Today we will meet one of the best masters Dutch luxurious still life BY WILLEM KALF 1619-1693
Willem Kalf was the sixth child in the family of a wealthy Rotterdam cloth merchant and member of the Rotterdam city council. Willem's father died in 1625, when the boy was 6 years old. The mother continued the family business, but without much success.
There is no information about which artist Kalf studied with; perhaps his teacher was Hendrik Poth from Haarlem, where the Kalfs' relatives lived. Shortly before the death of his mother in 1638, Willem left his hometown and moved to The Hague, and then in 1640-41. settled in Paris.
There, thanks to their " peasant interiors", written in the Flemish tradition, close to the work of David Teniers and other artists of the 17th century, Kalf quickly gained recognition.
In his rustic interiors, human figures were more in the background, and all the viewer's attention was concentrated on well-lit, colorful and artfully laid out fruits, vegetables and various household items.
Here he created a new form of artfully grouped still life with expensive, richly decorated objects (mostly bottles, plates, glasses) made of light-reflecting materials - gold, silver, tin or glass. This artist’s skill reached its peak in the Amsterdam period of his work in the mesmerizing “ LUXURY STILL LIFE»
Still life with a drinking horn belonging to the Guild of Archers of St. Sebastian, a lobster and glasses - Willem Kalf. Around 1653.
This still life is one of the most famous.
It was created in 1565 for the guild of Amsterdam archers. When the artist worked on this still life, the horn was still in use during guild meetings.
This wonderful vessel is made of buffalo horn, the fastening is made of silver, if you look closely, you can see miniature figures of people in the design of the horn - this scene tells us about the suffering of St. Sebastian, patron of archers.
The tradition of adding peeled lemon to Rhine wine came from the fact that the Dutch considered this type of wine too sweet.
The lobster, the wine horn with its sparkling silver filigree rim, the clear glasses, the lemon and the Turkish carpet are rendered with such amazing care that the illusion arises that they are real and can be touched with your hand.
The placement of each item is chosen with such care that the group as a whole forms a harmony of color, shape and texture. The warm light that envelops the objects gives them the dignity of precious jewelry, and their rarity, splendor and whimsy reflect the refined tastes of Dutch collectors in the 17th century, a time when still life paintings were extremely popular.
Still life with a jug and fruit. 1660
In 1646, Willem Kalf returned to Rotterdam for some time, then moved to Amsterdam and Hoorn, where in 1651 he married Cornelia Plouvier, daughter of a Protestant minister.
Cornelia was a famous calligrapher and poetess, she was friends with Constantijn Huygens, the personal secretary of the three stadtholders of the young Dutch Republic, a respected poet and probably the most experienced expert in the world theatrical and musical arts of her time.
In 1653 married couple moved to Amsterdam, where they had four children. Despite his wealth, Kalf never acquired his own home.
Still life with a teapot.
During the Amsterdam period, Kalf began to include exotic objects in his perfect still lifes: Chinese vases, shells and previously unseen tropical fruits- semi-peeled oranges and lemons. These items were brought to the Netherlands from America; they were favorite objects of prestige for the wealthy burghers, who flaunted their wealth.
Still life with nautilus and Chinese bowl.
The Dutch loved and understood a good interior, comfortable table setting, where everything you need is at hand, convenient utensils - in the material world that surrounds a person.
In the center we see an elegant nautilus cup made from a shell, as well as a beautiful Chinese vase. On the outside it is decorated with eight relief figures representing the eight immortals in Taoism, the cone on the lid is the outline of a Buddhist lion.
This still life is complemented by a traditional Kalfa Persian carpet and a lemon with a thin spiral of peel.
The pyramid of objects drowns in a haze of twilight, sometimes only light reflections indicate the shape of things. Nature created a shell, a craftsman turned it into a goblet, an artist painted a still life, and we enjoy all this beauty. After all, being able to see beauty is also a talent.
Still life with a glass goblet and fruit. 1655.
Like all still lifes of that time, Kalf’s creations were intended to express the iconographic idea of frailty - “memento mori” (“remember death”), to serve as a warning that all things, living and inanimate, are ultimately transitory.
Still life with fruit and a nautilus cup.1660g
For Kalf, however, something else was important. All his life he had a keen interest in the play of light and light effects on various materials, from the texture of woolen carpets, the bright shine of metal objects made of gold, silver or tin, the soft glow of porcelain and multi-colored shells, and ending with the mysterious shimmer of the edges of the most beautiful glasses and vases in Venetian style.
Still life with a Chinese tureen.
Dessert. Hermitage.
Before entering the Hermitage in 1915, the painting “Dessert” was part of the collection of the famous Russian geographer and traveler P. P. Semenov-Tyan-Shansky, a great connoisseur and lover of Dutch and Flemish art.
A bright beam of light pulls out from the semi-darkness a bowl of fruit, a peach on a silver tray and a crumpled white tablecloth. The glass and silver goblets still reflect the light, and the thin flute glass filled with wine almost blends into the background.
The artist masterfully conveys the texture of each item: a glass, a painted faience plate, a gilded goblet, an oriental carpet, a snow-white napkin. In the picture one can feel the strong influence that Rembrandt’s painting had on Kalfa: objects are shown against a dark background, the bright light seems to revive them, enveloping them in the warmth of golden rays.
Still Life with a Porcelain Vase, Silver-gilt Ewer, and Glasses
Pronk Still Life with Holbein Bowl, Nautilus Cup, Glass Goblet and Fruit Dish
The composition of Kalf's still lifes, thought out to the smallest detail, is ensured not only by specific rules, but also by unique and complex directionSveta.
Valuable objects—cut goblets, often half filled with wine—appear from the darkness of the background gradually, after some time. Often their shape is only surprisingly guessed in the reflection of rays of light. No one except Kalf managed to show the light penetrating through the nautilus shell so realistically. Absolutely rightly, Kalf is called the “Vermeer of still life painting,” and in some places Kalf surpassed him.
Since 1663 Kalf wrote less, he took up the art trade and became a sought-after art expert.
Willem Kalf died at the age of 74, injured in a fall on the way home while returning from a visit.
Thanks to his unique visual abilities, coupled with his excellent education and extensive knowledge of the natural sciences, he significantly expanded the illusionistic possibilities of still life. His creations are unsurpassed examples of this art.
Having gone through a series of stages, each of which had its own specific and original significance, Dutch still life widely embraced the world of things and organic nature. From the first stage in the work of artists of the beginning of the century, with the recording of things displayed as if on display, the painters of the next generation moved on to modest “breakfasts” with metal and glass objects grouped on a white tablecloth (Klas, Heda). These “breakfasts” are distinguished by the simplicity of the things depicted: a bun, tin dishes, glass vessels - these are the main components of the images, designed in a grayish colorful palette. Several fish in the paintings of Ormea and Putter, a kitchen still life by the Rotterdam artists reflect the modest Puritan tastes of the democratic strata in the first half of the century.
But as the republican system was established and the subsequent strengthening of the power of the bourgeois class, and then its gradual aristocratization, the requirements for art also changed. Still life loses its modest, simple character. “Breakfasts” become more luxurious and lush, striking in their richness of color. They are now built on a combination of warm tones of carpet tablecloths and orange, yellow, red fruits laid out on dishes of Delft earthenware or Chinese porcelain, enlivened by the sparkle of gilded goblets and glass glasses, on the surface of which light plays. Testifying to complete mastery of the transfer of material and lighting, saturated with color, the still lifes of Kalf, Beyeren, Streck characterize the time of the highest flowering of still life.
Not only time influenced the theme and development of still life, but also much more: local features, economic structure, typical for a particular city, often determine the theme and even the interpretation of the work of a local artist. It is no coincidence that in the rapidly developing Haarlem with its strong associations of citizens, the type of tonal still life was the first to develop, and in the center of the economic and cultural life of Holland - Amsterdam - the activities of the creators of luxurious desserts Kalf and Streck took place. The proximity of the Scheveningen coast inspired Beyeren, who lives in The Hague, to create a still life with fish, and in the university center - Leiden - a thoughtful still life appeared with the image of a skull and an hourglass, intended to remind of the frailty of earthly existence. Paintings depicting a scientist surrounded by tomes, globes and other scientific objects, often filling the entire foreground, were also widespread.”
A strict division of still lifes into genres is impossible, since several motifs were often combined in one picture, however, the most common genres can be identified.
Encyclopedic YouTube
1 / 5
Dutch still life. How to write chrysanthemum
Hermitage. Painting of the Little Dutch
Louvre: The largest museum in the world. 10 Flemish and Dutch painting of the 17th century. Rubens, Rembrandt
Dutch still life.
Hermitage. Art of Flanders and Holland
Subtitles
Flower still life
In flower still lifes, artists depicted tulips, roses, gladioli, hyacinths, carnations, lilies, irises, lilies of the valley, forget-me-nots, violets, violas, daisies, nigella, rosemary, anemones, calendula, gillyflowers, mallows and other flowers.
One of the first seventeenth-century artists to paint vases with flowers was Jacob (Jacques) de Ghein the Younger (1565-1629). His work is characterized by an elongated vertical format of paintings, a multi-tiered arrangement of flowers with alternating large and small plants, as well as the use of techniques that would become very popular among artists of this genre: embedding a bouquet of flowers in a niche and depicting small animals next to a vase.
The appearance of insects, animals and birds, and shells as auxiliary details in floral still lifes is a reflection of the tradition of using hidden meanings of depicted objects that have symbolic meaning. Various symbols appear in still lifes of all genres.
The followers of Jacob de Geyn the Younger were Jan Baptist van Fornenburg (1585-1649) and Jacob Wouters Vosmar (1584-1641).
Fornenburg painted bouquets of tulips, daffodils, roses, and physalis, while in his paintings there are motifs of “vanity of vanities” and the classic “deception.”
Characteristic feature Vosmar's paintings also feature a motif of “vanity of vanities” in the form of a drooping rose. He often depicted in still lifes a fly, a wren butterfly, a cabbage butterfly, a dragonfly and a bee.
The founder of a whole dynasty of masters of still lifes with flowers and fruit was Ambrosius Bosschaert the Elder (1573-1621). The dynasty included three sons (Johannes, Abraham and Ambrosius), two brothers-in-law (Johannes and Balthasar van der Asty) and a son-in-law (Hieronymus Swerts).
Bosshart painted small still lifes with a bouquet in a vase (in some cases it was a vase made of Chinese porcelain), placed in a niche or on the window sill. In addition to small animals, shells are also used as an entourage in his paintings.
Among Bosschaert's sons, the artist's talent most clearly manifested itself in Johannes Bosschaert (1610/11 - after 1629). Distinctive Features his creativity - the arrangement of objects diagonally in the picture and the matte metallic color.
Ambrosius Bosschaert the Younger (1609-1645) used the techniques of chiaroscuro modeling of the Utrecht Caravaggists.
Abraham Bosshart (1612/1613 - 1643) copied the techniques of his brothers.
The brothers of Ambrosius Bosschaert's wife, Johannes and Balthasar van der Asta, continued the traditions of Bosschaert.
Only one painting by Johannes van der Ast is known.
Of great importance for the development of still life was the work of the eldest of the brothers, Balthasar van der Ast (1593/1594 - 1657), who left a rich creative heritage - more than 125 paintings. He liked to depict a basket of flowers or a dish of fruit on the table, and in the foreground along the edge of the table he placed shells, fruits and butterflies. Some of his paintings depict parrots.
Roelant Saverey (1576-1639) belongs to the school of Ambrosius Bosshart the Elder. His still lifes are built on the principle of a bouquet of flowers located in a niche. He added “vanity of vanities” motifs to his paintings; the gravedigger beetle, dung fly, death’s-head butterfly and other insects, as well as lizards, were used as an entourage.
The work of Ambrosius Bosschaert influenced such artists as Anthony Claes I (1592-1636), his namesake Antoni Claes II (1606/1608 - 1652) and Ambrosius Bosschaert the Elder's son-in-law Hieronymus Swerts.
In the works of Hans Bollongier (around 1600 - after 1670), techniques of Utrecht Caravaggism were widely used. Using chiaroscuro, the artist highlighted the flowers against the background of twilight.
Further development of floral still life was observed in the work of Middelburg masters: Christoffel van den Berghe (about 1590 - after 1642), who depicted elements of “vanity of vanities” in floral still lifes: a bottle of wine, a snuff box, a smoking pipe, playing cards and a skull; and Johannes Goodart, who widely used insects and birds as surroundings.
The school of Dordrecht masters of floral still life includes Bartholomeus Abrahams Asstein (1607(?) - 1667 or later), Abraham van Kalrath (1642-1722), the father of the famous landscape painter and animal painter Albert Cuyp, Jacob Gerrits Cuyp (1594 - 1651/1652). Their work is characterized by extensive use of chiaroscuro.
“Served tables” (“Breakfasts”, “Desserts”, “Banquets”)
The birthplace and center of "set tables" was Haarlem. The prerequisite for the creation of this type of still life was the widespread distribution in the 16th century of portraits of members of shooting guilds during a banquet. Gradually, the image of a set table became an independent genre.
The set of objects forming the still life initially included traditional Dutch products: cheese, ham, buns, fruit, beer. However, later, in still lifes, dishes typical of special occasions or tables of wealthy townspeople began to appear more and more: game, wine, pies (the most expensive was blackberry pie). In addition to traditional herring, lobsters, shrimp, and oysters appeared.
Expensive dishes made of silver and Chinese porcelain, jugs, and tatsas also began to be used. Special attention The artists used glasses: Roemer, Berkemeier, pass glass, flute glass, Venetian glass, akeley glass. The most exquisite was the “nautilus” cup.
Frequent attributes of still lifes were a salt shaker and a table knife. Half-peeled lemon was often used as a colorful spot.
One of the earliest still lifes showing Dutch table setting is The Table Set by Nicholas Gillies (c. 1580 - after 1632). The artist used an elevated point of view in his paintings.
The still lifes of Floris Gerrits van Schouten (c. 1590 - after 1655) are characterized by complexity, he used a large number of objects, and the main subject was often a pile of cheeses. In a number of cases, he used the technique of moving the emphasis of the still life group away from the geometric center of the picture.
A significant figure in this type of still life painting was Floris van Dyck (1575-1651). The center of his paintings was a pyramid of cheeses, the background dissolving into haze.
Clara Peters (1594-1657) specialized in this same type of still life. She often depicted expensive, exquisite tableware, lobsters and oysters. In some of her still lifes she used a lowered point of view, almost at table level.
Compositions close to Peters were created by Hans van Essen (1587/1589 - after 1648).
Roelof Coots (1592/1593 - 1655) used the technique of deliberate negligence, the plate or knife in his paintings hung halfway from the edge of the table. He was one of the first to create canvases depicting not a set table, but a table with traces of the finished breakfast, introducing motifs of “vanity of vanities” into the paintings: clocks, books, fallen grapes.
At an early stage of his creativity, Peter Klas also created paintings in this genre.
Tonal still life
The tonal Dutch still life was led by Pieter Claes and Willem Claes Heda, who lived in Haarlem.
The tradition of depicting the mistress of the house, cook or servants has been preserved, although they increasingly moved to the background. In the foreground were kitchen utensils and meat, fish and many vegetables brought into the kitchen: pumpkin, turnips, rutabaga, cabbage, carrots, peas, beans, onions and cucumbers. Wealthier people had cauliflower, melons, artichokes and asparagus on their tables.
Pieter Cornelis van Ryck (1568-1628) painted in the tradition of the 16th century, sometimes with biblical scenes in the background.
Cornelis Jacobs Delff (1571-1643) used an elevated point of view and liked to place kitchen utensils in the foreground.
Wrote kitchen scenes and famous master“set tables” by Floris Gerrits van Schoten, sometimes he included genre motifs in his still lifes.
Cornelis Pieters Begi (1631/1632 - 1664) went even further by including a satyr who came to visit the peasants in the still life.
The genre and portrait painter Gottfried Schalcken (1643-1706) depicted a storeroom with barrels of wine and supplies.
A group of masters of the everyday genre, brothers Cornelis and Hermann Saftleven (1607/1608 - 1681 and 1609-1685), Pieter de Blot (1601-1658), Hendrik Martens Sorg (1611-1670) and Ecbert van der Poel (1621-1664) also wrote “kitchen” still lifes with genre motifs, but household items still dominated in their paintings.
The still lifes of the famous master of “peasant breakfasts” Philips Angel are also close to the works of Rotterdam genre painters.
Unlike artists who depicted the kitchens of a wealthy burgher with its cleanliness and order, Francois Reykhals (after 1600 - 1647) painted poor peasant kitchens.
The famous master of “luxurious” still lifes, Willem Kalf, dedicated more than 60 of his works to the theme of kitchen still life.
"Fish" still life
The Hague became the cradle of still life with fish. The proximity of Scheveningen encouraged artists not only to paint marinas, but also to create special type still life painting - paintings depicting fish and sea animals.
The founders of this type of still life were: Pieter de Putter, Pieter van Schijenborg and Pieter van Noort.
Pieter de Putter (1600-1659) chose a high point of view from which the table with fish was clearly visible; sometimes a net was added to the still life.
Pieter van Schijenborg (? - after 1657) painted fish on a gray or yellow-brown background.
The paintings of Pieter van Noort (about 1600 - ?), who colorfully conveyed the shine of scales, had a special color.
The main representative of this direction of painting was Abraham van Beyeren (1620/1621 - 1690), who worked in many other genres of still life, and also painted marinas. He depicted fish both on the table and on the seashore.
Perhaps van Beyeren's student was Isaac van Duinen (1628 - 1677/1681).
Landscape painter Albert Cuyp (1620-1691) can also be counted among the masters of “fish” still life.
Utrecht masters Willem Ormea (1611-1673) and his student Jacob Gillig (about 1630 - 1701) were fond of “fish” still life.
“Vanity of vanities” (Vanitas, Memento mori, “scientific” still life)
An important place in Dutch painting was occupied by the philosophical and moral still life, which received the Latin name “vanitas” (“vanity of vanities”).
“The ideological foundations of this movement uniquely intertwine medieval ideas about the frailty of all earthly things, the moralizing tendencies of Calvinism and the humanistic ideal of a wise man striving for truth and beauty.”
The most common symbols of mortality in “vanity of vanities” still lifes were: a skull, an extinguished candle, a clock, books, musical instruments, wilted flowers, overturned or broken dishes, playing cards and dice, smoking pipes, soap bubbles, stamps, globe, etc. Sometimes the artist included in the work a sheet of parchment with a Latin saying on the theme “vanity of vanities.”
The first still life of the 17th century that has come down to us, belonging to the “vanity of vanities” genre, was painted by Jacob de Geyn the Younger.
“In the upper part of the niche, on the capitals of the pylons flanking it, there are sculptural images of female and male figures, and on the keystone of the arch of the niche there is a Latin inscription carved: “HUMANA VANA”, which can be translated as “human vanity is in vain.” This motto allows us to understand the symbolism of the figures, of which the first, as if warning about the ephemerality of the soap sphere, points a finger at it, and the second, as if reflecting on the futility of human actions, in thought rested its head on its arm bent at the elbow. The validity of the Latin saying is confirmed by the image of a skull - a symbol of death, suppressing both good and evil human deeds, and a soap bubble, expressing tragic fate natural matter, doomed to disappear in the whirlpool of existence."
Jacob de Geyn the Younger lived in Leiden, the city in which the first Dutch university was opened and which was the center of book printing. It was Leiden that became the center of “scientific” still life.
The development of still life of the “vanity of vanities” type was greatly influenced by the activities of the Leiden resident David Bayley and the masters grouped around him.
The pioneer of a new type of still life genre was Jan Davids de Hem (1606-1684). He tried himself in various genres: floral, scientist, kitchen still lifes. In 1636 the artist moved to Antwerp and came under the influence of Flemish painting. He began to create luxurious still lifes, overloaded with bright and colorful fruits, lobsters, parrots... Flower still lifes also had a clear Flemish trace, distinguished by a baroque symphony of colors.
Jan Davids de Hem had a workshop with a large number of students and assistants. In addition to the master's son Cornelis de Hem, his direct students were Pieter de Ring, Nicholas van Gelder, Johannes Borman, Martinus Nellius, Matthijs Naive, Jan Mortel, Simon Luttihuis, Cornelis Kik. In turn, Kik raised gifted students - Elias van den Broek and Jacob van Walskapelle.
The techniques of Jan Davids de Hem were well mastered by his son Cornelis de Hem (1631-1695). At the same time, there is more air in his paintings.
The most gifted student of Jan Davids de Hem was Pieter de Ring (1615-1660). Distinctive feature his still lifes included the indispensable presence of a signet ring, hinting at the artist’s surname (ring in Dutch).
Another outstanding student of Jan Davids de Hem was Nicholas van Gelder (1623/1636 - c. 1676), who created his still lifes under the influence of the work of Willem Kalf.
More simple and intimate are the still lifes of the followers of Jan Davids de Hem - Johannes Bormann and Martinus Nellius (? - after 1706).
Simon Lüttihuis (1610 - ?) also created luxurious still lifes, adding to them motifs of “vanity of vanities.”
Another student of Jan Davids de Hem, Cornelis Kick (1631/1632 - 1681), used outdoor sketches in his paintings. He passed on his plein air techniques to his students Elias van den Broek (1650-1708) and Jacob van Walskapelle (1644-1727), whose still lifes are characterized by a subtle rendering of the light-air environment.
From the workshop of Jan Davids de Hem also came the master of vanity of vanities still lifes Maria van Oosterwijk, and two masters of late floral still lifes, Jacob Rotius (1644 - 1681/1682) and Abraham Mignon.
During the first “luxurious” still lifes of Jan Davids de Heem, a few works on this topic were also written by François Reichals.
The desire for color is characteristic of the luxurious still lifes of Abraham van Beyeren. An indispensable attribute of these paintings was a pocket watch.
One of Beyeren's few followers, Abraham Susenir, loved to depict silver dishes.
The “luxurious” still lifes of Willem Kalf (1619-1693) had a great influence on artists. In them, Kalf often used vessels made of gold, silver and Chinese porcelain. At the same time, the paintings were equipped with symbols of “vanity of vanities”: a candlestick and a pocket watch. Kalf often chose a vertical format. His work splits into periods of stay in France and return to Amsterdam. The late period is characterized by a decrease in the number of objects depicted in the picture and a gloomy background.
Kalf's followers were Jurian van Streek, his son Hendrik van Streek (1659 - ?), Christian Jans Streep (1634-1673) and Barent van der Meer (1659 - to 1702).
Another follower of Kalf, Peter Gerrits Rustraten (1627-1698), took the path of bringing “luxurious” still lifes closer to “deceptive” ones.
Along with Aalst, Matthaus Bloom is one of the pioneers of still life with hunting trophies.
A number of paintings on this topic were performed by Nicholas van Gelder (1623/1636 - around 1676).
Melchior de Hondecoeter also depicted hunting trophies.
The theme of hunting still life was touched upon by the famous landscape master Jan Baptist Venix (1621-1660), who depicted killed roe deer and swans. His son Jan Weniks created at least a hundred paintings with images of slaughtered hares against the backdrop of a stone niche or a park landscape.
Another student of Jan Baptist Weenix was Willem Frederik van Rooyen (1645/1654 - 1742), who also incorporated images of animals into the landscape.
Dirk de Bray was also a supporter of the ceremonial hunting still life, like Aalst and Royen. It represented the trophies of falconry, the entertainment of aristocrats and wealthy burghers.
Along with decorative canvases of “hunting trophies,” “chamber” hunting still lifes also became widespread. Jan Vonk (about 1630 - 1660?), Cornelis Lelienberg (1626 - after 1676), Aalst's student Willem Gau Ferguson (about 1633 - after 1695), Hendrik de Fromenthue (1633/1634 - after 1694) and Pieter Harmens Verelst (1618-1678), as well as his son Simon Peters Verelst (1644-1721).
“Chamber” hunting still lifes were created by painters who worked in other genres of still life: Abraham Mignon, Abraham van Beyeren, Jacob Biltius. The famous landscape painter Salomon van Ruisdael (1600/1603 - 1670), who wrote “Still Life with Killed Game” (1661) and “Hunting Trophies” (1662), and the genre painter, student of Adrian van Ostade, Cornelis Dusart (1660-1704) paid tribute to the hunting still life. .
Still life with animals
The founders of the genre were Otto Marceus van Scrieck (1619/1620 - 1678) and Matthias Withos (1627-1703).
Skrik started a terrarium on his estate with insects, spiders, snakes and other animals, which he depicted in his paintings. He loved to create complex compositions with exotic plants and animals, introducing philosophical overtones into them. For example, in the Dresden painting “The Snake at the Bird’s Nest,” butterflies collect nectar from flowers, a thrush catches butterflies and feeds them to its chick, another chick is swallowed by a snake, which is hunted by an ermine.
Vithos preferred to depict thistles and other plants in the foreground of his paintings, among which snakes, lizards, spiders and insects crawl. As a background, he depicted an Italian landscape, a memory of a trip to Italy.
Christian Jans Streep painted Thistles and Moles in the manner of Skrick.
Abraham de Heus very carefully and close to life depicted various species of moles, lizards, snakes and butterflies.
Willem van Aalst has several paintings dedicated to the depiction of animals. His student Rachel Reusch creative career began with imitations of Skrik, but then developed own style, which is characterized by the image of small animals against the backdrop of a golden landscape.
Dutch still life of the 16th–17th centuries is a kind of intellectual game in which the viewer was asked to unravel certain signs. What was easily understood by contemporaries is not clear to everyone today and not always.
What do the objects depicted by the artists mean?
John Calvin (1509-1564, French theologian, church reformer, founder of Calvinism) taught that everyday things have hidden meanings, and behind every image there should be a moral lesson. Objects depicted in still life have multiple meanings: they were endowed with edifying, religious or other connotations. For example, oysters were considered an erotic symbol, and this was obvious to contemporaries: oysters allegedly stimulated sexual potency, and Venus, the goddess of love, was born from a shell. On the one hand, oysters hinted at worldly temptations, on the other, an open shell meant a soul ready to leave the body, that is, it promised salvation. Of course, there were no strict rules on how to read a still life, and the viewer guessed exactly the symbols on the canvas that he wanted to see. In addition, we must not forget that each object was part of the composition and could be read in different ways - depending on the context and the overall message of the still life.Floral still life
Until the 18th century, a bouquet of flowers, as a rule, symbolized frailty, because earthly joys are as transitory as the beauty of a flower. The symbolism of plants is especially complex and ambiguous, and books of emblems, popular in Europe in the 16th and 17th centuries, helped to grasp the meaning, where allegorical illustrations and mottos were accompanied by explanatory texts. Floral arrangements were not easy to interpret: the same flower had many meanings, sometimes directly opposite. For example, the narcissus indicated narcissism and was at the same time considered a symbol of the Mother of God. In still lifes, as a rule, both meanings of the image were preserved, and the viewer was free to choose one of the two meanings or combine them.
Floral arrangements were often supplemented with fruits, small objects, and images of animals. These images expressed the main idea of the work, emphasizing the motif of transience, decay, the sinfulness of everything earthly and the incorruptibility of virtue.
Jan Davids de Heem.
Flowers in a vase.
In the painting by Jan Davids de Heem, at the base of the vase, the artist depicted symbols of mortality: withered and broken flowers, crumbling petals and dried pea pods. Here is a snail - it is associated with the soul of a sinner. In the center of the bouquet we see symbols of modesty and purity: wildflowers, violets and forget-me-nots. They are surrounded by tulips, symbolizing fading beauty and senseless waste (growing tulips in Holland was considered one of the most vain activities and, moreover, expensive); lush roses and poppies, reminiscent of the fragility of life. The composition is crowned with two large flowers that have a positive meaning. The blue iris represents remission of sins and indicates the possibility of salvation through virtue. The red poppy, which was traditionally associated with sleep and death, changed its interpretation due to its location in the bouquet: here it signifies the atoning sacrifice of Christ.
Other symbols of salvation are ears of bread, and a butterfly sitting on a stalk represents the immortal soul.
Jan Bauman.
Flowers, fruits and a monkey. First half of the 17th century.
Jan Bauman's painting “Flowers, Fruits and a Monkey” is a good example of the multi-layered meaning and ambiguity of a still life and the objects on it. At first glance, the combination of plants and animals seems random. In fact, this still life also reminds us of the transience of life and the sinfulness of earthly existence. Each depicted object conveys a certain idea: a snail and a lizard in in this case indicate the mortality of everything earthly; a tulip lying near a bowl of fruit symbolizes rapid fading; shells scattered on the table hint at an unwise waste of money; and the monkey with the peach indicates original sin and depravity. On the other hand, a fluttering butterfly and fruits: bunches of grapes, apples, peaches and pears speak of the immortality of the soul and the atoning sacrifice of Christ. On another, allegorical level, the fruits, fruits, flowers and animals presented in the picture represent four elements: shells and snails - water; butterfly - air; fruits and flowers - earth; monkey - fire.
Still life in a butcher shop
Peter Aartsen.
The Butcher Shop, or the Kitchen with the Flight to Egypt Scene. 1551
The image of a butcher shop has traditionally been associated with the idea of physical life, the personification of the element of earth, as well as gluttony. Painted by Peter Aartsen
Almost the entire space is occupied by a table laden with food. We see many types of meat: killed poultry and dressed carcasses, liver and ham, hams and sausages. These images symbolize excess, gluttony and attachment to carnal pleasures. Now let's turn our attention to the background. On the left side of the picture, in the window opening, there is a gospel scene of the flight into Egypt, which contrasts sharply with the still life in the foreground. The Virgin Mary hands the last loaf of bread to a beggar girl. Note that the window is located above the dish, where two fish lie crosswise (symbol of the crucifixion) - a symbol of Christianity and Christ. On the right in the background is a tavern. A cheerful group sits at a table by the fire, drinks and eats oysters, which, as we remember, are associated with lust. A butchered carcass hangs next to the table, indicating the inevitability of death and the fleeting nature of earthly joys. A butcher in a red shirt dilutes wine with water. This scene echoes the main idea of the still life and refers to the Parable of prodigal son. The scene in the tavern, as well as the butcher shop full of dishes, speaks of an idle, dissolute life, attachment to earthly pleasures, pleasant for the body, but destructive for the soul. In the scene of the flight to Egypt, the characters practically turn their backs to the viewer: they move deeper into the picture, away from the butcher shop. This is a metaphor for escape from a dissolute life full of sensual pleasures. Giving up them is one of the ways to save the soul.
Still life in a fish shop
The fish still life is an allegory of the water element. Works of this kind, like butchers' shops, were often part of the so-called elemental cycle and, as a rule, were created to decorate palace dining rooms. In the foreground of Frans Snyders's painting "The Fish Shop" there are many fish depicted. There are perches and sturgeons, crucian carp, catfish, salmon and other seafood here. Some have already been cut up, some are waiting for their turn. These images of fish do not carry any subtext - they glorify the wealth of Flanders.
Frans Snyders.
Fish shop. 1616
Next to the boy we see a basket with gifts that he received for St. Nicholas Day. This is indicated by the wooden red shoes tied to the basket. In addition to sweets, fruits and nuts, the basket contains rods - as a hint at education with “carrot and stick”. The contents of the basket speak of the joys and sorrows of human life, which constantly replace each other. The woman explains to the child that obedient children receive gifts, and bad children receive punishment. The boy recoiled in horror: he thought that instead of sweets he would receive blows with rods. On the right we see a window opening through which we can see the city square. A group of children stands under the windows and joyfully greets the puppet jester on the balcony. The jester is an integral attribute of folk holiday festivities.
Still life with a set table
In numerous variations of table settings on the canvases of Dutch masters we see bread and pies, nuts and lemons, sausages and hams, lobsters and crayfish, dishes with oysters, fish or empty shells. These still lifes can be understood depending on the set of objects.
Gerrit Willems Heda.
Ham and silverware. 1649
In Gerrit Willems Heda's painting we see a dish, a jug, a tall glass goblet and an overturned vase, a mustard pot, a ham, a crumpled napkin and a lemon. This is Heda's traditional and favorite set. The arrangement of objects and their choice are not random. Silverware symbolizes earthly riches and their futility, ham - carnal pleasures, attractive in appearance and sour inside, lemon personifies betrayal. An extinguished candle indicates the frailty and fleetingness of human existence, a mess on the table indicates destruction. A tall glass “flute” glass (in the 17th century such glasses were used as a measuring container with marks) is fragile, as human life, and at the same time symbolizes moderation and a person’s ability to control his impulses. In general, in this still life, as in many other “breakfasts,” the theme of vanity and the meaninglessness of earthly pleasures is played out with the help of objects.
Peter Claes.
Still life with a brazier, herring, oysters and a smoking pipe. 1624
Most of the objects depicted in Peter Claes's still life are erotic symbols. Oysters, pipe, wine refer to brief and dubious carnal pleasures. But this is just one option for reading a still life. Let's look at these images from a different angle. Thus, shells are symbols of the frailty of the flesh; a pipe, with which they not only smoked, but also blew soap bubbles, is a symbol of the suddenness of death. Claes's contemporary, the Dutch poet Willem Godschalk van Fockenborch, wrote in the poem “My Hope is Smoke”:
As you can see, being is akin to smoking a pipe,
And I really don’t know what the difference is:
One is just a breeze, the other is just a smoke.
The theme of the transience of human existence is contrasted with the immortality of the soul, and signs of frailty suddenly turn out to be symbols of salvation. The bread and glass of wine in the background are associated with the body and blood of Jesus and indicate the sacrament of the sacrament. Herring - another symbol of Christ - reminds us of fasting and Lenten food. And open shells with oysters can change their negative meaning to the exact opposite, indicating human soul separated from the body and ready to enter into eternal life.
Different levels of interpretation of objects subtly tell the viewer that a person is always free to choose between the spiritual and eternal and the earthly transitory.
Vanitas, or "Scientist" still life
The genre of the so-called “scientific” still life was called vanitas - translated from Latin it means “vanity of vanities”, in other words - “memento mori” (“remember death”). This is the most intellectual type of still life, an allegory of the eternity of art, the frailty of earthly glory and human life
Jurian van Streck.
Vanity of vanities. 1670
The sword and helmet with a luxurious plume in the painting by Jurian van Streck indicate the fleeting nature of earthly glory. The hunting horn symbolizes wealth that cannot be taken with you into another life. In “scientific” still lifes there are often images of open books or carelessly lying papers with inscriptions. They not only invite you to think about the objects depicted, but also allow you to use them for their intended purpose: read open pages or play music written in a notebook. Van Streck depicted a sketch of a boy's head and an open book: this is Sophocles' tragedy Electra, translated into Dutch. These images indicate that art is eternal. But the pages of the book are curled and the drawing is wrinkled. These are signs of the beginning of corruption, hinting that after death even art will not be useful. The skull also speaks of the inevitability of death, but the ear of bread entwined around it symbolizes the hope of resurrection and eternal life. By the middle of the 17th century, a skull entwined with an ear of grain or evergreen ivy would become a mandatory subject for depiction in still lifes in the vanitas style.
Elena Konkova is a bright representative of the modern intellectual elite, which the Spirit of the age (or, if you prefer, Zeitgeist) puts into glamorous forms, not forgetting about the inner content.
In this film she will talk about the mystical aspects European painting, will reveal the secret meaning encrypted in the frightening, funny and simply unusual attributes of Dutch still lifes, and gracefully invite everyone to start collecting this type fine arts, or painting as such...
Below is material that will slightly complement the visual series created by Ms. Konkova in the printed word.
So, in 1581, the inhabitants of the Northern Netherlands, after many years of war for liberation from Spanish rule, proclaimed the independent Republic of the United Provinces. Among them, Holland was the leader economically and culturally, so the whole country soon began to be called that. The social structure of the new Netherlands has changed little compared to the 16th century, but significant changes followed in spiritual life. Calvinism became the state religion. This doctrine did not recognize icons and church art in general (this movement in Protestantism is named after its founder, the French theologian John Calvin (1509-1564).
Dutch artists inevitably had to abandon religious themes and look for new ones. They turned to the reality around them, to the everyday events that happened day after day in the next room or on the next street. And the customers—more often than not nobles, but poorly educated burghers—appreciated works of art most of all for the fact that they were “just like life.”
Paintings became market goods, and the painter’s well-being depended entirely on his ability to please the customer. Therefore, the artist spent his whole life improving in a certain genre. The mood that permeates the works Dutch school, and even their small, as a rule, format suggests that many of them were not intended for palaces, but for modest living rooms and were addressed to the common man.
Dutch still life of the 17th century. amazes with its richness of themes. In every artistic center of the country, painters preferred their own compositions: in Utrecht - from flowers and fruits, in The Hague - from fish. In Haarlem they wrote modest breakfasts, in Amsterdam - luxurious desserts, and in the university of Leiden - books and other objects for studying science or traditional symbols of worldly vanity - a skull, a candle, an hourglass.
In still lifes dating back to the early 17th century, objects are arranged in a strict order, like exhibits in a museum showcase. In such paintings, details are endowed with symbolic meaning. Apples are reminiscent of Adam's fall, and grapes are reminiscent of Christ's atoning sacrifice. A shell is a shell left behind by a creature that once lived in it; withered flowers are a symbol of death. A butterfly born from a cocoon means resurrection. Such are, for example, the paintings of Balthasar van der Ast (1590-1656).
For artists of the next generation, things are no longer so much reminiscent of abstract truths, but rather serve to create independent artistic images. In their paintings, familiar objects acquire a special, previously unnoticed beauty. Haarlem painter Pieter Claes (1597-1661) subtly and skillfully emphasizes the originality of each dish, glass, pot, finding an ideal neighborhood for any of them. The still lifes of his fellow countryman Willem Claes Heda (c. 1594 - c. 1680) are filled with picturesque disorder. Most often he wrote “interrupted breakfasts.” A crumpled tablecloth, mixed up serving items, food that has barely been touched - everything here reminds of the recent presence of a person. The paintings are enlivened by diverse spots of light and multi-colored shadows on glass, metal, and canvas (“Breakfast with Crab,” 1648).
In the second half of the 17th century. Dutch still life, like landscape, became more spectacular, complex and multicolored. The paintings of Abraham van Beyeren (1620 or 1621-1690) and Willem Kalf (1622-1693) depict grandiose pyramids of expensive dishes and exotic fruits. Here you can find chased silver, white-and-blue earthenware, goblets made of sea shells, flowers, bunches of grapes, and half-peeled fruits.
We can say that time acted like a camera lens: with a change in focal length, the scale of the image changed until only objects remained in the frame, and the interior and figures were pushed out of the picture. “Still life frames” can be found in many paintings Dutch artists XVI century It is easy to represent it in the form independent painting a set table from the “Family Portrait” by Martin van Heemskerck (c. 1530. State Museums, Kassel) or a vase of flowers from the composition of Jan Brueghel the Elder. Jan Brueghel himself did something like this, writing at the very beginning of the 17th century. the first independent flower still lifes. They appeared around 1600 - this time is considered to be the date of birth of the genre.
At that moment, there was no word to define it. The term “still life” originated in France in the 18th century. and literally translated means “dead nature”, “dead nature” (nature morte). In Holland, paintings depicting objects were called “stilleven,” which can be translated both as “still nature, model,” and as “quiet life,” which much more accurately conveys the specifics of Dutch still life. But this general concept came into use only from 1650, and before that time the paintings were called according to the subject of the image: blumentopf - a vase with flowers, banketje - a set table, fruytage - fruits, toebackje - still lifes with smoking accessories, doodshoofd - paintings depicting a skull . Already from this listing it is clear how great the variety of objects depicted was. Indeed, the entire objective world around them seemed to spill out onto the paintings of the Dutch artists.
In art, this meant a revolution no less than that which the Dutch made in the economic and social sphere, winning independence from the power of Catholic Spain and creating the first democratic state. While their contemporaries in Italy, France, and Spain were focused on creating huge religious compositions for church altars, paintings and frescoes on subjects of ancient mythology for palace halls, the Dutch painted small paintings with views of corners of their native landscape, dances at a village festival or a home concert in a burgher’s house, scenes in a rural tavern, on the street or in a meeting house, laid tables with breakfast or dessert, that is, a “low” nature, unpretentious, not overshadowed by the ancient or Renaissance poetic tradition, except perhaps contemporary Dutch poetry. The contrast with the rest of Europe was stark.
Paintings were rarely created to order, but were mostly freely sold in markets for everyone and were intended to decorate rooms in the houses of city dwellers, and even of richer villagers. Later, in the 18th and 19th centuries, when life in Holland became more difficult and meager, these home painting collections were widely sold at auction and eagerly purchased for royal and aristocratic collections throughout Europe, from where they eventually migrated to the largest museums in the world. When in the middle of the 19th century. artists everywhere turned to depicting the reality around them, paintings by Dutch masters of the 17th century. served as a model for them in all genres.
Feature Dutch painting there was a specialization of artists by genre. Within the still life genre, there was even a division into separate themes, and different cities had their own favorite types of still life, and if a painter happened to move to another city, he often abruptly changed his art and began to paint those varieties of the genre that were popular in that place.
Haarlem became the birthplace of the most characteristic type of Dutch still life - the “breakfast”. The paintings of Peter Claes depict a laid table with dishes and dishes. A tin plate, a herring or ham, a bun, a glass of wine, a crumpled napkin, a lemon or a branch of grapes, cutlery - the meager and precise selection of items creates the impression of a table set for one person. The presence of a person is indicated by the “picturesque” disorder introduced into the arrangement of things, and the atmosphere of a cozy residential interior, achieved by the transmission of a light-air environment. The dominant gray-brownish tone unites objects into a single picture, while the still life itself becomes a reflection of a person’s individual tastes and lifestyle.
Another Haarlem resident, Willem Heda, worked in the same vein as Klas. The coloring of his paintings is even more subordinated to tonal unity; it is dominated by a gray-silver tone, set by the image of silver or pewter utensils. For this colorful restraint, the paintings began to be called “monochrome breakfasts.”
In Utrecht, lush and elegant floral still life developed. Its main representatives are Jan Davids de Heem, Justus van Heysum and his son Jan van Heysum, who became especially famous for his careful writing and light coloring.
In The Hague, the center of marine fishing, Pieter de Putter and his student Abraham van Beijeren brought to perfection the depiction of fish and other inhabitants of the sea, the color of their paintings is shimmering with the shine of scales, in which spots of pink, red, blue colors. The University of Leiden created and improved the type of philosophical still life "vanitas" (vanity of vanities). In the paintings of Harmen van Steenwijk and Jan Davids de Heem, objects embodying earthly glory and wealth (armor, books, attributes of art, precious utensils) or sensual pleasures (flowers, fruits) are juxtaposed with a skull or an hourglass as a reminder of the transience of life. A more democratic “kitchen” still life arose in Rotterdam in the work of Floris van Schoten and Francois Reykhals, and its best achievements are associated with the names of the brothers Cornelis and Herman Saftleven.
In the middle of the century, the theme of modest “breakfasts” was transformed in the works of Willem van Aalst, Jurian van Streck and especially Willem Kalf and Abraham van Beyeren into luxurious “banquets” and “desserts”. Gilded goblets, Chinese porcelain and Delft faience, carpet tablecloth, southern fruits emphasize the taste for grace and wealth that established itself in Dutch society in the middle of the century. Accordingly, “monochrome” breakfasts are being replaced by a juicy, colorfully rich, golden-warm flavor. The influence of Rembrandt's chiaroscuro makes the colors in Kalf's paintings glow from within, poeticizing the objective world.
The masters of depicting “hunting trophies” and “poultry yards” were Jan-Baptiste Wenix, his son Jan Wenix and Melchior de Hondecoeter. This type of still life became particularly widespread in the second half - end of the century in connection with the aristocratization of the burghers: the establishment of estates and the entertainment of hunting. The painting of the last two artists shows an increase in decorativeness, color, and a desire for external effects.
The amazing ability of Dutch painters to convey the material world in all its richness and diversity was appreciated not only by contemporaries, but also by Europeans in the 18th and 19th centuries; they saw in still lifes, first of all and only this brilliant mastery of conveying reality. However, for the Dutch themselves in the 17th century, these paintings were full of meaning; they offered food not only for the eyes, but also for the mind. The paintings entered into a dialogue with the audience, telling them important moral truths, reminding them of the deceitfulness of earthly joys, the futility of human aspirations, directing thoughts to philosophical reflections on the meaning of human life.
Dutch artists achieved great achievements in creating art of a realistic direction, naturally depicting reality, precisely because such art was in demand in Dutch society.
For Dutch artists, easel painting was important in art. The canvases of the Dutch of this time do not have the same dimensions as the works of Rubens, and preferably solve not monumental-decorative tasks; the clients of the Dutch painters were envoys of the ruling leadership of the organization, but also the second class - burghers and artisans.
One of the main concerns of Dutch painters was man and the environment. The main place in Dutch painting was the everyday genre and portrait, landscape and still life. The better the painters impartially and deeply depicted the natural world, the more numerous the significant and demanding subjects of their work were.
Dutch painters They carried out work for sale and sold their paintings at fairs. Their works were bought mainly by people from the upper strata of society - rich peasants, artisans, merchants, and factory owners. Ordinary people could not afford this, and looked at and admired the paintings with pleasure. The general disposition of art in the heyday of the 17th century, deprived such powerful consumers as the court, the nobility and the church.
The works were produced in a small format, based on the modest and not large-sized furnishings of Dutch houses. Easel painting became one of the favorite pastimes of the Dutch, as it was capable of depicting the reality of actions with great reliability and diversity. The paintings of the Dutch depicted, close to them, the reality of their country; they wanted to see what was very familiar to them - the sea and ships, the nature of their land, their home, the action of everyday life, the things that surrounded them everywhere.
One important attraction to learning environment appeared in Dutch painting in such natural forms and with such clear continuity as nowhere else in Dutch art of these times. In connection with this, the depth of its scale is also connected: portraits and landscapes, still lifes and everyday genres were formed in it. A few of them, still life and everyday painting, were the first to emerge in mature forms in Holland and flourished to such an extent that they became the only example of this genre.
In the first two decades, the main mood of searching for the main Dutch artists, counteracting the right artistic directions, - the attraction to the correct reproduction of reality, to the accuracy of its expression. It was not by coincidence that the artists of Holland were attracted by the art of Caravaggio. The work of the so-called Utrecht Caravaggists - G. Honthorst, H. Terbruggen, D. Van Baburen - showed an impact on Dutch artistic culture.
Dutch painters in the 20s - 30s of the 17th century created main view a suitable small-figure painting depicting scenes from the life of ordinary peasants and their everyday activities. In the 40s and 50s, everyday painting was one of the main genres, the authors of which in history acquired the name “little Dutch”, either because of the artlessness of the plot, or because of the small size of the paintings, or maybe for both. The images of peasants in the paintings are covered with traits of good-natured humor Adriana van Ostade. He was a democratic writer of everyday life and an entertaining storyteller. Jan Steen.
One of the major portrait painters of Holland, the founder of the Dutch realistic portrait was Franz Hals. He created his fame with group portraits of shooting guilds, in which he expressed the ideals of the young republic, feelings of freedom, equality, and camaraderie.
The pinnacle of creativity of Dutch realism is Harmens van Rijn Rembrandt, distinguished by its extraordinary vitality and emotionality, deep humanity of images, and great thematic breadth. He painted historical, biblical, mythological and everyday paintings, portraits and landscapes, was one of greatest masters etching and drawing. But no matter what technology he worked in, the center of his attention was always the person, his inner world. He often found his heroes among the Dutch poor. In his works, Rembrandt combined the strength and penetration of psychological characteristics with exceptional mastery of painting, in which neat tones of chiaroscuro acquire the main importance.
During the first third of the 17th century, the views of the Dutch realistic landscape emerged, which flourished in the middle of the century. The landscape of the Dutch masters is not nature in general, as in the paintings of the classicists, but a national, specifically Dutch landscape: windmills, desert dunes, canals with boats gliding along them in the summer and with skaters in the winter. The artists sought to convey the atmosphere of the season, humid air and space.
Still life has developed vividly in Dutch painting and is distinguished by its small size and character. Peter Claes And Willem Heda most often they depicted so-called breakfasts: dishes with ham or pie on a relatively modestly served table. The recent presence of a person is palpable in the disorder and naturalness with which the things that have just served him are arranged. But this disorder is only apparent, since the composition of each still life is carefully thought out. In a skillful arrangement, objects are shown in such a way that one feels the inner life of things; it is not for nothing that the Dutch called still life “still leven” - “quiet life”, and not “nature morte” - “dead nature”.
Still life. Peter Claes and Willem Heda
Subtlety and truthfulness in recreating reality are combined by the Dutch masters with keen sense the beauty revealed in any of its phenomena, even the most inconspicuous and everyday. This trait of the Dutch artistic genius manifested itself perhaps most clearly in still life; it is no coincidence that this genre was a favorite in Holland.
The Dutch called still life "stilleven", which means "quiet life", and this word expresses incomparably more accurately the meaning that Dutch painters put into the depiction of things than "nature morte" - dead nature. In inanimate objects they saw a special, hidden life associated with the life of a person, with his way of life, habits, and tastes. Dutch painters created the impression of natural “mess” in the arrangement of things: they showed a cut pie, a peeled lemon with the peel hanging in a spiral, an unfinished glass of wine, a burning candle, an open book - it always seems that someone touched these objects, just used them , the invisible presence of a person is always felt.
The leading masters of Dutch still life painting in the first half of the 17th century were Pieter Claes (1597/98-1661) and Willem Heda (1594-ca. 1680). A favorite theme of their still lifes is the so-called “breakfasts”. In "Breakfast with Lobster" by V. Kheda, the objects various shapes and materials - coffee pot, glass, lemon, earthenware dish, silver plate, etc. - are compared with each other so as to reveal the characteristics and attractiveness of each. Using a variety of techniques, Heda perfectly conveys the material and the specificity of their texture; Thus, reflections of light play differently on the surface of glass and metal: on glass - light, with sharp outlines, on metal - pale, matte, on a gilded glass - shining, bright. All elements of the composition are united by light and color - a grayish-green color scheme.
In “Still Life with a Candle” by P. Klass, not only the accuracy of the reproduction of the material qualities of objects is remarkable - the composition and lighting give them great emotional expressiveness.
The still lifes of Klass and Kheda are filled with a special mood that brings each other closer together - this is a mood of intimacy and comfort, giving rise to the idea of the well-established and calm life of a burgher's house, where prosperity reigns and where the care of human hands and attentive eyes of the owner is felt in everything. Dutch painters affirm the aesthetic value of things, and still life, as it were, indirectly glorifies the way of life with which their existence is inextricably linked. Therefore, it can be considered as one of the artistic embodiments of an important theme of Dutch art - the theme of the life of a private person. She received her main decision in genre picture.[&&] Rotenberg I. E. Western European art XVII V. Moscow, 1971;
In the second half of the 17th century, changes took place in Dutch society: the bourgeoisie’s desire for aristocracy increased. Klas and Heda's modest "Breakfasts" give way to rich "desserts" Abraham van Beijern And Willem Kalf, which included spectacular earthenware dishes, silver vessels, precious goblets and shells in still lifes. Compositional structures become more complex, and colors become more decorative. Subsequently, still life loses its democracy, intimacy, its spirituality and poetry. It turns into a magnificent decoration for the homes of high-ranking customers. For all their decorativeness and mastery of execution, the late still lifes anticipate the decline of the great Dutch realistic painting, which began at the beginning of the 18th century and was caused by the social degeneration of the Dutch bourgeoisie in the last third of the 17th century, the spread of new trends in art associated with the bourgeoisie’s attraction to the tastes of the French nobility. Dutch art is losing ties with the democratic tradition, losing its realistic basis, losing its national identity and entering a period of long decline.
Still life ("Stilleven" - which means "quiet life" in Dutch) - is a unique and quite popular branch of Dutch painting. Dutch still life painting of the 17th century is characterized by the narrow specialization of Dutch masters within the genre. The theme "Flowers and Fruits" usually includes a variety of insects. "Hunting trophies" are, first of all, hunting trophies - killed birds and game. "Breakfasts" and "Desserts", as well as images of fish - alive and asleep, various birds - are only some of the most famous topics still lifes. Taken together, these individual plots characterize the keen interest of the Dutch in the plots everyday life, and their favorite activities, and passion for the exoticism of distant lands (the compositions contain outlandish shells and fruits). Often in works with motifs of “living” and “dead” nature there is a symbolic subtext that is easily understandable to an educated viewer of the 17th century.
Thus, the combination of individual objects could serve as a hint of the frailty of earthly existence: fading roses, an incense burner, a candle, a clock; or associated with habits condemned by morality: splinters, smoking pipes; or indicated a love affair; writing, musical instruments, brazier. There is no doubt that the meaning of these compositions is much broader than their symbolic content.
Dutch still lifes attract, first of all, their artistic expressiveness, completeness, and ability to reveal the spiritual life of the objective world. Preferring large-sized paintings with an abundance of all kinds of objects, Dutch painters limit themselves to a few objects of contemplation, striving for the utmost compositional and color unity.
Still life is one of the genres in which Dutch national traits appeared especially clearly. Still lifes depicting humble utensils, so common in Dutch painting and very rare in Flemish painting, or still lifes with household items of the wealthy classes. Still lifes by Pieter Claes and Willem Heda, shrouded in cold diffused light, with an almost monochrome color scheme, or later still lifes by Willem Kalf, where, at the will of the artist, golden lighting brings to life the forms and vibrant colors of objects from the twilight. They are all characterized by common national features that will not allow them to be mixed with paintings of another school, including the related Flemish one. In Dutch still life there is always a feeling of calm contemplation, and a special love for conveying real forms of the tangibly material world.
De Heem gained worldwide recognition for his magnificent images of flowers and fruits. He combined the detail of the image down to the smallest detail with a brilliant choice of colors and refined taste in composition. He painted flowers in bouquets and vases, in which butterflies and insects often fluttered, flower wreaths in niches, windows and images of Madonnas in gray tones, garlands of fruit, still lifes with glasses filled with wine, grapes and other fruits and products. Hem masterfully used the possibilities of color and achieved a high degree of transparency; his images of inanimate nature are completely realistic. His paintings are in almost all major art galleries. Still life painting, which was distinguished by its character, became widespread in 17th-century Holland. Dutch artists chose a wide variety of objects for their still lifes, knew how to arrange them perfectly, and reveal the characteristics of each object and its inner life, inextricably linked with human life. The 17th century Dutch painters Pieter Claes (c. 1597 - 1661) and Willem Heda (1594 - 1680/1682) painted numerous versions of “breakfasts”, depicting hams, ruddy buns, blackberry pies, fragile glass glasses half filled with wine on the table, with amazing skill conveying the color, volume, texture of each item. The recent presence of a person is noticeable in the disorder, the randomness of the arrangement of things that have just served him. But this disorder is only apparent, since the composition of each still life is strictly thought out and found. A restrained grayish-golden, olive tonal palette unites objects and gives a special sonority to those pure colors that emphasize the freshness of a freshly cut lemon or the soft silk of a blue ribbon. Over time, the “breakfasts” of the still life masters, painters Claes and Heda give way to the “desserts” of the Dutch artists Abraham van Beyeren (1620/1621-1690) and Willem Kalf (1622-1693). Beyeren's still lifes are strict in composition, emotionally rich, and colorful. Throughout his life, Willem Kalf painted in a free manner and democratic “kitchens” - pots, vegetables and aristocratic still lifes in the selection of exquisite precious objects, full of restrained nobility, like silver vessels, cups, shells saturated with the internal combustion of colors. IN further development still life follows the same path as all Dutch art, losing its democracy, its spirituality and poetry, its charm. Still life turns into decoration for the home of high-ranking customers. For all their decorativeness and skillful execution, the late still lifes anticipate the decline of Dutch painting. Social degeneration and the well-known aristocratization of the Dutch bourgeoisie in the last third of the 17th century gave rise to a tendency towards convergence with the aesthetic views of the French nobility, leading to the idealization of artistic images and their reduction. Art is losing ties with the democratic tradition, losing its realistic basis and entering a period of long-term decline. Severely exhausted in the wars with England, Holland is losing its position as a great trading power and a major artistic center.
Willem Heda (c. 1594 - c. 1682) was one of the first masters of Dutch still life painting in the 17th century, whose work was highly valued by his contemporaries. Particularly popular in Holland was this type of painting called “breakfast”. They were created to suit every taste: from the rich to the more modest. The painting “Breakfast with Crab” is distinguished by its large size, which is uncharacteristic of a Dutch still life (Appendix I). The overall color scheme of the work is cold, silver-gray with a few pinkish and brown spots. Kheda exquisitely depicted a set table on which the items that make up breakfast are arranged in carefully thought out disorder. On the platter lies a crab, depicted with all its peculiarities, next to it is a yellowing lemon, the gracefully cut rind of which, curling, hangs down. On the right are green olives and a delicious bun with a golden crust. Glass and metal vessels add solidity to the still life; their color almost merges with the overall palette.