An experienced art forger reveals the secrets of faking Old Master drawings and paintings, discussing the inks, papers, pens, and colors of the great artists of the past and offering tips for experts and collectors on spotting fake works of art
Although this is an introduction to the gentle art (lol) of forgery, it does kind of work as an introduction into art especially oil painting, pull stop. The detailed explanation does not seem to assume that you already know everything there is to know about painting, and at the same time Hebborn manages not to sound patronising. But what I find even more interesting than the technical aspects of art forgery is the author's insight about art and art world, which makes me want to read his autobiography and learns more about his thoughts.
True, he may be a smidgeon too smug sometimes. And it may not be a good idea to romanticise art fraud because at the end of the day it is still a crime. But unlike counterfeit money, forgery of art is still art and the person who does it is still an artist (and a skilled one, too). I cannot help but find a peep into their world fascinating.
It saddens me to learn that Hebborn was assassinated in Rome not long after the Italian version of this book was published. I read somewhere that he might have connections with the mafia. There was a moderately long part near the end of the book that talked about mafia's involvement in art dealership in Italy but I didn't think much about it when I read it. But after learning about his death, it kind of make sense.
As a total lay person - I'm neither an artist, nor a critic, not a budding forger – I read this book for research for my next novel and found it fascinating. At one level, it does exactly what it says on the tin: provides a comprehensive and practical guide to copying artworks, with tips on everything from forging signatures to sourcing or making the right tools and materials, accompanied by extensive illustrations. But it’s much more than that: Hebborn, one of the 20th century’s most successful art forgers, also discourses on the nature of art forgery, pointing out some subtle legal and ethical distinctions (for example, the fact that merely copying an artwork itself is not a crime and something practised by countless respected artists over the centuries, from Michelangelo to Dali – and what makes it criminal is deliberately passing it off as a genuine Rubens, Turner, etc, and demanding correspondingly high sums of money. He also challenges public (and legal) perceptions of art forgery and criticizes the general monetization of the art market. It doesn’t in any way read like a criminal’s autobiography: Ebborn had a code of ethics and there are lines he did not cross (for example, he strongly advises against forging a certificate of authentication or taking advantage of gullible or inexpert art collectors). Forging tips aside, it’s an interesting and perceptive analysis of the art market today.
The best book I've read in a while, The Art Forger's Handbook is at once a book of art history, technique, and philosophy.
The book first covers drawings, and then paintings. In both sections, Hebborn describes the materials and tools that were originally used, why they were used, and modern alternatives. In one sense, it's the sort of information that one would need to forge old artwork -- but, honestly, how many forgers are going to read this book for their guidance? The real benefit to this book, and the reason I enjoyed it, is because it tells the story of how art and artists evolved over time, how old experts worked within the limitations of what was available to them.
Hebborn also describes the art market: the different types of people that buy and collect art, and how art dealers and auction houses work. I had only the faintest idea of the business side of art, and I found all the details fascinating.
Hebborn's writing style shines through in this book: playful, at once showing his reverence for the skill of the old masters while ostensibly telling people how to fake those same works. As an example, I reproduce this comment that I just flipped to, describing types of drawing ink: "It is not unknown for European manufacturers to wrap up the inferior sticks of their own making in fine rice-paper covered with alluring Chinese characters in a manner almost worthy of our good selves."
This is a how-I-done-it by a notorious forger. He's very pleased with himself.
Hebborn's discussions of how to look at genuine artworks and identify their authenticity are interesting. But speaking as an artist who practices ancient techniques and an amateur historian, I don't think he's being entirely honest about what he did and how he did it when he speaks of forgery.
Also, I don't think his forgeries are nearly as convincing-looking as he seems to think. I realise these are famous last words, and that many art historians have been embarrassed by fakes. The notorious Van Meegeren forgeries of the last century are a prominent example (although to my eye those paintings looked more like children's illustrated Bibles from the 1930s than like the Vermeers they were supposed to be).
Hebborn certainly is of the opinion that he is very clever. Perhaps some of his fakes are still floating around, as he hints here and there. Or perhaps he would be tickled at the thought that people are still worried about them. This book is a useful insight into the mind of a forger, and it may have some helpful information on how forgeries are made. But take it with a grain of salt.
Well, yes... A handy little guidebook to the materials and techniques of forging paintings, done by one of the most distinguished (notorious? infamous?) art forgers of the twentieth century. Lots of very good advice on acquiring paper and canvas, on mixing inks and paints, on creating provenance, on the chemical equipment you might need. It won't do anything for your talents as a painter, but Mr. Hebborn's advice (arrogant, arch, bitchy, often very funny) will help in case you'd like to...oh...just for fun...make that landscape you're doing seem dreadfully like it might've been painted in 1600 by someone who might...oh...have market value.
I'm fascinated by art crime. This book is really a manual and I'd recommend it not only to artists, but to art historians because of the technical details that Hebborn includes. He dates papers and materials that would give a forgery away but are equally useful for the art historian who might want to date works based on how they were made. It's entertaining, even when he's bragging about the museums and collectors he duped.
A genial, dapper, and rough-around-the-edges guide to the techniques and materials of old master artists. The title is of course pure pretense. Hebborn gives us a few glimpses into his practice and mindset, but in pretending to write for "colleagues" he was doing what he did best: faking. He wass really writing for people (like me) who want to be mildly titillated by glimpses of the art market's vast seedy underbelly.
I actually stayed up late to finish this book. But not because it was so good, I just wanted to be done with it and go on to something I probably would like.
There are some interesting data here, but it is probably outdated now. The author's style/tone was very annoying; smug, but almost begging you to like him at the same time.
This book was an interesting look into the world of art forgery. What struck me is the fact that to successfully forge art, one must first be already a skilled artist. A lot of the techniques discussed were way over my head.
That said---why is this book so outrageously expensive? The copies I've seen for sale go for multiple hundreds of dollars.
My husband really enjoyed this book, and thought that, as a practicing artist, I would love it too, but I didn't. It was interesting, at first, to read about modern sources for antique materials, but the self-congratulatory tone of the author quickly became tiresome and off-putting.
Interesting, snarky read. I read mostly for his insights on Old Master techniques/materials (some good, some bad information here!) and skimmed the bits regarding forgery, which did not interest me.