From my view, there are three kinds of academic research:
- There’s the research that will actually yield tangible results that benefit society (or tries).
- There’s the research that pretends it’s important but is actually just ridiculous.
- And then there’s the research that has no discernible purpose with any possibility of helping society in any way, meaningful or otherwise. It is of this last group that I put today’s headline:
Was the Mona Lisa pregnant when she posed?
What the F— difference does it make? Does this information (that with 3D analysis, they can tell that she was wearing something that was traditionally worn by new mothers or pregnant women) help anyone? Seriously, does the shmuck that was investigating this feel happy about himself that he’s found it? What does he tell people at research parties? “Hey, what do you do.” “I’m an oncologist. I’ve been working the last 5 years to develop a cure for Cancer. I think we’re close. Those guys that mapped the genome really helped. And what are you in?” “Oh, I discovered that the Mona Lisa was pregnant. I think that could really have some life-saving potential down the road. Once we get into the picture, we may be able to deliver the baby.” BITCH-SLAP.
That this is news irks me. That money was wasted on this infuriates me. Reserach should only be done if it can help people. This can’t help people. Not even in some esoteric, knowledge-is-good-for-society way. Nothing. This is completely worthless crap.
HA! Actually, I was urged to read this article by an art history major, who found it fascinating. Not so much that she was pregnant, but the tiny detail that they had to uncover to realize it. The societal benefit is culture. If you read the article, the things they discovered about da Vinci’s artistic ability was really amazing.
For instance:
The scans revealed depth resolution so detailed it was possible to see differences in the height around the paint surface cracks and in the thickness of the varnish.
“We know how the painting is painted with very thin layers,” Mottin told reporters in Ottawa, Canada. “That’s one of the things we couldn’t see by the naked eye, and that Canadian technology brought us.”
John Taylor of Canada’s National Research Council said there were no signs of brush strokes. “That includes the very fine details of the embroidery on the dress, the hair,” he said. “This is the ‘je ne sais quoi’ of Leonardo. The genius. We don’t know how he applied it.”
By: Adam on September 27, 2006
at 5:03 pm
What if she was pregnant with the son of Jesus – ala Davinci Code (which I have not read)? Would that change your opinion? I know it’s over a thousand years apart but maybe that’s part of the secret.
Rob
By: Anonymous on September 28, 2006
at 10:06 am