He writes dismissively of most collectors who seek him out: “Even today I wonder if certain purchasers really see what it is that I authenticate for them,” he writes. “I have reached the fairly simple conclusion that they don’t see much at all beyond their displays of wealth and social prestige.”
He’s similarly scornful of curators who rely on scientific methodology.
“In the English speaking world,” he writes, “some museum curators think that the laboratory will compensate for their lack of eye, and this will permit them to attribute effectively.” That, Costamagna continues, is dangerously incorrect. “Such scientific studies only ever really give them commonplace information that they tend to make much of.”
Bronzino and Pontormo, for instance, both used the same type of blue paint. So “pigment analysis has nothing definitive to say on the subject.”
And Yet …
While Costamagna’s book could be taken with a healthy grain of salt—it’s as much as a defense of his profession as it is a personal memoir—the results of his analysis speak for themselves. He’s spotted overlooked masterworks (visiting a church in Corsica, he spotted an unattributed painting by Giorgio Vasari), and disappointed countless more collectors who hope they’ve stumbled across a long-lost treasure.
Scholarship and his reputation, he says, are his motivation. Although he will accept a glass of Champagne, if offered.
“Or you can invite me to lunch at the Four Seasons in New York,” he says. “But I don’t care who I’m doing it for, rich or poor. I’ll be very happy to come see you, if you want an opinion.”
This article was provided by Bloomberg News.