維斯：假如偽造者確實(shí)畫了一幅藝術(shù)作品，存心仿冒大師作品，你能從筆觸中看出區(qū)別嗎？

查尼：是的，通常都可以。筆觸分析是專家也是科學(xué)家會(huì)采用的其中一種手段，雖然在分析和鑒定藝術(shù)作品方面，科學(xué)發(fā)展相當(dāng)遲緩。它趨向于神秘化，而非科學(xué)化。偉大的學(xué)者沃爾特·本杰明寫了一篇著名的文章說，我們不明白偉大的藝術(shù)品之所以偉大的原因，但它有一種人們會(huì)去追隨的光環(huán)。簡(jiǎn)單來說，如果我們能夠科學(xué)地解釋作品的美妙之處或者感人之處，其神秘之處就會(huì)減少。而就鑒定物品而言，大部分原因則歸結(jié)為專家的個(gè)人意見。他們會(huì)看一下筆觸，但你知道，任何一位藝術(shù)家的所有作品中，他們的風(fēng)格會(huì)有所變化。他們可能某天過得很開心。他們畫畫的時(shí)候并非總是一樣，所以發(fā)現(xiàn)筆觸有些不同并不能明確斷定其為贗品。有大量作品是原作的復(fù)制品。有些作品是由其他人在這位大師的工作室中在大師的監(jiān)督下創(chuàng)作的，幾乎是由這位大師許可的，但它們卻不是原作。馬德里的普拉多博物館不久前發(fā)現(xiàn)了一幅與原作幾乎一模一樣的《蒙娜·麗莎》。他們會(huì)說這是《蒙娜·麗莎》的復(fù)制品，但是它有與原作吻合的底稿，說明此作品的概念是和原作一起發(fā)展開來的，幾乎可以肯定這是達(dá)芬奇其中一位學(xué)生在他繪畫原作時(shí)和他一起創(chuàng)作的。

戴維斯：所以在這種情況下，在一個(gè)工作室系統(tǒng)里——大師監(jiān)督學(xué)生臨摹作品，這幅作品流入到藝術(shù)世界——這和大師本人的作品有多大不同？

查尼：?jiǎn)柕煤芎?。因?yàn)槲覀儍A向于認(rèn)為藝術(shù)家作為獨(dú)立的個(gè)體完整地創(chuàng)作藝術(shù)作品，然而很多世紀(jì)以來并不是這樣的。對(duì)于藝術(shù)是如何產(chǎn)生的，這是一種浪漫的說法。事實(shí)上，長(zhǎng)達(dá)幾百年來，藝術(shù)作品是在工作室系統(tǒng)產(chǎn)生的，所有偉大、古老的繪畫大師都經(jīng)營(yíng)藝術(shù)工作室。根據(jù)你支付金額的不同，他們會(huì)自己創(chuàng)作藝術(shù)作品的相應(yīng)比例。例如，你想要一幅魯本斯的作品，如果你支付最大金額，他會(huì)全部親力親為，還包括設(shè)計(jì)。如果你支付最低金額，這仍然稱為魯本斯的作品，但他監(jiān)控并設(shè)計(jì)該物品，但可能全部由他的學(xué)生來畫。在實(shí)踐中，作品通常是采用混合的方式。比如說人像，面容、眼睛和手幾乎總是由大師完成，因?yàn)檫@些都被認(rèn)為是難度較大的。但對(duì)于背景、建筑元素、靜物，大師幾乎從不沾手，然而任何大師工作室的出品都被認(rèn)為是魯本斯的作品。所以當(dāng)人們對(duì)諸如杰夫·昆斯和戴米恩·赫斯特等藝術(shù)家有所不滿，因?yàn)樗麄冊(cè)O(shè)計(jì)并監(jiān)控作品，但卻有一個(gè)團(tuán)隊(duì)在工廠里為他們制作，那事實(shí)上他們是在保持一種有著數(shù)百年歷史的藝術(shù)傳統(tǒng)。