Leonardo da Vinci, 500th Anniversary of His Death
Almost five centuries divide contemporary researchers from the first attempts to look at the phenomenon of Leonardo da Vinci. His thoughts and achievements, in which his mysterious personality is reflected, require staves of specialists in many branches of science to grasp their full meaning. In preserved writings, edited already after his death (1519) none of the genuine manuscripts made the complete whole. Also a part only mentioned, but so far untraced works impedes attempts to make transparent compilation of existing material, recorded on circa seven thousands cards.
Due to this, the number of painting achievements of the Master seems to be small but equally brilliant with an innovation and influence on the spectator, successfully achieving a rank of bright, almost universal connotation in handing over the most subtle phenomena and laws of the observed nature. In the belief of Leonardo only a painting offers a possibility of the fullest description of reality, therefore the Master granted it the prevailing place in the hierarchy of arts:
“This knowledge is more useful, of which the fruit is more available and on the contrary – the one is less useful which is hard to hand over. The painting has destination accessible to all generations of entire world, since work of it is subordinate of power of the eyesight, (…). Painting so not needs the translation to various languages, as [requires it] literature, (…). Is introducing work of the nature to senses with increased power and certainty than are making words or writings (…).”
This truly Promethean way for painting, in spite of best intentions amongst of generations of copyists and imitators, only with Leonardo is not rubbing with the gullibility. Just the contrary – it still puzzles focusing the attention of the civilized world (and concerns fundamentally two centers of the Italian Renaissance – Florence and Milan). To what extent is not right or quite proper the view, that this interest and admiration, which we keep for his knowledge – survived owing to his painting and the role he entrusted it. Although not numerous, it easily convinces us about his genius. Here mysterious “Mona Lisa” must be mentioned and also not questioned masterpieces of art – The Last Supper” and “The Battle of Anghiari”. However in the face of damage and many later repaintings or supplements piled up in layers over centuries, it is easiest here to meet our ignorance (the second of two murals except of copied fragment, unfortunately no longer exists).
It is good to see increasing number of studies arriving today, in which only progress in the quality of printed reproductions is satisfying. But is far worse if the reproductions become exclusiveness or comfortable alternative to our contacts with the works of masters as they may copy intellectual blunder sometimes present at the reproduction. It happens that only amuses with its gullibility in interpretation, as in not long ago edited multi-volume work on European painting. Its author having too much confidence in credibility of his senses, most clearly is losing the correctness of his commentary in the chapter devoted to Leonardo’s “Last Supper”. He has simply found one additional hand (27th hand) armed with knife, evidently not belonging to any of 13 human figures present on the mural. Distinct need of sensational news makes him write a little bit farther about the secret and mystery of Leonardo’s works – in places, where such secrets are not existing and mystery (undoubtedly present) here is rather a wishful thinking amongst densely quoted slogans, killing the thinking. An interesting would be a question, why that many deceptive stories can find their place and become almost a religion nowadays.
In case of poorly verifiable field that art is, we cannot disregard that only subjective judgements really exists in it and in principle only they are of any importance. Sometimes however facts of essential interpretative meaning are omitted or treated as not existing, if that may disturb harmonious composition. If wink here means more professionalism, no chance to gain more objective outlook, especially at works of the greatest.