5 ms·

Leonardo da Vinci was a chronic procrastinator. Ironic?

by shuaib 14y ago

slurgfest 14y ago
There were better artists, and better engineers, but he certainly had a fertile imagination, and who knows, maybe freedom of schedule was part of that.
- pknight 14y ago
  who were better artists, engineers during his time?
  - slurgfest 14y ago
    I don't see the purpose and don't have the time to have a long, detailed argument about this, particularly when you have begun by putting the words "during his time" in my mouth. The supremacy of Leonardo is contentious and shouldn't be taken as dogma. If you want to become an excellent engineer or artist then you will probably be better served by getting educated, and logging many hours in progressively more difficult jobs, than procrastinating and dithering. Anyway, most people don't have the luxury, and will only get anything interesting done if they put in serious focused effort.
    - pknight 14y ago
      I know about Michelangelo and Raphael - both painters, but those three are considered to be in the same tier. I don't know any engineers that were considered better in his day. Da Vinci is obviously famous in the history books so it would be interesting to know more about his peers, especially if they surpass him in certain domains.
    - latinohere 14y ago
      So basically you are being called out and finding no way to defend your statement now you are acting all high and mighty.
      - deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - asmithmd1 14y ago
    when Leonardo was young he sketched Brunelleschi's machines for lifting a bronze bell to the peak of the cathedral dome he also built: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunelleschi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunelleschi
    - latinohere 14y ago
      Still not as impressive as Davinci whom had very exact sketches of anotomy almost second to none during his time. Not to mention his sketches of flying machines. You need multiple artists and engineers to match all of Davinci's talents.
      - fluidcruft 14y ago
        Do you think da Vinci performing and documenting dissections is strong evidence of his procrastination? FYI my six year-old can also draw machines that can't actually fly.
  - jules 14y ago
    It is often claimed that Leonardo da Vinci was an all-round genius. In the areas that I can judge he was an amateur at best (mathematics, physics and engineering). He did not contribute anything new to mathematics and physics, and I don't see any evidence that he even understood any mathematics or physics of his time. Hardly any of his "engineering" actually worked (he was an excellent illustrator however). Whether he was a good artist is of course subjective.
    - pknight 14y ago
      I'm confused at why some people here are going out of their way to make Da Vinci's achievements sound trivial in the most fuzzy ways without providing any actual clear facts. 'he did not contribute anything new...' The truth is much of his work was lost and/or only discovered later, so by the definition of 'contributing' to the direct development of particular fields, it wasn't nearly as impacting as it could have been. I don't see how that reflects on his 'genius' in any shape or form. Instead it demonstrates ignorance and it's a point that someone who actually is just a little read up on Da Vinci wouldn't make. We only have a fragment of his work documented today, and just on that alone, his brilliance in the many fields he was interested is clearly observable. 'he was an excellent illustrator'... That's like looking at his anatomical drawings and concluding he's a great illustrator without really understanding what he was drawing. Only fairly recently has it been discovered exactly how well Da Vinci understood the workings of the aortic valve and blood flow. He used similar methods of flow visualisation that researchers used to make similar findings about the working of the heart in the 1990s (source http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00348-002-0478-8?LI=true#page-1 http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00348-002-0478-8...). It took over 500 years for the field to catch up in that respects. He figured out why the sky appears blue (requiring understanding in optics and physics), the cause of heart disease, created some of the first robotics. If Da Vinci's work was accepted and published out in the open during his time, his impact on several fields would be highly influential. 'Hardly any of his engineering worked' For a better appreciation of his engineering prowess, maybe check out some of the many attempts to replicate his machines. Granted some sketches (which is what we're left with) don't work as is (if that's what you're expertly judging), but as is the case with engineering, you learn by iterating designs and testing real models, a luxury not given to Da Vinci for each of his many projects. (And I wonder why people keep replicating his work if he was such an ordinary engineer) A lot of those experiments to replicate have been made into documentaries and are good fun to watch. Here's an interesting attempt to reproduce his diving suit design http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjzZ1-Plgjs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjzZ1-Plgjs.
  - east2west 14y ago
    I don't want to get into a pissing contest but just to point out there are people equal of him in the versatility and greatness, such as his great rival Michelangelo, who is also a great sculptor and great architect. Da Vinci's work as a field engineer impugns his character as a shiftless ingrate who laid siege to his home city that did nothing but adoring and honoring him. Compared to Michelangelo, who grew up poor and labored under severe constraints, Da Vinci had a much easier life.
    - pknight 14y ago
      Now you're just taking the piss:)
pknight 14y ago
He was notorious for not finishing projects, or finishing them late; but that's not the same as procrastinating by browsing reddit all day, he got a hell of a lot done.
- bgilroy26 14y ago
  I agree, the idea that Leonardo's works poofed into existence doesn't add up.

Leonardo da Vinci was a chronic procrastinator. Ironic?

by shuaib 14y ago

Leonardo da Vinci was a chronic procrastinator. Ironic?

There were better artists, and better engineers, but he certainly had a fertile imagination, and who knows, maybe freedom of schedule was part of that.

pknight 14y ago
who were better artists, engineers during his time?
- slurgfest 14y ago
  I don't see the purpose and don't have the time to have a long, detailed argument about this, particularly when you have begun by putting the words "during his time" in my mouth. The supremacy of Leonardo is contentious and shouldn't be taken as dogma. If you want to become an excellent engineer or artist then you will probably be better served by getting educated, and logging many hours in progressively more difficult jobs, than procrastinating and dithering. Anyway, most people don't have the luxury, and will only get anything interesting done if they put in serious focused effort.
  - pknight 14y ago
    I know about Michelangelo and Raphael - both painters, but those three are considered to be in the same tier. I don't know any engineers that were considered better in his day. Da Vinci is obviously famous in the history books so it would be interesting to know more about his peers, especially if they surpass him in certain domains.
  - latinohere 14y ago
    So basically you are being called out and finding no way to defend your statement now you are acting all high and mighty.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- asmithmd1 14y ago
  when Leonardo was young he sketched Brunelleschi's machines for lifting a bronze bell to the peak of the cathedral dome he also built: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunelleschi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunelleschi
  - latinohere 14y ago
    Still not as impressive as Davinci whom had very exact sketches of anotomy almost second to none during his time. Not to mention his sketches of flying machines. You need multiple artists and engineers to match all of Davinci's talents.
    - fluidcruft 14y ago
      Do you think da Vinci performing and documenting dissections is strong evidence of his procrastination? FYI my six year-old can also draw machines that can't actually fly.
- jules 14y ago
  It is often claimed that Leonardo da Vinci was an all-round genius. In the areas that I can judge he was an amateur at best (mathematics, physics and engineering). He did not contribute anything new to mathematics and physics, and I don't see any evidence that he even understood any mathematics or physics of his time. Hardly any of his "engineering" actually worked (he was an excellent illustrator however). Whether he was a good artist is of course subjective.
  - pknight 14y ago
    I'm confused at why some people here are going out of their way to make Da Vinci's achievements sound trivial in the most fuzzy ways without providing any actual clear facts. 'he did not contribute anything new...' The truth is much of his work was lost and/or only discovered later, so by the definition of 'contributing' to the direct development of particular fields, it wasn't nearly as impacting as it could have been. I don't see how that reflects on his 'genius' in any shape or form. Instead it demonstrates ignorance and it's a point that someone who actually is just a little read up on Da Vinci wouldn't make. We only have a fragment of his work documented today, and just on that alone, his brilliance in the many fields he was interested is clearly observable. 'he was an excellent illustrator'... That's like looking at his anatomical drawings and concluding he's a great illustrator without really understanding what he was drawing. Only fairly recently has it been discovered exactly how well Da Vinci understood the workings of the aortic valve and blood flow. He used similar methods of flow visualisation that researchers used to make similar findings about the working of the heart in the 1990s (source http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00348-002-0478-8?LI=true#page-1 http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00348-002-0478-8...). It took over 500 years for the field to catch up in that respects. He figured out why the sky appears blue (requiring understanding in optics and physics), the cause of heart disease, created some of the first robotics. If Da Vinci's work was accepted and published out in the open during his time, his impact on several fields would be highly influential. 'Hardly any of his engineering worked' For a better appreciation of his engineering prowess, maybe check out some of the many attempts to replicate his machines. Granted some sketches (which is what we're left with) don't work as is (if that's what you're expertly judging), but as is the case with engineering, you learn by iterating designs and testing real models, a luxury not given to Da Vinci for each of his many projects. (And I wonder why people keep replicating his work if he was such an ordinary engineer) A lot of those experiments to replicate have been made into documentaries and are good fun to watch. Here's an interesting attempt to reproduce his diving suit design http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjzZ1-Plgjs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjzZ1-Plgjs.
- east2west 14y ago
  I don't want to get into a pissing contest but just to point out there are people equal of him in the versatility and greatness, such as his great rival Michelangelo, who is also a great sculptor and great architect. Da Vinci's work as a field engineer impugns his character as a shiftless ingrate who laid siege to his home city that did nothing but adoring and honoring him. Compared to Michelangelo, who grew up poor and labored under severe constraints, Da Vinci had a much easier life.
  - pknight 14y ago
    Now you're just taking the piss:)

pknight 14y ago

He was notorious for not finishing projects, or finishing them late; but that's not the same as procrastinating by browsing reddit all day, he got a hell of a lot done.

bgilroy26 14y ago
I agree, the idea that Leonardo's works poofed into existence doesn't add up.