As the Russian art in the museum in Ghent would not really prove, we find that they suddenly less beautiful? “There is a smaaktaboe,” says the kunstfilosoof, ” but the personal aesthetic experience is untouchable.’ The restorer’s even proud that he is a copy of something more beautiful than the original. Eat that, Ensor.
It was our columnist Wouter Deprez that the idea conjectured: what a pity that the Museum of Fine Arts in Ghent, the loans, the Russian avant-garde art from the audience. Because, says the comedian, …
It was our columnist Wouter Deprez that the idea conjectured: what a pity that the Museum of Fine Arts in Ghent, the loans, the Russian avant-garde art from the audience. Because, says the comedian, ” you would expect that the work matters? That it is an aesthetic feeling misgivings, or confusion, or a theoretical reflection about art.’
His idea falls on fertile ground in. We know quite a few people who in tempore non suspecto delighted were the Russians in the museum. They took photos, praised the colors and were amazed about all the top names in. Their judgment was not clouded by the rumours which gradually force increases. They looked at a large piece of cloth, with a balanced composition, bright colors, saw there the name Malevich standing next to it and liked it. That appreciation was not only cut off by the open letter in which ten international kunstspecialisten the works ‘highly questionable’ called.
Gut instinct versus leading discourse
Who works saw, looked at them in a ‘naive’ era: relying on the individual gut instinct and not much more than that. Although, still not all the way. The work hung in a museum and had thus the hallmark of thoroughness and scientific reliability. It will soon be apparent whether they use that label to earn, but that aside for a moment. That buikervaring is what emeritus kunstfilosoof Antoon Van den Braembussche (Erasmusuniversiteit Rotterdam and VUB) the individual aesthetic experience calls. ‘That is the pure experience, not corrected by the intellect, or by the prevailing attitudes in the art world. Personally, I feel little in the Urinal of Duchamp, but this readymade in the development of the history of art have played a major role.’
The point that Van den Braembussche, is that the art institute has its own conventions on hold and that there a gap is with the individual aesthetic experience. ‘In the art world, the value is determined by the choices of leading curators, or the opinions of a handful of influential critics. They can be an artist, to upgrade or out of favor. The leading discourse that they produce, leads to a smaaktaboe. Someone who is an unknown painter or a plea for kitsch runs the risk of look ridiculous. If the work in Ghent is not authentic would turn out, then that is an opinion of the art institute and then devalues the individual aesthetic experience. Then you need the courage to still say that you like it, because it moves, persuades, or because you work well built to do.”
Label of the master
There is not only the aesthetic value, but also the market value. The prices for an artist can by useful mechanisms with steep start to peak, but also mercilessly plunging. Scarcity or supply have a direct impact on the market. When one of the daughters of Pablo Picasso stated that they are a large part of her estate wanted to auction for a good cause, and drove the panic by the art market. There was concern that, on its own, the prices for Picasso would devalue.
Authenticity is another parameter in the pricing. A work that is a bit indeterminate and goes through life as ‘Flemish school, 16th century’ is significantly less worth. If such an anonymous work – a sleeper – suddenly, however, a label of the master said, increases the price exponentially. That happened for example with a painting to Van Dyck’ where a real Rubens was to sit. Its value increased from 12,500 euros to five million – four hundred times as much.
Ugly, to a Magritte turns out to be
Even authenticity is relatively on the art market. Normally, a work of art burned on the art market if it is unmasked as a forgery or a copy. Unless the handy forger himself into a phenomenon. Pieces of the famous Dutch forger Han van Meegeren, do the best kind on the market, because it is so much fame and because the work is usually a colorful history (as used, for example, he nazi piece of Hermann Goering with a fake Vermeer. Around the getalenteerdste British forger Eric Hebborn was so much myth that he, once unmasked, a star was those who contributed to documentaries and biographies. When of him, the drawings were auctioned, brought that eighteen times as much as estimated.
‘The discourse of the art institution is closely linked with the market value, ” says Van den Braembussche. ‘Because there is a tug of war with the individual aesthetic experience, people often see why a work is being bombarded as important. While they often don’t even like it. For the same reason, people find it incomprehensible why some works such exorbitant prices on the art market.’
Kunstrestaurateur Frederik Cnockaert will find that the pendulum far too much blown to the search for the big names, rare books and authentic pieces. “When I was thirty years ago, went to people for a painting, and they found it beautiful or ugly. Now it is often about speculation and market value. If a work is authentic, one can find the fantastic. Even though it is not top. Recently I got someone on the floor with a piece of Magritte was attributed. There was a corner, it was not in good condition, it was not sure if it’s a Magritte was, and therefore he found it not so nice. To the moment later to be recognized as a real Magritte. When he found it, suddenly, fantastic. It was however the same painting.’
Copy is sometimes better than the original
Cnockaert saw the Russian avant-gardists in Gent and found a few of them weak painted. ‘Kandinsky may also sometimes has had a bad day, ” says the kunstrestaurateur. “But the penseeltoets is not always with a steady hand or with a lot of belief turned on. Usually he searches for composition and strength. In comparison with the work that I know of, I found this quite good. In the use of color I saw sometimes results in a mess and I was missing finesse. But whatever that work is, they are decorative. So why would you not enjoy it?’
The same applies to the copy that an owner sometimes, so that the original is safe in the vault. Copies are sometimes better than the originals. Ensor worked for example a lot with gels, and that in the course of the years, cock. So I recently found a copy in fresher shades. The owner finds it better that way. As a restorer you can sometimes get better technical painting and building than the artist, who previously focused on the imagination than on the technique.’
Marktbelangen, speculative purposes and the dictates of the art world, having a personal experience not to stand in the way. ‘The individual aesthetic experience is untouchable’, says Van den Braembussche. “Everyone has the right to everything, to tastes. That is ultimately the ground of art: our universal urge for beauty, which for centuries standing.”