Randy Kennedy has a piece in the Week in Review section of today's New York Times discussing the "Matter Pollocks" and the increasing role of science in art authentication disputes:
"Modern science employed in the cause of art world detective work is not exactly new; it was pioneered by scholars like Edward Forbes at Harvard beginning as early as the 1920s. But advances in technology and a growing desire among scientists to delve into art and conservation questions have made it a much more prominent part of the field in the last decade. And as this has happened, a clash of cultures between two very different worlds — hard science and the more subjective, individualistic traditions of the art scholar — has come into sharp relief."
Earlier post on a similar topic here.
Geoff Edgers of the Boston Globe has spoken with Alex Matter, who insists the paintings are real depsite the recent Harvard study. "His reasoning, which we'll detail soon in the paper, might make more sense than you would expect."
