By David Dollard
Forgery is an artistic word for theft, fraud, counterfeiting. The complete list of synonyms is much longer and grows more pejorative.
Searching for “Counterfeit” on WikiP, a superb moment of clarity was reached, not quite an epiphany, incredibly ironic though. At the bottom of the “Counterfeit” page under the header EXTERNAL LINKS, sub-head Anti-counterfeiting, a link appears for International Authentication Association (IAA). It leads to a ghost site – a counterfeit with the banner: “BUY THIS DOMAIN the domain lmnopqrst.xxx may be for sale by its owner.” One click and it leads to a front for a domain names website that will sell you the domain name for IAA. You could be the proud owner and curator of IAA for a bid “above the seller’s minimum threshold of 500 USD”. The “seller’s” is the domain names website! Who actually created the page? Was it just the domain-selling website? A fake link on the “Counterfeit” page: Hiding in plain sight, one of the the cornerstones of forgery.
A pastiche courtesy of Elizabeth Barrett Browning, “How many ways can I forge thee? Let me count the ways.” The first two examples that lit my brain’s light bulb were money and paintings. Silly me! If it can be made, someone can forge it.
A brief accounting: monies, paintings, sketches, weights and measures, authentications, clothing, machine parts, tabletop counters, clothing, drugs (legal and illegal), any consumer goods, archaeological finds, stamps, and history books. The basest and cruellest forgery now involves the stealing of a person’s identity, creating a de facto other person: Identity Theft.
When did the first forgery take place? The Shroud of Turin is cited often, as are copies of the woodcut engraving plates of Albrecht Dürer. Now, a little apocryphal history. A cave man finds a piece of flint while out walking. In picking it up, he slightly cuts himself. After the “ouch” wears off, he begins to cut small branches and notches in wood. Upon returning to the community enclave someone asks, “What have you got there, Art?” “A new cutting tool I made,” Art replies.
Art was now in a bind, he had to create what he found. While out testing how to make the new cutting tool, he was overseen by Sham, who produces a workable blade and several more higher quality blades. Sham decides to rename (re-brand) the cutting tool as Blade. “I’ve made a Blade!” he trumpets to the enclave. Art is not happy, he “found/made” the cutting tool, he should get full credit.
Ego is a powerful force in all of this then, now, and in the future. Whatever the work, we invest part of ourselves in its creation. We expect some emotional/financial return on our mental and physical investment.
Using the Internet, accrued knowledge from educational and personal sources (many from real paper books) are the basis for the research on this article. When struggling for ideas, I turn to the dictionary (paper version). Leafing through the pages looking for the correct spelling or definition of a word I’m looking for, I learn new words. My spiffy 1987-edition of Merriam-Webster’s Ninth Collegiate dictionary lists in order:
– forge
– forger
– forgery
– forget
The last two words struck me. If you’ve been the victim of a forgery, you don’t forget!. And forgery itself: Bakers works in a bakery, shouldn’t forgers work in a forgery? That last sentence plays too fast and loose with the definitions. However, new words and definitions are often cobbled together from existing lexicons. That’s not forgery?
Verifying the authenticity of any art work is highly ego-centric. Some one, an individual, must “sign off” on authenticity, an “expert”. A word similar to art: over time both have had their values as emotional and mental currency diluted by their fecundity.
The experts with educational letters after their names often have the most to lose by verifying a fake, or faking a verification. Their egos are heavily involved; reputations to lose and more(?) importantly money. Once that covenant of trust has been broken it is nearly impossible to repair.
In keeping this from becoming a tome, some brevity. Two short interjections: John Drewe and Han van Meegeren. Occasionally, even the experts go along with the con for their own reasons.
From the beginning of the use of weights to measure quantities in exchange for barter or money, some unscrupulous individuals began to lessen the actual weight by removing (shaving) parts off the original, creating a “knock off” weight. Knock off some weight for greater return.
Now artists, inventors, and creators are provided protection by a myriad of organizations: The World Intellectual Property Organization, the International Organization for Standards, and The International System of Units to barely skim the surface. The enacting of new local, federal, and international laws; re-writing them to keep pace with the continually expanding varieties of fraud, counterfeiting, etc., which introduced the concept of Intellectual Property Rights as a legal, potentially punitive measure to address “philosophical” debates.
What turns learning and ‘borrowing’ into forgery? Intent! When the student of any art learns from her/his teacher/master, the student may work at finding individual style by variations on the original. It becomes a moral and legal issue when those works are attempted to be passed off as originals with forged signatures and style. The original artist’s trademarks. Trademarks? I’m not delving deeper into guilds.
As simply a moral issue, regardless of law, though much of law is derived from “a common morality,” forgery is an art: A corrupting, erosive, divisive art. It is wrong. Can anyone honestly admit they have never participated in forgery or copyright infringement. Download an album or song from YouTube and you have. I have. Primarily to replace purchased CDs that I previously downloaded, but not all. I know that the original artist won’t receive a cent from my download, that is wrong morally and maybe legally. I won’t be re-selling it. A little conscience salve. That’s the rub! Ego-driven conscious omission.
The greatest losers to forgery are the artists (of all styles) who work and dedicate their lives and creative energy to pursuing their art, desire, calling to produce their own original works. To have those talents, skills, and hopes stolen by a charlatan for emotional/monetary profit by misrepresenting them is the act of a coward. Wrote myself into a corner here. Am I a coward, an honest coward, or a forger?
A fitting epilogue from H. L. Mencken: “When somebody says it’s not about the money, it’s about the money.”
