Is the Painting of Mona Lisa Really Overrated?
If you want praise of Leonardo daVinci’s Mona Lisa as art, you can find it.
But what if you think it’s just…. fine?
What’s the cynic’s explanation for the Mona Lisa? Why is the Mona Lisa so, so famous? Is it really that much better than da Vinci’s Lady with Ermine? That seems better. There’s one more ermine. But it’s Mona who is so famous that the director of the Louvre, where Mona Lisa lives, said 80% of their visitors are only there to see that one painting.
If you don’t think Mona Lisa is famous just because she’s somehow 10 times better than every other painting, her story reveals something more interesting, something about how art breaks into wider culture.
And it might never have happened if the Mona Lisa hadn’t disappeared. Before the painting became a mass culture star, before it vanished, one critic made her a work of art worth taking and he was so over-the-top insanely in love with “Mona Lisa” that he single-handedly made it a masterpiece.
Oscar Wilde thought the essay’s writing was great. He praised “the musical of the mystical prose.” And every general interest profile of the Louvre, from academic guidebooks to discussions clubs in Paducah, used Pater’s words to talk about Mona. Other critics jumped on — Mona was a popular, secular painting that they could analyze. Unlike da Vinci’s Last Supper, they could supply all the meaning. But even at her peak, Mona Lisa was just art world famous, not the most famous painting of all time.
Mona Lisa isn’t a portrait, but a blank face. A place for critics to paint meaning, and people to find mystery. That’s why she was so famous — not because of how she’s painted, but what we see in her. If that’s not art, then what is? I found one 1909 description of the Mona Lisa that seemed particularly prescient. The writer said: “Even those whose first expressions is ‘huh’ and proclaimed frankly that they cannot see her beauty or her interest find themselves disputing hotly over both.” That’s probably still the case today.
**Quick facts about “Monna Lisa”
- The original name of the painting was “Monna Lisa”, Monna in Italian closely relates to Madonna which means ‘My Lady’. Mona Lisa was actually a spelling error.
- A Bolivian National, in 1956 threw a piece of stone at the painting and that ended up in a small patch next to her left elbow.
- Mona Lisa painting is incalculable and so it cannot be insured by any company.
- Mona Lisa painting is the most expensive prison in the world. It has an exclusive chamber that costs the museum over 7 million USD. It is secured with a climate controlled environment and a bullet proof glass.
Source: Kottke || Follow @dommaraju
Source: http://www.read-videos.com/news-and-politics/20160920/1/how-the-mona-lisa-became-so-overrated
Copying/Pasting full or partial texts without adding anything original is frowned upon by the community.
Some tips to share content and add value:
Repeated copy/paste posts could be considered spam. Spam is discouraged by the community and may result in action from the cheetah bot.
Thank You! ⚜
In my opinion, whether or not a beautiful painting depends on the view of the person who saw it. Eye difference that see, different also beauty seen. The value of beauty in seeing a painting is the same as the value of beauty in seeing a girl. Different men who see, different beauty values owned by the girl.
Thanks friends for this nice post,and steemit has removed my grief
Thanks for the historical information and your view about art. It is interesting.
Whether you like it or not, Art is in the eye of the beholder. Personally I'm not an arty kind of person. Just because something is shown in a museum does not mean it is good and just because some one says it is good, does not mean it is good.
Haha love the title and concept of this post. Great question.
To be honest, I personally don't think it's that great of a painting. However, my opinion doesn't matter, it's what everyone else thinks. Am I right?
Let's just say I have seen some original artwork posted here on the STEEM platform that gives Mona a run for her money
https://steemit.com/steemit/@arthur-schopen/26-an-orange-russian-you-will-never-guess-what-is-actually-means-i-was-stumped-i-promise-this-will-make-you-laugh-i-kinas-like
I think the last photo on this post is a work of art haha
I imagine what was regarded as beautiful in 1503 is quite different than now. That's why she looks "plain" to many people today. Persistence of perceived historical value determines what is "better" or not, and what has more value than other creations over time. 500 years from now most of the artwork today will probably be considered pretty drab, but some of the art that achieves fame will still be considered masterpieces from our time, and therefore, not drab.
she is really a great person... thanks for sharing
I think part of the intrigue of Mona Lisa is the fact that she is so plain. She isn't really smiling, and the background is sort of blah. People wonder about who she really was that daVinci painted her. Her mystery, the questions behind the painting are what really draw people. IRL, she is only 12x12. A very small painting in comparison to some of his other works.
As a university trained oil painter I have been through the mill of intellectualizing this topic and so I shall not bore you with all that verbiage, nor will I pontificate upon my position -- rather, I will simply put it out there that if One looks at the portraiture of the time (especially up until this portrait) Mona Lisa's eyes stand out, it's a life, a sparkle that is not seen in other portraits until then and for that, it was and remains a masterpiece. It was a sea-change moment in truly capturing the "soul" of a person and not about her visage as a whole, or the fashion of the day.
Off course it is but that's life it's not my cup of tea. Cheers mike
I think people should study a little more before rating an absolut masterpiece like "La Gioconda" better known as "Monna Lisa" (Yes, two n's) . First of all, it is a portrait, of Lisa Gherardini della Gioconda, (hence the names).
Second, it was painted in an historic time where almost all art was of religious or mythological theme, this is one of the few portraits of the time where the subject is staring directly to the spectator, creating a sense of mystery never matched in any other painting.
Not only it is technically an incredibile painting, with details you probably don't even know about (Did you ever notice she doesn't have eyebrows?), but also a genius like Leonardo would usually hide secret messages in his art work of which still experts are debating.
No painter here on steemit would even come close to the same shape, tones, hue, shadowing,anatomical accuracy, level of details of La Gioconda.
It's kind of strange to me, we call trash cans in modern museums "masterpieces" that cost milion of dollars, but we think Monna Lisa is overrated!!!!!