Die angeblich authentische Gong Fu Tie Kalligraphie von alten chinesischen Schriftsteller und kalligraph Su Shi, Links, und die Replik von kalligraph Wen Fanggang
The allegedly authentic Gong Fu Tie calligraphy by ancient Chinese writer and calligrapher Su Shi, left, and the replica by calligrapher Wen Fanggang of the Qing Dynasty are displayed on a screen at a press conference in Beijing, China, 18 February 2014. Two months after the Shanghai Museum publicly pointed out that the famous calligraphy piece purchased by Chinese collector Liu Yiqian was fake, Liu and his Long Museum officially responded and confirmed the authenticity of the calligraphy at a news conference in Beijing on Tuesday (18 February 2014). At the conference, the Long Museum, based in Shanghai and founded by Liu to exhibit his collection, publicly showed experts and media the highly controversial calligraphy: The Gong Fu Tie by ancient Chinese writer and calligrapher Su Shi (1037-1101) of the Northern Song Dynasty (960-1127). According to the explanation by Huang Jian, executive curator of the museum, by applying high-definition technology and inviting different authoritative experts to appraise the calligraphy, they have confirmed its authenticity by examining various aspects including the characteristics of the writing, the paper itself and the seals found on the work. In September 2013, Liu bought the piece at a Sothebys auction in New York at the price of US$8 million. Deemed as possibly the only authentic calligraphy by Su still existing today, the purchase meant the treasure had finally returned to China. However, on December 21, 2013, it was reported by the Xinmin Evening News that three Shanghai Museum researchers, Shan Guolin, Zhong Yinlan and Ling Lizhong, discovered that the work was actually a replica made during the late Qing Dynasty (1644-1911) setting off concerns throughout art circles. With all the controversy around the Gong Fu Tie, Sothebys has stood by the authenticity of the work. On January 13, they published their own research results to refute the findings of the three Shanghai Museum researchers.
