I thought so...kaeldra_seaJanuary 16 2008, 05:52:15 UTC
A female icon who has been a "mystery" of origin for the common man for years gets identified. It's like seeing the face of the guy who played Wilson from Tim Allen's tv series..uhhh...Home Improvement! (almost couldn't remember it). I wonder if knowing her will historically lose her some of her mystique and sex appeal with her smirk. Only time will tell... I read too much news at work...
Re: I thought so...suzi_qJanuary 23 2008, 01:33:11 UTC
My girlfriend, who is a qualified Art Historian, and Dutch, mused this:
'It is all very interesting. I think it could be true though I don't know everything about the painting. However, everything I've read on this proposal is accurate. Frank Zollner is also very good, in my opinion.
As with everything, I can't help doubting that this might be the current theory for years, but that people will also try to fight this conclusion during that time. I can't comment on this subject with absolutely certainty because my knowledge is not broad enough for this painting. What is interesting to me personally though: this was a choice of mine for my final paper, though my teacher didn't want me to do, haha. I might have been famous already!'
My own comment is more simple. If you're going to re-render the Mona Lisa in yet another copy in this world: why make her look like a boss-eyed Native American lady with a case (facial expression) of flatulance...
All the details on the garment are nice, but her eyes look like she's trying to hide the fact she's literally just dropped one whilst glazilly staring off into the distance attempting to look serious at the same time and pretending it hadn't happened, while her mouth betrays the fact she does look like she's just done something unpleasant in her undergarments....
I guess the difference is that with the original you see her beauty and contempt at the same time in her face. But the contempt isn't at herself, the only thing she is hiding is the reason why she shows this contempt towards other people. This is partly where the mystery of the original Mona Lisa comes from. It's not a self induced representation or interpratation of herself, or her own actions, as this reproduction embellishes!
Comments 5
Reply
I wonder if knowing her will historically lose her some of her mystique and sex appeal with her smirk. Only time will tell... I read too much news at work...
Reply
'It is all very interesting. I think it could be true though I don't know everything about the painting. However, everything I've read on this proposal is accurate. Frank Zollner is also very good, in my opinion.
As with everything, I can't help doubting that this might be the current theory for years, but that people will also try to fight this conclusion during that time. I can't comment on this subject with absolutely certainty because my knowledge is not broad enough for this painting. What is interesting to me personally though: this was a choice of mine for my final paper, though my teacher didn't want me to do, haha. I might have been famous already!'
My own comment is more simple. If you're going to re-render the Mona Lisa in yet another copy in this world: why make her look like a boss-eyed Native American lady with a case (facial expression) of flatulance...
Reply
Reply
Aye, very true.
All the details on the garment are nice, but her eyes look like she's trying to hide the fact she's literally just dropped one whilst glazilly staring off into the distance attempting to look serious at the same time and pretending it hadn't happened, while her mouth betrays the fact she does look like she's just done something unpleasant in her undergarments....
I guess the difference is that with the original you see her beauty and contempt at the same time in her face. But the contempt isn't at herself, the only thing she is hiding is the reason why she shows this contempt towards other people. This is partly where the mystery of the original Mona Lisa comes from. It's not a self induced representation or interpratation of herself, or her own actions, as this reproduction embellishes!
Reply
Leave a comment