>>just "it's overrated" and "standards have risen".
> LOL
If it were simply the art itself, and not the name attached to it, nobody would care if a piece in the style of Leonardo was forgery or an original, they would only care if it was good.
There wouldn't even be a word for forgery, in the context of art, if it was really about the art itself.
About tourists pretending to be a museum audience.
>The Mona Lisa is famous in no small part because it was stolen. Its fame gave it appeal, as did its out-of-copyright status that allowed so many derivatives.
That's a myth, only applicable to mass audiences who wouldn't have the education to recognize, much less understand, the majority of what they saw in the museum in the first place. Da Vinci's work was in high esteem for centuries by the point the painting was stolen, which is also why Mona Lisa was displayed in the Louvre to begin with. That's regardless whether Joe and Jane Q. Public knew about it or read about it on magazine "must see" lists.
>just "it's overrated" and "standards have risen".
LOL