Was Michelangelo a forger?

BRY2K

Hmmm, THIS is a good question queproblema, and one that leads to endless speculation no doubt. One observation is that a new work by Michelangelo has been “discovered,” on average, every two or three years for the past 75 years, and not one of them is universally accepted as authentic. Many are attempts by art dealers to raise the value of their merchandise. Lynn Catterson, coordinator for Columbia University’s art history summer program would posit the thought that yes he was. She submits that the “Laocoon” statue is the work of Michelangelo and she noticed that a sketch of the back of a male torso by Michelangelo was practically identical to a photograph of the “Laocoon.” Catterson said Michelangelo’s motive for the forgery was profit. At the time, he was at the beginning of his career as a sculptor under the patronage of the Medici family, which had amassed a large collection of ancient works. When the Medici family was expelled from Florence, Michelangelo was under increasing financial strain. The artist knew more money could be made in forging antiquities than in creating contemporary works. More here: http://jscms.jrn.columbia.edu/cns/2005-05-03/grogan-michelangeloforgery Mar 10 08, 3:41 AM

author

The most famous case of Renaissance art fraud involved the young Michelangelo. In 1496 he sculpted a sleeping cupid which he (or an accomplice) buried in acidic earth to give it an appearance of great age. The plan was to pass it off as an antiquity, since it would fetch a higher price that way. The artificially aged sculpture was then sold through a dealer to Cardinal Raffaello Riario of San Giorgio. Eventually the Cardinal learned of the forgery, and he demanded his money back from the dealer. But the Cardinal wasn’t mad at Michelangelo. In fact, he allowed him to keep his percentage of the sale. Everyone was so impressed by Michelangelo’s obvious talent, that they all simply overlooked his youthful indiscretion. http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/Hoaxipedia/Renaissance_Forgeries/ Mar 10 08, 12:38 PM

queproblema

Thanks, guys. I read in great detail about the "Sleeping Cupid" in an older book, and then found a newer book that pooh-poohs the possibility of Michelangelo having done that. Turning to the internet, I found the controversial "Laocoon" story. Now Frankie points me to #'s 56658 and 72846, both impossible to find with the archive search engine because they don't have the name of the sculptor or either work. I'm thinking the truth may never be known, but my opinion is that if one can get over the heretical idea that he may have, well, he just may have. Mar 10 08, 10:08 PM

McGruff

Google sends a great deal of traffic FunTrivia's way. Our search engine only picks up keywords in the question and does not search the entire database. While trying to find older questions that I know are in the database, I've found Google to be a great aid. But Google can also be used to find information that may be contained in an answer, when the keywords do not appear in the question. If you google keywords: funtrivia michelangelo cupid, then hit the "More results from funtrivia.com" link under the first results from FunTrivia, you will find Q#72846 as the third result. Likewise, google: funtrivia Laocoon, hit "More results" and Q#56658 comes up on the first page. Googling the word 'funtrivia' with any keyword (and always click "More results") will bring up questions from quizzes, posts in the forums and questions from AFT. It is a great tool in quiz writing because you want to avoid asking a question that appears often on other quizzes, but AFT has a pretty high profile, so if you know there's an old question that you can't find, this is probably the best way to go. Mar 10 08, 11:04 PM