|  
 |  
   |  
 
Death of a Forger
Denis Dutton 
 
The murder of Eric Hebborn on January 11th (1996) brought to a close one of   the most illustrious careers of any twentieth-century forger. His body   was found on a street in Rome, the city where he had lived since the   1970s, with his skull broken, probably by a hammer blow from behind.   Only a few weeks before, he had published his second book, Il Manuale   del Falsario (The Faker’s Handbook), a set of complete instructions   on how to forge and market fake drawings and paintings from the   European tradition. 
   
  Born to a poor Cockney family in 1934,   Hebborn’s beginnings were unpromising. His mother apparently delighted   in beating him, and from what he describes, he must have provided no   little provocation. Eventually, Hebborn set fire to his school and spent   time in a reform school. His abilities as a draughtsman were recognized   and encouraged by his teachers, and though too young to join, he became   a kind of mascot of the Maldon Art Club, even exhibiting at age   fifteen. Finally, he made it to the Royal Academy, where he was awarded a   Silver Medal and a Rome Scholarship for study in Italy. 
   
  While   still a student, he went to work for a picture restorer named George   Aczel. Restoration, it developed, meant much more that cleaning and   retouching, and soon young Eric was painting large areas of old works,   cleverly extending cracking into newly painted surfaces, and even   “improving” old paintings by augmenting them. An insignificant landscape   became, with the addition of a balloon in its grey sky, an important   (and expensive) painting recording the early history of aviation. As   Hebborn says, “a cat added to the foreground guaranteed the sale of the   dullest landscape” Popular signatures came and unpopular signatures   went” Poppies bloomed in dun-coloured fields.” 
   
  From Aczel’s   studio, Hebborn discovered, such “improved” pictures went straight into   gold frames and the plush surroundings of a dealer gallery where a sale   often netted Aczel a fivefold profit. It wasn’t long before it struck   Hebborn that there is no need to fuss with an old painting to produce a   very valuable work of art: old paper and proper ink recipes, along with a   little talent, were enough. And talent, it must be said, is something   Hebborn has demonstrated in abundance. In fact, Hebborn began to produce   masterpieces to take importance places in the collections of the   British Museum, the Pierpont Morgan Library, the National Gallery in   Washington, and innumerable important private collections. These were   not trifles, but mainly Old Master drawings authenticated by noted art   historians, such as Sir Anthony Blunt, and sold though Christie’s,   Sotheby’s, and especially the respected London dealer Colnaghi. 
   
  By   the time his career as forger concluded, Hebborn had produced by his   own account approximately a thousand fake drawings, purportedly by such   hands as Castiglione, Mantegna, Rubens, Breughel, Van Dyck, Boucher,   Poussin, Ghisi, Tiepolo, and Piranesi. But that isn’t all: there has   been sculpture, a series of “important” Augustus Johns, and works by   Corot, Boldini, and even Hockney. A Renaissance bronze Narcissus was   authenticated by Sir John Pope Hennessy, and a “Parri Spinelli” drawing   was purchased by Denys Sutton, editor of Apollo, for £14,000. 
   
  During   most of the 1970s and 80s, Hebborn lived the dolce vita in Rome, using   various London dealers and galleries to dispose of his works, often at   spectacular prices. His loves included a relationship with Graham that   lasted for some years, until Graham became “sexually tired of me, and   was constantly looking about for a change – even girls.” After that, he   seems to have settled down with Edgar, and though he spent a night in   Sir Anthony Blunt’s bed, nothing happened due to due to the drunken   condition of both. “Brewer’s droop,” Hebborn calls it. 
   
  In 1978,   Colnaghi’s realised that they had been sold some fakes by Hebborn and   the temporary panic that set in depressed prices for Master Drawings. A   curator had noticed that the Pierpont Morgan’s “Cossa” was on paper   identical to the National Gallery’s “Sperandio.” As these drawings had   both been obtained from Hebborn, doubts multiplied. His reputation was   destroyed and the London market in Master Drawings temporarily crashed.   Hebborn might at this point have decided to retire, or at least lie low,   but instead he vowed to flood the Old Master market with five hundred   more drawings, which he claims to have accomplished between 1978 and   1988. Given the quality and diversity of his known output, there is no   reason to doubt this general claim. 
   
  On the other hand, he was   given to spreading complex layers of lies in order further to confuse   curators and the art market. For example, in his 1991 autobiography,   Drawn to Trouble (also published as Master Faker), he claimed for   himself several quite authentic drawings. In 1994, he said that the   pigment of a Leonardo cartoon in the British National Gallery had been   inadvertently destroyed and that he had redrawn the work from scratch.   His former partner, Graham Smith, told the Independent’s Geraldine   Norman, however, that this had never happened. Hebborn had also claimed   to have painted a Rogier van der Weyden and an Annibale Carraci, both   paintings having been discovered during the time of his active forgery.   These “revelations” are patently untrue, Norman insists. 
   
  Hebborn   was a charming rogue, highly intelligent, and an excellent writer   (assuming, of course, he actually wrote his autobiography). He was   imbued with an acid sense of resentment, and displayed that peculiarly   British working-class impulse to wreck revenge against the lordly elite.   Hebborn missed no opportunity to recount how he made a fool of some   mandarin art historian, a fatuous, titled collector, or an expert in the   employ of Christie’s or Sotheby’s. While many of these jabs are   deserved, Hebborn’s attempts at self-justification were less successful. 
   
  In   his autobiography, two of Hebborn’s themes are the venality of art   dealers and the pseudo-expertise of the scholars who authenticated his   fakes. Clearly, greedy dealers looked none-to-carefully at his works and   sold them for vast profits. The experts whom he tricked may have looked   more carefully, but Hebborn was an exceedingly clever forger. Not only   was he extremely knowledgeable about materials, he possesses a   remarkably adaptable mimetic ability. In this respect, his oeuvre   challenges to some extent the widely-accepted belief that forgers   invariably give themselves away by allowing their own personal   mannerisms to infect their fakes. Hebborn displayed an astonishing   ability to think himself into another artist’s style and effectively   imitate it. Moreover, many of his fakes are disarming in their life and   grace. They are, simply as basic visual objects, beautiful to look at. 
   
  Hebborn   had no reluctance to point this out, but he was not uncritical of his   own abilities. Most of his forgeries were original works in the style of   other artists, but at one point he compared an early copy he made of a   Corot drawing with the original in order to demonstrate how relatively   inferior his fake is. His copy was too timid and deliberate, he says,   and lacked “the strong sure line of Corot.” Perhaps, but his Temples of   Venus and Diana, by “Breughel,” or his Christ Crowned with Thorns, by   “Van Dyck,” would have done credit to their purported artists. 
   
  They   are not, however, works of art in the sense Hebborn argues for at   fallacious length. He quotes Gombrich that since pictures do not assert   anything, they cannot be true or false. It follows, Hebborn claims, that   his works cannot be false. Naturally, a drawing is a drawing. It is   claiming that it is by Tiepolo or Mantegna, when it is in fact by Eric   Hebborn, that is false. Pictures don’t lie: it is only the people who   make and sell them, such as Hebborn, who do that. 
   
  The greatest   crime Hebborn committed does not involve the misfortunes of the rich in   their attempt to use Old Masters as secure investments. It is rather   that there are now, thanks to him, hundreds of fake “Master Drawings” in   private and public collections. Art is not just about beautiful things,   it is about the visions of the world recorded in centuries past. Now   the drawn record of those visions has been corrupted by the skill and   subterfuge of a talented contemporary faker. 
   
  The extent to which   this will subtly distort our grasp of our ancestors’ understanding of   their world remains to be seen. Hebborn’s handiwork has altered our   understanding of the history of graphic representation just as surely as   a document forger’s skill might alter our understanding of the history   of ideas. More’s the pity. 
  
    1996   © Denis Dutton 
  
  
  
Go to article on  aesthetics-online.org  
  
  
  
  
nsthandel, Galerie, gallery, galerie, Museum, museum, 
musee, museo, art consulting, Kunstvermittlung, kunstberatung, Malerei, malerei, 
painting, peinture, pittura, Skulptur, skulptur, sculupture, Plastik, plastik, 
Bildhauerei, bildhauerei, Rauminstallation, rauminstallation, Environment, environment, 
Objekt, objekt, Objektkunst, Architektur, architektur, architecture, Fotografie, 
fotografie, photography, photographie, art brut, outsider art, Fluxus, fluxus, 
Plum, plum, Christoph Plum, Anna Klinkhammer, klinkhammer, Rainer Hansmeyer, hansmeyer, 
Dieter roth, diter rot, Holger Reintjes, holger reintjes, Jasna Bosniak, Jasna 
Bo, jasna bosniak, dirk markus lehnert, Lehnert, Robertz, robertz, Hagen, hagen. 
b222.de vertritt die auffassung, daß die ausrichtung des kunstbetriebs und 
künstlerischen mainstreams auf mediengerechte verwertbarkeit sowie auf vermarktung 
im sinne einer unterordnung unter kunstfremde interessen dem eigentlichen interesse 
von künstlern wie kunstliebhabern widerspricht. wir sind überzeugt, 
dass der künstlerischen wahrnehmung und produktion ein zutiefst anarchischer 
kern innewohnt, der sich der vereinnahmung durch kommerzielle interessen entzieht. 
mit unserer arbeit versuchen wir deshalb, jenseits des etablierten kunstbetriebs 
und abseits von überkommenen genregrenzen, das spartendenken aufzuheben und 
eine enklave der denk- und kunstfreiheit zu schaffen, in der absurdität, 
tragischer ernst, spiel und nichtinstrumentelle vernunft die notwendige beinfreiheit 
haben.   |