{"title":"是赝品吗?问问语义学家","authors":"William Casement","doi":"10.5406/jaesteduc.54.1.0051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Forgery is a commonly, if uncomfortably, recognized force in the art world. It might be assumed, then, that the meaning of the term forgery is uniformly established. That assumption would be a mistake. Although forgery in general parlance has a basic, easily understood meaning, specialists of various stripes employ the term in restricted ways that bear the potential for confusion not only among the cognoscenti but for the broader public. In particular, legal terminology often avoids the term forgery altogether in regard to artworks, and several competing and incompatible versions of the difference between a forgery and a “fake” are in circulation in books, on web-sites, and in the literature of certain professional groups. Differentiating forgeries from fakes makes for an exercise in semantics that, while sometimes offering helpful explications, on the whole bodes difficulty. In our age of increasingly shared information, it is possible to inform members of limited groups, as well as other people taking an interest in their activities, about the specific meaning of forgery that is employed by a group. The result can be a helpful understanding for insiders. However, when restricted meanings are presented as if they are general meanings and they conflict with established language, confusion is imminent, and rectifying it is difficult if even possible.","PeriodicalId":45866,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF AESTHETIC EDUCATION","volume":"54 1","pages":"51 - 68"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is It a Forgery? Ask a Semanticist\",\"authors\":\"William Casement\",\"doi\":\"10.5406/jaesteduc.54.1.0051\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:Forgery is a commonly, if uncomfortably, recognized force in the art world. It might be assumed, then, that the meaning of the term forgery is uniformly established. That assumption would be a mistake. Although forgery in general parlance has a basic, easily understood meaning, specialists of various stripes employ the term in restricted ways that bear the potential for confusion not only among the cognoscenti but for the broader public. In particular, legal terminology often avoids the term forgery altogether in regard to artworks, and several competing and incompatible versions of the difference between a forgery and a “fake” are in circulation in books, on web-sites, and in the literature of certain professional groups. Differentiating forgeries from fakes makes for an exercise in semantics that, while sometimes offering helpful explications, on the whole bodes difficulty. In our age of increasingly shared information, it is possible to inform members of limited groups, as well as other people taking an interest in their activities, about the specific meaning of forgery that is employed by a group. The result can be a helpful understanding for insiders. However, when restricted meanings are presented as if they are general meanings and they conflict with established language, confusion is imminent, and rectifying it is difficult if even possible.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45866,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOURNAL OF AESTHETIC EDUCATION\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"51 - 68\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOURNAL OF AESTHETIC EDUCATION\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1092\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5406/jaesteduc.54.1.0051\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF AESTHETIC EDUCATION","FirstCategoryId":"1092","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5406/jaesteduc.54.1.0051","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract:Forgery is a commonly, if uncomfortably, recognized force in the art world. It might be assumed, then, that the meaning of the term forgery is uniformly established. That assumption would be a mistake. Although forgery in general parlance has a basic, easily understood meaning, specialists of various stripes employ the term in restricted ways that bear the potential for confusion not only among the cognoscenti but for the broader public. In particular, legal terminology often avoids the term forgery altogether in regard to artworks, and several competing and incompatible versions of the difference between a forgery and a “fake” are in circulation in books, on web-sites, and in the literature of certain professional groups. Differentiating forgeries from fakes makes for an exercise in semantics that, while sometimes offering helpful explications, on the whole bodes difficulty. In our age of increasingly shared information, it is possible to inform members of limited groups, as well as other people taking an interest in their activities, about the specific meaning of forgery that is employed by a group. The result can be a helpful understanding for insiders. However, when restricted meanings are presented as if they are general meanings and they conflict with established language, confusion is imminent, and rectifying it is difficult if even possible.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Aesthetic Education (JAE) is a highly respected interdisciplinary journal that focuses on clarifying the issues of aesthetic education understood in its most extensive meaning. The journal thus welcomes articles on philosophical aesthetics and education, to problem areas in education critical to arts and humanities at all institutional levels; to an understanding of the aesthetic import of the new communications media and environmental aesthetics; and to an understanding of the aesthetic character of humanistic disciplines. The journal is a valuable resource not only to educators, but also to philosophers, art critics and art historians.