Latest news with #SamsonandDelilah
Business Recorder
21-06-2025
- Politics
- Business Recorder
Will Israel adopt the Samson's option?
In Samson and Delilah, the Hollywood classic created before the purge of all the progressives during the McCarthy era, Sampson –like Orpheus, another mythical character — revelled in carnal pleasures was ultimately betrayed by his beloved the beautiful queen. Blinded by the kings' men he brought the entire Temple down through his brute strength killing the king, his subjects and dying beneath Temple's rubble. In his incisive book 'I'll burn the bridge when I reach there,' Norman Finkelstein fuses the figures of Sampson and Cassandra, a Trojan princess, who spurned the advances of Apollo and cursed by him, she lost the power of convincing people to believe in her true prophecies. Akin to Cassandra, he writes, a woman, an inmate of concentration camp predicted the slaughter of all Jews, but no one believed her. Her prophesy finally came true. Finkelstein prophesies, 'Israel being a crazy state is pursuing the Samson's option'. It seems Finkelstein's observation was not far from truth. By attacking Iran, Israel may have cracked open the doors for Sampson's option. After successive triumphs — from Iraq to Libya to Syria — the US proxy in the Middle East has decided to destroy the last bulwark of resistance, Iran, with the help of its mentor and willing collaborator, the US. As if the genocide perpetrating by it in the occupied Palestine was not enough the imperialist alliance deceived Iran by engaging it in a dialogue. Before the farce could proceed further, Israel was given the green signal to attack Iran. Emboldened by the outcome of the1967 war, Israel attacked Iran inflicting serious damage to its war machine, killing its nuclear scientists, nearly 80 civilians and inflicting some damage to its nuclear infrastructure in Nantz. But to its dismay it was neither 1967, nor its opponents were the Arab leaders. Nasser and Hafizul Assad were ensnared by the US assurances of Israeli non-aggression—only to be betrayed in a classic act of US-Israeli duplicity. The 'pre-emptive' strike by the US proxy destroyed Egyptian and Syrian airpower. It was the death knell for Arab nationalism. They not only lost Gaza but the West Bank as well, latter a part of Jordan the eternal Israeli collaborator. The assault on Iran followed the similar script; sudden, unprovoked, launched amid diplomatic negotiations. A rude shock, a blitzkrieg, another massacre no one expected. But killing spree is a favourite pastime of the Zionist entity. Its necrophilia knows no bounds. With the continued genocide in Gaza and the West Bank where, according to Lancet, 400,000 civilians have been assassinated in the cold blood, the 80 plus Iranians were merely a 'one-time meal' for the Cyclops. Once again, the US lost its face and credibility, if it ever had any. After the fall of Assad and after Trump received Golani — a known terrorist with a $10 million bounty on his head — as a guest of honour, not only Iran but entire world knew about the next target. Iran standing alone between the Palestinians liberation and imperialism has learned from experience about Israeli tactics of attacking by surprise. It must have dispersed its weapons hidden beyond the reach of US logistics and Israel's hyped AI surveillance. Iran was privy to the history of European and American betrayal of Russia. As Angella Merkel admitted that the whole idea behind Minsk agreements was to buy time and prepare Ukraine for a protracted war with Russia. The only difference was that the Minsk accord was concluded but the Oman dialogue was unceremoniously ditched because of Israeli Illegal war on Iran. When imperialism was celebrating the losses it inflicted on Iran, to their bewilderment Iran retaliated like a wounded lion, hitting devastatingly on Kirya, Israeli equivalents to Pentagon, and its nuclear facilities in Dimona. When Israel started to attack on Iranian oil installation, Iran targeted Haifa that fuels the Israeli war machine. For the first time in their history Israelis have seen part of Tel Aviv in rubbles, corpses buried beneath the debris. The Israelis have never felt any repentance on the dead and alive Palestinians interred under the rubble of Gaza for they are Amalekites—the expendable ones. Reality has come to haunt them. 'There is something in human history like retribution,' Marx says, 'and it is a rule of historical retribution that its instrument be forged not by the offended, but by the offender himself.' No one can predict the outcome of this war, but Iranian attack has changed the asymmetrical balance of force. David Attenborough has poetically put it, 'The strike, deliberate and precise came not with power but with a message. In a single bold operation Iran attacked at the heart of a symbol, a symbol of invincibility, of technological superiority, of pride carefully curated over years of dominance. What was crushed was not merely a facility, or defence system, it was perception. It was the illusion that one nation stood above challenge….' Iran being a signatory of Non-Proliferation Treaty neither possesses a nuclear bomb nor is it seeking for one. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is a stooge of the US and Israel. Anything open to its inspection is open to the imperialist nexus. It twists the facts, mutilates and adjust them according to the desire of its masters. Its politically motivated resolution censuring Iran over its nuclear programme gave Israel a reason to attack a sovereign nation with impunity. For Iran it is an existential war. Not a war of regime change, alone, but of balkanization of the state of Iran. Much will depend how long the conflict prolongs. The longer it will last the sign of exhaustion already apparent in Israeli public, its crumbling economy, perpetually living in a state of war will bring bigger fissures in its public afflicted with 'chosen people syndrome'. The entity itself could become an unnecessary baggage for the US to piggyback. Iran has neither started the war nor can prolong or stop it. This will entirely depend upon the US and its western marionettes who unsurprisingly failed to condemn the Israeli aggression against a sovereign state. Iran is careful not to engage the US directly in the war. Though it seems to be heavily infiltrated by CIA and Mossad, yet the AIPAC and Mirim Adelson — who contributed 100 million to Trump's election campaign — would like to engage the US in a full-scale war with Iran to protect the apartheid entity. On Iranian side, Ansarullah in Yemen is already active against the apartheid entity. Hamas continues to inflict causalities on its army. Hezbollah and Iraqi resistance may yet rise. If Iran has indeed destroyed the three F35 planes with its homemade weapons, it's not only its remarkable achievement but it means the American technology is not invincible. What other options does Iran have? After fully supporting Russia against Ukraine, supplying the former with thousands of drones that crippled its enemy, it's time for Russians to repay not in words but in deeds. But Russia has complex ties with Israel though it has strongly condemned the Israeli aggression but how far those words translate into action is anyone's guess. China has condemned the attack unequivocally, but China has close partnership with Israel. Right now, it is involved in building the port of Haifa, a port on the hit list of Iran. Both Russia and China understand that the fall of Iran — especially when the US is relentlessly supplying weapons to Israel — would mean encircling China, a long cherished neo-cons dream. Israel is allegedly attacking Iran using the airbases of Baku in Azerbaijan. If Iran stands at the crossroads of history, so too do Russia and China—for the fall of one may spell encirclement for the others. No empire — especially a decaying one — bets on a lame Trojan horse. These are relationships of interest, not affection. Ukraine is already becoming a liability for the United States, and Israel appears to be following the same trajectory. When liabilities outweigh strategic value, the US will not hesitate to get rid of its useless assets. The moment of truth may not have arrived yet—but it will. And when it does, what options will Israel have? It has already become a global pariah. A rogue regime with its back against the wall is capable of anything. Will it unleash nuclear devastation on Iran, even at the cost of its own annihilation? If so, it would fulfill the terrifying prophecy Finkelstein alluded to, the Samson Option—a final, apocalyptic act of mutual destruction. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
The Guardian
15-06-2025
- Entertainment
- The Guardian
A £2.5m dud? Fresh doubt cast on authenticity of National Gallery Rubens
It is an unwelcome question, but an important one: did the National Gallery buy a £2.5m dud? This has remained the suspicion of many experts since one of Britain's premier cultural institutions acquired Samson and Delilah, a long-lost masterpiece by the Flemish artist Peter Paul Rubens, in 1980. And 45 years on, the debate has been stirred once again, with a petition launched calling for the National Gallery to honour its 1997 promise to stage a public debate on its authenticity. This time, it's not the front of the painting that's under scrutiny – it's the back of it. The debate began soon after the National Gallery bought the biblical depiction, known to have been painted by the master around 1609 before being lost for centuries. For the gallery, it was a 17th-century jewel in its collection, the sort of work to which tourists would flock. But some immediately began to question the brushwork (too clumsy), describing it as a brash 20th-century copy of the original – and these doubts have only intensified. For instance, Katarzyna Krzyżagórska-Pisarek, a Rubens scholar, described the Samson and Delilah as 'highly problematic' and 'oddly modern'. And Christopher Wright, a leading specialist in 17th-century paintings, said the picture itself was simply 'wrong'. He added: 'It lacks Rubens's subtlety. It has a beguiling, slush-and-splosh grandeur … All my instincts of knowing about old masters bring me to that observation. It's not a 17th-century picture.' Feelings run deep in the art world over the question of the painting's origins. Michael Daley, the director of ArtWatch UK, has researched the painting extensively and claims to have uncovered a mountain of evidence against the Rubens attribution. He calls it 'the biggest of all museum scandals' and 'a top-down conspiracy to conceal a massive purchasing blunder that debases Rubens's oeuvre'. The latest twist in this enduring saga comes courtesy of remarks made – and then withdrawn – by Christopher Brown, a former curator of the National Gallery, who headed the Dutch and Flemish collections. Speaking to the Guardian, Brown insisted the painting was authentic, but intriguingly, he also said that it was the National Gallery that had attached a modern blockboard to the painting's back. This apparent admission has electrified the Rubens doubters once more. The backs of pictures often carry as much history as the front. With Samson, the panel on which the painting was originally painted has been planed down and attached to a modern blockboard, covering up whatever was underneath. Critics suspect that the original panel may have held crucial evidence relating to the date of the painting. The doubters also think the picture's traditional cradled support was removed at the time. This would mean any clues to the Samson and Delilah's origins and age – and therefore its authenticity – have disappeared. One piece of evidence on the panel might have been the makers' monogram, the application of which was the done thing in 17th-century Antwerp. If a panel-maker's mark had showed the panel to have been made later than around 1609, that would have shown that the painting was almost certainly a copy. When the gallery acquired the painting in 1980, there was no talk of a blockboard – it was bought as a panel. The gallery's first public mention of the blockboard was in its 1983 technical bulletin report, with an earlier reference in its 1982 board minutes, when Brown was seeking permission to clean the painting. That was after the gallery had owned it for two years and its timber expert, Anthony Reeve, had described it as one of three unproblematic panels. The National Gallery said the painting's back had been glued to a blockboard sheet 'probably during the [20th] century', adding in a 1990s exhibition catalogue: 'The Samson and Delilah was planed down to a thickness of about 3mm and set into a new blockboard panel before it was acquired by the National Gallery in 1980 and so no trace of a panel maker's mark can be found.' However, an eminent art historian's condition report before the 1980 auction stated that the panel was 'excellently preserved' and measured between 25mm and 40mm in thickness. And herein lies the mystery: who planed down the panel and glued it to modern blockboard, when did they do it and why? Several renowned experts have questioned the logic behind the decision, considering it had been described as being in good shape. Sign up to Art Weekly Your weekly art world round-up, sketching out all the biggest stories, scandals and exhibitions after newsletter promotion Wright said: 'The matter is of very great importance because the blockboard conceals the possible original evidence on the panel. When the picture appeared at Christie's, it looked immaculate. If the panel had been insecure, it would have been obvious.' When approached by the Guardian, Brown said it was the gallery that put on the blockboard – a brand-new admission from a former curator held in the utmost regard. Brown said: 'The present backing was put on by the National Gallery … It's rather a thin panel. It's undoubtedly been thinned down at a certain stage and it was really to strengthen the panel.' However, after the Guardian approached the gallery for comment, Brown later changed his tune. He said: 'The National Gallery says that the backboard was applied before its acquisition. I have no reason to disbelieve them, and am certainly not in a position to contradict them.' In his original interview, he had argued that 'the idea that the National Gallery is in some way concealing something is nonsense' and that 'the great scholars of Rubens have, since 1980, congratulated me'. Daley described Brown's initial comments as 'startling', adding that he himself has 'a 2002 correspondence with the gallery denying that this had been done by their restorers'. The painting had been previously attributed to lesser hands, and has no history as a Rubens before 1929, when it was found by Ludwig Burchard, a German historian who, after his death in 1960, was found to have misattributed paintings for commercial gain. Krzyżagórska-Pisarek has subsequently discovered that at least 75 works that Burchard attributed to Rubens have been officially demoted. She described the Samson and Delilah as 'just the tip of the iceberg', noting 'the harsh, uniform red of Delilah's dress' and Samson's muscled back, which she said was 'anatomically incorrect', as well as a 'curious lack of craquelure' – fine cracks that would be expected on a 400-year-old painting. She expressed frustration over the lack of debate, adding: 'They don't want a discussion because we've got arguments that are really impossible to answer. This cannot be the original Rubens.' Amid all the uncertainty, two things are for sure: the provenance of the painting will continue to send the art world into a spin, with scholars and aesthetes across the world continuing to call for that public debate. The National Gallery said: 'Samson and Delilah has long been accepted as a masterpiece by Peter Paul Rubens. Not one single Rubens specialist has doubted that the picture is by Rubens. Painted on wood panel in oil shortly after his return to Antwerp in 1608 and demonstrating all that the artist had learned in Italy, it is a work of the highest aesthetic quality. 'A full discussion of the panel was published by Joyce Plesters and David Bomford in the Gallery's Technical Bulletin in 1983, when Christopher Brown was the Gallery's curator responsible for the picture. Their findings remain valid, including their unequivocal statement that the panel was attached to a support before the picture was acquired by the National Gallery.'
Sydney Morning Herald
02-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Sydney Morning Herald
This show hasn't been seen on a Melbourne stage for 40 years. Now it's back
OPERA Samson and Delilah ★★★ Melbourne Opera, Palais Theatre, June 1 Samson and Delilah is the quintessential grand opera – large scale, spectacular (with many choruses and two ballets) and requiring superb singers. Melbourne Opera's production – and music lovers should be grateful yet again for their vision and determination – unfortunately really had only the last. The staging was deeply underplayed – deliberately so, according to the director's program notes, to emphasise psychological aspects (budget constraints might have been relevant). For me, it didn't work. The sets were far too minimalist, the lighting not even that, though Rose Chong's costumes were a highlight. The stage was divided into three, with the singers in front, the orchestra behind – which considerably reduced its impact – and the chorus above and behind them. The outstanding contribution came from the principals, Deborah Humble and Rosario La Spina, and the chorus (which is always outstanding). La Spina's huge, sweet tenor was ideal for Samson, but the biggest moments belong to the mezzo Delilah, and Humble relished them: sensitive, seductive, superb. Simon Meadows, Jeremy Kleeman and Eddie Muliaumaseali'i were splendid in the minor roles, while conductor Raymond Lawrence was sympathetic to composer and singers. The opera, which Camille Saint-Saëns (himself quite familiar with marital problems) takes from the Old Testament, tells of the Israelite leader who is seduced and betrayed by the vengeful Philistine Delilah. First performed in 1877, it was slow to bloom because of its biblical theme, but became immensely popular worldwide. Loading For the shortcomings, director Suzanne Chaundy – a leading force in so many of the company's recent triumphs, especially its series of Wagner operas – must take chief responsibility. The production was almost introverted, especially the climax where the blinded Samson pulls down the temple of the Philistine god Dagon, killing thousands. The bacchanal would scarcely have offended a women's temperance union. When Delilah came on stage brandishing Samson's shorn locks (the secret of his strength, symbolising his vow to God), they looked more like a dead possum. Yet, despite imperfections, Melbourne's first Samson and Delilah in 40 years was a real pleasure.
The Age
02-06-2025
- Entertainment
- The Age
This show hasn't been seen on a Melbourne stage for 40 years. Now it's back
OPERA Samson and Delilah ★★★ Melbourne Opera, Palais Theatre, June 1 Samson and Delilah is the quintessential grand opera – large scale, spectacular (with many choruses and two ballets) and requiring superb singers. Melbourne Opera's production – and music lovers should be grateful yet again for their vision and determination – unfortunately really had only the last. The staging was deeply underplayed – deliberately so, according to the director's program notes, to emphasise psychological aspects (budget constraints might have been relevant). For me, it didn't work. The sets were far too minimalist, the lighting not even that, though Rose Chong's costumes were a highlight. The stage was divided into three, with the singers in front, the orchestra behind – which considerably reduced its impact – and the chorus above and behind them. The outstanding contribution came from the principals, Deborah Humble and Rosario La Spina, and the chorus (which is always outstanding). La Spina's huge, sweet tenor was ideal for Samson, but the biggest moments belong to the mezzo Delilah, and Humble relished them: sensitive, seductive, superb. Simon Meadows, Jeremy Kleeman and Eddie Muliaumaseali'i were splendid in the minor roles, while conductor Raymond Lawrence was sympathetic to composer and singers. The opera, which Camille Saint-Saëns (himself quite familiar with marital problems) takes from the Old Testament, tells of the Israelite leader who is seduced and betrayed by the vengeful Philistine Delilah. First performed in 1877, it was slow to bloom because of its biblical theme, but became immensely popular worldwide. Loading For the shortcomings, director Suzanne Chaundy – a leading force in so many of the company's recent triumphs, especially its series of Wagner operas – must take chief responsibility. The production was almost introverted, especially the climax where the blinded Samson pulls down the temple of the Philistine god Dagon, killing thousands. The bacchanal would scarcely have offended a women's temperance union. When Delilah came on stage brandishing Samson's shorn locks (the secret of his strength, symbolising his vow to God), they looked more like a dead possum. Yet, despite imperfections, Melbourne's first Samson and Delilah in 40 years was a real pleasure.
BBC News
12-03-2025
- BBC News
Rembrandt to Picasso: Five ways to spot a fake masterpiece
The recent discovery of an art forger's workshop reminds us of the long history of fraudulent artworks – here are the simple rules to work them out. It's everywhere: fake news, deep fakes, identity fraud. So ensnared are we in a culture of digitised deceptions, a phenomenon increasingly augmented by artificial intelligence, it would be easy to think that deceit itself is a high-tech invention of the cyber age. Recent revelations however – from the discovery of an elaborate, if decidedly low-tech, art forger's workshop in Rome to the sensational allegation that a cherished Baroque masterpiece in London's National Gallery is a crude simulacrum of a lost original – remind us that duplicity in the world of art has a long and storied history, one written not in binary ones and zeroes, but in impossible pigments, clumsy brushstrokes and suspicious signatures. When it comes to falsification and phoniness, there is indeed no new thing under the Sun. On 19 February, Italy's Carabinieri Command for the Protection of Cultural Heritage uncovered a covert forgery operation in a northern district of Rome. Authorities confiscated more than 70 fraudulent artworks falsely attributed to notable artists from Pissarro to Picasso, Rembrandt to Dora Maar, along with materials used to mimic vintage canvases, artist signatures, and the stamps of galleries no longer in operation. The suspect, who has yet to be apprehended, is thought to have used online platforms such as Catawiki and eBay to hawk their phoney wares, deceiving potential buyers with convincing certificates of authenticity that they likewise contrived. News of the clandestine lab's discovery was quickly followed by publicity for a new book, due for release this week, alleging that one of The National Gallery's highlights is not at all what it seems. According to artist and historian Euphrosyne Doxiadis, author of NG6461: The Fake National Gallery Rubens, the painting Samson and Delilah – a large oil-on-wood attributed to the 17th Century Flemish master Peter Paul Rubens and purchased by the London museum in 1980 for £2.5m (then the second-highest price ever paid for a painting at auction) – is three centuries younger than the date of 1609-10 that sits beside it on the gallery wall and is incalculably less accomplished than the museum believes. Doxiadis's conclusion corroborates one reached in 2021 by the Swiss company, Art Recognition, which determined, through the use of AI, that there was a 91% probability that Samson and Delilah is the work of someone other than Rubens. Her assertion that the brushwork we see in the painting is crass and wholly inconsistent with the fluid flow of the Flemish master's hand is strongly contested by The National Gallery, which stands by its attribution. "Samson and Delilah has long been accepted by leading Rubens scholars as a masterpiece by Peter Paul Rubens", it said in a statement given to the BBC. "Painted on wood panel in oil shortly after his return to Antwerp in 1608 and demonstrating all that the artist had learned in Italy, it is a work of the highest aesthetic quality. A technical examination of the picture was presented in an article in The National Gallery's Technical Bulletin in 1983. The findings remain valid." The divergence of opinion between the museum's experts and those who doubt the work's authenticity opens a curious space in which to reflect on intriguing questions of artistic value and merit. Is there ever legitimacy in forgery? Can fakes be masterpieces? As more sophisticated tools of analysis are applied to paintings and drawings whose legitimacy has long been in question (including several works attributed to Leonardo da Vinci, such as the hotly disputed chalk and ink drawing La Bella Principessa), as well as those whose validity has never been in doubt, debates about the integrity of cultural icons are only likely to accelerate. What follows are a handful of handy principles to keep in mind when navigating the impending controversies – five simple rules for spotting a fake masterpiece. Rule 1: Pigments never lie To be a successful art forger requires more than technical proficiency and a misplaced ethical compass. It isn't enough to approximate the dibby-dabby dots of a Georges Seurat, say, or the thick expressive swirls of Vincent van Gogh. You need to know your history as well as your chemistry. Anachronistic pigments will give you away every time and were the downfall of German art forger Wolfgang Beltracchi and his wife Helene, who succeeded in selling makeshift modernist masterpieces for millions before a careless squeeze of prefab paint onto their audacious palettes in 2006 sealed their fate. Beltracchi, whose modus operandi was to create "new" works by everyone from Max Ernst to André Derain, rather than recreate lost ones, was always careful to mix his own paints to ensure they contained only ingredients available to whomever he was attempting to impersonate. He only slipped up once. And that was enough. Fabricating a wonky Der Blaue Reiter-ish red landscape of jigsawed horses that he attributed to the German Expressionist Heinrich Campendonk, Beltracchi reached for a readymade tube of paint, which he hadn't realised contained a pinch of titanium white – a relatively new pigment to which Campendonk would not have had access. It was all investigators would need to prove the work, which had sold for €2.8m, was a fake. Beltracchi was unlucky. The gap between titanium white's availability and its potential use by Campendonk was only a few years. On occasion, the divide is shockingly wide. Analysis of a Portrait of Saint Jerome, once attributed to the Italian master Parmigianino and sold by Sotheby's auction house in 2012 for $842,500, exposed the prevalence throughout the work of phthalocyanine green, a synthetic pigment invented in 1935, four centuries after the 16th-Century Renaissance artist worked. Artists may be visionaries, but they're not time travellers. Rule 2: Keep the past present It is uplifting to believe that one's value, as a person, is not tethered to the past. Not so with art. A painting, sculpture, or drawing without a heavy history is not, alas, more inspiring for its lack of baggage. It is suspicious. Or rather, it should be. All too often, greed can interfere in the clear-sightedness of assessing the authenticity of a painting or sculpture. Things have histories we want them to have. That was certainly the case with a succession of phoney Vermeers that issued from the workshop of a Dutch portraitist, Han van Meegeren – one of the most prolific and successful forgers of the 20th Century. Desperate to believe that the miraculous appearance of canvases, including a depiction of Christ and The Men at Emmaus, might be lost masterpieces from the same hand that made Girl with a Pearl Earring and The Milkmaid, collectors were blind to the glaring absence of any trace of the paintings' provenance – their prior ownership, exhibition history, and proof of sales. Everyone was fooled. In authenticating the painting in the Burlington Magazine, one expert insisted "in no other picture by the great Master of Delft do we find such sentiment, such a profound understanding of the Bible story – a sentiment so nobly human expressed through the medium of the highest art". But it was all a lie. In a remarkable twist, Van Meegeren eventually chose to expose himself as a fraudster shortly after the end of World War Two, after being charged by Dutch authorities with the crime of selling a Vermeer – therefore a national treasure – to the Nazi official Hermann Göring. To prove his innocence, if innocence it might be called, and demonstrate that he had merely sold a worthless fake of his own forging, not a real Old Master, Van Meegeren performed the extraordinary feat of whisking up a fresh masterpiece from thin air before the experts' astonished eyes. Voilà, Vermeer. More recently, in a 2017 episode of BBC's popular arts programme Fake or Fortune?, presenter Philip Mould's long-held hunch that a painting he once sold for £35,000 was really a priceless original by the English Romantic artist John Constable – an alternative, and previously undocumented, view of the landscape artist's 1821 masterpiece The Hay Wain – was dramatically confirmed after Mould and fellow presenter Fiona Bruce excavated long-buried financial records. Having traced the painting's ownership back to a sale by the artist's son, the team recalculated the canvass true value to be £2m, proving that some pasts are worth hanging onto. Rule 3: Squint Artists' gestures – their simultaneously studied and instinctive brushwork and draughtsmanship – are nothing less than fingerprints writ large across canvases and works on paper. One artist's lightness of touch and another's sturdiness of stroke are exceedingly tricky to falsify, especially if you are conscious that every twitch of your brush and jot of your pen will be scrutinised by suspicious eyes and cutting-edge equipment. Pressure under pressure is hard to maintain, an obstacle that the British forger Eric Hebborn (who died under suspicious circumstances in Rome in 1996 after a career spent counterfeiting more than 1,000 works attributed to everyone from Mantegna to Tiepolo, Poussin to Piranesi) overcame with alcohol. By all accounts, brandy was Hebborn's tipple of choice for calming his rattling nerves. It allowed him to inhabit, without inhibition, the mind and muscle of whichever old master he was channelling. Whereas fakes from the hands of Beltracchi and Van Meegeren have since been found under closer inspection to be riddled with incoherent gestures, the fluidity of drawings falsified by the tipsy Hebborn in his heyday in the 1970s and 80s continues to confound the experts. To this day, institutions that possess works that passed through his hands refuse to accept they are all fakes, such as the Metropolitan Museum of Art's pen and ink drawing View of the Temples of Venus and of Diana in Baia from the South, a work it still insists is from the circle of Jan Brueghel the Elder. What do you think? Rule 4: Go deeper When the analysis of pigments, provenance, and paintbrush pressure still leaves you stumped, it may be necessary to dive a little deeper. For 20 years since the 1990s, the authenticity of a still life purportedly by Vincent van Gogh was serially confirmed and refuted by experts. To some, the garish reds and submarine blues that echoed eerily from the bouquet of roses, daisies, and wildflowers didn't have the ring of truth and seemed at odds with the painter's palette. The absence of any ownership record for the painting didn't help. But an X-ray undertaken in 2012 put questions to rest when it revealed that the artist, pinching pennies, reused a canvas on which he had created another image entirely – one to which he makes explicit reference in a letter from January 1886. "This week", Van Gogh remarked to his brother Theo, "I painted a large thing with two nude torsos – two wrestlers… and I really like doing that." As if proleptically anticipating the ensuing scholarly wrangle over the work's authenticity that the painting would in time trigger, the static tussle of the two athletes, trapped beneath paint for over a century, not only rescued the work from unfair allegations of illegitimacy, it created a kind of fresh composite painting, a vivid compression – a freeze frame of a restless mind forever scuffling with itself, desperate to survive. Rule 5: It's the little things that give you away As a final safeguard in authenticating a work of art, run the spell check. Doing so would have saved the collector Pierre Lagrange $17m – the price he paid in 2007 for an otherwise compelling forgery of a small 12x18in (30x46cm) painting falsely attributed to the American Abstract Expressionist Jackson Pollock. Famous for his drippy style, Pollock has a surprisingly legible signature, an unmistakable "c" before the final "k". The skipped consonant would do more than expose a single forgery; it would shatter the reputation of an entire gallery. The sloppy signature was just one of many missed red flags in works falsely attributed to Rothko, De Kooning, Motherwell and others that the Knoedler & Co gallery, one of New York's oldest and most esteemed art institutions, succeeded in selling for $80m. The fraudulent works had been supplied by a dubious dealer who claimed they came from an enigmatic collector, "Mr X". Just before the scandal erupted in the press, the gallery closed its doors after 165 years, while the suspected perpetrator of the fakes, a self-taught Chinese septuagenarian by the name of Pei-Shen Qian, who had operated from a forger's workshop in Queens, vanished; he later turned up in China. -- For more Culture stories from the BBC, follow us on Facebook, X and Instagram.
