History of Art: Interpretation – Select a work of art which is well published and write a comparative study of interpretations of its form and content by several different authors. Select the arguments you find most convincing and construct a composite in
...y of what is a portrait of Mona Lisa not her cloths or a landscape. He also concentrates on the hands and how they differ from hands in previous paintings “the strain is gone and what remains is studied casualness and repose reflecting the sense of tranquillity that governs the figure as a whole” The author is concentrating on the talent of Leonardo and what new ideas and techniques he brings to portrait painting which others cannot. In the Mona Lisa they are shown which makes the piece unique and inimitable. The next book I looked at is by Antonina Vallentin. Who states that when Leonardo started the painting Mona was 24 and she last sat for him around aged 30. He builds up a background of Mona and the life she would have lived within the context of the time she lived. Past her prime, her looks not in fashion. Instead of her filled out figure, broadened face the current fashion was the slender woman with fragile figures and slim necks. After making his point he asks why this “Thoroughly bourgeois woman…had been able to fascinate Leonardo more than any other woman he met in all his life”. Throughout everything he went through no matter how difficult or pressed for time he was the Mona Lisa was there with him being worked upon. He asks questions as to whether Leonardo was painting some of himself when painting the Mona Lisa’s hands and face. Going some way to disprove this by commenting on how the eyes and smile are similar to other works he has done but still not answering the question fully. Instead putting forth the idea that beneath Mona Lisa’s features Leonardo was “in search of the eternal mystery of womanhood” He shows how Leonardo’s style wasn’t easily copied using Raphael as an example in his portrait Messer Doni and his wife which tried but failed to be like the Mona Lisa. He concentrates on the techniques Leonardo used; not painting in the light of day but in dusk when light is failing or when cloudy and only pale light can get through. Also when Mona sat for Leonardo he employed musicians and general entertainment present not just for her but for him as well. “an atmosphere full of all the pulsations of light and colour and music that harmonised with his own spirit” Vallentin comments on the meaning of the Mona Lisa, as he puts it “an essay in the representation of women” and to him it is a “solitary masterpiece on the threshold of a new epoch” The next take on the Mona Lisa I looked at was by Edward McCuddy. He points to the skill Leonardo used in producing the painting with no preparatory drawings known to exist. He uses other contemporary artists views to back up his comments on the beauty of the hands and face, also giving examples of how throughout time it has always been a highly sought after piece. Stating that even though it is the furthest in degree of finish of all Leonardo’s works he thinks Leonardo still wanted to do some more finishing touches. The technique used in the picture with the “effect of softness of contour” and other techniques along with this as the time of day when it was painted agreeing with Vallentin and the way in which the light and the shade should be a gradual change not using lines as with Wasserman, and again partly agreeing with Vallentin that he has created “the embodiment of which men dream as of the eternal enigma of womanhood” but contrary to Vallentin he doesn’t state whether he thinks Leonardo did this on purpose or not. The next author I looked at was Georg Gronau. Again he points to the way in which Leonardo set the painting up with musicians around them to “dispel the melancholy which is so easily imported to painted portraits” The book then goes on to stress how this painting is so influential in the history of art in changing the style of a type of painting. “Never has an artistic taste become so antiquated, as the quattrocento style of portraiture” He gives examples of how Leonardo had no rival in this style and not even his successors could match him. He attributed this to the simplicity of the picture and the artist’s calculation in using cloths that don’t show her wealth instead concentrating on her and above all giving her a smile. He doesn’t go into Leonardo’s motivation for the picture other than the fact he was commissioned to do it. Instead concentrating on the artists skill in creating a “perfect piece of art” Carlo Maria Franzero was the next author I looked at who gave their view on the Mona Lisa. He attributes Leonardo’s devotion to the painting and the brilliance of it to what he thinks was a kind of self portrait. The reason Mona perplexed him for so long was because it took him so long to realise that “the smile of the Mona Lisa was his own smile” Putting on the entertainment provided so that she may always smile. Franzero attributes all the other features of the painting to Mona but questions the smile saying Mona represented his own image “no one had ever achieved before with the brush so disturbingly and passionately the heartbeat of a personality” Franzero believes very strongly that it was because of this that Leonardo produced such a masterpiece. He doesn’t go into details of technique in detail instead giving his opinion on why Leonardo spent so much time on the Mona Lisa and why it had such an effect on people and art when it was viewed. He also thinks it was never finished. He states it became famous overnight and word of it spread throughout the world. Stating again that it ...