Name:
Tutor:
Course:
Date:
The effects of fake paintings on the global art market
The effects of fake paintings on the art market have been subject to a large study over time. The effects of fake goods on the market have always been such that they lower the prices of their genuine counterparts. Interestingly, this is not the case in the art market. Fake paintings still get purchased by buyers at the prevailing market prices without affecting the market dynamics. This paper shall explore this phenomenon and establish if indeed that is the case.
Fake paintings always capture the imaginations of the society who revel in the ability of the forger to capture the detail of the original piece of work accurately. However, few give consideration to the effects such paintings have on the art market. It is widely accepted that the art market is growing rapidly followed by a corresponding market for fake paintings and other forgeries.
The international art market has rebounded to its 2008 pre-crisis level, providing a large market for art forgers. It is “estimated that the global art market is worth more than $64 billion as of 2013, providing skilled forgers with a large market for their products” (Pathak, 2007). However, most buyers are wary of works from artists they are not familiar with and platform such as eBay have tightened their terms and conditions regarding proliferation of fake paintings on the site. Even as these measures are taken to curb trade in fake art, the vice is still growing as evidenced by the increasing number of cases of fake art.
The stakeholders of the art market have not completely quit in the struggle to curb art forgery. Newer technologies have come up that are able to detect the evidence skilled forgers use to manipulate their unsuspecting victims. In addition to these methods, policy makers are also stepping up to the challenge to revise their laws and policies regarding the vice. However, fake paintings still continue to crop up in many auctions and galleries. Their existence tarnishes the reputations of these establishments ruining business for them.
Understanding the negative effects of part of a $ 64 billion dollar business from an economic perspective means analyzing the numbers involved. Unfortunately, access to such details is restricted by the fact that such unlawful practices are a concealed affair. Such unlawful elements destroys the integrity of the otherwise booming art trade while soiling the reputations of the original artists. If “fake paintings continue to infiltrate the market, global art trade might lose tractions denying the economies of many countries huge sums in revenue” (Tittler, 2012).
The ripple effect of fake paintings in the art market is another indicator of the negative effects of fake paintings and other forms of art on the market. Many artist organizations are creating mechanism of identifying forgeries and fake artwork. Interestingly, their work is also being limited by issues of litigation making authentication of paintings a tricky affair. In the long run, this has affected the market by introducing loopholes that forgers and fraudulent conmen continue to exploit through dealing in fake paintings.
The public relations nightmare surrounding discovery of forged art, especially fake paintings, makes for a strong case against the products of forgery. In addition to destroying reputations, it harms the art market by compromising the artwork’s historical knowledge. This can be both detrimental and beneficial for the piece. Some paintings gain unprecedented fame based on their association with fake art work increasing their prices. On the other hand, most fake paintings destroy the prices of even the original works.
Fake artwork also introduces other forms of evil into the art industry and especially the market. China is a victim of this kind of crimes where buyers use fake art to seal their deals in auctions and galleries. Used as a form of unconventional currency, the fake paintings find their way into the mainstream market and affect the prices of genuine artwork. In many cases, the museum directors have to be bribed in order to allow such transactions to take place in their museums and galleries.
Fake paintings affect our perception of the quality and authenticity in other related fields. Due to these two quality issues, many art dealers have had to invest heavily in expensive technology aimed at detecting fakes from the genuine artwork. However, it has not been an easy undertaking since forgers too seem to have upped their ante. Spencer(2004) reports that “using their own innovations, they are able to circumvent the checks and measures used to catch them which explain the recent rise in incidents of art forgery and especially fake paintings” (pg 82).
The effects of fake artwork on the art market are obviously negative. While some might choose to argue they increase aspects of integrity and escalate price differences, fake work is illegal and should be shunned. It affects the integrity of an otherwise good industry, introduces alternative forms of currency to criminals, and affects the professional and public image of the artists themselves. A lot of work needs to be done to introduce better legislation and policy into the market, but until that happens, fake paintings shall continue being a sensitive problem for the art market.
Works Cited
Pathak, Akhileshwar. “Ownership and Quality.” Legal Aspects of Business. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill, 2007. 164. Print.
Spencer, Ronald D. “Authentication and Connoiseurship.” The Expert Versus the Object: Judging Fakes and False Attributions in the Visual Arts. New York: Oxford UP, 2004. 82. Print.
Tittler, Robert. “Provincial painters.” Portraits, Painters, and Publics in Provincial England, 1540-1640. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2012. 76. Print.
