Does a famous signature make a picture more beautiful?

An interesting read by Eric Felton in the Wall Street Journal today: “Ansel Adams and the Art World Name Game”here

In it he discusses recent findings of old master works, including the now likely debunked Adams glass plate negatives.

“Why is a set of photos worth millions if they were shot by Ansel Adams, and next to nothing if the photographer depressing the plunger was a nobody? After all the images remain the same. To the extent that art is about appreciating aesthetic objects for their own sake, is it right to put so much stake in the question of who did the drawing or painting or snapping?”

Minor quibble here on the usage of “snapping” especially when related to the making of glass plate negs.

Felton continues, “…We might want to be more open minded when we encounter art of dubious provenance, allowing ourselves to judge and appreciate works for their quality rather than their attribution.”

As a girl of dubious provenance myself, I say amen, brother.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s