> A visitor to the Louvre in Paris viewed the renowned Mona Lisa and stated loudly: "That painting is nothing special. I am unimpressed." A curator who was standing nearby said: "Sir, the painting is not on trial. You are."
I wonder, is the quote trying to say something about pretentious audiences, or about pretentious curators?
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. Now, I'm not saying "it's terrible", just "it's overrated" and "standards have risen".
People speak of Lisa del Giocondo's "enigmatic expression": I see simply a neutral, resting face, there is no enigma for me.
The composition? No, the background has some of the flaws used today to identify AI generated images: Look at the waterline on the right, just below her eye-line, that's at an angle, and contradicts the elements on the other side of her head.
This isn't to diss Leonardo, he and his peers had to invent a lot from first principles, and that's much more difficult than learning the same techniques from others; but at the same time, the fact that we don't need to invent it all from scratch and we can learn from others, means that it's much easier to get to a higher quality standard today — and the corollary, if you want to be seen as a genius on the level of Leonardo, the bar is much higher than "do what Leonardo did with the Mona Lisa".
(Now one I will say "it's terrible", to the horror of those that love it, is Der Kuss by Klimt: the woman's head is at such an angle it seems to have been disconnected from her body, rotated 90°, and reattached at the ear).
We don't consider it a masterpiece because we think nobody could do something like that nowadays. We consider it a masterpiece because back then, it was a masterpiece. And we have had time to compare a lot of work from that era and we can say that Da Vinci was worth it.
This particular painting (Mona Lisa) is indeed famous because it got stolen, and that's also why people wait in line to take a selfie with it and completely ignore "The Virgin and Child with Saint Anne" that is in the next room. But still, its quality is undeniable. As is the quality of the other paintings around. Then of course, you may like the painting or not, that's orthogonal.
Da Vinci started a painting technique called "Sfumato", which is used there. Many other painters used and developed that technique, of course, but it means that Da Vinci created something meaningful there. Famous painters usually had an impact in their time.
We can say that da-vinci, bernini, and cervantes
did care about quality, but are all held at a remove, and the story of the critic bieng repremanded, by pointing out they, he not the mona lisa was on trial, is quite exact.
Facing a true master piece can be wonder, amazment and elation, or a trial and an afront.
Your simple egotist now has an easy solution, by taking a selfie, in FRONT of the amazing thing, but this is leading to fist fights in order to claim the exact right spot, with then certain municipalitys and private owners, building blockades to deter self(ie) seekers.
Its the difference between facing something special, or getting in the way, and we all do both
one time or another.
>I wonder, is the quote trying to say something about pretentious audiences, or about pretentious curators?
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".
>>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.
Art is subjective, there’s no right or wrong interpretation of it, and I wouldn’t be sure there is higher or lower quality either. Would you say that a Monet is higher quality than a Banksy?
Possibly both, I guess we're not the first ones to wonder why it's so famous. She isn't even a good looking lady, but obviously the painting must have something going for it, or some other painting would take its place.
I would put Starry Night in that place if it were my decision to make. But it's not.
I wonder, is the quote trying to say something about pretentious audiences, or about pretentious curators?
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. Now, I'm not saying "it's terrible", just "it's overrated" and "standards have risen".
People speak of Lisa del Giocondo's "enigmatic expression": I see simply a neutral, resting face, there is no enigma for me.
The composition? No, the background has some of the flaws used today to identify AI generated images: Look at the waterline on the right, just below her eye-line, that's at an angle, and contradicts the elements on the other side of her head.
This isn't to diss Leonardo, he and his peers had to invent a lot from first principles, and that's much more difficult than learning the same techniques from others; but at the same time, the fact that we don't need to invent it all from scratch and we can learn from others, means that it's much easier to get to a higher quality standard today — and the corollary, if you want to be seen as a genius on the level of Leonardo, the bar is much higher than "do what Leonardo did with the Mona Lisa".
I prefer the version in Prado, Madrid: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gioconda_(copia_del_...
(Now one I will say "it's terrible", to the horror of those that love it, is Der Kuss by Klimt: the woman's head is at such an angle it seems to have been disconnected from her body, rotated 90°, and reattached at the ear).