Average Reviews:
(More customer reviews)Although there is considerable interesting information in this book, the work overall is disappointing and even a little infuriating. The author proceeds in a general chronological fashion, but jumps from anecdote to anecdote, some quite lengthy, without any comprehensive framework or analysis. The book identifies and discusses in depth several forgers or schools of forgery, mostly from the early 20th century. Perhaps it's the nature of the subject itself or perhaps it's the translation (see below), or both, but I felt that the stories were murky, incomplete and unresolved. Statements are left unexplained and often unsourced. It is unsatisfactory for academics as it lacks consistent footnotes; the few that do appear seem randomly chosen. I'm not left with much understanding of what is the current status of the productions discussed in the book or the current views of museum curators in general.
The writing often is unclear and difficult to follow, likely a result of the translation from the French, which fact is noted only in tiny print on the last page. Awkward phrases or words are often used, such as "this wily chap would instance his `secret signature'" (p. 185), or "No crosscheck exists as to the actual origin of this collection..." (p. 163). And on page 32 this appears: "The progressive adoption of legislation restricting the trade in antiquities ... meant that archaeologists and Egyptologists were indeed increasingly led to purchase pieces on the market ..." Some explanation is needed if we are being told that restricting trade led to more trade. A number of the sentences are jarring, such as "Shaun dreamed up the idea of creating a translucent alabaster statuette measuring 19 3/4 inches ...." (p. 207); surely Shaun's dream was not so specific in dimensions. Or the statement, in a rather dry book, that one forger's history is "a truly crazy story." (p. 199) The writing also includes a few unnecessarily obscure words, such as "traceology" (pp. 192 & 203), a word which does not appear in the OED and which is not defined here, and the antiquated word "dupery" (p. 243), meaning deceit.
There are other problems with the work. It comes in an overly artsy package. Text wraps around photographs in an annoying fashion, often with a ragged left margin. Text sections begin with hugely oversized initial letters in a peculiar modern and not especially Egyptian font. Art further interferes with utility in several excursions inserted in the book in which the text is printed in orange on a near black background, which are difficult to read. Many of the photographs are of poor quality (e.g. Figs. 10, 31, 69) and most are reproduced in a colored monotone (none on glossy paper), making it more difficult to appreciate details. To make things worse, several of the figures do not match the descriptions in the text. For example, according to the text Figure 2 is a "green stone sphinx" (p. 21), but in fact it is an ushabiti. Figure 3 is supposed to be a "bronze tablet inlaid with silver" (p. 22) but in fact it is a head of Isis. Figure 74 is to be a "modern colossal head" (p. 185) but actually is a headless female torso. Other references are puzzling such as "see flyleaf illustration" (p. 188) - what flyleaf? Is Figure 60 genuine or a fake and what is its source? We're not told. And while Figure 64 is supposed to represent the "upper portion of the two [different] scarabs", only one image is shown; which does it belong to?
Although a few illustrations have a genuine artifact and a fake or questioned one on facing pages as they ideally should be shown, several times they are on the front and back sides of a single leaf making direct comparison impossible. See, e.g., pages 85-6 and 183-4. And while the author makes a great deal about the back side of a fake ("from the back it is clear that it is not an Amarna piece" (p. 210)), he does not explain why that is and no image of the back appears. Sloppiness continues in other aspects. The author quotes (p. 189) from "Hoving in his book The Game of Duplicity". In fact, the "Game of Duplicity" is a short article, not a book, that appeared in a pamphlet.
Click Here to see more reviews about: Egyptian Fakes: Masterpieces that Duped the Art World and the Experts Who Uncovered Them
Get 24% OFF
0 comments:
Post a Comment