Fakes and Forgeries

When looking at the essays done by Alfred Lessing and Denis Dutton about forgery in artwork, there was some confusion as to what exactly constitutes as a forgery, and whether or not there is anything wrong with a forgery in the first place. The book uses the main example of the famous forgery of Van Meegren who passed off his 'Disciples at Emmaus' as a genuine Vermeer, just to later admit to producing them himself. Both authors agree that aesthetically, there isn't much wrong with forgeries, it is rather a fact about the given art, an extra detail. The main conclusion that is drawn is that forgeries lack heavily in originality, and therefore posess technique but perhaps not creativity.
During our class discussion we touched on the point that forgeries sometimes even copy the techniques that were originated by the artist yet I have to say that I do see some originality in Vermeer's Disciples. I think that every artists work, no matter what form, takes bits and pieces from a variety of other artists and themes as a means to develope their own skills and ideas just as anyone does. In this, I think that originality can be found even in forgeries. For example, the famous "Nighthawks" painting by Edward Hopper:














Original 'Nighthawks" by Edward Hopper

Hopper is a renowned painter and 'Nighthawks' is possibly one of his most famous works (and one of my personal favorites). This painting is also widely used by other artists for creating parodies and references. Some of these parodies are obvious and made as jokes, and others are extremely detailed and use similar colors and styles as Hopper:
















Lego parody example











Parody example by Banksy















reference from The Simpsons.


Would you consider any of these reproductions to be forgeries of the original? I think that it can take just as much creativity to work off of an existing work as it did to create one, so much so that I actually collect various parody prints of Hoppers "Nighthawks".

Questions raised:

A forgery can posess technique, originality (to a point), and aesthetic qualities, what is it that we value about art which makes originality important for evaluative purposes?

Furthermore...When discussing music, sticking as close to the original work as possible is key to an "authentic" performance, where as with more "physical" art (painting, sculpture, etc.) this can be considered a forgery. Does this mean that authentic performances could be forgeries?