Hidden images in Da Vinci's paintings

I have read the book. I have seen the movie. I have followed the hype.

Dan Brown has given Leonardo Da Vinci more credit than he deserves. Or needs. Leonardo Da Vinci was a brilliant artist, thinker and designer. Dan Brown used that credibility and added some far out leads, theories and the unbelieveable to weave his own tale of intrigue all the way to financial riches. Who really had the hidden agenda?

I believe Da Vinci was a very wise and protective person. He hid his plans and writings behind a left handed scrawl that only he and a mirror could read easily. So if he mastered writing backwards, why could he not sketch images backwards and forwards in his paintings?
The Last Supper has two knights (of Templar?) on either side of the table when the painting is superimposed with its mirror image. Or does it? It is a spectacular image when you know what you are looking for, or are told what you are looking for in it.

Is the young John really Mary Magdalene? Is there really no reference to a wife for Jesus anywhere in the writings on Christ? So Da Vinci leaves us this clue in a painting? Well it has to be true! It has all the other correct disciples there, right? Of course I doubt the disciples were
sitting at the table like this in case they were having a "celebrity roast" and the part of John the Younger was played by Rose Marie. It is just a painting folks. Unless you come up with the manual or diary that says otherwise.

I can imagine how Da Vinci would explain it...
"Dear Diary... Boy! I'mma gonna fool dese-a peeps who come-a look atta my paint of the Last Sup! And a waita until dey-a try anna figure out da Mona Lisa." Or better written...
atta kool a-emoc ohw speep a-esed loof annog amm'I !yoB ...yraiD raeD" ...well you get my cryptic sarcastic point.

Doing so, I follow with these thoughts:
`The Mona Lisa was probably a real girl or the amalgam of a few.
`The Last Supper is not a musical score.
`Jesus was NOT married. (He had no wedding ring in the painting. This
would be a must for any man on a Boys Night Out away from the Missus.)
`John the Younger seemed to have an effeminate personage to Da Vinci.
`If you superimpose George Washington from the dollar bill, he crosses his eyes and holds his breath like how any kid would pose in a photo booth.

In all reality, Da Vinci was a private person who was very protective of his creations. He probably did not want to leave any hidden clues or meanings behind his work only to be discovered and exposed or copied for profit. The kind of profit that others like Dan Brown have gotten from conjecture. !desolc esaC

READ MORE ARTICLES BY MJ FERRUZZA HERE