CLICK HERE FOR ITALIAN VERSION
Jean-Yves Le Naour
Il furto della Gioconda
(Mona Lisa's Theft)
Bologna, Odoya Publisher, 2013
 |
| Leonardo da Vinci, Mona Lisa (Paris, Louvre Museum) |
An entertaining, witty and intelligent book, which makes you laugh but also reflect, and which can be read with satisfaction in a couple of hours and has nothing of a pompous writing. In France even a cartoon version of it was published.
The story of the theft of the Mona Lisa is,
more or less, known to all. We are repeating it briefly, referring of course,
for more details, to the review that Marco Carminati wrote on this same book:
The Mona Lisa was stolen at 7 am of Monday, 21st
August 1911 by Vincenzo Peruggia. For a short time before the theft, Peruggia
had worked for the company that was responsible for applying protection glasses
to the paintings in the museum. At the Louvre - he said – he got amazed and
outraged by the incredible number of Italian paintings populating the museum (the
result of the Napoleonic raids), and decided to steal one. Whether only for
patriotic reasons (as he argued at the trial) or even to sell it and get rich,
it is not really clear. Probably for both reasons. He was not sure about what to
steal; initially, he had thought at the Wedding of Cana by Paolo Veronese, but – as it is a canvas of 6 x 9 meters – he
realized that he would have a hard time to take it away. Then he had heard nice
things about the Mona Lisa: its dimensions were contained; it was a well suited
picture for him (of course, he did not know that it was one of the few Italian
paintings not stolen by Napoleon, but legitimately in France).
 |
| Vincenzo Peruggia |
On the night of Sunday 20, he made sure he
would remain hidden in the bathrooms of the Louvre. Monday was a rest day, the
day when especially housekeepers and maintenance workers were seen at the
Louvre. Peruggia comes out ot the baths, grabs the Mona Lisa (the paintings did
not hang at the wall through arrangements blocking them), detaches it from the
glass and slips the table under an apron. Then he exits the Louvre (in a quite
lucky way, it must be said), takes randomly a tram and then gets a ride home in
a coach. Incredibly, the disappearance of the most famous painting in the
museum is denounced only in the morning of the following day. At noon, the
director of the museum, who was out of Paris for the summer holidays, is warned
and the police is alerted. Of course, many had seen that the Mona Lisa’s place on
the wall was empty, but everybody found a valid explanation for not raising the
alarm (one of the most common hypotheses is that it must have been temporarily
taken to the photo lab).
Meanwhile, Peruggia has come home, gone to work
two hours late and now enjoys it. He will hold the Mona Lisa under the bed for
two and a half years. Then, proving to be embarrassingly naive, on 29 November
1913 he will contact a Florentine antiquarian, writing that he is the thief of
the Mona Lisa, he wants to return it to Italy and expects a good purchasing
price for his patriotism. The antiquarian warns the then director of the
Uffizi. Together, they agree to answer (at most, they would have had to do with
the usual compulsive liar). An appointment is agreed in Italy on 20 December. On
10 December Perugia introduces himself to the antiquarian. He had crossed the
border with the Mona Lisa in the false bottom of a suitcase. The day after, the
antiquarian and the director of the Uffizi are in the modest hotel where
Peruggia houses and incredibly realize they hold the true Mona Lisa in their
hands. In an equally incredible may, they manage to ‘borrow it' for a day, with
the excuse of having to perform the analysis on the authenticity of the work. The
day after, the Director of Fine Arts, Corrado Ricci, arrives in Florence and is
struck too. No doubt about it. Peruggia is arrested at the hotel by policemen who
he believed to have been sent by the Italian Government to pay him the
masterpiece of Leonardo. The Mona Lisa will be returned to France on 31 December:
Italy asks for the permission to expose it a few days in the Uffizi, in Rome
and Milan. France of course agrees, as a sign of gratitude.
That's it. The book by Jean-Yves Le Naour has
the great advantage of telling the story with humorous tone, examining it
through the French newspapers of the time. Shortly, he explores the impact on the
society of the time. And we would like to recall some of the issues that he brings
to light, because, even if narrated in a mild told, they clearly show how sick the
society was at that time (and unfortunately, how similar it is in many respects
to today Europe. We leave the easy task to the reader to imagine who could now
repeat aloud many of the stupid things that were written at the time). There is
a fact: the echo of the theft of the Mona Lisa and her discovery will be extinguished
eight months after by the outbreak of the First World War; the theft of the
century will fall into obscurity, overshadowed by the tragedy of the century.
 |
| Mona Lisa theft in the first page of the Italian weekly-magazine 'La Domenica del Corriere' 3-10 September 1911 http://www.italipes.com/citazionegioconda1.htm |
The echo of the theft of the Mona Lisa is huge.
The Louvre remains closed until 29 August. On 29th, when it reopens (in those
years the entrance is free), the Louvre has the highest number of visitors in
its history. The police search for the Mona Lisa has already started since long.
But there is a problem. How does the Mona Lisa look like? All the French are on
the hunt for a picture they have heard of, but, before the theft, only a very
small minority of them have seen it. Authorities arrange themselves with
reproductions in the newspapers, but surely the mass is not able to distinguish
a fake from the real, does not know if the picture is on wood or canvas, does
not know the size. Thousands of reports come to the police from all over
France: a pharmacist, who has a reproduction of the Mona Lisa of 15x25 cm, is
denounced; people handling a canvas are wanted by police, when in fact the
picture is on a table. Hundreds and hundreds are the arrests of representatives
of brushes, tourists, very common citizens whose only fault is to go around
holding a package wrapped in paper or tissue. Not even all policemen, of
course, know well how the Mona Lisa looks like. To help the research work and
especially that of customs officials, the data of the painting by Leonardo
appear among the mug shots of the most dangerous wanted. Of course we can laugh
at anything, but there is one thing we have to understand: before being stolen,
the Mona Lisa was considered one of the five most important paintings in the
Louvre. Afterwards, it becomes the painting for excellence worldwide. Mona Lisa
should be eternally grateful to Vincenzo Peruggia for theft. Marcel Duchamp,
Fernand Leger, Salvador Dali, Andy Warhol, Botero, Basquiat paint their Gioconde
thanks to Vincenzo Peruggia. We are really confronted with the theft of the
century.
 |
| The first page of the illustrated paper 'Excelsior' on 30th August 1911 |
Politics
Of course, a matter of such a great magnitude
cannot refrain to be commented by politics. In general, it can be said that the
theft of the Mona Lisa is an opportunity for the French right to take revenge
after the authentic disaster accomplished with the Dreyfus case [1]. Never as
in this occasion France has proved to be split in two. As a result of the
Dreyfus scandal, the Left took power in 1902. The victory was confirmed in
1906. In particular, the victory of the radicals that have implemented a
strongly anticlerical policy (France broke diplomatic relations with the
Vatican in 1904), have implemented social reforms as requiring a weekly rest by
law and passing tax reforms such as the introduction of a progressive income
tax. The Mona Lisa becomes an opportunity to lash out at this world, in a more
or less vehement way. We must not forget that the environment of the art is
split in two, and that an important part of French artists is deployed on the conservative
front, against the radical Republic and even in favour of the monarchy. Just
think of the old Renoir (of which just is published in 1911 the preface to the
Book of Art by Cennino Cennini) or the young Maurice Denis, the theorist of the
Nabis and then strongly committed to the renewal of sacred art in France.
Parliamentarism is
guilty
The right-wing newspapers criticize
parliamentarism and the bureaucratic state machine that is considered its
direct emanation. In a bureaucratic world, nobody is directly responsible for
their actions anymore. "It is thanks to parliamentarism that we have
administrators who do not administer. Museum curators who only curate their
salary, curators who do not take care of anything and directors of Fine Arts
more concerned to direct the radical politics of their arrondissement"[2].
The Louvre, mind you, is a veritable sieve and the episode of the Mona Lisa is
not the first dreadful event occurring. There is a famous jovial journalist who
first enjoyed to sleep in an Egyptian sarcophagus, then brought from home a fake
statuette and exhibited it in the show without anyone noticing for months.
Syndicalism is guilty
Nevertheless, it still appears completely absurd
to claim, for example, that the theft "is a logical, mathematical
consequence of the law on the weekly rest" [3]. Of course, reference is
made to the danger that the guardians may create a trade union and therefore well
hold the real power in the museum. "As good liberals, the ideologues of
the sovereignty of the market believe that the socialization of art and its
free access are the source of all problems. [...] The free access of all
citizens to public collections is not very popular [...] with the conservatives,
who see at least two advantages in charging visitors with tickets: to get money
in the coffers to reduce the burden of tax and eliminate the poor, bums and
other unfortunate, who in winter go to the museum to simply warm up "(p.
61). The model which they look at is that of a Louvre 'light', which is managed
by a cooperation between public and private.
The Jews are guilty
We move again further to the right and the
arguments become nauseating. The comment of the Action française, the newspaper of the pro-fascist line who
advocates a return to monarchy, is simple: it is the fault of the Jews.
"The Louvre is in the hands of the Jews" [...] Is it not self-explanatory
that "thieves of paintings are all Jews or working on behalf of the Jews,
for the Jewish or American collections?" Is it not common knowledge that
"Jews do not traffic in money and human flesh, but in art objects?" [...]
All the receivers of Paris are the children of Israel, the police knows it perfectly
but is silenced by the democratic government that has no intention of acting.
[...] Waiting for the restoration of the monarchy - which would get rid of all
these dreadful things but lets itself desperately wait - Léon Daudet and
Charles Maurras, the maître à penser of the monarchists, smell that the
abduction of the Mona Lisa will allow some copyist to make a fortune putting
off a fake at the Louvre, while the real Mona Lisa will become prey to a private
collection, of which it is not worth pointing out the religion"(pp.
65-67).
 |
| The recovery of the picture in a contemporary paper |
Patriotism
Of course, to locate the enemy in a foreign
power makes everyone agree more easily. It is in this case that the French
chauvinism gives the best of itself. And when it comes to foreign enemy there
is only one name: Germany
Germany is guilty
To be noted, the theft of the Mona Lisa happens
in the middle of an international crisis, which concerns the colonial policy of
France and Germany, the so-called second Moroccan crisis or crisis of Agadir
[4]. We are really on the brink of a war. Germany is opposed to the French expansionist
policy in Morocco and sends a gunboat off the coast of Agadir, a Moroccan port
controlled by the French. The situation is stalling (and then it will be unlocked
with the sale of part of Congo by the French to Germany). Imagine, in this
climate, what is unleashed after the theft of the Mona Lisa. Notoriously, the
Germans aim at the French richness: the Mona Lisa is one part of it. At best,
it is said that the theft was committed to have a hostage to exchange in the
Moroccan crisis. The consequences are logical: the ocean liner Kaiser Wilhelm
II, departing from Cherbourg to New York, is searched from top to bottom, not
only at the start, but, on the recommendation of the French authorities to
those of the US, also upon arrival. The Maison Braun, which is in charge of
photographic reproductions of the paintings in the Louvre, is singled out as
the true centre of the plot, based on the mere fact that it bears a German
name; too bad that it is a French company, founded by an Alsatian who in 1871,
after the Franco-Prussian War, has left Alsace conquered by the Germans in
order to live in France (the same personal history of Dreyfus). German agents
are everywhere.
Americans are guilty
Of course, the front of the foreign enemy does
not end with the Germans. Strongly suspects are also the American billionaires
who are spending in Europe, signing fat checks, and who are accused of using
illegal systems when they cannot purchase the European masterpieces by lawful
means. The newspapers of the Left and the Right feel the same way. So writes the
Midi socialiste: the Mona Lisa "has long aroused the desire of the American
billionaires who, not knowing what to make of their gold, plunder as lavishly
remunerated intermediaries the artistic treasures of old Europe" (p. 81).
But also the extreme right does not hesitate to consider the hypothesis, which,
in the words of Charles Maurras, links the Jewish conspiracy to the appetite of
American billionaires, because it is obvious that - as long as there are
Americans to buy - there will be Jews to steal. In the end, the anti-German spectre joins that of the rich American, when an
anonymous letter informs [...] that the Mona Lisa was stolen by two Germans on
behalf of an American instigator and that today, August 31, it is already
comfortably settled in a collection private on the other side of the Atlantic
"(pp. 81-82).
 |
| Vincenzo Peruggia on the first page of the Excelsior |
Apollinaire and Pablo Picasso
The hypothesis that an international gang has
been operating, with the intention to leave the country as soon as possible, is
one of the most popular, and it is logical. What is amazing is that this mess
will end up involving also Apollinaire (and with him Pablo Picasso). Let us summarize
events: Apollinaire was already at that time one of the most famous poets of
France. His only crime was to come across and make friendship with a poor man,
a certain Géry-Pieret; a Belgian deserter, born to make trouble. Despite all
(the two met in 1905), Apollinaire liked that a bit strange guy and took him
home with him, as a secretary and domestic. Géry-Pieret was really a
troublemaker. Short of money, in 1907, he had the bright idea to go to the
Louvre and to steal (on two occasions) two Phoenician statuettes (no one
noticed it: the Louvre was - as mentioned - a veritable sieve) which were then
sold it for 50 francs to a dear friend of Apollinaire (initially without his
knowledge): Pablo Picasso. When the poet heard of it, he threw him out of the
house, except in any case to deal with its periodic requests for money. A week
after the theft of the Mona Lisa, Géry-Pieret, which was a compulsive liar,
wrote to Paris-Journal, boasting of
his theft. An interview was organised, which was published on 29th August
in the newspaper (anonymously). After having read the paper, both Apollinaire and
Picasso literally went into a panic; first, they planned to get rid of the
statues (still at Picasso’s home) throwing them into the Seine, then
Apollinaire decided to show them up at in Paris-Journal
and to bring those two artefacts to return them to the Louvre. Unfortunately
for the poet, someone, in the editorial staff of the newspaper, did not
maintain the confidentiality about the identity of those who had handed over
the statuettes and reported them to the police the name of Apollinaire. On the
evening of 7th September, Apollinaire was arrested. Not so much for
the theft of the statuettes (for which the maximum risk was a charge of aiding
and abetting), but with the accusation of being the likely leader of a gang of foreigner
thieves who would steal the Mona Lisa [5]. Do not forget that Apollinaire was
not really French. His name was the pseudonym of Wilhelm Albert Włodzimierz
Apollinaris de Wąż-Kostrowicky. Born in Rome, he was an illegitimate son and
bore the surname of his Polish mother. On 8th September, the press
learns that a Russian was arrested for the theft, probably of Jewish origin:
Apollinaire precisely. A pandemonium breaks out. Apollinaire spends five days
in prison, during which the entire literary community of France takes position
in favour of the moral integrity of the poet. A dramatic face-to-face takes
place between Apollinaire (who does not make the name of those who bought the
statuettes) and Picasso, who denies having ever seen it in his life (the
friendship between the two will break later on due to this episode). The poet
wants that the public knows that he is not a Jew, but a practicing Catholic
and, in the end, the police is forced to admit that Apollinaire is not related
in any way to the theft of the Mona Lisa and eventually releases him.
The Mona Lisa is lost
After months and months of headlines, the story
of the Mona Lisa loses its appeal. The reality is that police had been alerted
too late and that investigations followed chasing phantom paths dictated by the
newspapers. And, as in all the occasions in which the processes are made by the
media (today, in the television) the result is nothing. It should also be said
that the theft is obscured, during the following year, by another great event:
in April 1912, the Titanic tragedy. Remains what was written in the newspapers,
what was told by the politicians and much more, that you will find in the book
of Le Naour, and we have failed to report. With the benefit of insight, a
century later, it is clear that Europe was seriously ill, without having a
clear perception of it. The suspicion that we are currently very much at the
same point as in those past days is a hypothesis that turns in my head, but I
hope to be wrong.
NOTES
[2]
"Discontent", L'Echo de Paris, August 27, 1911
[3] "Will
the Mona Lisa return?", Le Gaulois, 1st September 1911
[5] The
story is so absurd as to remind me somehow the hoax organized in 1978 by the
satirical magazine Il Male (the evil)
which was published by imitating the layout of some national newspapers and
announced that the Italian humour actor Ugo Tognazzi had been arrested as the
head of the Red Brigades (another humourist, Raimondo Vianello, would have also
been part of the national leadership of the Red Brigades. All the details on http://www.ugotognazzi.com/brigate_rosse.htm). The only difference is that the
gimmick of 'Il Male' was agreed with
Tognazzi.
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento