Abstract | Authenticity has long been, and remains, a deeply complex, nuanced, contested and evolving concept within the field of heritage and wider society. The ease with which digital tools can be deployed to (re)present, map, model and replicate artefacts of historic value adds a further layer of complexity, and even anxiety, to the question over what it means for something to be authentic or even original. This paper addresses the value of the copy; it is an investigation into the mechanisms by which the replica reinforces, redefines and extends any authenticity invested in the original object. In some cases, the authenticity of the copy may even, counter-intuitively, replace that found in the original (whatever the “original” actually is). The paper also critiques the value of the term "authenticity", and proposes that Ruskin's term "voicefulness" be revisited. |
---|