Freud on Leonardo Da Vinci

Much as Freud's ideas have permeated the thought of our day, psychologists rather than art historians have applied the new insight to the wider field of the arts. The pioneer achievement in the application of analytical psychology to a classical subject of art history, Freud's essay on Leonardo, demonstrates that this method has a contribution to make to the arts. An abstract of the essay itself should therefore be of interest, and here precedes the discussion.

Before analyzing Leonardo, Freud recapitulates the known facts of his life. To preserve the unity of the original essay, these are given in the abstract.

Abstract. Leonardo da Vinci, an enigma to his own period, retains today something of that character. How his own period reacted to him, we learn from Vasari, who reports that in his last hour, Leonardo accused himself for having offended both God and man by not having done his duty by his art. Even though this be a legend, it reflects the opinion of his contemporaries. What was it that they failed to understand in Leonardo ? Certainly not his versatility, for such was common to the Renaissance, and readily appreciated. He enjoyed perfection of personality and appearance, but in later life his scientific interests increased, while painting was neglected.

For this he was reproached by his fellowmen. Living in an age when free research was unknown, he became isolated, and was even suspected of black magic.

His proverbial slowness of work was due to extreme care. This symptomatically foreshadowed his final abandonment of painting; in certain periods of his life, Leonardo almost ceased to be an artist. He would not use fresco, as it necessitated a fast manner of working. Compelled to use the slower-drying oil, ruin came to his greatest works, the Last Supper and the Battle of Anghiari. His experimental attitude first increased his artistic interest, but later contributed to the disintegration of his paintings. In addition, Leonardo was indifferent to the ultimate fat