Knowledge Organization Louiza PatsisDr. Richard Smiraglia December 2004DIS 810

Representations of Art Works: The Mona Lisa as a Case Study

Abstract

Much research has been done on the categorization of art works, but not on the

categorization of representations of art works. The Mona Lisa, painted around 1503 by

Leonardo da Vinci, is one of the most famous paintings in the world, and is a good

example of an art work with many representations. A case study of the Mona Lisa is

used to find out the types of representations of the Mona Lisa, and what natural groupings

of these representations exist. The aim of this empirical study is to add to the new theory

of the work by developing a taxonomy of representations that can aid in developing

similar taxonomies of other works of art. This taxonomy will be useful to librarians for

cataloguing representations of the Mona Lisa, and would lead to effective information

retrieval by art expert and average users.

1. Introduction and Background

A vast array of representations of some art works exist in art libraries and

museums today, especially in the modern digital age. Each year, the amount of

information in the world increases, especially after the advent of the Internet. The growth

of representations of art work is no exception. Many works are communicated through

art, and contain much information about culture, times and humanity. They are of

interest to people around the world. Discovering what representations of works of fine

art exist is thus important, and can lead to improved information retrieval.

1

The Mona Lisa was composed of oil on panel on poplar wood panel. It is 77cm

X 53 cm (30 X 20 7/8 in). As McMullen (1977, 29-30) wrote, various sources cite

different years for the painting of the work, ranging between 1503 and 1515. The

original is in the Louvre Museum in Paris, France, and is the only instantiation of the

painting. The painting has inspired stories and myths on who the sitter in the Mona Lisa

was. Copies, photographs, critiques, books, movies and even chocolates in several

languages on or about this famous image have been produced since then.

McMullen (1977, 40) wrote that the Mona Lisa is a painting about the third wife

of merchant Francesco di Bartolomeo de Zanobi del Giocondo, Lisa di Antonio Mari di

Noldo Gherardini, who was born in 1479. Gould (1975, 110) wrote that this what most

people still believe; that is why the painting is called La Gioconda. Stites (1970, 329-331)

wrote that some people think the painting is of Isabella d’Este, daughter of Duke and

Duchess of Ferrara. Accordign to Stites (1970, 333), Da Vinci turned down offers by the

Pope and others to work on paintings, but did not turn down painting the Mona Lisa,

which he worked on for three years. He carried it with him everywhere, even to his

retreat in Ambroise, France. He never said that he had finished it.

There is one instantiation of the Mona Lisa. Smiraglia (2001, 167) wrote that an

instantiation is “a realization of a work that takes physical form in a document”, or a

manifestation of a work. This is the immutable original, the progenitor in the Louvre in

Paris. The instantiation is unique in ideational or semantic content (see section 2), and in

physical characteristics. Leonardo da Vinci did not paint more than one Mona Lisa.

Even if a contemporary of Leonardo da Vinci “copied” the painting, it would not be an

2

exact copy or instantiation of the original. Representations include paintings by

contemporaries of da Vinci, paintings by subsequent painters that added their

interpretation to the work, and photographs. At the International Society for Knowledge

Organization conference in 2004, Smiraglia presented a meta-theory of “works”, where

the evolution, derivation and mutation of ideational content varies across time, culture,

linguistic boundaries and canonicity. Smiraglia (2004) conducted a study on Etruscan

artifacts to demonstrate the inherence of the work in non-documentary artifacts, and

chose eight artifacts, intending find their representations. Smiraglia (2004, 311) wrote

that representations are infinitely mutable. The representations in the books found are

copies of such paintings or photographs and are thus second or third generation

representations.

A user might want to find a representation of the original, or they might want to

find an X-ray of the painting, or the Andy Warhol mutation of the painting. Or they

might want a description in a catalog of exactly what type of representation they have

found. If the library catalog is a bibliographic tool, it will assist the user in finding the

edition that he or she wants. The first step is categorization of representations of the art

work.

1.1 The Myth of the Mona Lisa

A myth has surrounded the Mona Lisa since it was first painted. The Mona Lisa

has come to mean different things to different people and cultures throughout time – from

the wife of Francesco del Giocondo to Leonardo da Vinci painted as a woman, to a

woman who holds the knowledge and mystery of all of life, to Mary Magdelena, possible

3

wife of Jesus Christ in Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code. Some believe that it the painting is

a self-portrait. According to McMullen (1977, 84) This belief may have been influenced

by rumor that da Vinci was a homosexual, and by the androgynous figures in his other

works such as The Last Supper. Some people believe that the sitter is a young man in

women’s clothes, perhaps because several figures in da Vinci’s works were androgynous.

In the twentieth century, some believed that the Mona Lisa is part of da Vinci’s religious

works. Costume analogies can be made between the Mona Lisa and his depictions of the

Virgin Mary, Apostles and angels. What adds to the mystery of the Mona Lisa is that it is

unsigned and undated. There are no traces of commission or records of payment. Part of

this myth has had to do with the myth around Leonardo da Vinci, who was considered a

new Pythagoras by people in his time. (McMullen 1977, 12) Although he was considered

a genius by some, and royals and clerics welcomed him into their homes, he had some

disadvantages. Da Vinci was left-handed which was almost like being cursed at his time,

and he was the out-of-wedlock son of Caterina and Ser Piero da Vinci. (McMullen 1977,

15)

A myth has surrounded the smile. Does she know a secret that we do not know?

Was she a saint? Some viewers would think that the smile is self-satisfied, while other

viewers may think that it is provocative. At the same time, according to McMullen

(1977, 80), it was customary for ladies of that time to lift the left side of their mouth in a

smile, and not to laugh, which was considered low-class. The mystery surrounding the

Mona Lisa led Clark (1961, 117) to write that the Mona Lisa is “one of those works of art

must be re-interpreted by each generation.” He wrote that artists prior to this painting did

4

not depict the people in their portraits with a soul, unless they used gestures to show the

soul.

Many painters tried to produce copies of the Mona Lisa, and others reinterpreted

it in their paintings. About twenty years after the painting of the Mona Lisa, the “Flemish

Gioconda” appeared. (McMullen 1977, 144) Through the 1600s and early 1700s, people

were enthralled by the Mona Lisa. During the latter part of the eighteenth century, the

Mona Lisa was relatively unnoticed. This was partly because French monarchs had kept

the painting in out-of-the-way places like the storerooms of the Direction des Bâtiments,

equivalent to modern ministry of fine arts. In 1800 the Mona Lisa was listed as hanging

in Bonaparte’s bedroom, and in 1804 the painting was taken to the Louvre. (McMullen

1977, 161) Here the painting became more popular than ever. Romanticism and

Romantic movements such as Neo-Gothicism, Aestheticism, Decadence and Symbolism

emerged. McMullen (1977, 163 and 168) wrote that the lady in the Mona Lisa was often

regarded as a femme fatale, and, at the same time, gifted painters and literati depicted the

lady in the Mona Lisa as a saintly, mysterious and erotic figure. The mystique of the

painting grew.

Art movements such as Dadaism and Surrealism also presented a less idealized

view of the Mona Lisa. The painting was stolen in 1911 by Vincenzo Peruggia, who

wanted it to be in Italy. The theft shows the symbolic importance of the art work. The

painting was displayed in various places in Italy before being returned to France on

January 4, 1914. (McMullen 1977, 205) When it was returned, it inspired more awe. But

many people started being tired of the following of the Mona Lisa, and began to satirize

it. This attitude to the work is found in the many cartoon mutations found in this study.

5

An example is Dali as Mona Lisa by Philip Halsman (McMullen 1977, 220 image 131).

Modernists thought that the Mona Lisa was irrelevant to their work. According to della

Chiesa (1967, 105), with the advent of Pop Art, many protested against the Mona Lisa, as

it symbolized academic museum culture and beauty.

Other people were still keeping the myth going. Through all of the cultural

interpretations and art history periods, the Mona Lisa is still a popular art work that

inspires the production of many derivations and mutations. McMullen (1977, 242) wrote

that the Mona Lisa, as opposed to other art works, was most popular because of “sheer

availability for meaning, of the general, uncommitted sign that invites the viewer-reader

to discover for himself, perhaps invent, exactly what is signified”. The painting is still

being interpreted.

2. Literature Review

Smiraglia (2001) wrote about the history of the concept of “a work” since the

Bodleian library in 1674. Since the earliest libraries, one author sometimes produced

more than one edition of a book. It is important to define what a work is in order to keep

an organized account of material produced from one primary source, including editions,

abridgements, commentary and more. The interest in a work, before the term was coined

in knowledge organization, was for the purpose of cataloguing material by one author.

Between 1994 and 1995, Yee published four articles about what a work is. Yee

wrote in “What is a Work? Part I: The User and the Objects of the Catalog”.

6

From the earliest libraries, there was concern about how to record and classify several

versions of one book, commentary on a book, or a book written by an anonymous author.

Panizzi called for displaying all the “works” of an author [artist], including editions of a

book, under a uniform original title, regardless of a change of title. (Yee 1994c, 11)

Cataloguing was more difficult with anonymous works or works where an author had a

pseudonym. Jewett went further. He listed editions of a work under the name of an

author that had a pseudonym (if the author was found). He called for a translation of a

work to go under its original title. Cutter’s rules made the objects of the catalog explicit

and brought together all editions of a work, whether entered under author or title.

Yee (1994c, 10 and 13) wrote that the first Anglo-American code in 1908 did not

define a work, and left out the objects of the catalog, dropped the rules for arrangement

that had called for the gathering and careful organization of all editions of a work entered

under the author, and dropped the rules for entering translations of modern anonymous

works under their original titles. Works do not need to have an author. Smiraglia (2001,

28) wrote that the AACR2 often used the terms “work” and “item” interchangeably.

These rules were in effect for about 50 years. Lubetzky in the 1950s wrote the

Code of Cataloguing Rules, in which he wrote the importance of collocating all editions

of a work, including works published in manifestations with different titles. He saw the

importance of the user being able to retrieve a particular edition of a work. At the

International Conference on Cataloguing Principles in Paris in 1961, the first formal

definition of a work was produced: “1. work: Any expression of thought in language or

symbols or other medium for record and communication; 2. version: One of several

intellectual forms taken by the same work. (These may be an original text and its

7

translation, or various texts in one language based on the same original work.); and 3.

adaptation: A work re-written or presented in another intellectual form to serve a

different purpose from the original version, or converted into a different literary form.”

(Smiraglia 2001, 24-25)

In 1968 Wilson recognized that a work is a group or family of texts with one

original ancestor. He wrote about the dichotomy between a work and the item, and about

a family of texts with a common progenitor. He also proposed two domains of

bibliographic control: descriptive power and exploitative power. Descriptive control

exists in cataloguing, classification and indexing. Wilson wrote that users need

exploitative control, which is an evaluative or selecting function. Understanding the

concept of a work, and creating taxonomies of representations of works, can lead to better

library catalogs, and thus exploitative power.

Carpenter (1981, 118-119) distinguished between the ideational and semantic

content for a work. Writing about books, he called the subject matter of a text ideational

content and the set of linguistic strings expression the text, the semantic content.

Carpenter used “ideational content” to refer to the intellectual or artistic content of a

work. In the case of the Mona Lisa, this would be the idea of a lady sitting and smiling.

The semantic content of the work for the Mona Lisa is the material of the work, in this

case the oil paint on poplar wood panel, as the text is the semantic content of a book.

What constitutes the ideational content of the Mona Lisa is subjective. The

painting is obviously about a woman sitting in front of a mirror, with crossed arms. She

is smiling and is dressed in a veil and dress. The background outside is of a mountainous

scene with streams and a bridge, and no people. People throughout history have guessed

8

at why the lady smiles. McMullen (1977, 165) wrote that some people believed that da

Vinci kept musicians and jesters in the room while he worked on the painting, to keep the

lady amused. Gould (1975, 113) wrote that some people have interpreted her smile and

gaze as “regal relaxation” that expressed superb confidence and tranquility. Some

twentieth century artists believe that several sitters sat for the painting. (McMullen 1977,

84) To add to this mystery, the hair and costume of the Mona Lisa seem to be deliberately

neutralized so as to imply no paritcular time or place. Some people believe that the

sitter is a young man in women’s clothes. Perhaps an apprentice sat for the painting, as

was cusotmary, since women were usually absent in workshops. (McMullen 1977, 85)

The ideational content differs according to viewers, culture and time, and the

interpretation of what is depicted in the painting and what this means. Myths

surrounding the Mona Lisa increased the perceptions of ideational content through

culture and time, and the mysterious nature of the painting itself led to varying

perceptions. The ideational content is also the foggy, mysterious background, painted by

the da Vinci technique sfumato, where nature not depicted identically to what it is, but

viewers are deceived that it is depicted identically.

The semantic content of the Mona Lisa is the material of the work, in this case the

oil paint on poplar wood panel. Rules for pictorial material were developed in the 1950s

at the Library of Congress. Since then, a change in medium, which would be the

semantic content of a painting, with a different artist producing the work, signifies a new

work. Photography has been considered the same work as the work reproduced.

9

2.1 Definitions of Works Since 1990

Yee (1994b) examined differences in manifestations and near-equivalents

regarding moving-image materials. A manifestation is a version or edition of a work that

differs significantly from another version or edition. A near-equivalent is a work that is a

copy of the manifestation that differs from other copies “in ways that do not significantly

affect the intellectual or artistic content”. (Yee 1994b, 227) Issues dealt with in this paper

assisted in this study, in determining whether a piece of art is a mutation or a derivation

(Section 5.1), and whether some mutations are so mutated as to warrant a different work.

A work of art originally conveys the meaning of the artist.

Yee (1994a, 227) distinguished between a manifestation and a near-equivalent. It

is pertinent to this study because it is similar to the difference between a derivation and a

mutation, although representations of the Mona Lisa were not categorized into

manifestations or near – equivalents. Yee (1994a, 252 and 1994b, 368) proposed that a

manifestation results when the continuity of a work (such as the visual, audio or textual

aspect), differs from that of the original work. The intellectual or artistic content changes

significantly. This is so when the ideational or semantic content changes from the

original work as in a mutation. A version or edition of a manifestation differs

significantly from another version or edition. A revised revision of a book can be a

manifestation. Yee (1994a, 248) wrote three ways that a film work can be a true

manifestation: 1. the film is edited to change continuity; 2. new material is appended to

the work; and 3. changes to the soundtrack or subtitles can be carried out by identifiable

subsidiary authors, the cast can change entirely, and differences in soundtrack can occur.

10

A near equivalent is a copy of a manifestation of a work that differs from other copies in

ways that are not significantly different in intellectual or artistic content. Yee (1994a,

369) determined that the length in film is the primary indicator of a copy being a

manifestation, as opposed to a near-equivalent. Title frame indicators on which

cataloguers relied were not reliable to test if a copy was a manifestation or a near-

equivalent.

Yee (1994d, 21) defined a work as a “product of intellectual or artistic activity of

a person or persons or of a named or unnamed group expressed in a particular way.” In

the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) of 1998, the

following grouping of documentary entities was suggested: works, expressions,

manifestations and items. (IFLA website) A work is an intellectual or artistic creation.

The expression is the intellectual or artistic realization of the work. A manifestation

embodies the expression of a work. An item embodied a manifestation. Smiraglia (2001,

48) wrote that the IFLA report was a milestone in treating works in catalogs by defining

them in concrete terms and providing an entity-relationship schema for their

incorporation into catalogs.

The idea of painting the Mona Lisa was the work. Its expressions could have been

various sketches or studies that Leonardo da Vinci composed before the final product:

studies of the hands, background and other parts of the painting. The manifestation of the

painting was how he chose to finally express his intellectual and artistic ideas, and the

item is the physical embodiment of this – the painting in the Louvre in Paris.

Tillett (1991, 156) wrote about seven types of bibliographic relationships:

equivalence; derivative; descriptive; whole-part or part-whole; accompanying; sequential;

11

and shared characteristic relationships. Smiraglia (2001, 51 and 130) studied derivative

relationships and came up with the following derivative relationships of works: a.

derivations, including successive and simultaneous derivations, amplifications and

extractions; and b. mutations, including translations, adaptation and performance.

Smiraglia (2001, 166-168) wrote that derivations are “instantiations of a work that retain

some ideational content from the progenitor but have significantly different semantic

content”, and that mutations are “instantiations of a work that have changed ideational or

semantic content”.

Svenonius (2000, 36) defined a work as “a set or family of documents in which

each document embodies essentially the same information or shares essentially the same

intellectual or artistic content.” She derived the term “superwork” for such bibliographic

families as Hamlet by Shakespeare. She used an edition for a particular manifestation of

a work. It is a collocating device, under which works related to a common progenitor can

be grouped. The Mona Lisa can be considered a superwork, because of all of its various

representations throughout time. Smiraglia (2001, 151) defined work as “a signifying

concrete set of ideational conceptions realized through semantic or symbolic expression”.

Smiraglia (2001, 565) wrote that works are communication vehicles across

cultures and times, and that, in the postmodern era, the concept of a work has evolved to

a group of instantiations with a collaborative social role, and that a work is the product of

intellectual activity across culture and time. Smiraglia (2001, 58-59) wrote that their

taxonomy and subsequent cataloguing for information retrieval is essential for the

dissemination of knowledge.

12

Eggert (1994, 75) wrote that the usual assumption is that the viewer plays no role

the painting but only reacts to it. But the reality is that a viewer interprets what an art

work is, and collective interpretations of the majority of art experts and viewers change

throughout cultures and time. Eggert (1994, 76) wrote that the work of art comes into

being with each new viewing, and incorporate the reactions of those who encountered

them. This is true with each derivation and mutation of the art work as well. The

mutations of the Mona Lisa over time, for instance, will show different art movements

and cultural aspects of time and place. These affected how the painting was interpreted.

The painting itself was an influential force in different art movements.

Smiraglia (2001, 65) wrote that the core literature or canon “functions to preserve

and disseminate the parameters of a culture by inculcating cultural values through the

information conveyed as a whole and in each of the works that comprise it.” The

canonicity of a popular work such as the Mona Lisa includes the academic canon where

scholars, art historians and painters study the work, and the popular canon, where

products, restaurants and the like have developed from the lure of the work. This,

together with the age of the Mona Lisa, ensures that many representations will exist.

Relations between works such as the Mona Lisa in a canon and between canons affect the

amount and types of derivations and mutations of a work. Culture, commerce and

technology affect the representations of a work.

3.0 Research Questions and Methodology

Research questions to be answered in this study are:

What types of representations of the Mona Lisa exist?

13

What natural groupings of Mona Lisa representations exist?

What constitutes a new work?

What can these groupings tell us about the cultural influence on

representations of an art work?

The terms "Leonardo da Vinci" were searched as subject in the catalog of the

Bobst Library, New York University. A total of 401 records were found. Books with call

numbers between ND623.A5 1938 and ND623.L53Z83 were located, to make the sample

a manageable size for this study. These books were about Leonardo da Vinci, and took

up the space of three and half book shelves. Representations of the Mona Lisa from these

books were photocopied. These photocopies were second version representations, if

they were copies of photographs of the progenitor, or third version representations, if

they were copies of photographs of amplifications or mutations of the progenitor. A total

of 131 representations were photocopied. Some representations were found in more than

one source book (See Appendix I for a list of source books). Representations were

identified as mutations or derivations, as per the theory of the work (Smiraglia, 2001). A

taxonomy of the representations was constructed, and an analysis of the representations

was conducted.

4.0 Results

With all of the myth and popularity of the work, many representations exist, as is

evidenced from the 111 distinct representations obtained from the sample of 20 books.

(Some of these representations appeared more than once. Counting all of them, the total

14

number of representations found is 131. This was noted in Appendix II.) While,

ideational content did not vary much in derivations, as was expected, it varied a great

deal from the progenitor to mutations, and among mutations. Most of the representations

found in the books studied did not have a changed semantic content. Sometimes, the type

of paint used was not described in the books. No sculpture representations were found.

All of the representations found were copies of photographs, or second and third version

representations. The semantic content of the representations that were photographed and

copied to book form was considered in the taxonomy.

Appendix II is composed of tables of representations found, categorized under

type of representation. An “*” indicates that a representation can belong to more than

one category. That representation is listed in all of the appropriate tables. “NA” signifies

that the artist or date of production is not available. The taxonomy reflects the natural

groupings of representations found among the source books. Some proposed sections of

the taxonomy, such as “Both” for color and black and white in one representation, and

“Impressionism”, were not found in the representations studied, but are anticipated to be

likely. Some representations might constitute new works. That is discussed in Section

5.2. The cultural and time influences on the interpretations of the Mona Lisa, and thus on

the types of representations found, are apparent, and are discussed in Section 5.1.2.

The most common type of derivation was an extraction. A total of 24 extractions

were found. A total of 16 subsequent representations and four amplifications were found.

The most common type of mutation was “cartoon”, with 34 different representations

found. Three were each found in two different source books. This was a total of six

representations. The image was counted as a cartoon once. The next most common

15

mutation was “embedded”, with 9 representations found. Following that in order of most

to least found are: nude renderings(9); sketches (6); “copies” by contemporaries of da

Vinci (5); photographic abstractions (3); photographic negative and computerized (2

each); and amplified mutation, study and radiography (1 each).

The following is the proposed taxonomy, based on the representations found:

4.1 Proposed Taxonomy of the Representations of the Mona Lisa

Taxonomy of an Art Work

Derivations: Painting with slightly changed or similar ideational content and semantic

content

Subsequent representations: Published copies of photographs of the Mona

Lisa: in paper, manuscripts, books

-Color

-Black and white

Amplification: art work (painting, photograph, sculpture, etc.) with more

than one representation of the progenitor

-Color

-Black and white

-Both

Extraction: art work with a portion of the progenitor, such as art work

featuring the eyes, lips, face, or part of the background of the Mona Lisa

-Color

-Black and white

16

-Both

Mutations: Painting by artists with changed ideational or semantic content or

both

- Attempts to recreate the Mona Lisa:

-contemporary to Leonardo da Vinci

-1600s

-1700s

-1800s

-1900s

-Surrealism

-Modern Art

-Color

-Black and white

-Both

- Changed ideational content on purpose

-contemporary to Leonardo da Vinci

-1600s

-1700s

-1800s

-1900s

-Surrealism

-Modern Art

-Postmodern

17

-Color

-Black and white

-Both

Nude renderings of the art work

-Color

-Black and white

-Both

Cartoon* renderings of the art work

-political

-Color

-Black and white

-Both

Radiography of the Mona Lisa

Sketches of the art work

Studies of the art work (can include lines of symmetry)

-Color

-Black and white

-Both

Embedded: art work with the image of part or the whole of the image of

the painting of the Mona Lisa inside it

-Color

-Black and white

-Both

18

*a drawing intended as satire, caricature, or humor (Merriam Webster online)

Photographic Negative

Photographic abstraction- the use of photography to produce an abstract

representation

Computerized edition: a computer generated edition of the image, or part

of the image

5.0 Discussion

The two large categories of the taxonomy, derivation and mutation, were taken

from Smiraglia (2001, 154). The representations were first divided into these the two

groups derivations and mutations for clarity in categorization. Successive and

simultaneous derivations were not found. Da Vinci did not paint more than one exact

Mona Lisa. Derivation here was defined as subsequent representations (photographs or

copies of the Mona Lisa), extractions of the Mona Lisa, or amplifications of the Mona

Lisa. Extractions were representations of part of the painting. Amplifications were

representations where all or part of the painting were shown. Ideational content was

slightly changed since a photograph or paper image will not yield the same feel as the

progenitor. The semantic content, which was photographic film, did change. (The second

level representations of the photographs were the representations in the books, and the

semantic content was the ink, paper, and other material that made up the image.) The

biggest difference between a derivation and a mutation in this study is that the ideational

content of a derivation changes slightly from the progenitor, as opposed to a mutation,

where there is a greater change in ideational content, even if viewed subjectively.

19

Mutations were representations where the ideational or semantic content, or both,

were changed. Productions by artists contemporary to da Vinci trying to copy the Mona

Lisa or producing pieces with significantly changed ideational content were grouped

under “mutations”. None of these were exact copies of the progenitor. No attempts to

copy the Mona Lisa were found that were produced by painters that lived after da Vinci’s

time. Further studies will probably reveal that artists in different time periods tried to

copy the progenitor, with ideational content staying the same and semantic content

staying the same or differing. These “copies” would still be considered mutations, since

they cannot be exactly the same as the progenitor. One limitation is that the type of paint

or panel used was not evident in the source books for all representations, and many of the

productions were by anonymous artists and had no title. It was thus difficult to find the

exact semantic content through print and online research.

A right handed image was found and was given a category of its own; more such

representations might be found upon further research. Da Vinci was left handed, and

researchers may want to study the work painted by a right-handed man. An amplified

mutation was a representation where one or more mutated versions of the Mona Lisa

were present. Many nude renderings of the painting, as early as the early 1600s were

found. The amount of such representations found seemed appropriate for a new category.

Several embedded mutations were found. In these mutations, whole or part of the Mona

Lisa was “inside” other art productions. Sketches are representations where the

progenitor is copied or studied with pencil, ink, or marker. Further research may reveal

more of these, such as those by famous artists starting a career while studying a great

20

painting like the Mona Lisa, for instance. Studies are representations with notes by the

artist to study proportion. Sketches can be studies and studies can be sketches.

Radiographic representations are representations where an X-ray or other radiographic

image was taken of the Mona Lisa. Photographic negatives are negative photographic

representations. These are not like the photographs under derivation, since the ideational

content or idea is changed to an abstract, scientific one, rather than an idea of a lady with

a mysterious smile. The semantic content is highly changed. A photographic abstraction

is a representation that is a photograph of an abstraction of the progenitor. The

abstraction is achieved through mirrors or optical instruments. A scientific mutation is a

mutation produced through scientific equipment, other than photography or computers.

A computerized mutation is a mutation produced through computer equipment.

Technology made it possible for more mutations to arise. The last three categories make

the grouping of some of these mutations possible.

5.1 Derivations and Mutations Found

5.1.1 Derivations

Several subsequent representations were found. Examples are the color

representation in Vallentin (1938, 354) and the black and white representation in Bodmer

(1931, 36). An example of an amplification is Andy Warhol’s Thirty Are Better Than

One. (McMullen 1977, image 129) This can also be categorized as a cartoon since

Warhol was poking fun at the prestige of the Mona Lisa. Examples of extractions are

21

extractions of the eyes, lips, face, and background, such as the extraction of mouth in

image 195 in McMullen (1977, 195) and the color image of the hands in Reti (1974, 95).

5.1.2 Mutations

Copies of artists can be divided into attempts to recreate the Mona Lisa and

“abstractions” where the ideational content is changed on purpose. The latter can be

divided by art movement or time period. Examples of copies from contemporaries of da

Vinci are the Italian copy, image 83 of McMullen (1977), and the Spanish copy, image

84 in McMullen (1977). Other copies had ideational content changed to different degrees

on purpose. One such copy is that by an artist contemporary to da Vinci is a Florentine

portrait by Raphael, dated as early as 1504 (McMullen 1977, image 15). This is a sketch

of a young lady in a similar pose as that in the Mona Lisa. Raphael produced other

copies: Maddelena Doni (image 86, McMullen 1977) and La Muta (image 87,

McMullen 1977)

An amplified mutation is The Occasion Makes the Gioconda by Rene Bertholo

(McMullen 1977, 228 image 135). Amplified cartoon images of the sitter are part of the

artistic piece, which is also a cartoon. An example of a nude Mona Lisa is the one by a

follower of da Vinci. (McMullen 1977, 67, image 38) These nude renditions date back to

the sixteenth century. According to McMullen (1977, 67) some believe that they are

copies of the original Mona Lisa by da Vinci. Other nude representations include

representations 91, 92, 93 and 97 in McMullen (1977, 150-151, 157), image XV in della

Chiesa (1967, 105). People started thinking that the lady in the Mona Lisa had

22

sophisticated sexuality, and she appeared in mutation copies as a courtesan. An example

is Lady in Her Bath by François Clouet, which is discussed under “New Works”.

Many representations of cartoons were found. These increased in the twentieth

century, as Dadaism, Surrealism and Pop Culture became popular, and interpretations of

the Mona Lisa varied. Examples of cartoons include the sitter making a face (della

Chiesa 1967, 105, IV), and the sitter with her hands over her eyes (della Chiesa 1967,

105, XXVI).

Examples of embedded representations include representations 101 and 122 in

McMullen (1977, 166, 206). Image 101 is of the scene of da Vinci painting the Mona

Lisa. It depicts the lady sitting and being entertained by court jesters, while Raphael and

a monk look on. Image 122 King Carnival with Mona Lisa by G.A. Mossa depicts the

lady of the Mona Lisa snuggling up to a Rabelaisian figure of King Carnival. Here the

semantic content is changed; it is ink. Gioconda with Keys by Fernand Leger (McMullen

1977, 224, 133) is an example of an embedded representation which is also a cartoon,

where the admiration of the Mona Lisa is satirized.

An example of a sketch is image eight in Scalliérez (2003, 16). An example of a

study is Plate XV in Goldblatt (1961, 62). It is also an extraction which focuses on the

face, and includes circular marks to study facial proportions.

An example of radiography is the image on page 10 of della Chiesa (1967) and

image 66 in McMullen (1977, 113). The latter is also an extraction, since it is an image

of the face of the lady in the Mona Lisa. A photographic negative representation is the

one by J. Margat (della Chiesa 1967, 105, XXI). A photographic abstraction

23

representation is the Mona Lisa as a narrower image (Della Chiesa 1967, 105, image

XXXVI).

An example of a scientific mutation is the Squared Gioconda (McMulllen 1977,

231, 141) This was produced in 1973 using optical equipment during experiments aimed

at finding how people remember faces. Examples of computerized representations

include representations 142 and 143 in McMullen (1977, 232). Image 142, Striped

Gioconda, and 143, Abstract Gioconda, were produced by artist Shigeo Fukuda by

playing with printing methods.

The ideational and semantic content vary more with mutations than with

derivations. The ideational content varies the most with cartoons, and scientific or

computerized representations. The semantic content varies with most with scientific or

computerized representations.

5.2 New Work

Sometimes the ideational content of a representation is changed so much, the

work can be considered new. An example is Lady in Her Bath, painted by Francois Clout

(McMullen 1977, image 94). It is not so obvious that the painter derived his idea for the

painting from the Mona Lisa. The lady does have a mysterious look and smile. She is

nude, her arms are not crossed and she is holding something with one hand, and several

people appear in the painting, including a mother suckling her baby. The latter can just

as easily be said to be derived from a painting of the Virgin Mary. Furthermore, Nature

is not depicted. Another work that can be considered new is Raphael’s Lady with a

Unicorn, dated to about 1506. (McMullen 1977, image 37) McMullen wrote that this is

24

part of a Florentine series which Raphael painted under the influence of the Mona Lisa.

The position of the lady is similar, yet there is no mysterious smile, or Nature depicted, or

plain dress. The overall feel, although subjective, is different. The sitter is holding a

unicorn. According to McMullen (1977, 37), X-ray studies revealed that a saint’s mantle

and wheel had been repainted by another hand, presumably da Vinci’s, with a unicorn

emerging in the work.

6.0 Conclusion

Old popular works of art have many derivations and mutations. Work must be

done to find the types of derivations and mutations, and to categorize them into a

taxonomy that would be a first step toward more effective information retrieval tools.

The sample taken for this study was small, and was not obtained in a systematic way.

Studies to obtain representations of the Mona Lisa from print, Internet and commercial

sources will undoubtedly retrieve more, various types of representations. Different

technological mutations may be found in the future.

Difficulty might arise since categories of representations can overlap: an

extraction can be a cartoon, for instance. One type of mutation may also be another type

of mutation, or even another type of derivation. The cartoon mutation of the Mona Lisa

smile on a dog in della Chiesa (1967, XIX) is also an extraction derivation. The

radiography mutation in della Chiesa (1967, 10) is also an extraction derivation. Only the

face of the sitter, for the most part, is shown. King Carnival with Mona Lisa (McMullen

25

1977, 206, image 122) is both a cartoon and an embedded mutation. More research is

needed in this area.

Future research can be done to comprise more terms to describe derivations or

mutations of an art work such as the Mona Lisa which is old and popular and has

influenced and whose interpretation has influenced culture over time. More research can

be done to define what would compose a new work altogether. Research can also be

done to explore the various interpretations of the painting across time and culture, and to

see how these interpretations influenced the emergence of derivations and mutations.

This research can include categorizing representations of the Mona Lisa according to

different art movements in the United States, Europe, and other areas.

An interesting study would be to see if the Mona Lisa is in fact part of a work of

an older progenitor. McMullen (1977, 80 and 84) wrote that mysterious smiles were

prominent in Gothic religious paintings, and that fictional natural scenery was prominent

in his religious works.

So many representations of the Mona Lisa exist: in museums, in books, in

products in stores, or on Ebay, on the Internet. Research will result in a complete

taxonomy of derivations and mutations that will ultimately aid in taxonomies of art works

in general, and in the production of more effective information retrieval tools for these art

works.

26

Works Cited

Carpenter, Michael. 1981. Corporate authorship: Its role in library cataloging.

Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.

Clark, Kenneth.1961. Leonardo da Vinci An account of his development as an artist

Baltimore: Penguin Books.

Chiesa, Anglela Ottino della, ec. 1967. The complete paintings of Leonardo da Vinci

London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson.

Eggert, Paul. 1994. Editing paintings/conserving literature: The nature of the “work”. In

Studies in bibliography, vol. 47, ed. By David L. Vander Meulen, 65-78. Charlottsville,

Pub. For The bibliographical Society of the University of Virginia by the University

Press of Virginia.

Gould, Cecil Hilton Monk. 1975. Leonardo: The artist and the non-artist Boston: New

York Graphic Society Ltd.

International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions

http://www.ifla.org

Accessed on December 1, 2004

McMullen, Roy. 1977. Mona Lisa: The picture and the myth New York: Da Capo Press,

Inc.

Merriam-Webster Online http://www.merriamwebster.com Accessed on December 8,

2004

27

Sassure, Ferdinand de. 1959 (repr. 1966) Course in general linguistics. Ed. By Charles

Bally and Albert Sechehaye; in collaboration with Albert Riedlinger; trans., with an

introduction and notes by Wade Baskin. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2001. The nature of work: Implications for the organization of

knowledge. Lanham, Md: Scarecrow Press.

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2003. The history of the work in the modern catalog. Cataloging &

classification quarterly 35(3/4): 553-67.

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2004. Knowledge sharing and content geneology: extending the

“works” model as a metaphor for non-documentary artifacts with case studies of Etruscan

artifacts. In: Knowledge Organization and the Global Information Society, ed. By Ian C.

McIlwaine, 309-321. Wurzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag.

Tillett, Barbara B. 1991. A taxonomy of bibliographic relationships. Library Resources

and Technical Services 35(2): 150-158.

Accessed on November 10, 2004.

Vellucci, Sherry L. Bibliographic Relationships. International Conference on the

Principles and Future Development of AACR, Toronto, Canada, October 23-25, 1997.

Available at: http://collection.nlc-bnc.ca/100/200/300/jsc_aacr/bib_rel/r-bibrel.pdf

Accessed on November 10, 2004.

Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mona_Lisa

Accessed on December 8, 2004

Wilson, Patrick. 1968. Two kinds of power: An essay on bibliographical control.

Berkeley: University of California.

28

Yee, Martha M. 1994a. Manifestations and near-equivalents: Theory, with special

attention to moving-image materials. Library Resources and Technical Services 38(3)

227-255.

Yee, Martha M. 1994b. Manifestations and near-equivalents of moving image works: A

research project. Library Resources and Technical Services 38(4):355-372.

Yee, Martha M. 1994c. What is a work? Part 1: The User and the Objects of the Catalog

Cataloguing & Classification Quarterly 19(2): 5-22.

Yee, Martha M. 1995d. What is a work? Part 4: The User and the Objects of the Catalog

Cataloguing & Classification Quarterly 20(2): 3-24.

29

Appendix IBibliography of Source Books

ArtBook Leonardo. London: Dorling Kindersley; 1999.

Bodmer, Heinrich. 1931. Leonardo: Des meisters gemalde und zeichnungen in 360

abbildungen Berlin: Stuttgart Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt.

Calder, Ritchie. 1970. Leonardo and the Age of the Eye New York: Simon and Schuster.

Clark, Kenneth.1961. Leonardo da Vinci An account of hisdDevelopment as an artist

Baltimore: Penguin Books.

Constantino, Maria. 1994. Leonardo Greenwich, CT: Brompton Books.

Chiesa, Anglela Ottino della, ec. 1967. The complete paintings of Leonardo da Vinci

London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson.

Fumagalli, Guiseppina. 1952. Leonardo: Omo sanza lettere Florence: G.C. Sansoni

SPA.

Gould, Cecil Hilton Monk. 1975. Leonardo: The artist and the non-artist Boston: New

York Graphic Society Ltd.

Hohenstatt, Peter. 1998. Leonardo da Vinci Berlin: Konemann.

McMullen, Roy. 1977. Mona Lisa: The picture and the myth New York: Da Capo Press,

Inc.

Philipson, Morris, ed. 1996. Leonardo da Vinci: Aspects of the Renaissance Genius New

York: George Braziller.

Roger-Miles, Leon. 1923. Leonard De Vinci et les jocondes Paris, H. Floury.

Rosci, Marco. 1977. The hidden leonardo Chicago: Rand McNally & Company.

30

Scaillierez, Cecile. 2003. Leonard De Vinci: La joconde Paris : Réunion des musées

nationaux

Siren, Osvald. 1916. Leonardo da Vinci, the artist and the man New Haven, CT: Yale

University Press.

Stites, Raymond S. 1970. The sublimations of Leonardo da Vinci Washington, D.C.:

Smithsonian Institution Press.

Svenonius, Elaine. 2000. The intellectual foundation of information organization.

Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Vallentin, Antonina. 1938. Leonardo da Vinci: The Tragic Pursuit of Perfection New

York: Viking Press.

Wallace, Robert. 1967. The world of Leonardo, 1452-1519 New York: Time, Inc.

Wasserman, Jack. 1984. Leonardo Da Vinci: Leonardo New York: Harry N. Abrams.

31

Appendix IISubsequent representations of original (photograph representations, with second generation representations in source books as representations)Representation Artist Source DateMona Lisa, B/W Leonardo da Vinci Bodmer 1931, 36 1503-1515Mona Lisa, color Leonardo da Vinci Calder 1970, 147 1503-1515Mona Lisa, B/W Leonardo da Vinci della Chiesa 1967,

Tav. XLVII-IL1503-1515

Mona Lisa, B/W Leonardo da Vinci Eissler 1962, 171 1503-1515Mona Lisa, B/W Leonardo da Vinci Freud 1947, 171 1503-1515Mona Lisa, B/W Leonardo da Vinci Fumagalli 1952,

Tav. XXIV1503-1515

Mona Lisa, B/W Leonardo da Vinci Gould 1975, 102 1503-1515Mona Lisa, B/W Leonardo da Vinci McMullen 1977,

introduction1503-1515

*Mona Lisa float in Paris mid-Lent parade [embedded], B/W

NA McMullen 1977, 205, image 121

1912

Mona Lisa, B/W Leonardo da Vinci Philipson 1996, Figure 7

1503-1515

Mona Lisa, B/W Leonardo da Vinci Rosci 1976 1503-1515Mona Lisa, color Leonardo da Vinci Scaillierez 2003, 5 1503-1515Mona Lisa, B/W Leonardo da Vinci Stites 1970, 330,

Figure 2831503-1515

Mona Lisa, color Leonardo da Vinci Vallentin 1938, 354 1503-1515Mona Lisa, color Leonardo da Vinci ArtBook Leonardo,

4 1503-1515

Mona Lisa, color Leonardo da Vinci ArtBook Leonardo, 90

1503-1515

AmplificationsRepresentation Artist Source DateThree sitters in one, B/W

NA della Chiesa, 1967, 105, image XXV

NA

Thirty Are Better Than One, B/W

Andy Warhol McMullen 1977, 216 image 130

NA

*Mona Lisa shop in Tokyo (photograph, B/W)

NA McMullen 1977, 236 image 146

1970s

32

ExtractionsRepresentation Artist

(photographer names are not noted in sources)

Source Date (of Extraction)

Face and upper part of painting, B/W

Leonardo da Vinci Bodmer 1931, 37 1503-1515

Eyes, color Leonardo da Vinci ArtBook Leonardo NAEyes, B/W Leonardo da Vinci McMullen 1977,

238, image 149NA

Mouth, B/W Leonardo da Vinci McMullen 1977, 195, image 118

NA

*Face, B/W [radiography]

Leonardo da Vinci della Chiesa, 1967, 10

NA

Face, color Leonardo da Vinci Hohenstatt 1998 NAFace, color Leonardo da Vinci Rosci 1977,130 NAFace, B/W Leonardo da Vinci McMullen 1977,

119, image 70NA

Upper part of Painting, color

Leonardo da Vinci Constantino1994, 97

NA

*Upper part of Mona Lisa with superimposed geometrical designs (also study)

Leonardo da Vinci Goldblatt 1961, 62 Plate XV

NA

Upper part of painting, thumbnail, B/W

Leonardo da Vinci Reti 1974, 21 1503-1515

Upper part of painting, B/W

Leonardo da Vinci Reti 1974, 25 1503-1515

Hands, color Leonardo da Vinci Constantino1994, 95

NA

Hands, B/W Leonardo da Vinci della Chiesa, 1967, 10

NA

Hands, B/W Leonardo da Vinci McMullen 1977, 119, image 69

NA

Hands, color Leonardo da Vinci Rosci 1977,132 NAHands, color Leonardo da Vinci Scailliérez 2003, 8,

image 4NA

Hands, color Leonardo da Vinci Wasserman 1984, 147

NA

Hands, color Leonardo da Vinci ArtBook Leonardo NAPart of face and left background, B/W

Leonardo da Vinci Wasserman 1984, 40

NA

Bodice, B/W Leonardo da Vinci McMullen 1977, 60, image 30

NA

33

Background, B/W(left)

Leonardo da Vinci McMullen 1977, 102, image 62

NA

Background, B/W(right)

Leonardo da Vinci McMullen 1977, 102, image 63

NA

Background, color Leonardo da Vinci ArtBook Leonardo NA

MutationsCopy by contemporary artistRepresentation Artist Source DateItalian copy, B/W Anonymous McMullen 1977,

141, image 83 and Siren 1916,156

NA

Spanish copy, B/W Andrea Salai McMullen 1977, 141, image 84 Bodmer 1931, 84, Siren 1916,156, and Goldblatt 1961, 104

NA

Maddelena Doni, B/W

Raphael McMullen 1977, 143

NA

La Muta, B/W Raphael McMullen 1977, 143

Around 1506

Flemish Gioconda, B/W

Anonymous McMullen 1977, 145

Mid 1500s

Right-handed imageRepresentation Artist Source DateRight-Handed Mona Lisa B/W

NA McMullen 1977 122, image 71

NA

Amplified MutationRepresentation Artist Source Date*The Occasion Makes the Gioconda[cartoon], B/W

René Bertholo McMullen 1977, 228 image 135

NA

Nude RenderingsRepresentation Artist Source DateNude Gioconda Anonymous Bodmer 1931, 7 NANude Gioconda, B/W Anonymous McMullen 1977,

150NA

Nude Gioconda, B/W Joos van Cleve McMullen 1977, 150

NA

Nude Gioconda, B/W Barthel Bruyn McMullen 1977, 150

NA

Nude Gioconda, B/W Anonymous McMullen 1977, 157 and Bodmer

Early 1600s

34

1931, 85Monna Vanna Andrea Salai Scailliérez 2003, 31,

Bodmer 1931, 86, and Goldblatt 1961, 114

NA

Nude Gioconda Anonymous Siren 1916,156Nude Mona Lisa in a pot, B/W

Souzouki della Chiesa 1967, 105

NA

CartoonRepresentation (name or description)

Artist Source Date

Sitter laughing, B/W NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, I

NA

Sitter laughing hand to mouth, B/W

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, II

NA

Sitter laughing thumb to nose, B/W

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, III

NA

Sitter in apron, B/W NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, IV

NA

Sitter making a face, B/W

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, V

NA

Lady looking like sitter and standing between two men; B/W postcard

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, VI

NA

Sitter with eyeglasses, mustache, hat and two birds on her shoulders; B/W postcard

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, VII

NA

Sitter with a pipe, B/W

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, XI

NA

Sitter with bullet holes, B/W

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, XIII

NA

Sitter with pins, B/W

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, XVI

NA

The sitter on a motorcycle, B/W

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, image XVIII

NA

*Smile of sitter on a dog [embedded] , B/W

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, XIX

NA

Dissociated Mona Lisa in the figure of

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, image XX

NA

35

a pair of shoes, B/WThe Mona Lisa with an old man’s face, B/W

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, image XXII

NA

*Abstract Sketch with enlarged head of the sitter, B/W [sketch]

Anonymous della Chiesa, 1967, 105, image XXIII

Mid 1900s

Sitter with elongated neck, B/W

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, image XXVIII

NA

Skull on sitter, B/W NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, XXIV

NA

Hands over sitter’s eyes, B/W

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, XXVI

NA

Man’s face inplace of sitter’s face, B/W

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, XXXIII

NA

Sitter with bob, as a transvestite B/W

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, XXXIV

NA

Sitter as seen through water, B/W

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, XXXVI

NA

Deconstructed sitter with geometrical shapes, B/W

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, XXXVII

NA

King Carnival with Mona Lisa, B/W

G. A. Mossa McMullen 1977, 206 image 122

Early 1900s

L.H.O.O.Q. Marcel Duchamp McMullen 1977, 220 image 131 and della Chiesa 1967, 105, IX

1919

Dali as Mona Lisa Philip Halsman McMullen 1977, 220 image 131 and della Chiesa 1967, 105, X

NA

In Tears Paul Wunderlich McMullen 1977, 227 image 134

NA

*The Occasion Makes the Gioconda B/W [amplified mutation], B/W

René Bertholo McMullen 1977, 228, image 135

Early 1900s

*Great American Nude No. 31, B/W [embedded]

Tom Wesselmann McMullen 1977, 228, image 136

Early 1900s

*Gymnastic Gioconda B/W [embedded]

Urbaniec Maciej McMullen 1977, 230, image 137

Early 1900s

36

Stalin as Mona Lisa(political)

Marinus McMullen 1977, 230, image 138 and della Chiesa 1967, 105, VIII

Early 1900s

Golda Meir as Mona Lisa (political)

David Geva McMullen 1977, 230, image 139

Early 1900s

Mona Owl (political)

Chris Marker McMullen 1977, 230, image 140

Early 1900s

Lisa ReactingNA McMullen 1977,

233, image 144NA

Tokyo Poster NA McMullen 1977, 237, image 148

1970s

Embedded Representation Artist Source Date*Smile of sitter on a dog [cartoon] , B/W

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, XIX

NA

Troubadourish canvas showing Leonardo da Vinci painting the sitter and the painting, B/W

Aimée Bruné-Pages McMullen 1977, 166, image 101

1845

*Mona Lisa float in Paris mid-Lent parade [subsequent representation], B/W

NA McMullen 1977, 205, image 121

1912

The Return of the Mona Lisa, B/W

Orens McMullen 1977, 211, image 125

NA

Gioconda with Keys,B/W

Fernand Léger McMullen 1977, 225, image 133

1930

*The Occasion Makes the Gioconda B/W [cartoon], B/W

René Bertholo McMullen 1977, 228, image 135

Early 1900s

*Great American Nude No. 31, B/W

Tom Wesselman McMullen 1977, 229, image 136

Early 1900s

*Gymnastic Gioconda, B/W

Urbaniec Maciej McMullen 1977, 229, image 137

Early 1900s

*Mona Lisa viewers in Tokyo (photograph)

NA McMullen 1977, 236, image 147

1974

37

SketchesRepresentation (name or description)

Artist Source Date

Maddelena Doni, B/W

Raphael della Chiesa 1967, 104, McMullen 1977, 28, image 15 and Siren 1916, 156

1506

Mona Lisa with Skull, B/W

Maurice Henry della Chiesa, 1967, 105, image X

Early 1900s

*Abstract Sketch, B/W [cartoon]

Anonymous della Chiesa, 1967, 105, image XXIII

Mid 1900s

Cover of Bizarre magazine, B/W

Siné della Chiesa 1967, 105, image XXVII

1959

Sketch of face and bust of Mona Lisa, B/W

Anonymous McMullen 1977 1651

NA pencil or ink right-handed three-quarter representation

NA Scailliérez 16, image 8

NA

StudyRepresentation (name or description)

Artist Source Date

*Detail of Mona Lisa with superimposed geometrical designs [extraction]

Leonardo da Vinci Goldblatt 1961, 62 Plate XV

NA

RadiographyRepresentation (name or description)

“Artist” Source Date

*Face, B/W [Extraction]

Leonardo da Vinci della Chiesa, 1967, 10

NA

La Joconde radiography

Laboratory of the Museum of France

Scailliérez 2003, 7 1951

38

Photographic NegativeRepresentation (name or description)

Artist Source Date

Photographic negative

J. Margat della Chiesa 1967, 105, image XXI

1959

Photographic negative

NA McMullen 1977, 219 image 130

NA

Photographic abstractionRepresentation (name or description)

Artist Source Date

Face of sitter widened as in mirror effect, B/W

A. Snelling della Chiesa 1967, 105, image XXIX

NA

Profile of sitter, B/W

L. Vala della Chiesa 1967, 105, image XXX

NA

The Mona Lisa as a narrower image, B/W

NA della Chiesa 1967, 105, image XXXVI

NA

ScientificRepresentation (name or description)

Artist Source Date

Squared Gioconda NA McMullen 1977 231, image 141

1973

ComputerizedRepresentation (name or description)

Artist Source Date

Striped Gioconda Shigeo Fukuda McMullen 1977, 232 image 142

1970

Abstract Gioconda Shigeo Fukuda McMullen 1977, 232 image 143

1970

39

40