 |
|
|
Click here to Buy a physical Copy
Chapter 13
|
CHAPTER TWO: Who Is Mona Lisa?
In this chapter I will explain the current consensus as to who the woman in the painting was. Also the curiosities of her various titles, and why I think Lisa was used for her name - not her face.
WARNING: This chapter is very confusing! Each different title is a clue, and a curious coincidence that’s intentionally confusing. But once you put them all together, it’s easy to see why.
Perhaps the greatest mystery about the painting of Mona Lisa isn’t the painting itself but the identity of the sitter. Who is Mona Lisa? After much debate which continues to this day (and will only be amplified by this book and the discoveries I present) the current consensus by those who have studied the history of the painting pretty much agree that she’s Lisa Giocondo. Or Lisa Gherardini, the wife of Francesco del Giocondo. The following is the only reason why:
“Leonardo undertook to execute, for Francesco del Giocondo, the portrait of Mona Lisa, his wife; and after toiling over it for four years, he left it unfinished; and the work is now in the collection of King Fraces of France, at Fontainebleau.” – Vasari
The title “Mona Lisa” comes from Vasari’s biography. He coined the name “Mona Lisa” which is really just Madam Lisa. He asserted that the woman in the painting was Madam Lisa Giocondo but curiously (and purposely) used “Mona Lisa” instead. Something that will be elaborated on later is this strange name game that seems to be going on. But for now lets try to make it simple:
Vasari was the first and only person to say that the woman in the painting was Lisa Giocondo. He choose to word it as “Mona Lisa” which eventually became the popular title of the painting instead of “Lisa Giocondo.” Why?
The alternative title to the painting is “La Giaconda” which just happens to be the feminine form of Giocondo (Her husbands last name) This actually supports that the painting really was of Lisa Giocondo. It makes it seem like the reason the painting was called “La Giaconda” alludes to it really being of Lisa Giocondo – which makes sense.
Alternatively “La Giaconda” could be considered to be the title not to allude to Lisa being the sitter but to the expression on the sitter’s face. “light hearted” could describe her smile and disposition – both make sense. Da Vinci used titles, things in the paintings, and the sitter to make word games and coincidences before.
Interestingly “Giocondo” means “light-hearted” in Italian. In feminine form, La Giaconda, means “light hearted woman.”
In French “La Joconde” means the same thing and is also yet another alternate title of this painting. After Leonardo’s death there was a paper found that had a list of some of his paintings. Similar to an inventory. On the list was- “La Joconde” with a description that matches the Mona Lisa’s description. This would be the closest we can come to what Da Vinci himself might have named the painting since the list appears to be from him or someone close to him. Even more interesting isn’t all these weird names and double meanings but the fact that Leonardo didn’t title the painting, right? Why paint a painting and leave it with out a title? There would have to be a reason. There aren’t many paintings without a title, let alone from the most famous painter who has ever lived.
If the painting really was of Lisa Giocondo why didn’t he give it to her? Why didn’t he leave any indication in his thousands of notes who the painting was of? Why was Vasari the first to say it was of a Lisa? A whole 30 years after Da Vinci died?
This seems very complicated and for good reason. It’s also hard to understand which makes it difficult to realize its significance. After reading it you might just think: So what? I don’t get it, why are these names so important? This is an example of how I noticed the curiosities and coincidences that others had, but put them together myself.
I will explain the significance to all of this later but for now just contemplate the coincidences.
· Leonardo paints a portrait of a woman starting in 1503. At this time her identity is unknown since the first to say who it was didn’t assert anything until 30 years after Da Vinci’s death. · There is a list of his paintings with the title “La Joconde” that describes a portrait of a woman that matches the painting. This is why Mona Lisa sometimes titled: La Joconde · Before Vasari said it was “Mona Lisa” the painting went by the names: o “A certain Florentine lady” o “A courtesan in a gauze veil.” o And La Giaconda
Then after Da Vinci’s death and 30 years later Vasari wrote:
“Leonardo undertook to execute, for Francesco del Giocondo, the portrait of Mona Lisa, his wife; and after toiling over it for four years, he left it unfinished; and the work is now in the collection of King Fraces of France, at Fontainebleau.” – Vasari
After this the painting goes by the title “Mona Lisa”
SO. La Jaconde -> La Gioconda -> Madam Lisa Giocondo = Mona Lisa
The coincidence is that all these titles are related but from different sources.
There is a little French/ Italian word play going on. This means that coincidentally the name on a piece of paper, the last name of the supposed sitter, and her expression- all happen to be related in a strange, complicated, coincidental way..
By the end of this book I should be able to prove within a shadow of a doubt that Lisa Giocondo is not the woman in the painting and that she was used for her name and not her face. I’m not saying that she didn’t exist! I’m sure she did. She was actually probably dead before Vasari said it was her anyways. Besides, back then they didn’t have photographs or anything to show that the woman in the painting was really Lisa Gioconda. So no one would have known or been able to tell if the girl in the painting was really the real Lisa G or not.
Something else to consider is that there could be more than one painting. Da Vinci could have painted a portrait of the real Lisa G but that doesn’t mean that the one in the Louve really is. There are plenty of copies and even one that the owners swear is legitimately by Leonardo Da Vinci. Could he have painted more than one? Of course – this is probably the case and source of the confusion. Maybe he really gave her a copy, maybe he didn’t. My guess is that he started a portrait of the real Lisa Giocondo, but then used it as inspiration to paint Mona Lisa which is definitely not of Lisa Giocondo. He used the circumstances to create a controversy to serve a greater purpose. This is starting to sound like the Da Vinci code isn’t’ it?? Just wait, it gets better.
What’s in a name?
Sometimes a name is just a label but other times it’s a description. Smith = Blacksmith, nicknames are given for reasons. Why would a portrait of Lisa or a painting with a name, go by anything else? Before Vasari’s biography the painting didn’t have a specific title. No one thought it was of “Lisa.” Keep in mind how slang names work: they’re descriptive and allude to something! “A courtesan in a Gauze Veil” & “A certain Florentine Lady” Why wouldn’t people know it was of Lisa Giocondo? Why would they call it these two names instead of Lisa?
Obviously both of these descriptions allude to a totally different sitter than Lisa Giocondo. She was not a Courtesan and they would have no reason to say “A certain Florentine lady” if they knew who she was, right?
Both of these names allude and support that the person in the painting is anything but a simple portrait of a silk merchants wife.
"A Courtesan in a Gauze Veil."
A courtesan was like a high classed escort. This was in a day when women were still treated as being inferior to men. It’s hard to imagine or compare what a courtesan would be today. I guess it would be like a trophy mistress? A woman who was smart and educated in art and such things to make them good companions to affluent men. Not just prostitutes, but women who got what they wanted and were rewarded for their company. They were good for conversation and sex!
Everyone knows what Gauze is today but consider this is 500 years ago and translated from another language. I would assume it has a similar meaning; something to wrap and cover a wound or in this case (usually cotton)- covering a painting? What’s being covered up?
A veil covers something up as well. You can see what looks like a veil on the Mona Lisa’s forehead which makes sense. But why would a painting be called this? In the news in 2006 researchers in Montreal used state of the art 3d laser technology to scan the Mona Lisa. They found that there was originally a veil covering the woman in the painting. This veil was worn by women who were pregnant. This made the news;
“Mona Lisa was pregnant when she posed for the painting!”
Because she was wearing this veil. When I read the article it actually alludes and supports what I think the painting really is, but that will be explained later. She is pregnant but now how you would imagine.. It’s also interesting that the people in the past who noticed the veil considered and assumed it was a veil worn in mourning. This just goes to show how time and different cultures can cause the wrong impression. Just because we wear veils at funerals today doesn’t mean that’s why they wore them 500 years ago in a different country and culture. Not to mention they were pretty stupid to think that when she had a smile on her face. They thought she was happy her husband died!
“A Certain Florentine Lady”
When I think of names that aren’t given at birth, they’re usually hinting to something about a person or a thing. These names are very strange for a portrait. Portraits are of people, people have names. Why wouldn’t they call a painting of someone by their name? (Especially if it didn’t have a given title?) When considering these names think of why a painting of real Lisa Gicondo would go by these names. Then consider how these names support that the painting is a lot more then meets the eyes, and a lot more than a wealthy merchant’s wife.
“A certain” sounds funny to me, almost like they knew who it was but didn’t say - like it was a secret. Does this sound like they didn’t know who she was, or that they did and it wasn’t really a certain anyone? Almost how people allude to something they aren’t supposed to say but everyone still knows what they’re talking about. Kind of like “oh you know who.” It could also mean they didn’t know at all, but then how could it be of Lisa? No one knew her? hmm
Florentine is a place but also a concept like Florentine eggs (served with spinach.) It’s also defined as: “Having or characterizing a dull chased or rubbed finish. Used of gold.”
I’m sure they meant Florence but sometimes places can have meaning as well. I think of this title like someone saying “You know, that certain LA girl, wink wink, nudge nudge. She’s so Hollywood” A city can also take on a personality all its own and even describe the people who live there. Think of Florentine as Las Vegas or Hollywood of today. It’s probably more a description of the person than the location. It was a very arty place in a time art was more edgy and rare than prostitution. So just to summarize the most popular current opinion about the identity of Mona Lisa:
Mona Lisa is short for Madam Lisa Gherardini, the wife of Francesco del Giocondo. He commissioned Da Vinci to paint her in 1503. After he “toiled over it for four years” he stopped and never gave Lisa the painting of herself. Instead he carried it with him until his death in 1519, during which he obviously finished the painting. It then goes on to become the most famous work of art of all time.
Right?
Or isn’t the real question; Who is the person in this painting if it’s not Lisa ?
|
