Skip to main content

Mona Lisa


I had been looking at Leonardo da Vinci’s Mona Lisa for a long time wondering why people admired that painting so much when Mona Lisa started talking. There is really nothing much surprising about Mona Lisa talking. My cat, Bobs, talks to me. The images of deities in holy places talk to me when I care to visit them. Sometimes a flower in my garden talks, the stream in the village does, and the cloud in the sky too. If you care to listen, even the grain of sand outside your house will talk to you.

You wonder why an apparently bland woman like me caught the fancy of the world, Mona Lisa said. I couldn’t make out whether it was a statement or a question. It was like her smile: neither here nor there.  

I wouldn’t use the word ‘bland,’ I said.

You don’t have to be so deferential, she said. Men hardly gave us any respect in our days.

Is that why your smile is not so… happy?

Was happiness permitted to us? Mona Lisa asked. Everything we did was controlled by the conventions that men set up. Even our smiles. We were supposed to be exemplars of chastity, modesty, sobriety, reticence and obedience. Leonardo tried his best to make me smile better than this. He gave up in frustration. He couldn’t smile himself, the wretch. He always looked like someone whose consciousness didn’t belong to him.

I recalled that Leonardo da Vinci was an illegitimate son of Ser Piero who seduced a peasant woman. But Ser Piero was noble enough to take Leonardo into his care. The boy found ways to educate himself and opportunities to develop his artistic skills. He was not treated as a legal offspring, however. How could his heart belong to him?

His heart was in the right place, alright. Mona Lisa corrected me. It was his mind that didn’t stay with him. His mind was always seeking something. Do you know how many times he made me sit in different places, in different kinds of light, before he started painting me? He never seemed happy with anything. How could I smile any better though I quite liked the man?

Mona Lisa reminded me of the Duchess in Robert Browning’s poem, My Last Duchess. A duke in Italy, Mona Lisa’s country – and time too – is going to marry. The poem is his speech to the person who is bringing the alliance. The duke tells the emissary about his former wife, the duchess who is now no more. Her painting is there on the wall: a beautiful young lady “looking as if she were alive.” She was a very gentle and sweet person who smiled genially at everyone. What happened to her? The duke “gave commands; / Then all smiles stopped together.”

The duke ordered her death because she smiled at everyone. Her smiles should have been reserved for her husband only. Reticence!

I shuddered. Did Mona Lisa’s husband demand the same? Was that the reason for the reluctance of her smile?

Her answer was another smile which was as mysterious as the one in the Da Vinci painting. 


PS. This post is part of #BlogchatterA2Z 2023

Previous Post: Leader

Coming up tomorrow: Nineteen Eighty-Four

Comments

  1. I had no idea of Leonardo Da Vinci being an illegitimate child. I wonder how much his skills would have soared had he been given his due respect!
    Death sentence because of smiling? This is utterly depressing. Part of the reason why I don't dive into the history of that era.
    www.docdivatraveller.com

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Great people like Da Vinci initiated the Enlightenment. It was a dark world until then.

      Delete
  2. Hello, it is said that the Mona Lisa is the artist's self portrait. Also, I recently heard that the Mona Lisa was stolen ages back and finally returned, which did a lot for its PR in those days, making it the priceless painting it is. I have seen the original in the Louvre. It is much smaller than expected. As for patriarchy, it still exists!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are many theories and stories about that painting. Dan Brown alone gave us a lot to wonder about.

      Patriarchy still exists. As do so many forms of authority. People like to exercise power over others. We call it democracy or whatever. Nowadays I come across a lot of women who think that the solution to patriarchy is matriarchy: just invert the power structure!

      Delete
  3. Mona Lisa...I don't see the appeal. But also I dont have an eye for that stuff. It does show the reticent smile expected of women in that age, so to see that reflected in the painting does give it value but then again what was Da Vinci seeing...only he knows. But the legends and myth surrounding make it so interesting...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Da Vinci had a lot of secrets up his sleeve. This painting was probably more than a painting.

      Delete
  4. This is a very beautiful writeup on how women in most societies are forced into subservience to men's whims and fancies. And what an explanation you have given for Monalisa's rather mild and dim smile!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Women were ill- treated almost all over the world, including India, in those days.

      Delete
  5. I've been to the Louvre (multiple times) and refuse to step inside because I fail to understand the fascination behind this painting and wait hours to catch its glimpse for a few minutes that too an unsatisfactory one.
    I'd much rather read a piece like this on its history, or read a book like The Da Vinci Code.
    Thank you for this 👏🏻

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Medieval history is alluring, I should say bewitching. The Louvre won't ever give you that charm, I'm sure.

      Delete
  6. That was a fascinating read. I wonder what Mona Lisa would say to me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm sure you two will have a far sweeter conversation. 😊

      Delete
  7. Lovely how you brought together Mona Lisa and My Last Duchess. A very interesting take on the mysterious smile.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Loved how you reflected upon the mysterious smile. I hope Monalisa too reads this and wonder what would she feel !

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ayodhya: Kingdom of Sorrows

T he Sarayu carried more tears than water. Ayodhya was a sad kingdom. Dasaratha was a good king. He upheld dharma – justice and morality – as best as he could. The citizens were apparently happy. Then, one day, it all changed. One person is enough to change the destiny of a whole kingdom. Who was that one person? Some say it was Kaikeyi, one of the three official wives of Dasaratha. Some others say it was Manthara, Kaikeyi’s chief maid. Manthara was a hunchback. She was the caretaker of Kaikeyi right from the latter’s childhood; foster mother, so to say, because Kaikeyi had no mother. The absence of maternal influence can distort a girl child’s personality. With a foster mother like Manthara, the distortion can be really bad. Manthara was cunning, selfish, and morally ambiguous. A severe physical deformity can make one worse than all that. Manthara was as devious and manipulative as a woman could be in a men’s world. Add to that all the jealousy and ambition that insecure peo...

Lucifer and some reflections

Let me start with a disclaimer: this is not a review of the Malayalam movie, Lucifer . These are some thoughts that came to my mind as I watched the movie today. However, just to give an idea about the movie: it’s a good entertainer with an engaging plot, Bollywood style settings, superman type violence in which the hero decimates the villains with pomp and show, and a spicy dance that is neatly tucked into the terribly orgasmic climax of the plot. The theme is highly relevant and that is what engaged me more. The role of certain mafia gangs in political governance is a theme that deserves to be examined in a good movie. In the movie, the mafia-politician nexus is busted and, like in our great myths, virtue triumphs over vice. Such a triumph is an artistic requirement. Real life, however, follows the principle of entropy: chaos flourishes with vengeance. Lucifer is the real winner in real life. The title of the movie as well as a final dialogue from the eponymous hero sugg...

Abdullah’s Religion

O Abdulla Renowned Malayalam movie actor Mohanlal recently offered special prayers for Mammootty, another equally renowned actor of Kerala. The ritual was performed at Sabarimala temple, one of the supreme Hindu pilgrimage centres in Kerala. No one in Kerala found anything wrong in Mohanlal, a Hindu, praying for Mammootty, a Muslim, to a Hindu deity. Malayalis were concerned about Mammootty’s wellbeing and were relieved to know that the actor wasn’t suffering from anything as serious as it appeared. Except O Abdulla. Who is this Abdulla? I had never heard of him until he created an unsavoury controversy about a Hindu praying for a Muslim. This man’s Facebook profile describes him as: “Former Professor Islahiaya, Media Critic, Ex-Interpreter of Indian Ambassador, Founder Member MADHYAMAM.” He has 108K followers on FB. As I was reading Malayalam weekly this morning, I came to know that this Abdulla is a former member of Jamaat-e-Islami Hind Kerala , a fundamentalist organisation. ...

Empuraan and Ramayana

Maggie and I will be watching the Malayalam movie Empuraan tomorrow. The tickets are booked. The movie has created a lot of controversy in Kerala and the director has decided to impose no less than 17 censors on it himself. I want to watch it before the jingoistic scissors find its way to the movie. It is surprising that the people of Kerala took such exception to this movie when the same people had no problem with the utterly malicious and mendacious movie The Kerala Story (2023). [My post on that movie, which I didn’t watch, is here .] Empuraan is based partly on the Gujarat riots of 2002. The riots were real and the BJP’s role in it (Mr Modi’s, in fact) is well-known. So, Empuraan isn’t giving the audience any falsehood as The Kerala Story did. Moreover, The Kerala Story maligned the people of Kerala while Empuraan is about something that happened in the faraway Gujarat quite long ago. Why are the people of Kerala then upset with Empuraan ? Because it tells the truth, M...

Empuraan – Review

Revenge is an ancient theme in human narratives. Give a moral rationale for the revenge and make the antagonist look monstrously evil, then you have the material for a good work of art. Add to that some spices from contemporary politics and the recipe is quite right for a hit movie. This is what you get in the Malayalam movie, Empuraan , which is running full houses now despite the trenchant opposition to it from the emergent Hindutva forces in the state. First of all, I fail to understand why so much brouhaha was hollered by the Hindutvans [let me coin that word for sheer convenience] who managed to get some 3 minutes censored from the 3-hour movie. The movie doesn’t make any explicit mention of any of the existing Hindutva political parties or other organisations. On the other hand, Allahu Akbar is shouted menacingly by Islamic terrorists, albeit towards the end. True, the movie begins with an implicit reference to what happened in Gujarat in 2002 after the Godhra train burnin...