The Depiction of Servants in Some Paintings by Pieter de Hooch Author(s): Wayne E. Franits Source: Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte, 52. Bd., H. 4 (1989), pp. 559-566 Published by: Deutscher Kunstverlag GmbH Munchen Berlin Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1482471 Accessed: 11-04-2020 12:30 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms Deutscher Kunstverlag GmbH Munchen Berlin is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte This content downloaded from 85.72.204.160 on Sat, 11 Apr 2020 12:30:14 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms I. Pieter de Hooch, A girl with a basket in a garden, 1661 x ?, Basel, Kunstmuseum Wayne E. Franits The depiction of servants in some paintings by Pieter de Hooch The Dutch seventeenth-century painter Pieter de dated 28 May I653, he himself is recorded as a ser- Hooch is well-known for his paintings of domestic vant (dienaar) of the Delft linen merchant Justus themes, works that comprise a considerable part of de la Grange. Apparently, a fellow servant had his ceuvre'. De Hooch's numerous paintings of suddenly vanished from De la Grange's service housewives and their maids have long been es- presumably stealing some of his master's posses- teemed as quintessential expressions of the virtues of domesticity. Moreover, he is one of the few ar- ' In his exemplary monograph on the artist, Peter C. Sut- tists of his day to depict servants as an independent ton: Pieter de Hooch, Oxford 1980, 45 states that subject . domestic subjects compose more than one-third of De Hooch's works. It is possible that Pieter de Hooch had a personal 2 See, for example, ibid., color pls. VIII, IX; pls. 39, 40, interest in portraying servants. In a document 41, 42, 49. 559 This content downloaded from 85.72.204.160 on Sat, 11 Apr 2020 12:30:14 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms NEC SVMMA SATIS; ship was purely contractual: he received room and board and a stipend in exchange for his paintings6. In Berchem's case, our source Arnold Houbraken ,.. ?.. .?.- .. in simply notes that he produced pictures for a cer- 4A4 tain gentleman who paid him ten guilders per rJ r diem7. 'ForL It is important to reiterate that the precise nature of De Hooch's arrangement with De La Grange is i i - unclear. But because of the manner in which it is _::7s recorded in the document - versus the purely con- tractual agreements of De Witte and Berchem - we - - . 5.. can speculate that he might have actually been De La Grange's servant if only for a brief period of time. The document in which De Hooch is de- . .............-. scribed as a servant and painter was drafted in May 1653, in other words when he was no older than twenty-three. As a relatively new resident of Delft 2. Illustration from: Jacob Cats, Proteus- De Hooch ofte was a native of Rotterdam - perhaps minne-beelden verandert in sinnebeelden, the young Rotter- painter needed to support himself by dam 1627, Amsterdam, Universiteits-Bibliothek another occupation, a not uncommon practice among artists in The Netherlands at this time8. sions in the process. The belongings that 3 De Hoochthis wasser- given the coat because the other servant had stolen his own coat. For the document in question, vant had left behind were consequently see auctioned. A. Bredius: ))Iets over de Hooch,<< Nederlandsche A cloth coat that remained unsold was Kunstbode, given Beeldende to Kunst, Oudheidkunde, Kunst- >>De Hoogh, Schilder, mede dienaer van de voorsz. raphienijverheid, van PieterIII, i88i, de 126; Hooch,<< idem: Oud,Bijdragen Holland, tot VII, de 1889,biog- La Grange<<3. Although the document specifically 162. See also Sutton, op. cit. (n. i), 9 and 145 document describes De Hooch as a painter who was 15. a servant of De la Grange, the exact nature of their 4 De la Grangerelation- gave these paintings to a relative in 16655, presumably to cover a debt; see Sutton, op. cit. (n. i), ship remains unclear. Nevertheless, it146 isdocument known 23. that De la Grange owned eleven paintings 5 See for example,by the Leonard J. Slatkes: Vermeer and his artist4. This fact along with the wording contemporaries, of the New York I981, 124. Sutton, op. cit. (n. i), 9 states that there is no proof that De Hooch ever document has led scholars to postulate resided that with De De la Grange and that their relationship ap- Hooch probably worked as an artist pears under to have con- been short-lived. tract to De la Grange, to wit, handing 6 overSee Ilse partManke: orEmanuel de Witte 1617- 1692, Amster- dam 1963, 3-4. See also A. Bredius: Kiinstler-Inventare: all of his paintings in exchange for room Urkunden and board zur Geschichte der hollandischen Kunst des or some comparable benefit5. XVIten, XVIIten und XVIIIten Jahrhunderts, The There were precedents for this type of Hague commer- 1918, V, 1837-45. 7 Arnold Houbraken: De groote schouburgh der Neder- cial relationship in the seventeenth lantschecentury konstschilders be- en schilderessen, 2nd ed., The cause the painters Emmanuel de HagueWitte I753, and II, 112-13. Nicolaes Berchem were involved in similar 8 See Sutton, agree- op. cit., (n. i), 9 and 145 document 14, which places De Hooch in Delft before August 5, 1652. See ments. However, there is one notable difference: also ibid., 9 and 245 document 18, a proclamation of the De Hooch is the only one of the three artistsartist's betrothal who recorded on I2 April I654 in which De is specifically identified as a dienaar. De Hooch Witte is once was again living in Rotterdam. Ibid., 9 also notes that upon his entry into the Delft guild in Sep- employed by a >>patron< but the surviving tember I655, docu- De Hooch could only afford to pay part of ments unequivocally indicate that their the entrance relation- fee required of artists born outside the city. 56o This content downloaded from 85.72.204.160 on Sat, 11 Apr 2020 12:30:14 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms q~1k.by! I 'ail 1.W ?1 "'--:-'.,..;. _ .-:""-': ?__ . .- A;; . .,=:.t . ........ ? ?; - . .,? . 3. Pieter de Hooch, The courtyard of a house in Delft, with a woman and child, i658, London, The National Gallery (Reproduced by courtesy of the Trustees, The National Gallery, London) Whatever the nature of De Hooch's and De la Hooch's painting of a maid in a garden, carrying a Grange's relationship, it is possible that it influ- shallow straw basket filled with beans (now in the enced the former's decision to depict servants fre- Kunstmuseum in Basel), is particularly revealing quently in his art, and even his choice of sym- (Fig. 1)9. At first glance, the representation appears bolism in this regard. From this standpoint, De since they are depicted wearing them in a number of 9 For this painting, see ibid., cat. no. 45. The painting iscontemporary paintings, including ones by De Hooch; also discussed in Petra ten-Doesschate Chu and Paul H. see Sutton, op. cit. (n. I), pls., 115, 127, I 35; color pls., Boerlin: Im Lichte Hollands; Hollindische Malerei des XI, XIII. Not all of these women are wearing actual ear- 17. Jahrhunderts aus den Sammlungen des Fiirsten von rings. In many instances, the jewelry is attached to their Liechtenstein und aus Schweizer Besitz, exh. cat., bonnets (which could be the case with the painting by Kunstmuseum, Basel 1987, 146, cat. no. 47. There it isDe Hooch under consideration here); see for example, stated that the woman with the basket must be recog- Gerrit Dou's The Young Mother in the Gemildegalerie nized as the mistress of the house because she wears in Berlin-Dahlem. This picture is illustrated in Werner pearl earrings. However, the fact that the woman is Sumowski: Gemaiilde der Rembrandt-Schiiler, Landau/ wearing earrings does not necessarily mean that she is Pfalz 1983, I, 583 no. 286. For the wide variety of hats, the mistress of the house. As strange as it seems, maids bonnets, etc...., worn by women in Dutch seventeenth- evidently wore pearl earrings in the seventeenth century century paintings, see Maria Meyer: Das Kostiim auf 561 This content downloaded from 85.72.204.160 on Sat, 11 Apr 2020 12:30:14 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms to be commonplace. The maid has evidently serve their employers obediently with fear and picked the beans from the tall stalks behind her and trembling, accepting their station in life as a divine is shown returning to the house. Yet on the shutter calling, >>dat Godt dese gehoorsaemheyt ende of the window closest to the viewer is a portrait of dienst die sy aen hare Meesters ende Vrouwen be- a man in sixteenth-century costume, wearing the wijsen/ selfs sal vergelden<<'5. Clearly, the relation- gold chain and pendant of the famous Order of the ship described in contemporary literature is an ar- Golden Fleece'0. This little portrait is completely chetypal one. As the recent work of several social unexpected in this ostensibly straightforward con- historians has confirmed, the writings of Cats, text and besides, to my knowledge, portraits were Wittewrongel, and their contemporaries on the not actually painted on window shutters in the subject of master/servant relationships presents an seventeenth century.