message de groupe de discussion : 4bfeccb3$1@news.povray.org...
> After highly specialized research involving x-rays and more it was shown 
> that the painting was not painted by Rembrandt himself, but by an unknown 
> pupil of Rembrandt. And, lo and behold, the famous painting was not so 
> good anymore, and they wanted to remove it from the collection.

I doubt that the curators thought that the painting was "not so good 
anymore". It is just that, once established that the painting was not from 
Rembrandt, its historical and artistic significance became different and 
murkier. For instance, it could be a faithful or crappy copy of something 
that Rembrandt did (but has been lost since), or an original work from an 
unknown genius. In any case it cannot be studied from a "Rembrandt" 
perspective anymore. The painting no longer tells us anything about 
Rembrandt, all the "Rembrandt" features people admired in it have 
disappeared and whatever it told us about Rembrandt must now be erased from 
art books. It's now in its own little isolated bubble of art history. It 
does not mean that people should not enjoy it, but it cannot be looked at 
and appreciated the same way as before.

G.

Post a reply to this message