What if Those Paintings... Are Fakes? French Art Museum Discovers Half of its Collection are Fake

It's every art gallery's worst nightmare: given the ability of forgers down the centuries, what if some of those priceless works of art hanging on the walls are... not real?

A state-owned French art museum has discovered that more than half of its collection consists of worthless fakes and experts fear that other public galleries may also be stuffed with forgeries. An art historian raised the alarm after noticing that paintings attributed to Etienne Terrus showed buildings that were only constructed after the artist’s death in 1922.

Experts confirmed that 82 of the 140 works displayed at the Terrus museum in Elne, the artist’s birthplace in southern France, were fakes. Many of the forged oil paintings, watercolours and drawings were bought with £140,000 of municipal funds over the past few decades. Others were given to the museum by two local groups that raised money to buy them by appealing for donations. Some were bequeathed by a private collector.
Yves Barniol, the mayor of Elne, near the Spanish border, said: “It’s a catastrophe. I put myself in the place of all the people who came to visit the museum, who saw fake works of art, who paid an entrance fee. It’s intolerable and I hope we find those responsible.” The municipality has filed legal complaints for forgery and fraud. Police have seized the fakes and are trying to trace the forgers and dealers who sold them.

Among my prize possession are two Brueghels, Jan pere et fils, (the son and grandson of Pieter Brueghel) both fake, but beautifully painted by a Viennese-born artist, a dear friend long since dead, who worked "in the style of" as a hobby.

A state-owned French art museum has discovered that more than half of its collection consists of worthless fakes and experts fear that other public galleries may also be stuffed with forgeries.

Since the value of all art is no more than that value placed upon it by those who accept that it has value why is that art suddenly worth less because its providence is in question?

If this art is now believed to be produced by a different artist is its quality suddenly less?

If the painting was of good enough quality to be by Rembrandt yesterday is its quality now somehow less because it is painted by Armstrong?

who saw fake works of art,

Fake?

Are the images not really hanging on the wall? Are they not paintings?

Nonsense! They're real enough; not fake at all.

They're just painted by someone other than the one to whom they're attributed.

Which raises an interesting question: Are they any good? If they're rubbish, they shouldn't be hanging on the wall. If they're good, the real artist should get credit for them.

Thanks for the ping!

It was in the Sunday N.Y. Post, so I read it yesterday; this article is almost word for word the Post one, except that the one in the Post had much more info.

The funny thing about the "art expert world" is, that many times they can't tell what's fake from what's REAL and call real one "FAKE". And the 2 different shows from the UK, about this, are now on PBS. Both shows are really interesting .

Yves Barniol, the mayor of Elne, near the Spanish border, said: “It’s a catastrophe. I put myself in the place of all the people who came to visit the museum, who saw fake works of art, who paid an entrance fee. It’s intolerable and I hope we find those responsible.”

I don't understand; call me stupid, ignorant or whatever.

If it took that long to discover they were fakes, but they were enjoyed for a long time as real, admired and enjoyed, what disqualifies them as "works of art?"

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.