AUTHORSHIP DETERMINES VALUE Fake Aboriginal Art and Family Paintings
Like counterfeit money, fake paintings attributed to Masters can be devastating in the art arena, particularly for collectors and the Masters themselves, who -in relation to the latter- are left with their expertise denigrated by sub-standard work and their legacy polluted. No-where is this more obvious than in the Australian Aboriginal Art World, which has been plagued by a number of greedy dealers and counterfeiters since the mid 1980s. This, of course, is not new news, but for far too long fake works have hardly been shown to the public, though openly discussed over and over again in the media by reporters and art critics and in private among dealers and collectors. As a result, the aim of this `page` is to offer the public a view of fake Aboriginal Art in order to assist in educating collectors and the like, and hopefully help to rid the world of imitations and the imitation industry as a whole.
There is, however, the issue of `family` assisted works, which in themselves are not fakes, but rather paintings where Masters have been helped by relatives or friends in finishing works. In many instances having relatives assist in the creation of paintings acts as a tool for Masters to transmit their Culture onto the next generation through conversation and imagery as a painting takes shape. These works need, however, to be acknowledged as `family paintings` when placed on the market, but in most cases to date this has not been the case, which is deceitful. For `family paintings` are inferior to works not solely created by the hand of a Master and in some cases hardly at all. But even more dishonest, or more to the point, outright corrupt, is when family members take it upon themselves to produce paintings in the style of their famous relatives and pressure them into signing these works for the purpose of profit making. Consequentially, these works cannot be thought of as `family paintings`, but rather outright frauds, or fakes, masquerading as authentic master paintings.
Being the most important Aboriginal Artist in Australia, Clifford Possum Tjapaltjarri has, in turn, possibly been the most faked Master and assisted artist in the land, so for this reason this artist is thought of as having created thousands of paintings, which, in fact, is a total misconception perpetuated by the number of works seen with the artist`s name and in many cases accompanied by photographs of the artist holding paintings that are not his own. This is also the case with other renowned Aboriginal artists, who, like Clifford Possum, sometimes knowingly and unknowingly are asked to pose with paintings that are not their own, so that the authentication of fakes is better established by those selling the dud works.
In every instance of counterfeiting where Masters have been involved at any level, let there be no doubt that these artists have not enjoyed their role, but rather saddened and humiliated by such practice from which there remained no escape. Traditional Aboriginal Culture internalized by the most important Aboriginal Artists that Australia will ever know, dictates that adults are in the service of each other and the rest of the family/tribe. Shunning this responsibility results in having a spear through ones leg, or else, in extreme cases, death (execution). Those involved in the `imitation industry` know this and have used it to the hilt, thus turning a substantial profit at the expense of Masters` pride and their artistic and cultural legacy. Not to mention the expense of collectors, who have been hoodwinked into buying shoddy work, which can be recognized in most cases and need to be.
There is, however, an overwhelming problem in distinguishing frauds and family paintings from authentic works solely, or at least almost solely, created by the hand of Aboriginal Masters. And this problem has to do with errors of judgement made by Aboriginal Art specialists, who do need to be excused, of course, as important contemporary Aboriginal Art is relatively new in the World, as opposed to other great art that has been around and studied for `umpteen` years, but not be excused to the point that forces people to be afraid of pointing out `suspect` works that have been authenticated by those in the know and, or, possibly owned by institutions or powerful individuals.
Fear of being persecuted in the Aboriginal Art arena has long been my own cross to bear during my involvement in the World of Aboriginal Art, so this issue comes from experience, and though I still have not shaken off this cross, I have long felt it a must to be candid, or else join the `hypocrisy club` and remain a life member, which would be more intolerable than the stifling fear of condemnation. I cannot recall who said this, or something like this: "Evil flourishes when good people do nothing", and it is what this `quote` tells us that had an impact on my thinking many years ago and remains a constant support in my work and beyond.
In accord with what has so far been written, I now, with regret, need to turn attention to The Clifford Possum Tjapaltjarri Retrospective to demonstrate the serious nature of `family paintings` that have not been acknowledged as such and have been misjudged by a person or people with much credibility in the Aboriginal Art World. The work that needs to be drawn attention to in this most important exhibition accompanied by a book written by the curator Vivien Johnson is `Carpet Snake Dreaming, c.1991-1992`, which, as the photograph on the `Fakes & Family Works` page shows, was worked on by Heath Ramzan, the de facto husband of the artist`s daughter Michelle Possum Nungurrayi. Given that Clifford Possum Tjapaltjarri himself clearly expressed that his retrospective must only exhibit works created solely by him, shows that the artist himself recognized his own works as being distinct from assisted paintings, and that they are. Just as they are rare in a sea of fakes and family paintings.
This not only applies to Clifford Possum Tjapaltjarri, but to many Masters` works, which, to date, are seemingly in abundance, when, in fact, the opposite is true. Clifford Possum knew this and often said, "Too much humbug I don't know what to do, they don't stop". He also said on many occasions when seeing dud works supposedly his own and his contemporaries - works that he had already pointed out as fakes- but were now in publications, "see Milanka, no-body cares only you". The only you came from my years of openly expressing my outrage at the `frauding` that was going on, but, like the Master, could do nothing to stop it, however hard I tried.
Every dealer, who I found selling dud work heard from me, as did the Australian Federal Police -twice- in the early 1990s. The latter was more concerned/involved with fake Aboriginal Art being produced overseas and coming into this country, while the former just continued `business as usual`, as they do to this present day. These sellers are no less guilty of counterfeiting than the producers (black and white) of the fakes and family paintings being distributed as important works. Guilty also are the specialist that will not `come clean` after featuring dud works in their publications, after they learn of their mistakes. These duds in particular help to authenticate other shonky paintings on the market and continue to confuse collectors and other art specialist world wide; not to mention the fact that it sends a clear message to the counterfeiters that they're safe.
It is estimated that Australian Aboriginal Art generates between one hundred and two hundred million dollars annually; a sum of money that this country enjoys at the expense of Art History. Though there is no doubt that if a clean up of the `Aboriginal Art industry` took place, this revenue would not fall, for important Aboriginal Art, as well as Aboriginal Art perse, is too amazing to be ignored and will continue to be appreciated well into the future. In the meantime, the most important Aboriginal Art in the World remains victim in an industry that is running riot.
People who view Aboriginal Art from a social perspective might consider family works important, which they are, but the idea that `the family who paints together stays together` is no justification to accept Masters` paintings, which have been produced by many hands, as strictly the Masters` own. While European Masters have had assistance with work, every element had followed the Masters` set plan, as with Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel. Andy Warhol is also a case in point having had a `couple` of works totally produced outside of himself, but `Pop Art` had to do with mass production/consumerism, so this practice is in keeping with Warhol's genre.
The social perspective is well intentioned, but Contemporary Aboriginal Art is in the domain of Fine Art, which has its own criteria that important work needs to meet. To make-up different `rules` for Aboriginal Art seems patronizing, or denigrating, both to the art and the artist, who have a right to exist and be remembered as accomplished individuals in their own right, no less than Picasso, or Van Gogh, for example; rather than solely part of a tribe. To argue otherwise seems a subtle form of racism. To view a `family painting` where a Master has not participated in a work that is pretending to be by a Master's own hand as something other than a counterfeit is beyond reason. Contemporary Aboriginal Art proper is ethnographic in content, but a painting on canvas can not be confused with `Traditional Cultural Art` where the focus of engagement differs. Aboriginal Art on canvas can be said to be many things, but at the end of the day it is a commodity where authorship determines value; this applies to all art genres, including Contemporary Aboriginal Art.
Copyright of text remains with the writer: Milanka J Sullivan