On Fraudulence in Art

Abstract

Contemporary art is frequently accused to be fraudulent. Usually explained away as an epiphenomenon, the experience of fraudulence is rarely investigated per se. This paper closely examines Stanley Cavell’s stance on the issue, comparing it with the positions implied in Arthur Danto’s, Nelson Goodman’s and Richard Wollheim’s aesthetics. Reflections on examples of fraudulent art in the history of visual art lead to partly dismiss Cavell’s position in his own term: fraudulent art can be part of the media resources which might allow an artist to “keep faith with tradition.” The impression of fraudulence is then dependent on the ontology of contemporary artworks.