By the early twentieth century, the Mona Lisa was considered by art critics and museum professionals to be one of the great treasures of Western painting. Art historians wrote about it. It was reproduced in books and encyclopedias. It was taught as a central work in formal art education. Visitors to the Louvre sought it out specifically.
What it was not, in 1911, was a universal mass-culture icon of the kind it became afterward — recognizable to billions of people across all social classes and educational backgrounds as the exemplary famous painting. That level of recognition required the specific mechanisms of mass-media celebrity that the theft activated.
A man shot himself in front of the painting in 1910 and the incident was reported in the press. The museum’s custodians noted, as a matter of institutional record, that the Mona Lisa drew more unusual emotional responses from visitors than most other works. Love letters were sent to it. These are not the behaviors of a public encountering an unknown work; they are behaviors directed at something that has accumulated layers of cultural significance.
The theft did not create the Mona Lisa’s fame. It transformed it — from the specialized fame of a recognized masterwork to the global celebrity of a violated icon. These are genuinely different categories of cultural visibility, and the distinction matters for understanding what 1911 changed and what it did not.
—
## Two Years in a Trunk
Vincenzo Peruggia did not immediately try to sell the painting after taking it. He hid it.