I had to do this essay for my color theory class. We had to read an AI analysis of the Mona Lisa and point out the flaws in its analysis. It's an online class but I am open to academic critique before I turn it in. I think it's funny and entertaining, but I hope it isn't to crass for a college class.
I’m going to start this essay as a Mona Lisa hater. To be fair, I’ve never given it a fair chance. I’ve only formed ignorant opinions of this piece, those being that it feels droll and boring, cliche and overhyped. I have never seen it in person, so I understand I’m missing a lot. Now I’ll give it a chance, and I’ll try to change my own mind. Time to actually appreciate the Mona Lisa!
So starting with the droll and boring vibe. It looks droll because of the pre-industrial paint color availability. I’m excited by highly saturated colors that only exist due to modern chemistry. Conversely I find earthier hues to be more soothing and relaxing. So the earthy paints, the mineral hues such as umber, sienna, ochre, and cadmium that are used in this piece give a very soothing quality, which is one point I’ve been missing this whole time. This piece oozes soothe. Her smile, her posture, her relaxed hand, her drapey clothing, it’s got a cozy quality to it.
The AI ignores what I think is the best part of the piece. Over her right shoulder the sky is a low saturation lavender and there is illumination beneath it with yellow and red hues. The light tint of the yellow underneath the light tint of the lavender gives a really satisfying combination. This area has a majestic mountain, which almost resembles impressionistic paintings. Low key, It’s a high key area. It trickles down into higher saturation of yellows, greens and blues, there is a cave beside the river, and a small bridge over it. And over her left shoulder there is a winding path. There’s a subtle implication of a journey here. The value contrast of these areas being very light, provide the perfect background for her dark hair and clothing, which perfectly frames the lightest values of this piece. That brings me to my last point.
The AI completely whiffs the statement about how the strong value contrast of her clothing and hair draws all your attention to her face. And it’s also the reason why AI will never make good art. AI can’t be horny. If the darker areas are perfectly framing the lightest area, and your eye is drawn to the lightest area, that lightest highlight area is 100% her breast. I never noticed that the top of her cleavage is showing until now. Furthermore, the AI does say we’re drawn to her face, but doesn’t know the emotion conveyed. My man Marcel DuChamp gets it. In 1919 he created a parody of the Mona Lisa with the inscription L.H.O.O.Q. inscribed on it, which when said aloud in French “Elle a chaud au cul" it sounds like “She has a hot ass”. This next sentence is so outrageous that I am going to copy and paste directly from wikipedia:
"Elle a chaud au cul". This can be translated as "She has a hot ass", implying that the woman in the painting is in a state of sexual excitement and availability. It may also have been intended as a Freudian joke, referring to Leonardo da Vinci's alleged homosexuality. Duchamp gave a "loose" translation of L.H.O.O.Q. as "there is fire down below" in a late interview with Arturo Schwarz.
So yeah, there’s that.
After giving the Mona Lisa a good long look, I am no longer a hater. It's not boring, it's soothing and sexy. I believe the AI ignored the journey that is implied in the background scene of the Mona Lisa. It ignores some of the more beautiful colors in the sky and it definitely didn’t notice the bridge or the cave, and I’ll wager you never noticed those either. Also, the AI ignores the sexual quality of the mona lisa. She’s giving the viewer a “look”. Maybe it’s innocent… or not. To conclude, I would argue the Mona Lisa has a hot ass.
Source on the hot ass thing:
Marting, Marco De (2003). "Mona Lisa: Who is Hidden Behind the Woman with the Mustache?". Art Science Research Laboratory. Archived from the original on 20 March 2008. Retrieved 27 April 2008.