(214)
|
| 作偽的剖析——濟汀偽作帕麥爾畫作事件 |
| An Analysis of Forgery: Tom Keating's Forgery of Samuel Palmer's Works |
 |
| 作者 |
李淑卿 |
| Author |
Shwu-Ching Lee |
| 關鍵詞 |
帕麥爾、
濟汀、
索倫、
《泰晤士報》、
偽作
|
| Keywords |
Samuel Palmer,
Tom Keating,
Shoreham,
Times,
Forgery
|
| 摘要 |
古今中外皆有偽作藝術品事件，且是層出不窮。作偽現象愈來愈猖獗已是不爭的事實，而真偽混雜辨識不易的現象，常阻礙藝術史家對藝術家風格的研究。十九世紀英國畫壇已屢見偽作，但並未有特別受注意的作偽者。至二十世紀下半期則出現一位震驚藝術界的作偽者濟汀，他抗議且愚弄藝術界，不僅是西方藝術史上作偽者寫自傳的首例，亦開啟作偽者在電視講解古代大師的例子。因濟汀極具代表性且尚未被學術界所重視，本文即以1976年濟汀偽作帕麥爾畫作事件為主軸，企圖探究與其相關的各種面向。因作偽者與其偽作絕不可能孤立於歷史文化的時空脈絡中，藉對此重要實例的剖析，我們除得以實際瞭解作偽事件所可能牽涉到的複雜問題，尤其是其與當時藝術環境及藝術史發展的關連性，亦可經由真偽作品的比較，得以對帕麥爾早期畫風的瞭解更為清晰。
本文探討的主要面向有三，一是分析濟汀個人學習歷程，及其作偽動機、題材、方法與技巧、實例等；二是從各角度討論濟汀為何選擇帕麥爾早期的畫作作偽，其中特別探究帕麥爾的早期畫風與他在當時畫壇的影響力；三是論述事件披露後學術界、藝術界與濟汀本人的迴響，主要分析發表於《泰晤士報》近百篇的文章。最後，論述濟汀事件對學術界與藝術界有何重要意義與影響。 |
| Abstract |
Picture forging had been increasing in Britain through the nineteenth century, but no single forger had drawn special attention until Tom Keating (1917-1984) emerged in the second half of the twentieth century. Keating, who protested against the art establishment by fooling it, was the first forger in the history of art to write an autobiography; he even spoke about the old masters on television. This paper attempts to discuss various aspects of the Keating affair, centering on Keating's forgery of Samuel Palmer's (1805-1881) works, particularly with a view toward analyzing its relationship with the art world at the time and the development of art history.
This article thus discusses primarily three aspects of the case. Keating's background and art education is analyzed first, as well as his motivations, themes, techniques, and several examples of his forgery. Secondly, this article discusses why Keating chose to forge a large number of Samuel Palmer's early “Shoreham period” works, with special attention to the impact those works were having among painters of the time. Finally, the reactions of the academic world, the art world, and Keating himself after the forgeries' discovery are thoroughly traced through nearly one hundred articles and letters published in The Times. Finally, the importance and significance of the Keating case in the art world is discussed in the conclusion. |
|
|
|
