Using Fraud to Increase Art Accessibility

The Problem: The cost to the public purse of buying artworks is increasing all the time while accessibility to see the pieces remains static.

The solution: Make realistic copies of famous artworks and display them for a wider audience.

I recently read that the UK is seeking to partner with the USA to raise the funds to buy a famous painting; with a price tag of £50 million, the UK cannot afford to make the purchase alone.

I’m not sure I’ve seen the painting live, and I’m not particularly bothered, but it does seem crazy to spend £50 million on a piece of art that most people in both the UK and the USA do not particularly value.

So, my proposal is simple – fill public museums with copies of great artworks and sell the real things. This will not only save money, but also make those artworks much more accessible to populations in the UK and the world at large.

By all means keep a few originals for special displays, but otherwise create realistic copies of other works and then sell the originals – that amount of funding could do great things for the arts sector in the UK, or even other social and environmental issues that are short of money.

Those private foundations or individuals that buy the original artworks can then choose to do with them as they wish – they might display them as an act of public generosity (or vanity) or keep them in their vaults or private displays.

It doesn’t really matter, since the public at large won’t be able to tell the difference between the copies and the original (and, research suggests, neither would many art critics, from a distance at least).

Some may scoff and say it’s not proper cricket, but how many people that visit art galleries really need the see the original painting, or would be aware if a fake were in place?

For example, in the V&A they have a room full of massive statues and sections of buildings, which all look and feel very real, but a sign tells visitors they are just cast mouldings. Does the visitor really miss out?

Indeed, with fakes, there is less chance of damaging expensive artworks and the chance for more interactive and engaging experiences as a result, as well as lower overheads as less security and insurance is required.

For anyone still not convinced, let me suggest an alternative to prove the point: create 9 fakes of some of our most famous paintings and put them on display all over the country, and get people to vote on which they think are the real thing.

Unless 80% of all guesses are correctly made for the real artworks, then my point is proven – most people simply cannot tell the difference.

So, a chance to raise a lot of money and make great art more accessible to people in the UK and globally, while leaving the uber wealthy to foot the bill for buying and protecting the originals.

That sounds like a win-win if ever there was one.