The Last Essay…

“The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it.” (George Bernard Shaw, 1856 - 1950)

Jennifer Leung 0301742 CTX3005 Aesthetics and Experience Graphic Communication BA honours University College for the Creative Arts May 2006

1 The piece I have chosen to write about is the famous painting by Leonardo Da Vinci called: “The Last Supper” (fig1). I will firstly look purely at the aesthetics of the painting, translating and interpreting any meanings with the use my own cultural knowledge and no prior context to the piece. The second part of this essay will involve the researching any relevant context to the painting. Within that I will be looking at any influences and experiences that could provide more depth and meaning. The second stage of this essay will involve researching any relevant context to the painting; looking at any influences and experiences that may provide more depth and meaning, helpful to further appreciation or value of the painting to discover whether the context would add to my experience. My aim is to argue how important the value of art is comparing aesthetics and contextual studies.

Fig 1: The Last Supper, Refectory, S. Maria delle Grazie, Milan

2 Leonardo’s masterpiece has become a widely known painting and has raised numerous debates over the last years. The painting portrays The Last Supper which is described in four of the Gospels. The scene is set the evening before Christ was betrayed by one of his disciples, Judas, he gathered them together to eat, told them he knew what was coming and wash their feet (a gesture symbolizing that all were equal under the eyes of the Lord). As they ate and drank together, Christ gave his followers explicit instructions on how to eat and drink in the future, in memory of him. It was the first celebration of the Eucharist, a ritual still performed. Jesus also reveals that one of his followers will betray him that night and they were all exceeding sorrowful and ask him who is the one that will deceive him. The disciples are all reacting in horror to the thought that someone at that table would betray their master. These reactions are portrayed on their faces.

Leonardo’s version of the Last Supper is the most dominating one in most of our imagination. His representation of this part of the Christian story has achieved a common acceptance and influence. There are countless copies and reproductions of this particular painting in homes, places of worship, and museums throughout the world.

Looking at the picture from left to right you can see the following figures: Bartholomew, James Minor and Andrew form a group of three who are horrified, Andrew to the point of holding his hands up in a "stop!" gesture. Judas, Peter and John form the next group of three. Judas has his face in shadow and is clutching a small bag. Peter is visibly angry and a feminine- looking John seems about to faint. Christ is the calm one in the middle of the table. Thomas, James Major and Philip are next. Thomas is clearly restless. James Major stunned and Philip seems to be seeking clarification. Matthew, Thaddeus and Simon comprise the last group of three figures.

3 Over the years the painting has been the centre of attention due to the number of restorations it has undertaken since its completion in the fifteenth century. Leonardo painted it using an unconventional technique, sometimes without letting of a paintbrush the whole day long, other times not picking up a paintbrush for days at a time. Unfortunately, this technique involving the use of tempera paint over a double layer of plaster (rather then true fresco pigment which becomes part of the wall itself) proved faulty, and the fresco, which could not withstand the dampness of the wall it was painted on, was soon rotting. Leonardo’s experiment was a disaster. The paint soon began falling off the plaster. The humidity was causing the paint to separate from the plaster on which it had been painted. Whole pieces of paint fell off the wall. Over the years, the piece has been vandalized and nearly fell apart completely. The most recent work that has been done has provoked a lot of debate. Some say its repainted more than restored. Therefore the original intention of Da Vinci may be lost.

Part of why Leonardo’s version was immediately famous after publishing, was that he had changed the usual way that this scene was portrayed before. The majority of painting on the Last Supper showed Jesus blessing the bread and whine in a more calm scene. Judas was sat in the corner, sulking away from the rest of the apostles. The contradiction of Leonardo’s painting did not please the Dominican monks at the time, which created a lot of publicity. Even in those days, there was no such thing as bad publicity

4 “It's asking a great deal that things should appeal to your reason as well as your sense of the aesthetic.”(W. Somerset Maugham, Of Human Bondage', 1915)

The first thing that I noted about this painting is its huge size (460 x 880 cm). Next is the use of space to make it look bigger. The whole scene is covered in a diffuse, gentle light coming partly from three windows at the far end of the room and partly from the light at the front, which seems to come from the actual window in the real room. When I took a closer look to the people in the scene, I noted they were divided into little groups of three, leaving Jesus isolated. The first group of people look horrified. The second group is looks joint to Jesus by the hip between him and John, who looks very feminine. The lord Jesus himself looks a bit isolated in the middle. On his left the next group of people are looking very restless and the group next to them are looking confused and looking for an explanation. The background of the painting is very dark compared to the characters in middle, however it looks like the group of confused people are half blended in the background with their dark clothing. The more important people on the table are mainly dressed in blue and red colours. The biggest debate of this painting is whether John, who is sitting on Jesus’ right side, is a man or a woman, called Mary Magdalene. In my opinion this character is a female. One of the things that were odd in the picture is that there is no central cup or chalice, no Holy Grail and very little bread is been broken.

Leonardo da Vinci was a Florentine artist, one of the great masters of the High Renaissance, he was also famous as a painter, sculptor, architect, engineer, and scientist. Many of his ideas have been an inspiration for some modern technology. Leonardo was born on April 15, 1452, in the small Tuscan town of Vinci, near Florence. His father was a wealthy Florentine notary and his mother was a

5 peasant woman. After his birth, Da Vinci's father was quickly convinced to marry into a wealthy family, and his mother was given to a cow herder. In the mid-1460s the family settled in Florence, where Leonardo was given the best education that Florence, the intellectual and artistic center of Italy, could offer. About 1466, thanks to his father, he became the apprentice to Andrea del Verrocchio, the leading Florentine painter and sculptor of that time. In Verrocchio's workshop Leonardo was introduced to many activities, from the painting of altarpieces and panel pictures to the creation of large sculptural projects in marble and bronze. In 1478 Leonardo became an independent master. His first commission, was to paint an altarpiece for the chapel of the Palazzo Vecchio, the Florentine town hall, but was never executed. Around 1482 Leonardo entered the service of the duke of Milan, Ludovico Sforza, having written the duke an amazing letter in which he claims that he could build portable bridges; that he knew the techniques of constructing bombardments and of making cannons; that he could build ships as well as armored vehicles, catapults, and other war machines; and that he could execute sculpture in marble, bronze, and clay. He served as principal engineer in the duke's numerous military enterprises and was active also as an architect. In addition, he assisted the Italian mathematician Luca Pacioli in the celebrated work Divina Proportione (1509).

The most important of his own paintings during the early Milan period was The Virgin of the Rocks, two versions of which exist (1483-85, Louvre, Paris; 1490s to 1506-08, National Gallery, London); he worked on the compositions for a long time, as was his custom, seemingly unwilling to finish what he had begun. From 1495 to 1497 Leonardo labored on his masterpiece, The Last Supper, which is now hanging on a wall of the refectory in the Convent of Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan, Italy.

6 He was very careful and precise and making sure no one was copying him. He started experimenting with secrecy to hide his inventions of the Roman Catholic Church, who did not approve scientific ideas as they contradict the bible. This might be a start of a hatred he had against them. As a scientist it was very hard for him to not publish his ideas and inventions and the only the thing standing in his way to do this was the Roman Catholic Church.

After researching the life of Leonardo, the meaning of the Last Supper has changed. My views are highly influenced on the theories that are based that Holy Grail was not a cup, but a woman, Mary Magdalene. Now knowing that Leonardo ‘hated’ the Christian family, we can find many hidden things which are offensive to the Holy family in his paintings. Ironically the work that is probably the worlds most famous painting, has so many hidden messages for those with eyes to see. First of all, the person sitting next to Jesus on his right has all the characteristics of a female. This suspicion can be confirmed by the clothes that both characters are wearing; they are opposites of each other. Also they look like they are joint by the hip, which makes both bodies form the letter “M”, which could be a clue for Mary Magdalene. In the forbidden books it says that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were lovers and Peter hates her because of the power she has over Jesus. Mary Magdalene in this painting has the hand of Peter across her throat like a knife, like a threat. The hatred between Peter and Magdalene can be found in the gospel of Philip:

“and the companion of the Savior is Mary Magdalene. Christ loved her more than all the disciples and used to kiss her often on her mouth. The rest of the disciples were offended by it and expressed disapproval. They said to him, ‘Why do you love her more than all of us?’

7 Next Leonardo liked painted himself in the painting; the figure which would represent him is Saint Jude, the only figure that has his back to Jesus. If you look carefully you can see a hand sticking out behind Judas and Peter, however the hand does not belong to anybody on the table, as it is physically impossible to take that position. Another subtle message is the fact that Thomas is making a John the Baptist gesture almost in Jesus’ face. Even though John was not physically present at the last supper…

To back up the argument that Leonardo hated the Holy family, I looked at other paintings of him. “Madonna of the Rocks” (fig 2.) is a title that two painting have been given by Leonardo. The first commissioned version was refused by the church of Saint Francesco in 1480. In this masterpiece you can see the Virgin Mary sitting with two babies, Saint John and Jesus and an angel. After reading about this painting, hidden messages can easily be recognized. The child believed to be Jesus is sitting crossed legged and makes a blessing gesture with his hands, next to the angel as it would be in her protection. The other child, John the Baptist, is sitting with his hands like he would be praying is being protected by the Virgin Mary. These can be seen as savages against the Holy family, as every detail is a contradiction of the bible. John is doing what Jesus should be doing and it is not Jesus that is being protected by the Virgin Mary, it is John.

8 Fig 2: Madonna of the rocks, he Louvre in Paris

In the later version of the Madonna of the rock (fig 3.), the figures are bigger and the angel is not pointing at John anymore. John is holding the cross of John the Baptist; however it has been added on a later date, so it was not Leonardo’s intention. Also added is the halo’s above the heads. These added symbols were to stop the ambiguity of the identities of the two babies. Leonardo takes an extreme vulgar savage at the assumed Virginity of Mary, by painting sexual shapes within the background rocks.

9

Fig 3: Madonna of the Rocks, National Gallery, London

The Adoration of the Magi (fig. 4), an unfinished piece was painted in 1481- 1482. According to Maurizio Seracini, Leonardo wanted to portrayal a world that was being reconstructed out of ruins, a reflection of the master’s feelings in the beginning of the Renaissance. If you look properly at the painting, there are two kinds of people. The ones that adore the Holy family are repulsive looking creatures clawing at them. The other group of worshippers gathered around a carob three, which in church tradition is a symbol of John the Baptist; are young and beautiful looking. It is backed up even more that those people are worshipping John the Baptist, is the hand sign again of him behind the three. Leonardo never finished the painting; scans now show that layers of paint have been added later, in a clumsy way which does not reflect Da Vinci’s finesse.

Fig 4: Adoration of the Magi, Uffizi, Florence

10 The most important contextual aspect of Leonardo is to know that he hated the Holy family. Objectively looking at each of his religious painting, you can pick up on details that prove Leonardo’s feelings towards the Holy family. Whenever he painted himself in the scenery, he will make sure that his body language will show the hate to the Holy Family by for example turning his back to them. According to the Dosiers secrets, Da Vinci was one of the grand masters of the Priory of Sion. The modern Priory of Sion has an important duty. The brotherhood is sworn to secrecy and most protect the Sangreal documents, the tomb of Mary Magdalene and the bloodline of Christ. Knowing this, it makes perfect sense that Leonardo hated the Holy family and would be capable of sneaking in clues in his work to savage them.

“Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!” (Leonardo Da Vinci)

Personally I think that external factors will have a weight on our opinion. Depending on the mood it can either put more value into it or less; however that opinion can change easily overnight with a different mood. At first sight it will be the aesthetics that will grab your attention to a piece of work. At that point your own interpretation and cultural knowledge of the piece or its content will be important; however if I like something, I would want to find out more about it, including the artist. I believe it is essential that you find out the background of the artist, the emotion they went through while working on their piece and anything else relevant to it. Without that contextual knowledge, I would not be able to fully appreciate the work, its true meaning and the message the artist is trying to get across. Leonardo Da Vinci is known to hide secret messages in his paintings, invisible to those who don’t know what to look for. But strong clues to those who know Leonardo’s other work and the symbols he uses to put a

11 message forward. No doubt that on their own Leonardo’s paintings are fantastic, but knowing what some symbols mean in his work, makes it more interesting. It becomes more than a flat painting. To me the painting comes alive with all its secret messages and the intentional meaning of the artist.

“The noblest pleasure is the joy of understanding.” (Leonardo Da Vinci)

I do believe when viewing a piece of Art, there are aesthetic values involved. At first sight, you will only be attracted by the beauty, ugliness or something interesting of a piece of art. When viewing a painting it is important that you first take a general look, then have a closer look to see if you can spot any details you missed out on at first sight. Especially with this painting, you need to know more about the context to experience the full glory and intention of the artist.

So in the outlined argument of aesthetic vs. experience I would probably position myself a bit more towards experience than aesthetic. I like the first impressions a piece of art can give me, however I do think I can only enjoy it completely when I have more than just the aesthetic values. With the experience included, I feel that I don’t lose myself in the obvious beauty of a piece or art. Obvious things don’t appeal to me as much as when I have to actually do some searching to get the truth of the whole piece. For me, experience contributes to aesthetics, one need the other to be complete.

12 Bibliography:

Internet: http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~lbianco/project/home.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/leonardo/gallery/lastsupper.shtml http://arthistory.about.com/cs/leonardo/a/last_supper.htm http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/bio/l/leonardo/biograph.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Supper http://www.lairweb.org.nz/leonardo/rocks.html http://www.engineering.com/content/ContentDisplay?contentId=41003018 http://www.lisashea.com/hobbies/art/lastsupper.html

Books: Brown, Dan. (2004). “Da Vinci Code” M Baigent ; R Leigh ; H Lincoln. “Holy Blood and the Holy Grail” L Picknett ; C Prince (1998). “The Templar Revelation: Secret Guardians of the True Identity of Christ” S Newman. “The Real History Behind the Da Vinci Code” M Lunn. “The Da Vinci Code Decoded” S Sontag, “Against Interpretation”. Leonardo Da Vinci, the Complete Works B Barber. “Through the Eyes of Leonardo Da Vinci: Selected Drawings of the Renaissance Master with Commentaries”

Video: Cox, Simon. Cracking the Da Vinci Code Channel 4. The real Da Vinci Code Da Vinci code trailers

13