Page 73 - Studio International - October 1967

Above left: An x-ray photograph of a genuine virtually unrecognizable. instances in which dealers have proved to be the
painting by Van Gogh. One of the reasons why Van Meegeren's work forger's undoing.
ought to have been detected more speedily than it X-ray photographs require skilled interpretation,
Above right: An x-ray of the same part of a copy was is to be found in the occurrence, in quick and their value in the examination of modern
by Otto Wacker.
succession, of several paintings with religious sub- paintings is perhaps greatest in the case of Van
jects purporting to be by Vermeer. Only one such Gogh, but they can and do reveal overpainting
below left: The court-room during Wacker's trial
painting was known before 1937, the year in which and alterations which, in some instances, may
in 1932 with some of his forgeries on exhibition.
the Christ at Emmäus first came on to the market, provide proof of fraud.
and the attribution to Vermeer in this particular The forger always selects as his victim an artist
Below right: the trial of Otto Wacker in 1932.
case does not find general concurrence. It is, whose work is in demand, and demand naturally
Wacker giving evidence.
therefore, fair to say that no universally accepted varies from one period to another according to the
religious painting by Vermeer existed before 1937, state of the art-market. It is, for instance, unlikely
Photos : Ullstein Bilderdienst, Berlin
nor does it exist now. Much the same applies to that any forgeries of the work of the Impressionists
Wacker's Van Goghs. Among them were four self- are even near contemporary, and Wacker did not
portraits, four Cypresses, and three Olive Trees. This produce his Van Goghs until the market value was
layers of stucco applied to the canvas—a completely concentration on a few subjects in a relatively rising steeply. Forgeries today purport to be
different basic structure. small collection should, in itself, have given rise to Cézannes, Renoirs, Van Goghs, or Chagalls. No
The Van Gogh painting shown above is an x-ray. suspicion. one that I have ever heard of has attempted to
The elements of the painting are all quite recogniz- De la Faille soon withdrew from a position which market a forged Sickert. A time of increasing
able, and it is typical of the result to be obtained he found to be untenable, and he added a supple- demand, of a rise from relative obscurity to sale-
from the examination of most genuine Van Goghs ment to his Oeuvre catalogue which stigmatized room popularity, is the time to look for forgeries,
by this method. The other x-ray photograph is of thirty of Wacker's paintings as spurious. Paul and any artist whose work is becoming fashionable
one of Wacker's copies. The subject is the same, Cassirer, the noted Berlin dealer, played a major is likely in the future to be the target for someone
and so it appears in visible light, but by x-ray it is part in the exposure of the fraud, one of the many trying to augment a limited supply.