On Authenticity

Authenticity. The concept has been used so ubiquitously, in everything from 20th century art criticism to modern-day marketing jargon, and yet, its meaning remains amorphous.

An ephemeral quality, especially when used to describe people, it can refer to the innate or spontaneous; and is also understood by its contrasts: not fake or altered. “The power to authenticate a Picasso, a Rothko, a Hepworth, is a lambent, magical thing,” wrote Sam Knight recently, in a New Yorker piece about the long process of an owner’s attempt to authenticate a painting as a work by Lucien Freud. The piece made clear how dicey authentication can be even in the art world: the painting, even if actually painted by Freud, might still not be considered ‘authentic’.   

Authenticity seems inherently paradoxical. How can a word that signifies something approximating truth be this arbitrary? In spite of the hazy definitions though, it’s a quality that continues to be pursued, in politics and business, as well as in the creative fields. And interestingly, this seems to be hastening at a time when so many of our experiences are being mediated through technology; perhaps as a way of preserving what it means to be human within an increasingly automated reality.