After spending pretty much an entire day talking about Orson
Welles and F For Fake not long ago, I feel like I’m beating a dead horse here…
but let’s talk about ‘fake art’. Forgery on its own is already a pretty dicey
prospect, but applying that to the creative arts like painting, filmmaking or
writing opens up whole new dilemmas to the equation. And indeed, much like
Elmyr de Hory, sometimes deliberate artistic imitation can be called out and
still considered to be as worthy as the genuine article. Rather than just
rehash the F For Fake argument, let’s instead see how that mindset of 'fake
art' applies to this film, a based-on-actual-events of a writer who forged
letters from famous writers and actors.
The reasons why are two-fold: The film is honest about the
criminality of Israel’s actions, but also the environment that pushed her into
doing so. It seems like writer Nicole Holofcener has a real knack for bringing
out the emotional connection in quite unlikeable people, as the script does a
great job at showing the trials and tribulations that are trying to make a
career out of writing. It deals in the narcissistic attitude that comes with famous
writers, but it also delves into the reasons why people put up with such things
in those with a name for themselves, yet don’t accept it from those who haven’t
gotten there yet. Add to that the pretty heartbreaking financial issues that
Israel was going through at the time, and while it’s hard to defend her
actions, it’s also hard not to feel bad for her.
And the funny thing about all this is how her crime, passing
off her writing as that of someone else’s, is a bizarrely common thing in the
creative arts. Maybe not as explicitly, but with how marketing trends get
followed in fields like book writing or screenwriting or even blogging, there
is a certain expectation that a writer will bend to certain trends in order to
get noticed. Like how, after Twilight started getting major press, anyone who
had an even-slightly similar romance story involving fantastical creatures were
getting their work sent to bookstores by the truckload.
And for those with the
will to try and make it as a writer, that kind of pressure can be difficult to
handle. When you see someone whose work you genuinely don’t like doing better
than yourself in the same field, it can be a sore blow to the ego. And ego is
what makes the cult of personality around writers thrive, so it becomes this
ouroboros that ends up fuelling a lot of the more… colourful attitudes certain
writers have regarding their work and themselves.
Not that the general public seems to care one way or
another. That’s the weirdest part of this entire concept, and something that
brings this film into the realm of surprisingly poignant: If it reads like the
famous writer, then it might as well be their work. I brought up F For Fake and
Elmyr de Hory at the start, but the thing is that, even after he got exposed as
an art forger, galleries still carry some of his work as a "genuine" from a
famous painter. Because in this world of art appreciation, where the name on
the tag is more valuable than the price right next to it, it is enough just to
have something that feels like it is a genuine work, rather than actually being
one.
Art is art at the end of the day, and even when it comes to forgery, there
is still an aspect of artistry involved in its creation. I mean, Banksy is one
of the most recognised names in the art world and most of his work falls under
the less-than-legal.
All of this put together results in a character study about
a writer who lied her way into notoriety and the surprisingly complicated
mechanics of the establishment that bought the lie, even willingly. This is
quite impressive work, and it marks a serious high point in Melissa McCarthy’s
career, applying her typical on-screen persona to an amazingly well-fitted
story.
No comments:
Post a Comment