ABSTRACT
Great value is generally attached to “originality” in the post-Enlightenment world, an extension of the notion that each human being is a unique creation and therefore has the ability to create unique objects. It also suggests the power of individuals to create rather than attribute creation to a divine power. The very word “copy” carries the notion of slavish imitation or outright fake or forgery. That is also true of art that was created before the Enlightenment in the West. But it has been far less true in India, except in the case of forgeries intended to deceive a potential purchaser, that is, a person who considers the work of art a commodity whose price tag is, to a large extent, based on the uniqueness, as well as quality, of the piece. Thus when art historians see two almost identical works, a great deal of effort is devoted to determining which of the two is the original, from the hand of a master creator, and which is the copy. Not only is originality valued, but so is age. That is, older is generally assumed to be better than more modern, especially in societies that are cast as traditional, as India most definitely is. Those older works are seen as closer to authentic, unsullied by any sort of external influence, as if India were once an isolated and protected garden akin to Eden.
