A Survey of Authenticity Indexes in Allographic & Autographic Works Based on Nelson Goodman’s Theory

The authenticity of the work of art has always been one of the issues that have attracted the attention of artists as well as art critics and theorists. Authenticity is associated with concepts such as continuity, change, and truth; in other words, the truth of the work is actually the continuity as well as the change in the framework determined by the work’s essence.
While expressing the distinction between various arts as for their authenticity, the American philosopher Nelson Goodman offers an innovative approach of the processes and methods of artistic creation in the allographic and autographic arts. For him, autographic arts are created in a single-stage and are inimitable while the allographic arts are two-dimensional and can be unlimitedly reproduced. Taking into account such definition, arts such as painting and sculpture can be considered autographic or autobiographic while other types of art such as photography and graphics that are easily available to everyone for logical reproduction might be considered allographic.
Employing a descriptive method and collecting data through desk study of library resources, the research has been based on the theory of Nelson Goodman on the division of works of art into two groups of autographic and allographic and investigates the characteristics of authenticity in the group of reproductive works.
Authenticity has been examined and used in many different ways. Therefore, there are several definitions of this concept. A number of theorists believe that creativity, as an important issue in an artwork, is the main pillar of authenticity of any original work. Autographic and allographic works are different in terms of ontology, the nature of the work and the presentation; however, in terms of authenticity, both are considered authentic and artistic; in fact these are original works and their creator has made them without imitating any previous artwork but through his own creativity and innovation, and thus, they are ‘unique’ in essence.
One can also search for authenticity in works that exhibit some degree of mental effort and are worthy of deliberation. The reproducibility of works is not an indication of the absence of authenticity, but shows that reproduction and copying of such works have been carried out by technological means without the slightest manipulation. Therefore, they don’t have original and copy versions and are unique and matchless in nature. However, as for autographic works, the copy of the work is devoid of value and originality and has defects that differentiate it from the original one.
Ultimately, intellectual and original works which possess a degree of creativity and intellectual endeavor are considered as authentic. Therefore, the authenticity of the works depends on the thought and content of the work that must be pure and innovative, and the way of presenting as reproduction or non-reproduction is not a criteria to be considered while examining the authenticity of any artwork.