Posted on 02/02/2011 4:26:26 PM PST by DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis
Have you read about his life and the era?
“Dude looks like a lady!!”
Actually, if that’s Salai, he looks prettier than the Mona Lisa.
I don’t see the resemblance between this and the Mona Lisa. Not the same person.
Do you have a source for what you claim about him?
To be honest, I haven’t studied DaVinci’s life exhaustively. Apparently he was once arrested for sodomy - but the charges were dropped. The conventional wisdom is probably based on that, the fact that he never married, and that he seemed to like apprentices with feminine features. Obviously, that’s not conclusive - but suggestive.
|
· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic · subscribe · |
|||
Antiquity Journal & archive Archaeologica Archaeology Archaeology Channel BAR Bronze Age Forum Discover Dogpile Eurekalert LiveScience Mirabilis.ca Nat Geographic PhysOrg Science Daily Science News Texas AM Yahoo Excerpt, or Link only? |
|
||
|
· Science topic · science keyword · Books/Literature topic · pages keyword · |
|||
I have never heard that before. Wasn't in his biographies. I don't know how anyone would know what all his apprentices looked like unless they were all identified. His sketches cover people of all ages and looks but most are rather ugly older guys. He liked sketching people with exaggerated and unique features.
Nothing in his sketches indicates to me that he had any interest in sexuality of any kind. Which probably explains why he was so prolific and creative. His mind was not distracted by lust.
There is NO, not ONE scintilla of evidence that da Vinci was gay.
None
nada
there is, however, clues that he was a Cathar...which he would have had to keep secret if he had no desire to become a human teriaki. He was known to dress in white - as did Cathars.
Also, if I remember right, Cathar leaders often didn't marry.
AT any rate, there IS evidence he was a Cather - there is NO evidence he was gay - other than the gay communities lust to name everyone who didn't marry and ‘AH HA, one of US!’
On the other side of the coin, a lot of gays - still - marry for ‘cover. So marriage or lack of it proves nothing.
As an aside, the Mona Lisa we see today has no resemblance to La Gioconda, whom he was commissioned to paint. I've seen a photo of the original cartoon (sketches) of La Gioconda and she looked totally different. He never finished or deliver the portrait - but, as many artists do - and particularly artists back then, with materials so dear, used the canvas to paint over - using the same pose, but different face. I have my own theory as to who he meant this to be and why the knowing/amused smile - and I have a good clue - but I'm not going to say...at this time.
from the “not that there’s anything wrong with that” dep’t:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo_da_Vinci%27s_personal_life#Personal_relationships
The most overt biographical detail concerning Leonardo’s personal life is a Florentine court record showing that in 1476, while in the workshop of Verrocchio, Leonardo (along with two others) was accused anonymously of sodomy with a male prostitute, Jacopo Saltarelli. Though he has been described in recent times as a “model,” no such profession existed in his days.[11] After two months he was acquitted due to a lack of evidence.[12] Sodomy was theoretically an extremely serious offense, carrying the death penalty, but its very seriousness made it equally difficult to prove. [citation 11 — Caravaggio and his two cardinals By Creighton Gilbert, Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio; p303N96. citation 12 — Saslow, Ganymede in the Renaissance: Homosexuality in Art and Society, 1986, p.197]
The footnotes to the wikipedia article on Leonardo provide references for the sodomy arrest and the allegations regarding his apprentices.
You make a good point, though; Leonardo does seem kind of asexual. It’s certainly possible that his aesthetic choices were not his sexual choices.
Cathars were Occitanians not Milanese, their clergy practiced ritual suicide, they were forbidden to have any dealings with Catholics and taught to avoid Catholic holy places, they opposed the making or display of images and the King of France exterminated them three centuries before Leonardo was born. This theory is preposterous on numerous counts.
I see that reference in SunkenCiv’s post above yours. I see that it mentions the accusation was anonymous which corresponds to what I read about a system of “accusation boxes” put up in Florence. (I mistakenly said Milan before forgetting where he lived for most of his life while in Italy.) I also note that he was exonerated based on lack of evidence. If they couldn’t find it then I doubt that anyone will find any now.
I don't think anyone can doubt that he had an eye for the beauty of structure whether that of living things or inanimate things. He created a huge body of work on war machines, some of which are still inspiring technology today, and yet he hated war.
I think he loved his mind and he loved to work and he primarily produced what his patrons paid him to produce. He had a very poor opinion of humanity in general. I think he wrote that most people contribute nothing to life but consuming food and producing feces.
If he had a special fondness for his apprentices it was probably because they loved the work he was doing. They probably had to work very hard to keep from being shown the door. I suspect that hard work and talent were the only things he respected.
I never said anything about him being gay, I was merely pointing out the resemblance.
He had a good lawyer, charges were reduced to following too close.
Bada-bing.
Thanks, I’ll be here all week, try the veal.
If half my face looked like that, I’d moan too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
