Reproductions or Fakes?

In judging the 2005 Directory competition, the jurors overseeing the selection of samplers raised an important issue: many of the samplers entered were accurate historic reproductions of period samplers that by their very accuracy seemed contrived to deceive their audience. That is, they were emblazoned with the name and date of the maker of the original that they sought to reproduce. In the eyes of the jurors, these were fraudulent works, fakes, the bane of museum curators everywhere (and particularly the curators we asked to judge the work). In response to the concerns of the jurors, we included no samplers in the 2005 Directory, notwithstanding the skillful work of many entrants. We also refunded their entry fees. 

Although the issue runs through any area where craftspeople seek to reproduce the work of the past, it came to a head with samplers because most are emblazoned on their faces with the name of their maker and date of their making. An exact reproduction will include the name and date of the original, which is misleading, particularly if the sampler has been "aged" to look ancient when it is, in fact, a new creation. Potters, painters, and the like are proud to affix their own names to their work because the inclusion is not so glaringly obvious and is actually a matter of pride. 

For 2006 and onward, we require that reproductions bear notice they are exactly that in a way that cannot be separated from the work. Although we prefer samplers to bear their actual makers' names and dates, we accept a signing elsewhere on the piece in a way that is integral to the piece.