[DaWorm]

For those interested, you can view Davinci's "Last Supper" in 16Billion Pixels at this location:

http://www.haltadefinizione.com/en/

I swear, John, who is sitting on Jesus' right side (our left side as we look at the picture) looks like a woman.

[Black Unicorn]

Iam not sure.
Look at this:


Johannes was certain a man.
Or ... Jesus was also a woman. He was represented also very femalely.
Most male angels from Da Vinci look also very female.
And the "Sacred Gral" is the child that his Mrs (Maria Magdalena) expected from Jesus.
Therefore he, the Gral, is also filled blood.
So! This is my theory.

BTW I think that Vinci has painted so androgynously there, he wanted to say because, that the sex doesn't care. And I also think,that every age had/have his "Jesus". No matter whether he Buddah, Pharao, Vinci, Isis or Smith named is.Sometimes they are found. Sometimes not.
So be nice to the people outside.

end of the lecture LOL

[drkn]

it doesn't matter, really. i am more curious about mysterious hand with a knife, more to the left from johannes/mary, just by that black guy, right over the table. whose is it, why with knife?

[Black Unicorn]

Yes, I also think that this is the decisive question.
It seems that is the hand of Petrus . I guess Peter is the american name. All popes are descendant of Peter. Could be that somebody kept the church for a traitor.

[DaWorm]

The knife is defintiely in the right hand of Peter...a not so subtle jab at the Catholic Church I think. Notice that Mary/John is the only one smiling serenely (almost like mona lisa, soft facial features) and with hands clasped gently in front. Everyone else is in an uproar over the news from Jesus that one at the table would betray him. The only other non-bearded person at the table has very strong, harsh male features, but not John/Mary. As far as DaVinci always portraying saints with femine qualities...most of the people at that table are saints. Strange, eh?

[Black Unicorn]

If one considers have been restored like of the picture, don't find this so obvious.
I find it looks more than somebody would hold an arm after that. An arm of somebody
other. Or a dead arm. He is painted also quite differently as his other hands. The perspective
don't make right.

[Strati]

Wanna know? check in the exif

I don't know, for me it's just someone trying to see things that aren't there...
After all it's just a painting. It's almost like those people that play songs
backwards and think they are hearing satanic messages.

Curious is that suppers should be at night, not in plain daylight as seen in the picture.

[Black Unicorn]

Strati

If works of art are nothing else as color on canvas for you I,really feel sorry for you.
But I agree with you that some are overvalued. But I find it what a picture importantly tells me. What is important at a picture, what one feels is. If it moves you, makes you sad, you glad makes you suffer with him. I like it not if one wants to interpret too much meaning in a picture. But perhaps somebody has made to himself at the times thought. I think one should honor this.
A picture is not only a picture mostly.

[Strati]

Well, some pictures are just pictures...wheter you like it or not.

I think that paintings don't bring emotions to me as other kinds of art, like music would or even poetry and photography.
I see this one more as illustration from the bible than a second-thought work.
I know that picture is Leonardo's own vision of Jesus the 12 apostles, and the last supper was a nice occasion to join everyone.
But what i'm saying is that some people try to find some bible-hidden truth in Da Vinci's works, i mean, some people think "from the painting to the bible canon" than the real thing that is "from the bible canon to the picture".

"If works of art are nothing else as color on canvas for you I,really feel sorry for you. "
That's very noble of you

[DaWorm]

Strati,

In this case, we know from many other documents and such that DaVinci actually often put "hidden" or "subtle" meanings into his paintings, so that is part of the attraction, trying to figure out what is going on....what exactly is that smile on Mona Lisa's face and who was she to Leonardo?, etc. I totally agree though that just because it is a painting, doesnt automatically give it value. For instance, Jackson Pollack...for me, that is the most ridiculous, overvalued painter ever....a bunch of paint splatters on canvas and it is worth $50 million! That is a joke in my opinion, but some people see more.

I am not a total art afficionado, but the first time I saw a Van Gough in real life, I was thunderstruck. There are some talents that can transcend the medium...like hearing Miles Davis for the first time, or reading your first short story by Hemingway. Genius breaks through.

Anyway, that is my two cents, which isnt worth what it used to be

[Strati]

In this case, we know from many other documents and such that DaVinci actually often put "hidden" or "subtle" meanings into his paintings, so that is part of the attraction, trying to figure out what is going on...

Well, i didn't knew that before, so it changes things a bit. Yet still is just some "imagination candy", because i doubt we, even with the nicest guesses, will ever find out his true intent.
I think the whole art power is about identification, I don't know about you,
but what i like in art is to imagine a way to mold myself into it, to find something that was made by a total stranger that still can tell exactly what I think, even that the way it tells me is just inside my head.

That taken, it still doesn't make me that curious about this one... i don't know...
Well...whatever...

[Black Unicorn]

And God said to his disciples:

Go away!! You make me nervous.

[ Added: 2007-11-08, 16:48 ]

[Strati]

Should I be like...offended now?

The window there behind clearly shows a light blue at the sky.
Leonardo could just paint it black, add some fire light here and there, darken the background and then you are done. Not any "Omg, it's too dark!!!", and even if Da Vinci
was all this genius they tell he was, he would find a way to paint it darkly and still neat.
So it's still weird - why the day clear sky instead of night?

There is no reason a night ambiented picture would be colorless, even at the top of your undriven sarcasm.

[vard]

here's something to provide all the explanations you need.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4oKXagF3IE