Portraits As Objects Within Seventeenth-Century Dutch Vanitas Still Life

University of Amsterdam Graduate school of Humanities – Faculty of Humanities Arts and Culture – Dutch Art (Masters) Author: Rukshana Edwards Supervisor: Dr. E.E. P. Kolfin Second reader: Dr. A.A. Witte Language: English Date: December 1, 2015 Portraits as Objects within Seventeenth-Century Dutch Vanitas Still Life Abstract This paper is mainly concerned with the seventeenth-century Dutch vanitas still life with special attention given to its later years in 1650 – 1700. In the early period, there was significant innovation: It shaped the characteristic Dutch art of the Golden Age. The research focuses on the sub-genre of the vanitas still life, particularly the type which includes as part of its composition a human face, a physiognomic likeness by way of a print, painted portrait, painted tronie, or a sculpture. This thesis attempts to utilize this artistic tradition as a vehicle to delve into the aspects of realism and iconography in Dutch seventeenth-century art. To provide context the introduction deals with the Dutch Republic and the conditions that made this art feasible. A brief historiography of still life and vanitas still life follows. The research then delves into the still life paintings with a portrait, print or sculpture, with examples from twelve artists, and attempts to understand the relationships that exist between the objects rendered. The trends within this subject matter revolve around a master artist, other times around a city such as Haarlem, Leiden or country, England. The research looks closely at specific paintings of different artists, with a thematic focus of artist portraits, historical figures, painted tronies, and sculpture within the vanitas still life sub-genre. 2 Contents Abstract .................................................................................................................................. 2 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 4 Chapter 1 – Vanitas portraits to vanitas still life ................................................................... 8 Chapter 2 – The skull as motif and the conventional vanitas objects .................................. 13 Chapter 3 – Methodologies and interpretations .................................................................. 17 Chapter 4 – Still life source media ....................................................................................... 26 Chapter 5 Observations on the selection of seventeenth-century vanitas still life .............. 31 Historical figures ............................................................................................................. 31 Self-portraits and self-representation .............................................................................. 48 Tronies and Sculpture ...................................................................................................... 51 Chapter 6 – Themes and relationships examined – “Spirit of the times” ............................ 56 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 65 Appendix .............................................................................................................................. 68 Bibliography ........................................................................................................................ 69 3 Introduction The Golden Age of Dutch history and subsequently its art gave rise to an unique era. The Dutch Republic, constituted in 1588, produced great wealth, and the prolific creation and sale of Dutch art. At that time the Dutch Republic was one of the most forward thinking and prosperous nations in Europe. It was made up of the seven Northern Dutch states with a large influx of immigrants from Flanders, which after 1588 had continued to be occupied by the Spaniards. The tension between the Catholic tradition of the south and the emerging Calvinistic religious movement in the north, along with the upheavals of the wars, resulted in a constant migration of people and ideas throughout this time. The immigrants from the south contributed a great deal to the art and culture of the Republic. The Dutch art of this time frame was classified into many genre and a couple of elements made them stand out. The Dutch paintings of this era can be categorised as history, landscape, portraits, genre paintings and still life, in roughly the order of popularity. Landscape, genre, portrait and still life were based on life or emulating life and hence the term, natuelyk (from nature), is used to describe seventeenth-century Dutch art, even at the time. Remarkable for its time, the creation of paintings in seventeenth-century Netherlands was based on a free and open market. Unshackled from religious or church based patronage, it came into a distinct style of its own, and one that to this day is considered unique. This Dutch art tradition from 1600s to the early 1670’s is classified as the Golden Age of Dutch painting. It reflected the growing commercial wealth, the development of a new wealthy middle class, the learning, the need for possessions to decorate a home, the time and luxury to enjoy these possessions, and it reflected the growing commerce in art. In short, it was the new urbanisation of the Republic, rooted in the success of its international trade.1 Still life painting was a significant branch of oil painting in the Netherlands in the first half of the seventeenth century, at its height from about 1610 – 1640, it waned in the latter half of the century.2 It was usually a portrayal of an arrangement of objects artfully, seemingly casually or deliberately displayed on a table.3 Still life was not unique to the 1 Kahr 1993, p. xii-xiv; pp. 1-7 2 Bacthelor 2012, p. 17; With the decline in the commerce of art in the Netherlands, many artists moved to more productive regions, and the ebb and flow of artists and the public continued. 3 Kahr 1993, pp. 199 - 200; The collection of objects are said to be realistic, meaning they are rendered as objects appear, with not even a scant hint of the brush stokes which created them. But, there are numerous examples of how the collection, which is usually placed on a table would not clearly exist for physical reasons; it would all topple over. Still life compositions with objects, would if painted as seen, require an effort to create 4 Netherlands, but within the Dutch canon still life painting took a firm and new direction, and established itself as an independent genre. Still life is a collection of objects usually displayed on a table or pedestal. In recent cross discipline discussions, it has been termed material culture, designating objects that cultures create and use in the course of common life. Objects referencing music, visual arts, architecture, drama, dance and writing, can come under this designation.4 From the southern cities such as Antwerp, to the northern cities such as Amsterdam, Leiden and Haarlem, artists were creating a variety of still life paintings which we now know became a singularly Netherlandish art tradition. The artfully composed objects illustrated the contemporary interests in nature, science, the idea of transience, humanist teaching and philosophy, and it also played with illusionistic practices or trompe l’oeil.5 Material objects were incorporated and placed together to aid with this communication. While there was no specific terminology associated with the genre in the seventeenth century, contemporary writers allude to “painters of inanimate objects” by using a Latin term “inanimatus.” Constantijn Huygens (1596-1687) provides enough evidence in his writings to indicate that still life was an accepted genre in the seventeenth century.6 In seventeenth-century Holland, the term “stilleven” was coined to mean a “quiet life” or “inanimate model.”7 Samuel Van Hoogstraten (1672 – 1678) in his 1678 treatise on the art of painting refers to “stilleven’’ in his work. The authors of iconic Dutch art treatises, Karel van Mander (1548 – 1606) and Gerard de Lairesse (1641 – 1711), do refer to paintings with objects as its central motif, albeit grudgingly, as they both do not consider still life the highest form of painting. Yet there is every indication, notably the quantity that survives to this day, that still life was an established genre within the Dutch canon. Still life in general illustrates a deep interest by the artists in positioning motif, lighting, and to some extent, repetition of the motif as seen among several works of contemporary artists. A still life, given its intrinsic nature, simply creates a world that is unchanging, where everything is preserved. It requires interpretation to regain its potency, to bring it back to life. Alan Chong describes still life as an “independent world, carefully in the physical space. Thus, it is probably a composition created from imagination, based on prints and studies, with attention given to individual objects as they appear in reality. 4 Frantz 1998, p. 791 5 Chong; Kloek; Brusati 1999, pp. 11 - 14 6 Chong; Kloek; Brusati 1999, p. 11 7 Sonnema 1980, p. 1; Chong; Kloek; Brusati 1999, p. 12 5 selected, composed and lit.”8 While there is an abundance of categories within the still life genre, the importance of still life in general to the Dutch art canon is irrefutable. The still life tradition in the seventeenth century is categorized into several distinct types. They are flower paintings, the ontbijtjes

Load more