what's so great about the mona lisa?

[chazanoble]

http://www.malaspina.org/GIF/BAR_vinci_03.JPG
*what's so great about the mona lisa?

What do you guys/gals think of this piece that is considered as one of the greatest work of art? Is it necessary to have an understanding of art history to appreciate it as it evokes nothing from me.

[Elwell]

Read Walter Pater.

[Justin.]

To save you some time. (http://www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/p#a1367)

[jrr]

i hear she has a nice ass.

[Elwell]

jrr FTW.

[kingshaj]

its famous 'cuase its famous
....most scholars agree that it is famous because it has been the subject of the most debate for the most centuries...some of Davinci's greater works may fade to dust...but as longs we debate the Mona Lisa’s significance...it will be remembered (or perpetuated)

walter pater's poem while moving, is reeealy hard to reconcile with what we see outside of its historical context

"like a vampire, she has been dead many times...and learned the secret of the grave"? "

'and has been a diver of deep seas"? i love this image particularly because i can see her in scuba gear

i certainly know what Pater means here.
He's evoking the idea that woman is eternal..
But, he is so many centuries removed from davinci that the painting was already a mystery and subject of great debate/conjecture. His poem speaks only about Pater's feelings on the "modern woman" and the "eternal woman" Its more about the social changes in France in his day....than it is about the painting or davinci's intent


walter pater was using a contemporary symbol of female mystery to get a point across...similarly in the 70s mona lisa made a comeback as an icon of feminism in the ERA days.

i just picture leoonardo sctatching his head...."hmmm thats my most famous?"

[Elwell]

Seriously, here's why (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mona_Lisa#Theft) it's so famous.

[kev ferrara]

I like it because it's so boring. :)

I do like the screwed up background though. He'd totally fail a CA crit. Maybe get a paintover from YVerlock.

I would guess from the start its the enigmatic smile and the perfect restful composure and the softness and femininity of it that carries allure. I think some people still respond to that.

In fact I'm sure of that because I was just arguing with a guy who liked Botticelli more than Frazetta. Well, what can you say to that person? :)

[Elwell]

its famous 'cuase its famous
174173

[Ellingsworth]

Give that sucka some lens flair earrings.

[kev ferrara]

lol!

Hey, if you were going to do a paintover, at least fix the background!

[Spiralfish]

He'd totally fail a CA crit. Maybe get a paintover from YVerlock.


HAHAHAHA!!!

[Justin.]

How many paintings do we have that are done by Leonardo (for certain),

How many paintings do we have that are done by Picasso?

I think that's one reason why it's so famous.

[Magic Man]

174173

Dear LORD! Suddenly, I have the urgent need to punch myself in the nuts. >:|

[kingshaj]

haha i love it Elwell you read my mind...with that image. it may be more accurate than we know...she probably was an eccentric popular noblewoman commissioning a portrait

no less likely than a "vampire scuba diver"

cool link as well..pretty much what i was taught.
aaall coming back now.

[Randis]

we will never understand it as it is not meant for artists to judge or understand art, that part others do for us. I believe that its not really the artistic part, the execution that made it famous nor the exorbitant beauty of her/him?
Maybe its the same effect like you get if someone finds out that it is a ladyboy.
Its probably about some impact on the society at that time and the artists social status/fame at that time as no one would have cared if he were a noname. Who knows...
If you have to have a doctor in history and whatever else to understand an image then its probably not meant to be understood.

it is somewhat an insider that i missed, like the jokes about Michaeal Jackson that people will not get 200 years later.

whatever, don't take it to serious

[Darasen]

There are some works that simply have to be seen to be seen in person to be appreciated. I know for me I never appreciated Monet's work until seeing the originals, when I did OI was blown away by Woman with a Parasol - Madame Monet and Her Son. (http://www.nga.gov/cgi-bin/pimage?61113+0+0)

I was reading an article (I think it was by W. Joe Innis) that said much the same that he never really understood why the painting was so renown until he saw it and then 'stood there spellbound'.

[Brendan N]

i hear she has a nice ass.

She's also the only woman Andy did thirty times. Marylin only made to twenty five I think...

[MidgardSerpent]

There are some works that simply have to be seen to be seen in person to be appreciated. I know for me I never appreciated Monet's work until seeing the originals, when I did OI was blown away by Woman with a Parasol - Madame Monet and Her Son. (http://www.nga.gov/cgi-bin/pimage?61113+0+0)

I was reading an article (I think it was by W. Joe Innis) that said much the same that he never really understood why the painting was so renown until he saw it and then 'stood there spellbound'.
A former classmate of mine saw the Mona lisa in real life, he said he was underwhelmed by it considering it's reputation. He also said it was surprisingly small.

[chazanoble]

Thanks for your thoughts everyone. That was really helpful to put things in perspective for me. I've been trying to learn more about art history (I thought it would help me become a better concept artist but except for a few Renaissance artists, I find most of the old "masters'" work crap than inspiring.[yeah, you can tell I like to hold back on my opinions.:D]) I'm going to learn a little more about the techniques that some of the old masters use to do their work next. Anyone recommend any articles/books on painting techniques of Caravaggio, Michaelangelo, De Vinci, or Rafael?

[timpaatkins]

How many paintings do we have that are done by Leonardo (for certain),

How many paintings do we have that are done by Picasso?

I think that's one reason why it's so famous.

Yea man i think there are about 19 (paintings) or something in the whole world, and about 4000 Van Gogh's, just to put it in perspective (no pun intended).

That means that these suckers are INVALUABLE, which kind of blows my mind.

[chobomaster]

Thanks for your thoughts everyone. That was really helpful to put things in perspective for me. I've been trying to learn more about art history (I thought it would help me become a better concept artist but except for a few Renaissance artists, I find most of the old "masters'" work crap than inspiring.[yeah, you can tell I like to hold back on my opinions.:D]) I'm going to learn a little more about the techniques that some of the old masters use to do their work next. Anyone recommend any articles/books on painting techniques of Caravaggio, Michaelangelo, De Vinci, or Rafael?

Haha, if you wanna be like that then sure, in terms of concept art, the Renaissance is the way to go. but make sure you study the northern renaissance too: Grunewald, Durer, Bosch, among others.

Anyway for a great book on Caravaggio I suggest Puglisi's. She's got an appendix in the back with a lot of first hand material. It's even got the man's court testimony defending himself as a painter, and his controversial technique. you'd best read up on it.

[chazanoble]

Haha, if you wanna be like that then sure, in terms of concept art, the Renaissance is the way to go. but make sure you study the northern renaissance too: Grunewald, Durer, Bosch, among others.

Anyway for a great book on Caravaggio I suggest Puglisi's. She's got an appendix in the back with a lot of first hand material. It's even got the man's court testimony defending himself as a painter, and his controversial technique. you'd best read up on it.

Cool! Thanks a lot. I'll definitely check out the artists you mention. I'm going to see if I can get Puglisi's book today also.

[Farvus]

If we stick to actual trends then this Mona Lisa would be more popular :).

185920

[worxe]

+fav ^_________________________________________^

[rustikof]

hahaha funny enough i could actually see that hanging in a museum in some type of Superflat-esque style of show.

you know what i always wonder, who taught Leo? I mean, he studied for the better part of his life as an apprentice, but to who? Really, I haven't looked into it that far so this is basically just an excuse to be lazy, but yeah. One thing I usually think about with all artists, cause everyone had a teacher at somepoint.

[Ellingsworth]

who taught Leo?

God.

Just kidding. I found this article on Google not sure if it's 100% correct, I need to learn more about this stuff because as of right now I know nothing. Hopefully this article is correct.

http://www.kausal.com/leonardo/apprenticeship.html

[Elwell]

Leonardo apprenticed with Andrea Verrocchio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_del_Verrocchio), who is more famous as a sculptor than a painter. I though everybody knew the story about the Baptism of Christ:
In this work he was assisted by Leonardo Da Vinci (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo_Da_Vinci), then a youth, who finished the background and painted the left angel, excelling in quality the rest of the painting. According to Vasari (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giorgio_Vasari), Andrea resolved never to touch the brush again because Leonardo, his pupil, had far surpassed him.

186132

Some scholars believe that Leonardo was the model for Verrocchio's Young David.

186133

[<RJMC>]

I think is the way how it looks the viewer

you can feel like its alive

[rustikof]

yeah i knew the story, i just didnt know who the dude was:) awesome.

are there really any artists prior to the italian renaissance/flemish masters that people consider to have any stark relevance in art? because, when you say "who's the best artist ever" most people will go "da vinci" or "michaelangelo" or "etc", but i wonder who inspired those guys?

[Elwell]

Looks like it's time for a bunch of folks to brush up their art history:
For a basic introduction, Gombrich (http://www.amazon.com/Story-Art-Pocket-E-H-Gombrich/dp/0714847038) is good.
The two standard textbooks are Janson (http://www.amazon.com/Jansons-History-Art-7th-Ed/dp/0131934783) and Gardner (http://www.amazon.com/Gardners-Art-Through-Ages-Concise/dp/0534605117) (both super expensive, but because they're textbooks used copies are easy to find, and older editions will be cheap).

[Elwell]

She's also the only woman Andy did thirty times. Marylin only made to twenty five I think...I don't think Andy did any women, even once :)

[rustikof]

BAH! reading?? who does that?

[Flake]

BAH! reading?? who does that?

Not nearly enough people.

[Elwell]

The good thing about art history books is that they've got lots of purty pichers along with all those confoozing wurdz.

[tomwaits4noman]

I think I know why.... I hadn't heard of the painting until I read the book, the author sure picks obscure works of art and blends them into an intelligent and well written novel- note heavy use of sarcasm.



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e6/DaVinciCode_US.png

[BANNED_For_POOPY_PANTS]

Honestly, I don't know why Mona is more famous than LdV's St. John:

http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s31/Vaiagra/3Leonardo-Da-Vinci-Saint-John-the-B.jpg