Mona Lisa

A controversy in the art world re-emerged today after being dormant for some 40 years. Apparently, before World War I an art collector discovered what he considered an earlier version of Leonardo da Vinci’s Mona Lisa, a portrait of the same woman painted 10 years earlier than the famous version in the Louvre. During the war the painting was moved for safe keeping in the United States, and then after the war moved to Switzerland where the Mona Lisa Foundation has spent years trying to prove or disprove the painting’s authenticity. They now have decided that it is indeed an authentic da Vinci portrait. (Can anyone say “Ka-ching!”)

According to Stanley Feldman, an art historian and foundation member, “When we do a very elementary mathematical test, we have discovered that all of the elements of the two bodies – the two people, the two sitters – are in exactly the same place. . . . It strikes us that in order for that to be so accurate, so meticulously exact, only the person who did one did the other. . . . It’s an extraordinary revelation in itself, and we think it’s valid.”

I’m no art historian (or art anything else) but I think that’s bullshit. What artist would 10 years later recreate an earlier work with “all of the elements of the two bodies – the two people, the two sitters – . . . in exactly the same place . . . so accurate, so meticulously exact,” including the exact same pose, costume, and expression (the smile). Is there any other example in the history of art? And there are only 15 extant paintings of da Vinci, various in style and subject, because he was always experimenting with subject and technique. He also relegated much of his work to his assistants and apprentices. It’s much more likely that the painting in question is merely a discovery of a copy from one of his students or admirers. But again, what do I know about art? I do, though, know about ka-ching!