I agree that the art world have a vested and justifiable interest in preserving the art that was painted over Da Vinci's but it's hard to believe the lengths some people will go to in order to achieve this.
If this is happening in the art world, amongst academics who have the time and privilege to stydy in detail, one can assume that its happening in other academic disciplines too.
Its basically a mistrust of 'little man', whose judgement academics think is severely lacking.
Why not just tell us the truth and let the people decide whether to continue searching or not? Surprisingly we are actually capable of rationale thought and can understand nuance.
This is so typical of elites, whose worldview is such that they elevate themselves above the great unwashed and feed us the selected tidbits they think we can digest whilst hiding facts for their own convenience.
Lab leak? Don't be a conspiracy theorist.
Masks can't prevent microscopic viruses entering your mouth? Don't be ridiculous.
I can't believe how naive and trusting I used to be, viewing academics as the font of all knowledge and bowing to their opinions. It's taken a few decades for the scales to fall from my eyes but once you see their patronising stance its impossible to ignore it.
(I don't suggest all academics are patronising but they are all human and vulnerable to bias etc.)
Thank you Anfrew for your painstaking and diligent writing and for reminding us all that the 'noble distortions of truth' are undermining trust in our society. '
Thanks Julie. There's an observable problem with academics convincing themselves of the most egregious falsehoods partly because they are so accustomed to deep thought. In other words - they have the skill to rationalise and justify the most improbable of theories!
Andrew, not another one of your "obsessions"? An "obsession that blinds him to the strength of all the contrary evidence"? I see a parallel "obsession" here. Behind the carefully constructed façade of medical consensus on "gender affirming care" is the truth .
Do you paint, Andrew? I do sometimes and back in the days I was a decent charcoal portraitist. It is very common for an artist to abandon a work because his or her attention was attracted by something else. This is why they all have so many half finished pieces because they instinctively start to draw or paint wherever they have a chance. It is a bit like an obsession. Maybe Leonardo started it and never finished it? Maybe he lost interest or something else attracted him? I guess we will never know. However, for art lovers the idea that someone can destroy something to find painting that may not be there is a horrible thing. I am trying to explain why she is reacting this way and why you should not look at it as a personal attack. It is like suggesting to the priest that you will dip the Bible in the water to see if any hidden text will appear on the old script. Can you hear the gasp for air and see the horror in his eyes? Yes, it is the same reaction for art critics.
Oh, I don't think it's a personal attack at all. But it strikes me that her need to leap to the defence of the establishment position is revealing of the groupthink that can prevail in academic circles.
Leonardo almost certainly abandoned the piece after the technical failing. He was attempting a secco, not a fresco (painting directly on the wall, not on wet plaster), and was trying to dry the paint with hot coals. It didn't work. And the only image he mostly completed was the "capture of the standard" - the image we see at the top of the article. He had other commissions, and so he left it. Even though the Florentine authorities had initially prevented him from getting out of his contract. It must have caused quite a stir.
But we do know that this image was present on the wall for half a century. All the evidence is quite clear on this point.
He probably abandoned it or just painted it somewhere else. Depends how keen he was on doing that. Artists are interesting characters and if you tell them not to do something they will most certainly do it to prove you wrong.
Yes, this is how it works at the universities. There is a main narrative and if you want to keep your job and get promoted you have to follow it. It has been like that for years which is why we don't have any discoveries and everyone is basically doing the same thing. This is the disease of the modern era - lack of independent thinking or even imitative for that. Comply or be forever damned.
That's a fascinating piece, and I remember reading your original, which I guess must have been on here too. It's indeed interesting that your article did provoke such a strong reaction from Prof Fiorani: part mind-reading, part scorn, part argument from authority. Keep it up, Andrew! 🙂
What a fascinating piece.
I agree that the art world have a vested and justifiable interest in preserving the art that was painted over Da Vinci's but it's hard to believe the lengths some people will go to in order to achieve this.
If this is happening in the art world, amongst academics who have the time and privilege to stydy in detail, one can assume that its happening in other academic disciplines too.
Its basically a mistrust of 'little man', whose judgement academics think is severely lacking.
Why not just tell us the truth and let the people decide whether to continue searching or not? Surprisingly we are actually capable of rationale thought and can understand nuance.
This is so typical of elites, whose worldview is such that they elevate themselves above the great unwashed and feed us the selected tidbits they think we can digest whilst hiding facts for their own convenience.
Lab leak? Don't be a conspiracy theorist.
Masks can't prevent microscopic viruses entering your mouth? Don't be ridiculous.
Humans can't change sex? You're obviously biologically illiterate.
I can't believe how naive and trusting I used to be, viewing academics as the font of all knowledge and bowing to their opinions. It's taken a few decades for the scales to fall from my eyes but once you see their patronising stance its impossible to ignore it.
(I don't suggest all academics are patronising but they are all human and vulnerable to bias etc.)
Thank you Anfrew for your painstaking and diligent writing and for reminding us all that the 'noble distortions of truth' are undermining trust in our society. '
Thanks Julie. There's an observable problem with academics convincing themselves of the most egregious falsehoods partly because they are so accustomed to deep thought. In other words - they have the skill to rationalise and justify the most improbable of theories!
Andrew, not another one of your "obsessions"? An "obsession that blinds him to the strength of all the contrary evidence"? I see a parallel "obsession" here. Behind the carefully constructed façade of medical consensus on "gender affirming care" is the truth .
If writing one article is an 'obsession', then by that logic her one letter signifies that she is 'obsessed' with me. Weird.
Another expert insisting 'the science is settled!!". Great read Andrew, thank you !
Thanks Michael!
Do you paint, Andrew? I do sometimes and back in the days I was a decent charcoal portraitist. It is very common for an artist to abandon a work because his or her attention was attracted by something else. This is why they all have so many half finished pieces because they instinctively start to draw or paint wherever they have a chance. It is a bit like an obsession. Maybe Leonardo started it and never finished it? Maybe he lost interest or something else attracted him? I guess we will never know. However, for art lovers the idea that someone can destroy something to find painting that may not be there is a horrible thing. I am trying to explain why she is reacting this way and why you should not look at it as a personal attack. It is like suggesting to the priest that you will dip the Bible in the water to see if any hidden text will appear on the old script. Can you hear the gasp for air and see the horror in his eyes? Yes, it is the same reaction for art critics.
P.S Of course they can use AI.
Oh, I don't think it's a personal attack at all. But it strikes me that her need to leap to the defence of the establishment position is revealing of the groupthink that can prevail in academic circles.
Leonardo almost certainly abandoned the piece after the technical failing. He was attempting a secco, not a fresco (painting directly on the wall, not on wet plaster), and was trying to dry the paint with hot coals. It didn't work. And the only image he mostly completed was the "capture of the standard" - the image we see at the top of the article. He had other commissions, and so he left it. Even though the Florentine authorities had initially prevented him from getting out of his contract. It must have caused quite a stir.
But we do know that this image was present on the wall for half a century. All the evidence is quite clear on this point.
He probably abandoned it or just painted it somewhere else. Depends how keen he was on doing that. Artists are interesting characters and if you tell them not to do something they will most certainly do it to prove you wrong.
Yes, this is how it works at the universities. There is a main narrative and if you want to keep your job and get promoted you have to follow it. It has been like that for years which is why we don't have any discoveries and everyone is basically doing the same thing. This is the disease of the modern era - lack of independent thinking or even imitative for that. Comply or be forever damned.
That's a fascinating piece, and I remember reading your original, which I guess must have been on here too. It's indeed interesting that your article did provoke such a strong reaction from Prof Fiorani: part mind-reading, part scorn, part argument from authority. Keep it up, Andrew! 🙂
Thanks, Andrew, fascinating piece.
Some art historians can be remarkably vicious when their pet theories are challenged!!
I did an art history masters though never used it in my work but I have some expereince of art historians!
Dusty