Is It Real, or Is It Michelangelo Lite?

So the Italian government has forked over $4 million to buy what it believes to be an original Michelangelo —a 16” wooden image of the crucified Christ. It’s currently on display in Naples, but critics say it’s a phony:

“When it comes to this statue, it is like comparing a Ford with a Ferrari,” Professor [Tomasso] Montanari said.

“This is way below the standard of Michelangelo,” he added. “It is like it has come off a production line and could have been made by any one of a dozen wood carvers of the time.”

Professor [Francesco] Caglioti agreed.

“It’s a scandal,” he said. “The muscle definition is all wrong.

“Michelangelo rarely worked in wood. He rarely made small pieces like this. His contemporary biographers make no mention of his having made small works in wood,” he added.

Does this convey the technical skill or sublimity that defined Michelangelo’s artistry? I may not know art, but I know what I think I like. And I think the Italians got rooked.

But why spend that kind of geetis on a sculpture of dubious provenance in the first place? Well, the more cynical among the government’s detractors say that it “endorsed the wooden cross as a work by Michelangelo to boost its standing with the Catholic Church, and to burnish its credentials with the electorate as a government of conservative beliefs.”

Wow. Not even a bona fide original by the Renaissance master himself could be expected to bear the sins of the Italian government.

“[M]ajor works of art rarely have supportive documents,” said Cristina Acidini Luchinat, the superintendent of Florence’s state museum and a renowned expert on Renaissance art.

Mrs Acidini has lent her support and considerable authority to the exhibition.

“These pieces don’t come with a written guarantee,” she said.

That’s why it’s so important to hang on to those receipts . . .