Appraising Unauthentic Art:

Facsimiles in Post-Modernity

By Charlie Wiseman

Dr. Jared Benton

Art as Cultural Heritage
December 13, 2018
 There has been a longstanding debate about the value and function of facsimiles (copies,

replicas, reproductions, forgeries) situated at the intersection of material culture and the art

world.1 For museums and private collectors, facsimiles represent a threat to profitability as the

commercial value of any artwork is bound to its authenticity. The concept of authenticity is a

complicated one. Bryony Roberts offers this clarification on its historical developments:

Although the word authenticity has its origins in antiquity and long usage in the English

language, it has a short and tumultuous history within preservation discourse. From the

beginning, the word authentic was associated with authorship, having its origins in the Greek

authentikos, meaning “original, genuine, principal”; from authentes, meaning “author, or one

acting on one’s own authority”; derived from autos the word for “self.” As the term evolved

into the Latin authenticus, and later the French authentique, it continued to evoke that which is

“original, genuine,” with the subtle duality of that which can be traced to an author versus

traced to an authority. The English word authentic gains significance in the eighteenth and

nineteenth centuries in opposition to the copy or imitation, in an era that witnessed the

flourishing of both historical imitation and industrial reproduction. A 1790 definition points

directly to the threat of the copy, defining “authentic” as “proceeding from its reputed source

or author; genuine (Opp. To counterfeit, forged, etc.).”2

UNESCO established the World Heritage Committee in 1972 and its subsequent “Operational

Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention” from 1977 requires

proof of authenticity of both materials and setting, and broadens authenticity to include

subsequent authors, stating that “authenticity does not limit consideration to original form and

structure but includes all subsequent modifications and additions, over the course of time,

which in themselves possess artistic or historical values.” As multiculturalism,

1
Uchill, Rebecca. "Original Und Reproduktion : Alexander Dorner and the (Re)production of Art Experience."
Future Anterior: Journal of Historic Preservation, History, Theory, and Criticism 12, no. 2 (2015): 13-37.
2
Roberts, Bryony. "Competing Authenticities." Future Anterior: Journal of Historic Preservation, History, Theory,
and Criticism 12, no. 2 (2015): 2.
 postcolonialism, and identity politics blossomed in the 1970s and ’80s, this definition

expanded further until the Nara Document on Authenticity of 1994 recognized the importance

of intangible heritage and cultural traditions beyond the confines of Western object-based

monumentality. As a result of these cultural tremors, UNESCO’s most recent Operational

Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention from 2013… allows that

proof of authenticity can be expressed through not only “materials and substance” but also

“traditions, techniques, and management systems; language, and other forms of intangible

heritage; spirit and feeling; and other internal and external factors.”3

Despite UNESCO broadening the connotations of authenticity, museums have continued to

reject the pursuit and display of facsimiles, except in the case of replicated artefacts and notable

cultural properties with grand aesthetic appeal. Private collectors, not reverent to the imperatives

set forth by UNESCO and with much to lose in the lucrative business of acquiring and selling

originals, have no incentive to accept facsimiles. On the other hand, there are entire cultures that

rely on facsimiles to maintain their cultural heritage as demonstrated by Ross Bowden who

describes the Kwoma practice of constructing copies of original artifacts to replace them once

they are no longer suitable for display for reverence or transport for rituals. He claims that

similar attitudes of separating cultural value from the physical form and the agency of the

original craftsperson can be identified in “many if not all other Oceanic cultures (including

Australian Aborigines) and to many of the small-scale, nonliterate societies found in sub-Saharan

Africa and the Americas.”4 To evaluate this claim, this paper will explore three case studies to

examine how non-European societies perceive, consume and utilize replicated artworks.

3
Roberts, 4.
4
Bowden, Ross. "What Is Wrong with an Art Forgery?: An Anthropological Perspective." The Journal of Aesthetics
and Art Criticism 57.3 (1999): 334. Web. 7 Sep 2018.
 The first case study focuses on the 3-D replication of painted folding screens (byōbu) in

Japan, a trend that Shoji Yamada considers to be diminishing the cultural heritage in Kyoto – the

birthplace of major art schools that specialized in producing byōbu. By analyzing the role of

byōbu as material culture and contextualizing them as facsimiles, we will offer a counterpoint to

Yamada’s claims. The second case study focuses on the prevalence of stone and wood replicas

throughout Mexico. As tourists flock to the country, these facsimiles strive to preserve pre-

Hispanic culture but also assume the influence of foreign cultures with the commodification of

these objects as souvenirs. By comparing local and tourist consumption discussed by several

authors, we will provide evidence that the commercial value of artifacts confounds their social

value, contrary to the prevailing perspective of private collectors. The third case study focuses on

the reproduction of aboriginal art styles by Elizabeth Durack, infamous for her false portrayal as

an Aboriginal artist. By identifying the entrenchment of facsimile in Aboriginal culture and

conceptualizing certain facets of identity, we will develop an impartial account of how Durack’s

deception may have impacted the Aboriginal art market and offer an alternative.

3D Replacement in Japan

A distinct purpose of folding screens (byōbu) in the East was to separate architectural

spaces from natural forces, primarily the wind. Popularized in China and Korea, byōbu emigrated

into Japan during the Nara period (710-784 AD) where it was adapted as a privacy tool to

supplement traditional Japanese floor culture. Japanese craftspeople would substitute reinforced

hinges with paper (washi) to replace the original bulky, heavy, silk constructions during the

Kamakura period (1185-1333 AD).5 This adaptation allowed for greater mobility and more

5
Tracking changes that emphasized the novelty of Japanese byobu: Yale University Art Gallery, Byobu Exhibit,
2014.
intricate panoramic displays of Japanese poems, folklore, landscapes and celebrations which

contributed to its wide appeal by the Muromachi period (1392-1568 AD).6 In addition to

partitioning the floor, byōbu were used as a device to display wealth by Japanese aristocrats

throughout the Edo period (1603-1868 AD). Emperors and samurai would commission skilled

calligraphers and artists to produce extravagant screen paintings, sometimes embellished in gold.

One method of training individuals in the art of byōbu was the replication of other screen

paintings. Ogata Korin7, who inspired the Rinpa school8 in the city of Kyoto, completed many

works as replicas. His rendition of the Wind and Thunder God is recognized as an important

cultural property in Japan, often displayed at the Tokyo National Museum.9 The original from

Tawaraya Sotatsu, on the other hand, is a national treasure stored at the Kenin-ji Temple in

Kyoto. This is mentioned to demonstrate how the reproduction of art has been a respectable

practice throughout Japan for centuries prior to the complaints of digital replacement in the 21st

century presented by Shoji Yamada.

Following the destruction of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, the national government’s

commitment to the preservation of Japanese material culture became a rational one. At the turn

of the century, digital replacement projects were initiated to transport “treasured sliding door

paintings (J. fusumae), wall paintings (hekiga), folding screen paintings (byōbue), hanging scroll

paintings (kakemono), and illustrated manuscripts (emaki)” from temples and museums into

storage for protection against damage and looting. The leading competitors involved in the

6
Small catalog of famous Japanese screen paintings: Julia Meech-Pekarik, Twelve Japanese Screens, The
Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, n.d.
7
Describing the influences and impact of Ogata Korin in Japanese Art: Hugo Munsterberg, Ogata Korin,
Encyclopædia Britannica, July 2018.
8
Historical development and thematic expressions associated with the Rinpa school: Department of Asian Art,
Rinpa Painting Style, October 2008.
9
Criteria for Important Cultural Property in Japan: Agency For Cultural Affairs, “Cultural Properties.”
http://www.bunka.go.jp/english/policy/cultural_properties/
digital replacement since of Japanese art are Canon Incorporated10 and Dai Nippon Printing11

Company. Production costs are relatively low for these corporate entities which contributes to

the appeal of relying on digital replacement as a preservation aid. Easily replaceable, these

copies presents an opportunity for greater immersion as the inherent need for exhibition cases is

eliminated. Technology standards guarantee high-quality replicas, however that does not

guarantee an authentic aesthetic considering “digital copies appear to fade far more rapidly than

expected.”12 Furthermore, gold embellishments that once reflected grand opulence are difficult to

re-create with inkjet printing. Instead,

technicians have been forced to adopt a number of less than satisfactory methods: (1) print imagery of gold

leaf onto which a pictorial imagery is in turn printed; (2) apply actual gold leaf and print digital imagery

upon it; (3) print pictorial imagery and then apply actual gold leaf. 13

Where the fantasm of gold does correlate to the social hierarchy in pre-modern Japan, its

diminished impact on the visual aesthetic can be offset with a commitment to other types of

context. Why was this particular property determined important to copy? What national events

are portrayed in the images? What do the brush strokes tell us about the time period and the

artist?

Removal and storage methods are also troubling to Yamada who acknowledges the

delicate nature of Japanese cultural assets. For example, the hinges of sliding door paintings and

folding screen paintings experiencing warping without adequate holding structures, discoloration

10
Canon. “Tsuzuri.” https://global.canon/ja/tsuzuri/
11
Dai Nippon Printing Company. “Denshobi.” http://www.dnp.co.jp/denshoubi/
12
Yamada, Shoji. "Who Moved My Masterpiece? Digital Reproduction, Replacement, and the Vanishing Cultural
Heritage of Kyoto." 24, no. 3 (2017): 303.
13
Yamada, 303.
from improper lighting and tearing in unfavorable temperatures. 14 Moreover, he believes that

their absence creates a dissonance between environment and cultural context:

In a number of cases, the pictorial compositions of wall and sliding door paintings connect visually with the

compositions and motifs located in adjacent rooms and with exterior landscape gardens. The dislocation of

a set of paintings from their intended location effectively destroys the symbiotic pictorial and architectural

(and ritual and social) context, at least in terms of the integrity of its mutually original material and visual

and spatial identity. 15

Carl Einstein and other spatial purists champion this complaint about the transport of art and

artifacts.16 Even as a reasonable stance, Yamada contradicts himself by acknowledging that

“most Japanese art historians, however, do not attach such weight to the relationship between an

original work and its original context.”17

Walter Benjamin posits the trend of 3D replacement and other causations for inducting

facsimiles on a universal arena:

The uniqueness of a work of art is identical to its embeddedness in the context of tradition. Of course, this

tradition itself is thoroughly alive and extremely changeable. An ancient statue of Venus, for instance,

existed in a traditional context for the Greeks (who made it an object of worship) that was different from

the context in which it existed for medieval clerics (who viewed it as a sinister idol). But what was equally

evident to both was its uniqueness—that is, its aura. Originally, the embeddedness of an artwork in the

14
Further concerns regarding the storage of Japanese folding screens. Dianne Lee van der Reyden. The History,
Technology, and Care of Folding Screens: Case Studies of the Conservation Treatment of Western and Oriential
Screens. Conservation Problems and Treatments.
15
Yamada, 313.
16
Carl Einstein in Uchill, 25-26: An art object or artifact that lands in a museum is stripped of its existential
conditions, deprived of its biological milieu and thus of its proper agency. Entry into the museum confirms the
natural death of the work of art, it marks the attainment of a shadowy, very limited, let us call it an aesthetic
immortality. An altar panel or a portrait is executed for a specific purpose, for a specific environment; especially
without the latter the work is but a dead fragment, ripped from the soil; just as if one had broken a mullion 26 out of
a window or a capital from a column; probably the building had already collapsed. And yet one thing is now
isolated: the aesthetic phenomenon—from that very moment the effect of the art object becomes falsified and
limited.
17
Yamada, 313.
 context of tradition found expression in a cult . . . Art history might be seen as the working out of a tension

between two polarities within the artwork itself . . . the artwork’s cult value and its exhibition value . . . The

scope for exhibiting the work of art has increased so enormously with the various methods of

technologically reproducing it that, as happened in prehistoric times, a quantitative shift between the two

poles of the artwork has led to a qualitative transformation in its nature.18

Where 3D replacements may not hold spatial contextuality, they are more easily

accessible by populations that may be unable to enter the spaces once occupied by the originals

such as ancient temples. Their aura is maintained in what new viewers can see and can touch.

Museums located in regions experiencing political distress or targets of military hostility may

benefit the most from this tactic. However, they likely do not have funding available to commit

to 3D replacement. Curators facing these dilemmas could consider developing online exhibits

which are becoming increasingly popular. When it comes to cultural artefacts, curators may seek

to form partnerships with local artisans that are familiar with pertinent techniques.

Replicas in Mexico

The National Anthropology Museum in Mexico City is home to a “ a monolithic 167-ton

pre-Hispanic stone carving dating from the apex of the Teotihuacan period (roughly A.D. 400–

500), which most archaeologists have identified as a representation of the Aztec rain god Tlaloc”

that had been previously been buried in Coatlinchan prior to 1964.19 It is believed that the Aztecs

had discarded the stone structure with little intention to finish its carving as it was found

unfinished and not in proximity to other pre-Hispanic monuments from that era. Despite its

isolation, Spanish and Christian forces that documented its location did not destroy it. When it

was excavated, the Mexican government assumed possession of Tlaloc stone carving from the

18
Walter Benjamin in Uchill, 26.
19
Rozental, Sandra. "Stone Replicas: The Iteration and Itinerancy of Mexican Patrimonio." Journal of Latin
American and Caribbean Anthropology 19, no. 2 (2014): 331.
Coatlinchan townspeople and relocated it to the national museum because it represented a direct

link to the nation’s untampered history which prompted its relocation once uncovered. As such,

several replicas can be seen throughout the country including massive dams and souvenir shops

alongside facsimiles of other pre-Hispanic artifacts. Further South in Oaxaca, another set of

stone carvings are appreciated: the dazantes (dancers) and nadadores (swimmers) that were once

etched in the walls of Monte Alban, a Zapotec pyramid. Despite the authentic impression given

from the collection of stones placed around the archeological site of Monte Alban, each artifact

is a replica of the images found inside the pyramid during excavation. Closer to the heart of the

city, these images are re-imposed again as wood carvings, stone masks and other tourist-facing

consumables

Sandra Rozental identifies the various forms that pre-Hispanic iconography can be found

in today in Mexico’s market landscape:

…tiny refrigerator magnets or keychain holders made out of plastic and resin; others are painted, plaster or

clay decorative items, such as tequila bottles, chess pieces, bookends, and obsidian paperweights. These

portable replicas are sold along with countless miniature ruins from all over Mexico: the Tula Atlantes,

pyramid of Chichen Itza, Mayan Chac Mool, and famous Olmec heads, among others. 20

Essentially, these items are housewares or home-based souvenirs. In his definition of the term,

David Hume implies that these objects have compromised aesthetic value for profit:

Objects of repetitive production manufactured ‘when the profit motive or economic competition of poverty

override aesthetic standards, satisfying the consumer becomes more important than pleasing the artist.’21

20
Rozental, 338.
21
Hume, David L. “Tourism Art and Souvenirs: the Material Culture of Tourism [e-book]. New York: Routledge,
2014. Web. p.28.
Ronda Brulotte corroborates a gradient of this claim in an anecdote she provides describing

unethical practice of certain vendors in Oaxaca deceiving buyers about the materials and

provenance of their crafts.22 These deceivers rely on local and foreign (e.g. United States, China,

Taiwan) means of mass production to maintain stock. Besides the lack of agency with their

crafts, they also demonstrate little to no commitment to the significant of the icons being sold,

having found complacency with fabricating stories to appease the imaginative, sometimes

discriminatory nature of tourists. Fortunately, there are masses of Mexican craftspeople that

continue to produce souvenirs as weapons against such irreverence pre-Hispanic culture. They

assume the role of preserving their collective memory because:

if we…return to the humble art of copying, then we shall see that any of the cheap copies on permanent

display in the intimacy of people’s home museums-even the commercially produced series-preserve or

acquire some kind of an individuality lingering between personal memory and aesthetic experience.23

From this perspective, the agenda behind the proliferation of replicated Mexican artifacts

becomes more evident without focusing exclusively on their profitability.

By encouraging replica mass, a concept coined by George Kubler, the Mexican

government has all but guaranteed an undying interest in pre-Hispanic icons, locations and

religion both domestically and abroad.24 As souvenirs permeate outwards to the coasts from the

inland artisan hubs, residents of distant cities are subconsciously encouraged to attend festivals

and visit museums to learn more about the origins of the facsimile they’ve encountered. Just as

easily, in the Age of Information, they may be inclined to conduct research online. Similarly, as

souvenirs rest on the mantles of foreign homes, their owners are reminded of Mexico’s thriving

22
Brulotte, Ronda L. Between Art and Artifact Archaeological Replicas and Cultural Production in Oaxaca,
Mexico. 1st ed. Austin: University of Texas, 2012. Print. p.120
23
Brulotte, 118.
24
Rozental, 335.
role in the world sphere both before and after Spanish occupation. In spite of everything, the

Mexican people have reached into the past and devised a method to fund their present and

cultivate their future. Thereby confirming Benjamin’s assertion that:

Objects become available for resignification and for new forms of reverence…the creative possibilities of

reproduction that transform configurations of distance and proximity whereby objects do not lose “aura, but

rather shed a certain pretence of authenticity. 25

Reproduced Art Styles in Australia

Aboriginal art has survived as replicas of ancient symbols and motifs constructed into

unique arrangements that separate one artist from another. According to Bowden, authenticity

was instead

…determined by how well they reproduced the ancestral prototypes on which all artworks

were thought to be based, and whether or not their reproduction was authorized. Reproducing a

design 'correctly' involved, in part, capturing the brightness, color and visual power of the

ancestral original. 26

A reverence for transformative replicas does not implicate appreciation for all forms of

unauthentic art. Art produced through deception is almost always ill-received by Aboriginals due

to their reverence of artmaking as an intimate experience per Adler et. al.:

Where the original artist is closely tied to Aboriginal traditions, issues of responsibility and custodianship

may arise in situations where someone has copied motifs of an Aboriginal artist. Such fakery may

undermine the position of the artist as a senior member of the community, since there may be an

expectation that the artist should maintain control over the distribution of sensitive thematic content within

25
Rozental, 335.
26
Bowden, Ross. "What Is 'Authentic' Aboriginal Art?" Pacific Arts, no. 23/24 (2001): 7.
 any art objects, and be accountable for improper distribution of this content, a consideration quite absent

from traditions of European art.27

Members of the aboriginal art community, such as Turkey Tolson and Ginger Riley, have faced

intense scrutiny in the wake of incidents involving fraud. Unironically, the news that Eddie

Burrup (an aboriginal artist gaining traction in the mid to late 90s) was a fake identity created

ripples through the entire aboriginal art market. The woman behind the ruse was Elizabeth

Durack, an elderly white woman with a pre-existing reputation as an artist. With the aid of her

daughter, a museum director, she decided to undertake her persona as Eddie Burrup to showcase

her adoration of the Aboriginal art style rather than advertising that series of works as her own

from the beginning. Her actions were particularly offensive given her awareness of pertinent

community rules established through extensive contact:

She spent most of her life, including childhood, in a remote area of Western Australia where she played

with Aboriginal children and then later as an adult went on journeys of durations up to two weeks. There

she was included in the men’s ceremonies, which she sometimes sketched. (She said the men seemed to

think of her as sexless because she was white, whereas Aboriginal women were excluded from the

ceremonies.) From the 1950s onward her art featured Aboriginal subjects, and sometimes alluded to the

Dreaming. She learned much from her study with a highly respected Aboriginal painter, and herself

mentored an Aboriginal boy, her “classificatory son,” who continued to be close in adulthood.28

Due to her relationship with the Aboriginal community, the scandal shed a new light on cultural

interactions and cultural heritage.

Although it seems logical that the Aboriginal community should have the authority to

determine who is and is not an Aboriginal artist, perhaps that is not the case due to defensive

27
Alder, Christine, Duncan Chappell, and Kenneth Polk. "Frauds and Fakes in the Australian Aboriginal Art
Market." Crime, Law and Social Change 56, no. 2 (2011): 199.
28
Casement, William. "Art and Race: The Strange Case of Eddie Burrup." Society 53, no. 4 (2016): 423.
bias. From an ethnic perspective, at least, Durack may have genuinely identified as an Aborigine

which would grant her some rights to the art style as cultural heritage. Considering nearly all of

her works as Eddie Burrup were not for sale during their public display, financial gain was

decidedly not a motive for her actions.29 However, there are financial implications involved. As

a member of the middle class, Durack had access to materials and supplies that a less prosperous

Aboriginal artist would not. Additionally, the spaces falsely occupied by works from Durack

barred recognition for more authentic pieces. On the other hand, the mystique surrounding Eddie

Burrup did invoke interest in the Aboriginal art market which benefited the community by some

means, marking her as an active contributor despite her replication of the style not meeting the

community criteria of authenticity. Still, some would claim that Durack’s facsimiles were

devices of cultural appropriation.

The Cambridge Dictionary defines cultural appropriation as “the act of taking or using

things from a culture that is not your own, especially without showing that you understand or

respect this culture."30 In societies with lower cultural proximity, such as indigenous Australians

and their Anglo-Celtic counterparts, the burden of proof is assigned to the accused cultural

offender whereas societies with higher cultural proximity the burden is displaced onto the

appropriated culture. The relationship between a given culture and outsiders is further

complicated if unfavorable historical relations exist, however, these challenges present an

opportunity for reconciliation as shared cultural heritage projects. On the matter, Basu & Wayne

offer this justification:

29
Some speculation afforded here. Details gathered from her artistry website. Elizabeth Durack estate. Eddie
Burrup: his emergency – in exhibitions. http://www.elizabethdurack.com/burrup_4_exhibits.php
30
Cambridge University Press. “Cultural Appropriation.”
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/cultural-appropriation
 the notion of ‘shared heritage’ enables us to reflect on those heritage-making processes that […] also make

possible a creative reinterpretation of colonial relations in the frame of a mutually shaped view of the past

that encourages reciprocal recognition. The word shared should not evoke false charity or a naïve sense of

doing good. It should rather stress the idea of a heritage both literally and figuratively ‘built’ together by a

variety of diverse actors in a process not devoid of tensions and resistance… 31

Instead of assuming rights to produce isolated facsimiles, regardless of intent, Basu & Wayne

advise artists to pursue shared heritage projects as alternatives to give facsimiles (or an original

artwork in exceptional social circumstances) a sense of authenticity:

As co-protagonists of multiparty heritage-making processes, partners in such projects have an ability to

connect different cultures and shift nimbly from one context to another by crossing symbolic and semiotic

borders that are otherwise not so permeable. Manipulating different languages, the passeurs culturels are

able to mix up academic discourses and rhetorics of development in creative ways as well as give novel

meanings to key concepts such as ‘tradition’ and ‘identity’, which, thanks to their agency, gain new

significance in valorization processes. […] Putting emphasis on cultural relations, mutuality and sharing,

these concepts expand the dialogue between the anthropology of development and recent studies in cultural

heritage and ethnographic museography. 32

Where accountability and progress are the primary focus, the opportunity for open

dialogue about the diffusion of material and intangible culture increases rather than stalling on

cultural appropriation which is blatantly complicated by egocentric patrimony and stringent

labeling. Approved facsimiles, in this context, would encourage cultural education and supports

freedom of expression, a proponent of UNESCO’s mission.

Conclusion

31
Basu, Paul, and Wayne Modest. Museums, Heritage and International Development [e-book]. New York:
Routledge, 2015: 152. Web.
32
Basu & Wayne, 152.
 Unauthentic art, in spite of their faults, tell a story of mankind that authentic art may be

unable to articulate about history, tradition and identity. This is particularly accurate in the

consideration of facsimiles in material culture, expressed in this quote from Gilles Deleuze:

“…the simulacrum is not degraded copy, rather it contains a positive power which negates both original

and copy, both model and reproduction. It doesn’t work to invoke the model of the Other, because no

model resists the vertigo of the simulacrum.”33

Although the existence of replicas complicate matters of cultural heritage, their exclusion from

museums is a disservice to the wider public, similar to that of unprovenanced artifacts. However,

it does not appear that the separatist attitudes needed to encourage casual circulation extend into

developed countries – even outside of Europe - where most high traffic museums are located.

Fortunately, institutions such as the Fälschermuseum in Germany offer hope that the pathway to

fully appreciating all forms of art can be achieved with enough interest - and adequate funding.34

33
Brulotte, 173.
34
Fälschermuseum. http://www.faelschermuseum.com/Seite1_englisch.htm
 Bibliography

Alder, Christine, et al. "Frauds and Fakes in the Australian Aboriginal Art Market." Crime, Law

and Social Change 56.2 (2011): 189-207. Web. 7 Sep 2018.

Basu, Paul, and Wayne Modest. Museums, Heritage and International Development. New York:

Routledge, 2015. eBook Collection. Web. 7 Sep 2018.

Bowden, Ross. "What Is Wrong with an Art Forgery?: An Anthropological Perspective." The

Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 57.3 (1999): 333-43. Web. 7 Sep 2018.

Bowden, Ross. “What Is ‘Authentic’ Aboriginal Art?” Pacific Arts 23/24 (2001): 1-10. Web. 18

Nov 2018.

Brulotte, Ronda L. Between Art and Artifact Archaeological Replicas and Cultural Production in

Oaxaca, Mexico. 1st ed. Austin: University of Texas, 2012. Print.

Bueno, Christina. The Pursuit of Ruins [e-book] Archaeology, History, and the Making of

Modern Mexico, 2016.

Card, Jeb J., and Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. Center for Archaeological

Investigations. The Archaeology of Hybrid Material Culture [e-book], 2013.

Casement, William. "Art and Race: The Strange Case of Eddie Burrup." Society 53.4 (2016):

422-24. Web. 7 Sep 2018.

Di Giuseppantonio Di Franco, Paola et al. Talking about Things: A Cognitive Approach to

Digital Heritage and Material Culture Studies in Archaeology, 2014, ProQuest

Dissertations and Theses.

Hume, David L. “Tourism Art and Souvenirs: the Material Culture of Tourism [e-book]. New

York: Routledge, 2014. Web.

Roberts, Bryony. "Competing Authenticities." Future Anterior: Journal of Historic Preservation,

History, Theory, and Criticism 12, no. 2 (2015): 1-12.

Rozental, Sandra. "Stone Replicas: The Iteration and Itinerancy of Mexican Patrimonio." Journal

of Latin American and Caribbean Anthropology 19, no. 2 (2014): 331-56.

Uchill, Rebecca. "Original Und Reproduktion : Alexander Dorner and the (Re)production of Art

Experience." Future Anterior: Journal of Historic Preservation, History, Theory, and

Criticism 12, no. 2 (2015): 13-37.

Yamada, Shoji. "Who Moved My Masterpiece? Digital Reproduction, Replacement, and the

Vanishing Cultural Heritage of Kyoto." International Journal of Cultural Property 24.3

(2017): 295-320. Web. 7 Sep 2018.