Aspect Art | art history, info & news

The Last Supper: A Painting with Mary Magdalene?

There are numerous theories and legends attached to the Last Supper, a painting already rife with symbols. In recent years, many of these theories have appeared in novels and in movies depicting Leonardo’s The Last Supper, controversies that have only been blown up with their inclusion in the huge selling Da Vinci Code.

One of the first legends attached to the painting, not quite a controversy, but an interesting legend regardless, is that the model used to paint Jesus is the same as the one used to paint Judas. It has been said that Leonardo hired a nice young baker, around 19 years of age to be the model for Jesus. A few years later, when finishing the mural, Leonardo hired a criminal to sit as the model for Judas. The legend has it that the model was the same person as the one used for Jesus. However, there is no direct evidence that any of this is true, especially as the mural is believed to have only taken 3 years to complete.

The biggest theory though, and one that has gotten a lot of press and attention in recent novels, is that the figure seated to the left of Jesus is actually Mary Magdalene and not John. These theories describe the figure as having a womanly bosom and the facial features of a woman. The posture is described as feminine and graceful, while Peter appears to be making a threatening gesture toward the throat. In Dan Brown’s famous Da Vinci Code, the correlation between the Last Supper and the picture of the knife were made world famous. The theory of course goes deeper as writers have postulated (and not always in fiction) that Leonardo was the head of a secret society which held such secrets.

The theory itself is subject to much criticism though. First, critics argue that the damage to the painting makes it impossible to know if the figure is male or female. Furthermore, the figure is wearing men’s clothing.

Next, there are only thirteen figures in the painting. If John were replaced by Mary Magdalene it would mean that an apostle was removed altogether. It would have been noted much earlier if an apostle were missing from the painting. The knife itself is pointing towards Bartholomew, a man who is later executed by being flayed. It is largely believed that the knife might allude to Peter’s impulsive acts later in removing a soldier’s ear.

The original sketches do not reveal any of the secrets of the Last Supper either. Originally preserved in Da Vinci’s notebooks they do not show any female faces either nor do they offer any clues that John might in fact be Mary Magdalene.

Another reason why John might look so feminine is that it was common during the time period to paint John as a youthful, feminine looking male. Because he was the youngest of the apostles, he was often shown with long hair and a clean face. He is also shown often as the most devout of the apostles, asleep beside Jesus, a common technique.

Another popular theory is that there is in fact no cup in the painting, despite the directions in which Jesus’ hands point. There are numerous cups located on the table, though the actual location is hard to discern because of the deterioration of the mural. The argument over realism in Leonardo’s paintings though continues. He largely disagreed with the use of methods such as Michelangelo’s showing supernatural forms or embellishments.

Another theory that has been created due to the nature in which the painting was created on a wall, is that a grail like image appears behind the figure of Bartholemew. However, because of the cup that some say is within reach of Jesus (though it’s impossible to be sure), it is hard to know if this is merely an optical illusion or a purposeful representation of the Holy Chalice. The image itself usually only appears in small scale reproductions. On the larger scale, the series of shapes that create the illusion only appear to do so when certain parts are removed, as with what occurs in small scale reproductions. It’s ultimately impossible to know with the deterioration of the painting.

The presence of the number 3 in Da Vinci’s painting, the Last Supper has also created much speculation over the possibilities the painting represents. The disciples are bound in threes, there are three windows behind them and Christ is placed in a pose similar to a triangle.

Ah, the Mona Lisa. She been one of the most inspirational women in history and we don’t even really know if she was real or even a woman. The most popular theory and the most probable one as well is that the subject of the portrait was Mona Lisa, the wife of the rich silk merchant, Francesco del Giocondo. However, it has been suggested that it is a portrait of da Vinci’s mother and also that it is a self portrait.

Regardless of whom the true subject of the painting is, the most endearing and enigmatic feature of the Mona Lisa is her smile. This smile has been talked about and studied for centuries and the reason for it still eludes us. The most recent attempt at determining the mystery behind the famous smile has been to run the portrait through a computer program that analyzes emotion based on facial features such as the curve of the mouth. According to this study, Mona Lisa was 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry. Wow, what a mix?

Now to the real reason behind the mysterious smile. It is simply because the smile seems to disappear and then re-appear right before your very eyes. Or, according to a new theory offered by Harvard neuroscientist Dr. Margaret Livingstone, it doesn’t really change; it is simply an effect of eye movement. When we look at the painting and our eyes move from one aspect of it to another, the smile will disappear and re-appear depending on the shadows, etc…

This theory isn’t all that surprising when you consider the incredible scientific, anatomical, and artistic genius of da Vinci. If anyone could have pulled this of it was him. However, there is at least one person out there who is convinced it is a self-portrait. Dr. Lillian Schwartz of Bell Labs digitized the Mona Lisa and his self-portrait and then superimposed them. The facial features lined up perfectly.

We may never know who posed for the famous portrait and it is less likely that we will ever know what is behind the enigmatic smile, but in the end it doesn’t really matter. The important thing is that da Vinci did what artists dream of doing. He created a piece of art that has brought feeling and joy to millions of people. If you visit Paris you can stand in line for hours to get a mere 15 seconds to look at it and take a picture. This doesn’t seem very practical, but considering millions of people do it every year, there must be something about that smile…

Both of these artists were known to suffer from mental illness. Munch had what is now believed to be bi-polar disorder. Van Gogh suffered from paranoia, and possibly a myriad of other mental ailments, including epilepsy and absynth addiction, that the psychiatric community still debates. It is clear that they both suffered in ways which most of us are fortunate to not understand, but how did it show up in their work.

Vincent Van Gogh : The Starry Night - 1889

In looking at the paintings of both Munch and Van Gogh, it may be tempting to say that Munch was the more disturbed of the two. In fact, Van Gogh was an influence for Munch. He painted emotion, raw emotion. These emotions were dark and “negative” and his work had a depth of sorrow and madness to it that may be unsurpassed. On the other hand, while Van Gogh’s paintings were often somber, hey do not seem to embody the depths of sadness and despair that are seen in Munch’s work.

Edvard Munch : The Scream - 1898

Munch definitely has the privilege of having painted a painting that has come to symbolize our own modern feeling of despair and hopelessness. The Scream has become an icon of the world today and many people can relate to – that feeling of just wanting to scream!

His paintings were part of his therapy with his forward thinking doctors feeling that it would be beneficial for him to paint and express his feelings whilst in the asylum.

We will probably never know who had the more severe mental illness. Certainly Munch’s most likely stemmed from the fearful upbringing of his parents. His father instilled in him and his siblings the fear of eternal Hell and living in fear, especially as a child, creates deep-seated damage to the mind and soul. Van Gogh is for many the embodiment of the tortured artist. He cut off the earlobe of his left ear, an act of self-mutilation, after an argument with fellow artist Paul Gauguin. A year later he shot himself.

Vincent Van Gogh : Self Portrait with a Bandage - 1889

It is difficult to compare mental illness, each person and their experiences are so radically different. However, it is obvious that mental illness and insanity are not enough to stop geniuses from creating masterpieces that will be with us for eternity. In a way, both Munch’s and Van Gogh’s sadness and the torture they endured will be with us for eternity as well.