Who do you think is the better artist between Michael Angelo and Leonardo Da Vinci?
Share
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Who do you think is the better artist between Michael Angelo and Leonardo Da Vinci?
Da Vinci was in no way any kind of slouch, but his inventions were half flights of very clever imagination, often devoted to war and such, his art, beyond Mona Lisa and The Last Supper, I think, less enduring, and in effect,
Michelangelo was essentially the best ever at anything he put his unparalleled mind to. That so many of his years were spent on lesser toil, as opposed to the sculpting that he loved, the messages and lessons in David, the breathtaking beauty of his first Pieta. He never got near finishing the one he most wanted, Leo’s tomb, which is a sad shadow of what he envisioned, but was continually dragged away from. He could be petty, and a bit of a whiner at times, but Michelangelo, to me, is the height of human achievement, our greatest genius to date.
Both Michael Angelo and Da Vinci were, to my knowledge, great masters of their crafts. And both of them were influenced by each other. Michelangelo had the added advantage of the direct support of the Pope, and the very prominent Medici family. So that we cannot ignore the value of the sponsorship.
In my mind I can’t find much to downplay the Supreme painter’s talents of Michael Angelo though. Had it stopped there I myself would have been quite happy, because his work was like an endless feast of “wonderful”… with, to me, the exhilarating Heaven inspired achievement of the Sistine Chapel. On the other hand one can’t either play down the talent and gifting of the man who painted the Mona Lisa smile. Yet again, their talents were just different.