Michelangelo's first painting, created when he was 12 or 13

Subject and Source of the Painting

• Several commenters note the figure is St. Anthony, not God; the work depicts “The Torment/Temptation of St. Anthony.”
• The composition is not original: it’s a painted study after Martin Schongauer’s engraving, a common practice exercise at the time.
• Multiple versions of this theme exist (including later by other famous artists); it was a popular religious motif.

“First Painting” vs “Earliest Known Work”

• Many object to the headline: this is almost certainly not his literal first painting, just the earliest surviving or documented one.
• Some argue the wording reinforces the myth of effortless, innate genius rather than years of prior practice and study.
• Others emphasize that even if it’s not truly “first,” the level of skill at roughly age 12–13 is still extraordinary.

Attribution and Provenance Skepticism

• Commenters question how confidently such a work can be attributed and dated, given incentives for museums/collectors to label it as by a genius.
• Some find the article light on evidence, pointing instead to external scholarship and museum catalogues for justification.
• The presence of pentimenti (changes during painting) is cited in the article as evidence of originality rather than rote copying, but one commenter doubts this is conclusive for a 12‑year‑old copyist.

Talent vs Training Debate

• One camp claims “anyone” could reach this level with enough focused instruction and practice, framing the painting as a master study rather than evidence of supernatural talent.
• Others counter that only a tiny fraction of people (especially children) could ever reach this quality, even with equal training; they cite other prodigies as analogies.
• A nuanced view appears: talent sets a ceiling; most people never reach it, but early, intensive training and patronage were crucial in this case.

Childhood, Apprenticeship, and Distraction

• Several point out that in that era, gifted children often worked almost full-time under masters instead of attending modern schools; this context makes such precocity more plausible.
• Others speculate about modern “distractions,” arguing that lack of support and institutional structures matters more than smartphones.
• There’s side discussion on early specialization, gifted education, and whether modern systems under-serve exceptional youths.

Religious/Demonic Imagery and Reactions

• Commenters note demons of this era are hybrid, grotesque chimeras, not the modern “red guy with horns.”
• Some compare the subject matter to teenagers today drawing edgy monsters or comic-book scenes, seeing the painting as a kind of religious “fan art.”
• A few delve into the moral/religious symbolism of St. Anthony’s temptation and demonic assault as an allegory of temptation and spiritual struggle.

Copying as Core Artistic Pedagogy

• Multiple comments stress that for most of history, learning art meant voraciously consuming existing works and copying them extensively.
• Modern “fan art” is framed as the same tradition under a new name; imitation and transcription are defended as powerful learning tools.

Museum Experience and Physical Impression

• Visitors to the museum housing the work describe it as surprisingly small but striking in person.
• There’s praise for the surrounding local museum scene, which some say is “world class” despite regional stereotypes.

Miscellaneous and Humor

• Thread includes jokes about demonic content (including a much-discussed anatomical detail), exorcisms for talented children, and “press X to doubt” skepticism.
• Some commenters criticize the original article as essentially a retread of a well-known encyclopedia entry.