The Mona Lisa has fascinated and inspired painters, poets, scientists, singers, psychologists since its inception, even though so little is known with certainty about this painting. The mystery around the Mona Lisa feeds the imagination of many . So, it is not surprising that millions of people visit the Louvre in Paris every year to glance at this famous portrait realised by Leonardo Da Vinci between probably 1503 and 1506 . In the face of its well-established fame of today, it is interesting to discuss the place of the Mona Lisa within the context of Italian Renaissance portraiture. In this essay, I will argue that the Mona Lisa is a very significant artwork and that this famous painting was revolutionary and unconventional for the period.
…show more content…
Primarily, at the time of Da Vinci, women were mostly painted when they were getting married, as a sign of contract between the two families. Only the side of the face was painted to represent the dowry-bedecked woman . Therefore, it was very rare to see the full face of a woman in Italian paintings, even though it was present among Flemish art. However, Da Vinci painted the Mona Lisa in a way that we can see her whole face. As Sassoon explains, “the pose of the Mona Lisa was one such significant innovation. She sits presenting a three-quarter view, while the face looks in a different direction – the so-called contrapposto position. She looks directly at the viewer, another innovation. Leonardo had broken his own rules, for he had written that women should be painted in a demure position, ‘their heads lowered and inclined to one side’.” In fact, the Mona Lisa is very unique and different for the context of Italian Renaissance, since Da Vinci depicted his subject with a sense of individuality and personality rather than a mere “object” in a marital contract. Secondly, Mona Lisa’s posture, a sited pose with crossed hands on the arm of the chair and a …show more content…
As I explained earlier, women portraits were used as a symbol of a contract. Jewelry, fancy clothes and symbolic objects were often part of the painting, as it showed the status or the rank of the women and her family. “When Italian Renaissance painters included the sitter’s hands in a portrait they usually had a function: they held a symbolic object that provided a clue to the identity of the sitter, as is evident in Botticelli’s Young Man Holding a Medal of Cosimo il Vecchio, or Perugino’s Francesco delle Opere holding a scroll.” However, Mona Lisa doesn’t wear any jewelry that can indicate her wealth. Her dress is dark and simple and she is wearing a transparent veil on her head. Mona Lisa doesn’t hold anything in her hand and there is no object in her surroundings that can give the viewer a clue about herself. It is also one reason why the Mona Lisa is so mysterious and that there are so many hypotheses on her identity. “The lack of distinguishing clues helped to transform the Mona Lisa into a portrait in general – no longer the conventional portrait of a particular individual (by definition a portrait is the visual representation of a specific person)” . So, the fact that the Mona Lisa is not displaying any attributes to indicate her position in society is really surprising for the context of Italian Renaissance. The
Primarily, at the time of Da Vinci, women were mostly painted when they were getting married, as a sign of contract between the two families. Only the side of the face was painted to represent the dowry-bedecked woman . Therefore, it was very rare to see the full face of a woman in Italian paintings, even though it was present among Flemish art. However, Da Vinci painted the Mona Lisa in a way that we can see her whole face. As Sassoon explains, “the pose of the Mona Lisa was one such significant innovation. She sits presenting a three-quarter view, while the face looks in a different direction – the so-called contrapposto position. She looks directly at the viewer, another innovation. Leonardo had broken his own rules, for he had written that women should be painted in a demure position, ‘their heads lowered and inclined to one side’.” In fact, the Mona Lisa is very unique and different for the context of Italian Renaissance, since Da Vinci depicted his subject with a sense of individuality and personality rather than a mere “object” in a marital contract. Secondly, Mona Lisa’s posture, a sited pose with crossed hands on the arm of the chair and a …show more content…
As I explained earlier, women portraits were used as a symbol of a contract. Jewelry, fancy clothes and symbolic objects were often part of the painting, as it showed the status or the rank of the women and her family. “When Italian Renaissance painters included the sitter’s hands in a portrait they usually had a function: they held a symbolic object that provided a clue to the identity of the sitter, as is evident in Botticelli’s Young Man Holding a Medal of Cosimo il Vecchio, or Perugino’s Francesco delle Opere holding a scroll.” However, Mona Lisa doesn’t wear any jewelry that can indicate her wealth. Her dress is dark and simple and she is wearing a transparent veil on her head. Mona Lisa doesn’t hold anything in her hand and there is no object in her surroundings that can give the viewer a clue about herself. It is also one reason why the Mona Lisa is so mysterious and that there are so many hypotheses on her identity. “The lack of distinguishing clues helped to transform the Mona Lisa into a portrait in general – no longer the conventional portrait of a particular individual (by definition a portrait is the visual representation of a specific person)” . So, the fact that the Mona Lisa is not displaying any attributes to indicate her position in society is really surprising for the context of Italian Renaissance. The