That's a LOT of Money for a Painting

Salvator Mundi, ca. 1500

Since every art critic and those who think they are art critics have weighed in on the recent sale of Leonardo’s Salvator Mundi. I thought I’d add my observations. Although the majority of scholars who actually know something about his work have decided that it is actually by him, some have wondered if the mystery buyer has paid $450 million for a hack job by a second rate student.

Critics have described the painting as flat and lifeless, noting that Leonardo favored motion in his paintings. It is true that Leonardo favored motion in his paintings. He like to paint people at an angle, with their upper bodies and faces turned to face the viewer, such as with the Mona Lisa. What these critics are not taking into account is that this painting is different from the others that have survived from Leonardo. This is a devotional work. At the time it was considered irreverent to paint a figure head-on because that pose was reserved for Christ. Albrecht Durer’s famous self portrait is a good example of a secular take on this. Painted at the same time as Leonardo’s Salvator Mundi, Durer’s self portrait mimics the pose reserved for Christ. He even paints his own hair loose, as paintings of Christ often depict. Durer had an enormous self-image and he apparently needed a pose normally reserved for the divine to contain his greatness. Durer also knew how to paint motion, and often did. Does that mean that his self portrait wasn’t by him because it wasn’t his normal way of painting a portrait? Of course not.

Durer self portrait, 1500

The media have issued a torrent of words, speculating on the allure of a Leonardo. Obviously, he’s the most famous artist of any generation. Even people who know nothing about art recognize the Mona Lisa. They speculate that with the hype a number of years ago about the Da Vinci Code ( a work that is totally worthless and was a shrewd way to make lots of money) and the excitement of a new Leonardo appearing after centuries of obscurity, people just can’t help themselves.

One factor, the most obvious in my opinion, I have already hinted at above, is that the allure is in the fact that it’s a painting of Jesus. Why this? We have to go back to the root  of religious art. In religious iconography, an image of Jesus, let’s say, has a connection to Jesus himself. The image participates in the divine nature. This is the essence of Orthodox icons. An icon is a window to the reality beyond it.

An image of Jesus, in the minds of many, participates in the nature of Jesus himself. Most art critics do not understand the nature of religious experience, and this wouldn’t naturally occur to them. I believe that beyond being a painting by Leonardo, it is a painting of Jesus by Leonardo. Put the two together and you’ve got a team that can’t be beat.

So, let’s sit back, pop open a cold one and wait for the buyer to be revealed, and whether he or she will donate it to a museum or put it over the fireplace in the recreation room next to the deer trophy.