When the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York acquired a rare Duccio painting from the 1200s for $50 million, a lot of eyebrows raised in the art world. That's a lot of money to pay for a new acquisition. But it's also a Star Acquisition.
My theory of Star Acquisitions is that museums acquire high profile works, such as the Duccio, as a way of attracting new visitors, increasing exposure, and ultimately in raising even more money. The Metropolitan Museum of Art also states that the purchase of this piece filled in a gap in their collection.
Now there is an art scholar who claims the Duccio of a Madonna and Child is a forgery, and a bad one at that. Professor James Beck of Columbia University in New York claims that he is debunking the value of the Duccio to promote his ArtWatch International, which is trying to maintain quality standards in the world of fine art. To quote from Professor Beck, "When a mediocre object is classified as a great work by a great artist, that artist is unfairly diminished and the public is misled."
This is a tough battle to call. The Met stands behind the authenticity of the Duccio painting. After all, wouldn't it look really bad for one of the foremost art institutions in the world to have to back down and admit they made a mistake? And with so much money at stake wouldn't the Met have investigated the provenance of the artwork exhaustively?
There are too many questions to answer but the motives of both the Met and Professor Beck seem to be to get the attention of the media for their respective institutions. But the debate about the authenticity of this painting is good and should continue.
