The Mona Lisa is in fact smiling!

Add to My FavoritesReport this DebateShare with My Friends

Do you like this debate?No Yes+0

Vote Here

		Pro	Tied	Con
	Who did you agree with before the debate?
	Who did you agree with after the debate?
	Who had better conduct?
	Who had better spelling and grammar?
	Who made more convincing arguments?
	Who used the most reliable sources?

The voting period for this debate does not end.

Started:	4/25/2008	Category:	Arts
Updated:	5 months ago	Status:	Voting Period
Viewed:	226 times	Debate No:	3787

Debate Rounds (3)

Comments (5)

Votes (17)

Pro If u just look at the mouth, even take a ruler if you must but it is blatantly obvious that the Mona Lisa is smiling. Report this Argument Con I will simply make these statements: "The Mona Lisa" is a painting; therefore, devoid of self emotion, henceforth, devoid of smiles. If in fact you meant just "Mona Lisa" is smiling, you are again, wrong, because Mona Lisa, is in fact, Leonardo Da Vinci in disguise. Report this Argument
Pro whyugottabelikedat32 forfeited this round. Con Just like to reiterate my main points, A picture is an inanimate object, it is devoid of emotion, devoid of the ability to smile. Also, the Mona Lisa, has been under scrutiny with a conspiracy theory that Da Vinci is in fact the Mona Lisa. There are many variables, because the girl in the picture might not be the one they called the Mona Lisa, it was one of about 4 girls that it could have been. Report this Argument
Pro hey, the picture is named Mona Lisa regardless of the subject, and if you knew anything about art then you would know that a picture has emotion, it's just the emotions of the creater of the piece. Report this Argument Con While I understand that emotion can be conveyed through art, people in the actual artwork are left with the look that the artist gave them, therefore, no emotion. It's also pretty tough to even call it a smile. It could very well just be a small grin, or maybe a nervous twitch, but to be so overzealous as to say that she is IN FACT smiling, is foolhardy. Da Vinci is the only one that knew if she were smiling or not... Thank You. -BBE Report this Argument

Post a Comment

5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.

Posted by electriqued 5 months ago

Art is a representation of emotion. Although it does not have the ability to FEEL emotion, it *has* emotion. It is incorrect to say that "The Mona Lisa" is devoid of emotion because it defeats the purpose of the painting. As for Da Vinci's original intentions toward the artwork itself, it is impossible to determine what exactly she was doing but one can conclude that the painting represents complacency or perhaps the embodiment of the female. Whatever it may be, the absence of a strong expression from the subject does not mean it hold no emotion or has no emotional value.

Report this Comment

Posted by behindblueeyes 5 months ago

lol brian...yeah, it's definitely a smirk, not a smile.

Report this Comment

Posted by brian_eggleston 5 months ago

This question has exercised the minds of scholars and art historians for generations. However, thanks to the latest technological advances, scientists have now been able to establish, categorically, that the model in the painting entitled "Mona Lisa" was not smiling; she was, in fact, smirking.

Furthermore, using a special instrument, they discovered what she was actually smirking at. They were able to discern a reflection of Leonardo painting her with his thing hanging out!

Report this Comment

Posted by VenomousNinja 5 months ago

However, Con brings up the fact that the Mona Lisa is a painting, and the girl's name in the painting may or may not be 'Mona Lisa'. Also, the resolution states that THE Mona Lisa is smiling, and THE Mona Lisa is a painting, and like con said, painting are devoid of any emotion.

To me, Con won.

Report this Comment

Posted by Paradigm_Lost 5 months ago

Neither side proved anything or substantiated a single claim. Its a draw in my opinion, and therefore I vote for neither.

CON alleges, "Mona Lisa, is in fact, Leonardo Da Vinci in disguise," but does nothing to substantiate the claim.

PRO makes no attempt to persuade CON beyond simple suggestion.

Its a draw in my opinion. Neither side was able to make a single persuasive argument.

Report this Comment

Loading voting charts...

Show people this debate by sending them this public link: