I fully agree.
Excellent highly skilled draughtsman.
But high grade artist producing great art?
Not in my expert opinion.
Since Leonardo died a bit before I was born he never met me so I can not present a view on his personality.
The rumours that he was a homosexual have never gone away.
The smirky awkward effeminacy in nearly all his artwork is a gigantic defect.
If you argue that Da Vinci reflects the low artistic standards of an era where sodomy is promoted as being ok then yes.But is an artist not supposed to reflect the times - hold the mirror up to nature. That "smirky awkward effeminacy" is the hallmark of the modern era.
Take a look at this Leonardo work.I do think he reflects the modern era very well.
Take a look at this Leonardo work.
St John the Baptist was a virile man wearing loinclothes and eating locusts living wild in the desert.
He preached fire and fell out with Herod who beheaded him.
Do you really think the simpering effeminate idiot represented in this da Vinci drawing represents anything other than a homoerotic corruption of virility?
But why would a talented famous draughtsman like Leonardo portray a major catholic saint in that way?Absolutely not. That painting is of a male prostitute. No doubt, one of Leonardo's catamites. However, that painting does reflect very well the degeneracy and effeminacy of the modern world - of the Capitalist world in particular.
But why would a talented famous draughtsman like Leonardo portray a major catholic saint in that way?
Answer: Leonardo was a degenerate.
Conclusion: degenerates though talented rarely produce great art. Da Vinci is a prime example of this truism.