What's inauthentic is the misrepresentation, not the quality of the work. Otherwise, why would they be proven to be made by art students? No one is pleased by misrepresentation and rightly so. It's always an insult, made to discredit the viewer, not the work. It would seem ludicrous or unethical if not criminal for one to knowingly of defend a misrepresentation of authenticity. To do so is not "authentic" no matter how personal it is.
You confuse the notion of authenticity by saying the truthfully or untruthfully based judgment of a viewer can be projected to the work itself (which it is) and is thus becomes intrinsic to the work (which it does not). WC --- Chris Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > and..... the concept of of authenticity belongs to > Derek as much as to anyone > else. > > For example -- if someone had proven that those > African heads on Derek's > website had been made by American art students -- > I'm sure that he would never > have posted them as examples of art. > > Not because they looked any less "powerful" -- but > because they were not > "authentic" > > ____________________________________________________________ > Bills adding up? Click here for free information on > payday loans. > http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/Ioyw6ijmOWd5C7AxovsgTlk7sQZYrj > moFY55LAFhApMLSI8C41LaGQ/
