Artworks not always what they seem (Tuesday 14 February 2006)
comiled by Jessica Langan-Peck
 |
| Da Vinci Code: Is this really a self-portrait by Leonardo? Image held here |
Artworks, like most art forms, are often shrouded in mystery. There is no one way to describe an artwork, no single interpretation that is correct. Experts use computer programs and acute oveservation to decipher the hard facts of a work: they can determine what year a painting was done, what technique was used, and what medium was used. Though the answers to some of these questions are definitive, many are purely speculative. In Italy, an exhibition of a Leonardo da Vinci work long accepted as the artist's self-portrait has rekindled doubt that the man in the drawing is actually da Vinci.
The portrait and two other da Vinci works are currently on display in Turin, Italy, in honor of the 2006 Winter Olympics. Normally kept out of the light to prevent fading, the red chalk drawing depicts a very old man with white hair and a flowing beard. His face is wise, yet brooding. According to da Vinci expert Pietro Marani, strong stylistic evidence shows that the painting was done in the 1490s, when da Vinci was only thirty or forty. Surely at this age da Vinci had fewer wrinkles than the subject of the painting?
Other experts say that the drawing depicts a man of approximately eighty years of age, and historians know that da Vinci didn't live this long. So who is this wise fellow with the stern, intelligent look? Art Historian Maike Vogt-Luerssen guesses it may actually be Leonardo's father, Ser Piero da Vinci. Da Vinci works are often mysterious in nature - we're fascinated by the Mona Lisa's ambiguous features and the speculated presence of Mary Magdalene in Last Supper . Especially in the aftermath of pop-fiction super hit The Da Vinci Code , Leonardo strings us along and keeps us guessing five hundred years after his death.
When the artist of a work is in question instead of the subject, painting identification is even more crucial. Six paintings by renowned American abstract artist Jackson Pollock are under investigation. The six, part of a collection of thirty-two, were discovered in the attic of Pollock's close friends Herbert and Mercedes Matter last year. Dr. Richard Taylor, a Physics professor at the University of Oregon, has used a mathematical technique to analyse paterns of abstract art such as Pollock's. Known as fractal geometry, the system focuses on tiny patterns like those in snow flakes. Taylor says, "Pollock's specific fractal signature has not been found in the submitted paintings... indicating that they may have been painted by different hands."
It is possible that the different techniques present in the six 'Pollock' paintings were simply evidence of experimentation. Pollock was an abstract artist, and may have tested different patterns and methods of application. However, many experts agree that the paintings are not authentic. They may have even been painted by Mercedes Matter and her art students in attempts to mimic Pollock's style.
If the Pollock paintings are indeed discovered to be fakes, it may be impossible to tell whether the six were planted intentionally, perhaps to gain money or to achieve recognition, or if they were simply innoccent experiments of art students. Though Pollock certainly used a specific style and pattern, who are we to generalize? Perhaps he was trying something new.
 |
| A utumn Rhythm (No. 30 ), a Jackson Pollock painting from 1950 that was scanned into a computer and compared against recently discovered works associated with Pollock; image held here |
Do you have an opinion on this news item? If so, please click here for our comments form.
