Frans Hals Antwerp c. 1582–Haarlem 1666
Banquet of the Officers of the St George Civic Guard, 1616
him at various stages of his life through Hals’ eyes and hands. Hals painted him again in 1631, together with his wife Cornelia Vooght. The features are unmistakably the same, but the 15 extra years have undeniably made their mark on his body.
Oil on canvas, 175 × 324 cm Acquired in 1862 Object number os I-109
Frans Hals is known for having been a bohemian, an extravagant bon vivant. It is therefore notable that he virtually never left Haarlem; he was a real homebody in that regard. He carefully scrutinised the people who shared the town with him and his work can therefore be read as a visual biography of his fellow Haarlemmers. Hals painted his first militia portrait in 1616: the officers of the St George Civic Guard at their farewell banquet. The most important task for the civic guards was to protect the town against attacks from outside and to maintain order in the town. These citizen militias had a strongly hierarchical organisation and were led by officers from the same wealthy families that also provided the members of the town council. The fact that Hals, the son of Flemish migrants, was able to join the St George Civic Guard in 1612 was therefore an indication of his social acceptance. It is sometimes said that Hals was able to paint snapshots. He captures people in a moment, not posing rigidly but with a living presence. I therefore see this militia portrait as a choreography of glances that are shooting to and fro. The men are not just looking at one another; the viewer is also addressed and thereby made part of the scene. The person who is looking at us most directly is the captain seated in the foreground: Nicolaes van der Meer, a brewer who would also rise to be mayor of Haarlem. What appeals to me is that we get to know
6
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
BANQUET OF THE OFFICERS OF THE ST GEORGE CIVIC GUARD
|
7
Frans Hals Antwerp c. 1582–Haarlem 1666
Banquet of the Officers of the St George Civic Guard, 1616
him at various stages of his life through Hals’ eyes and hands. Hals painted him again in 1631, together with his wife Cornelia Vooght. The features are unmistakably the same, but the 15 extra years have undeniably made their mark on his body.
Oil on canvas, 175 × 324 cm Acquired in 1862 Object number os I-109
Frans Hals is known for having been a bohemian, an extravagant bon vivant. It is therefore notable that he virtually never left Haarlem; he was a real homebody in that regard. He carefully scrutinised the people who shared the town with him and his work can therefore be read as a visual biography of his fellow Haarlemmers. Hals painted his first militia portrait in 1616: the officers of the St George Civic Guard at their farewell banquet. The most important task for the civic guards was to protect the town against attacks from outside and to maintain order in the town. These citizen militias had a strongly hierarchical organisation and were led by officers from the same wealthy families that also provided the members of the town council. The fact that Hals, the son of Flemish migrants, was able to join the St George Civic Guard in 1612 was therefore an indication of his social acceptance. It is sometimes said that Hals was able to paint snapshots. He captures people in a moment, not posing rigidly but with a living presence. I therefore see this militia portrait as a choreography of glances that are shooting to and fro. The men are not just looking at one another; the viewer is also addressed and thereby made part of the scene. The person who is looking at us most directly is the captain seated in the foreground: Nicolaes van der Meer, a brewer who would also rise to be mayor of Haarlem. What appeals to me is that we get to know
6
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
BANQUET OF THE OFFICERS OF THE ST GEORGE CIVIC GUARD
|
7
Jan van Scorel Schoorl 1495–Utrecht 1562
The Baptism of Christ, c. 1530 Oil on panel, 120.5 × 156.5 cm Acquired in 1862 Object number os I-312
It is particularly intriguing that Frans Hals may have been responsible for restoring this painting by Jan van Scorel. In 1629 he was commissioned by Haarlem town council to ‘enlighten and change’ a few works from the St John’s Monastery (Jansklooster), including this work. We are no longer able to establish whether it was actually Hals who worked on this painting. But the possibility certainly appeals to the imagination. Jan van Scorel painted The Baptism of Christ after a long trip to Italy and the Holy Land (Palestine). As far as we know, he was one of the first Northern artists to make such a journey. In 1522 Adrian VI, the only Dutch Pope, appointed him as superintendent of the papal art collections. This enabled him to closely study the classical sculptures and the art of his contemporaries Raphael and Michelangelo. When he returned from Rome, he introduced the new Italian idiom to the northern Netherlands, from which point Renaissance art began to displace medieval art. The painting focuses on the baptism of Christ. Notably no one seems to realise the significance of this. Most of those present appear to be sunk in their own thoughts. If you follow the sightline of a few people who are staring upwards, you catch a glimpse of a white dove, symbol of the Holy Ghost, which descended from Heaven after Christ’s baptism. It was not until a recent restoration that it was discovered that there is another figure under the clouds, who can only be God the Father. After all, the biblical account includes his voice declaring: ‘You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased’ (Mark 1:11). When and why someone decided to make God disappear is unclear. The Protestant town council may have ordered it following the dissolution of the Catholic St John’s Monastery where it hung. After all, the Protestants had a prohibition on creating images of God.
10
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST
|
11
Jan van Scorel Schoorl 1495–Utrecht 1562
The Baptism of Christ, c. 1530 Oil on panel, 120.5 × 156.5 cm Acquired in 1862 Object number os I-312
It is particularly intriguing that Frans Hals may have been responsible for restoring this painting by Jan van Scorel. In 1629 he was commissioned by Haarlem town council to ‘enlighten and change’ a few works from the St John’s Monastery (Jansklooster), including this work. We are no longer able to establish whether it was actually Hals who worked on this painting. But the possibility certainly appeals to the imagination. Jan van Scorel painted The Baptism of Christ after a long trip to Italy and the Holy Land (Palestine). As far as we know, he was one of the first Northern artists to make such a journey. In 1522 Adrian VI, the only Dutch Pope, appointed him as superintendent of the papal art collections. This enabled him to closely study the classical sculptures and the art of his contemporaries Raphael and Michelangelo. When he returned from Rome, he introduced the new Italian idiom to the northern Netherlands, from which point Renaissance art began to displace medieval art. The painting focuses on the baptism of Christ. Notably no one seems to realise the significance of this. Most of those present appear to be sunk in their own thoughts. If you follow the sightline of a few people who are staring upwards, you catch a glimpse of a white dove, symbol of the Holy Ghost, which descended from Heaven after Christ’s baptism. It was not until a recent restoration that it was discovered that there is another figure under the clouds, who can only be God the Father. After all, the biblical account includes his voice declaring: ‘You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased’ (Mark 1:11). When and why someone decided to make God disappear is unclear. The Protestant town council may have ordered it following the dissolution of the Catholic St John’s Monastery where it hung. After all, the Protestants had a prohibition on creating images of God.
10
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST
|
11
Piet Mondriaan Amersfoort 1872–New York 1944
Line of Trees in Marshy Landscape, c. 1905 Watercolour, chalk and pastel on paper, 48.5 × 67.5 cm Acquired in 1913 Object number mt l 455
An oval of poplars and reeds appears to join together the grey sky and the boggy grassland; the river offers a horizontal counterpoint. The Geinrust farm lies hidden behind the slender trees. As far as I’m concerned this is one of Mondriaan’s most beautiful early works. The Frans Hals Museum’s collection is built around innovators in the arts. Mondriaan is certainly one of those, although you might not say so on the basis of this peaceful landscape. Yet this work was produced during a period of great experimentation. Between 1905 and 1908 Mondriaan often went out on his bicycle. From his home in Amsterdam he travelled south along the Amstel river, past Duivendrecht to the banks of the Gein. Armed with paint and chalk, he used the same locations as a subject time and again, and here the emphasis was on the air and the water – the ditch by the Het Kalfje café, the Oostzijdse Molen windmill and this farm, which he depicted more than 15 times. The works that he produced during these trips give insight into his frantic quest for his own style. Mondriaan thereby drew upon a variety of styles in order to assess their value: the naturalism of the Hague School, Breitner’s refined impressionism, symbolism and luminism. The mist that hangs over this landscape makes it an almost abstract representation. It is tempting to think that this work already reveals something of Mondriaan’s unquenchable quest for ‘the essence’, which ultimately prompted him to abandon everyday reality.
12
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
LINE OF TREES IN MARSHY LANDSCAPE
|
13
Piet Mondriaan Amersfoort 1872–New York 1944
Line of Trees in Marshy Landscape, c. 1905 Watercolour, chalk and pastel on paper, 48.5 × 67.5 cm Acquired in 1913 Object number mt l 455
An oval of poplars and reeds appears to join together the grey sky and the boggy grassland; the river offers a horizontal counterpoint. The Geinrust farm lies hidden behind the slender trees. As far as I’m concerned this is one of Mondriaan’s most beautiful early works. The Frans Hals Museum’s collection is built around innovators in the arts. Mondriaan is certainly one of those, although you might not say so on the basis of this peaceful landscape. Yet this work was produced during a period of great experimentation. Between 1905 and 1908 Mondriaan often went out on his bicycle. From his home in Amsterdam he travelled south along the Amstel river, past Duivendrecht to the banks of the Gein. Armed with paint and chalk, he used the same locations as a subject time and again, and here the emphasis was on the air and the water – the ditch by the Het Kalfje café, the Oostzijdse Molen windmill and this farm, which he depicted more than 15 times. The works that he produced during these trips give insight into his frantic quest for his own style. Mondriaan thereby drew upon a variety of styles in order to assess their value: the naturalism of the Hague School, Breitner’s refined impressionism, symbolism and luminism. The mist that hangs over this landscape makes it an almost abstract representation. It is tempting to think that this work already reveals something of Mondriaan’s unquenchable quest for ‘the essence’, which ultimately prompted him to abandon everyday reality.
12
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
LINE OF TREES IN MARSHY LANDSCAPE
|
13
Hendrick Goltzius Mühlbracht 1558–Haarlem 1617
Hercules and Cacus, 1613 Oil on canvas, 207 × 142.5 cm On long-term loan since 1917 from the Mauritshuis Royal Cabinet of Paintings Object number 79-1566
When a contemporary artist uses an old work as a source of inspiration, it often appears to be one-way traffic. However, it isn’t: new approaches and interpretations can also alter the meaning of the original work. When Jeff Koons appropriated this work by Hendrick Goltzius by having it copied and making it part of his ‘Gazing Ball Paintings’, he prompted me to look at this painting in a new, searching way. Goltzius created his work for the Haarlem town councillor Johan Colterman; it was part of a series of three paintings that together represent the ideal of humanist education. To the left of Hercules would have been a painting of the god Mercury, who represents eloquence, and to the right the goddess Minerva, who embodies wisdom. The story of Hercules and Cacus was popular in illustrating the triumph of virtue over evil. Here Goltzius shows the mythical hero Hercules after he has defeated the giant Cacus. According to Virgil, Cacus was a hideous demigod who decorated his cave with the heads and limbs of his victims. One night he surreptitiously stole cattle that Hercules was guarding. When Hercules awoke, he noticed some cows were missing and was unable to find them. But after he departed with the rest of the herd, the mooing of the stolen cows could be heard from Cacus’s cave. Hercules was furious and killed Cacus in a fight. It is noteworthy that the patron probably requested that his 22-year-old son be used as the model for the sturdy Hercules figure.
HERCULES AND CACUS
|
15
Hendrick Goltzius Mühlbracht 1558–Haarlem 1617
Hercules and Cacus, 1613 Oil on canvas, 207 × 142.5 cm On long-term loan since 1917 from the Mauritshuis Royal Cabinet of Paintings Object number 79-1566
When a contemporary artist uses an old work as a source of inspiration, it often appears to be one-way traffic. However, it isn’t: new approaches and interpretations can also alter the meaning of the original work. When Jeff Koons appropriated this work by Hendrick Goltzius by having it copied and making it part of his ‘Gazing Ball Paintings’, he prompted me to look at this painting in a new, searching way. Goltzius created his work for the Haarlem town councillor Johan Colterman; it was part of a series of three paintings that together represent the ideal of humanist education. To the left of Hercules would have been a painting of the god Mercury, who represents eloquence, and to the right the goddess Minerva, who embodies wisdom. The story of Hercules and Cacus was popular in illustrating the triumph of virtue over evil. Here Goltzius shows the mythical hero Hercules after he has defeated the giant Cacus. According to Virgil, Cacus was a hideous demigod who decorated his cave with the heads and limbs of his victims. One night he surreptitiously stole cattle that Hercules was guarding. When Hercules awoke, he noticed some cows were missing and was unable to find them. But after he departed with the rest of the herd, the mooing of the stolen cows could be heard from Cacus’s cave. Hercules was furious and killed Cacus in a fight. It is noteworthy that the patron probably requested that his 22-year-old son be used as the model for the sturdy Hercules figure.
HERCULES AND CACUS
|
15
Jan Brueghel (II) Antwerp 1601–Antwerp 1678
Satire of Tulipomania, c. 1640 Oil on panel, 31 × 49 cm Acquired in 1975 with support from Vereniging Rembrandt Object number os 75-699
It is now almost a cliché to mention that the tulip, one of the icons of Dutch identity, is actually an imported product – an immigrant. At the start of the 17th century, not long after the first tulips had been imported from the Ottoman Empire, there was a craze for growing and collecting them. The tulip trade was initially restricted to the flowering period, when growers and wealthy hobbyists could examine the flowers. Only after the bulbs were harvested did they actually change hands. When the rapidly rising prices prompted outsiders to get involved in the tulip trade, there was a genuine speculative bubble: ‘tulipomania’ or ‘tulip fever’. Options were even sold on tulip bulbs that had only just been planted and that no one had yet seen in bloom. The profits were fantastic: at the peak of this boom a rare Semper Augustus bulb cost an incredible 5,000 guilders, a sum for which you could have bought a canalside house with a garden at the time. The market collapsed suddenly in 1637 when a rumour spread that the bulbs would be valueless and everyone tried to sell their stock extremely quickly. When it was discovered that many tulip traders had sold on bulbs that they did not yet possess to buyers who could not pay for them, chaos ensued. The parallels with later economic bubbles are clear. Jan Brueghel II mocked these fortune-seekers by depicting them as foolish monkeys. The monkey on the left is studying a list of bulb prices. On the right a monkey is peeing on the tulips. Behind him a speculator is being brought before the judge for being in debt. Another monkey is crying in the dock. A speculator is even being buried in the background. You can read this work as a painted cartoon full of irony and venom!
16
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
SATIRE OF TULIPOMANIA
|
17
Jan Brueghel (II) Antwerp 1601–Antwerp 1678
Satire of Tulipomania, c. 1640 Oil on panel, 31 × 49 cm Acquired in 1975 with support from Vereniging Rembrandt Object number os 75-699
It is now almost a cliché to mention that the tulip, one of the icons of Dutch identity, is actually an imported product – an immigrant. At the start of the 17th century, not long after the first tulips had been imported from the Ottoman Empire, there was a craze for growing and collecting them. The tulip trade was initially restricted to the flowering period, when growers and wealthy hobbyists could examine the flowers. Only after the bulbs were harvested did they actually change hands. When the rapidly rising prices prompted outsiders to get involved in the tulip trade, there was a genuine speculative bubble: ‘tulipomania’ or ‘tulip fever’. Options were even sold on tulip bulbs that had only just been planted and that no one had yet seen in bloom. The profits were fantastic: at the peak of this boom a rare Semper Augustus bulb cost an incredible 5,000 guilders, a sum for which you could have bought a canalside house with a garden at the time. The market collapsed suddenly in 1637 when a rumour spread that the bulbs would be valueless and everyone tried to sell their stock extremely quickly. When it was discovered that many tulip traders had sold on bulbs that they did not yet possess to buyers who could not pay for them, chaos ensued. The parallels with later economic bubbles are clear. Jan Brueghel II mocked these fortune-seekers by depicting them as foolish monkeys. The monkey on the left is studying a list of bulb prices. On the right a monkey is peeing on the tulips. Behind him a speculator is being brought before the judge for being in debt. Another monkey is crying in the dock. A speculator is even being buried in the background. You can read this work as a painted cartoon full of irony and venom!
16
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
SATIRE OF TULIPOMANIA
|
17
Pieter Jansz Saenredam Assendelft 1597–Haarlem 1665
Interior of the Nieuwe Kerk in Haarlem, 1652 Oil on panel, 65.5 × 93 cm Acquired in 1879 Object number os I-304
You can still visit this scene: the Nieuwe Kerk (New Church), a short walk from the Frans Hals Museum, painted here by Saenredam. Inaugurated in 1649, it was the first stone church building in Haarlem to be built specially for the Protestants. The stark, classical design by Jacob van Campen was tailored to Protestant services: the pulpit was placed centrally so that the preacher could be seen and heard from all corners of the church. We know that the interior has not changed substantially since then because Van Campen’s close friend, Pieter Saenredam, recorded it in a number of drawings and paintings. Saenredam was the most significant architecture painter of the 17th century. The Haarlem artist was the first to record church buildings and interiors on canvas. Saenredam is also distinguished from his contemporaries by the fact that he worked on the basis of accurate measurements and sketches on site. He then used these to produce careful ‘construction drawings’ which led to paintings – often a number of years later. His style is unmistakable: well-considered compositions, exuding great calm and clarity, focusing on the grandeur of space. Despite his accurate way of working, Saenredam was not averse to tweaking reality in order to achieve the effect he was looking for. He did that in this case as well. By making the pillars and arches larger than they are in reality, and the figures proportionally much smaller, Saenredam lends a much more monumental feel to the space. The Nieuwe Kerk may look like a cathedral here, but in reality it’s much more intimate.
56
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
INTERIOR OF THE NIEUWE KERK IN HAARLEM
|
57
Pieter Jansz Saenredam Assendelft 1597–Haarlem 1665
Interior of the Nieuwe Kerk in Haarlem, 1652 Oil on panel, 65.5 × 93 cm Acquired in 1879 Object number os I-304
You can still visit this scene: the Nieuwe Kerk (New Church), a short walk from the Frans Hals Museum, painted here by Saenredam. Inaugurated in 1649, it was the first stone church building in Haarlem to be built specially for the Protestants. The stark, classical design by Jacob van Campen was tailored to Protestant services: the pulpit was placed centrally so that the preacher could be seen and heard from all corners of the church. We know that the interior has not changed substantially since then because Van Campen’s close friend, Pieter Saenredam, recorded it in a number of drawings and paintings. Saenredam was the most significant architecture painter of the 17th century. The Haarlem artist was the first to record church buildings and interiors on canvas. Saenredam is also distinguished from his contemporaries by the fact that he worked on the basis of accurate measurements and sketches on site. He then used these to produce careful ‘construction drawings’ which led to paintings – often a number of years later. His style is unmistakable: well-considered compositions, exuding great calm and clarity, focusing on the grandeur of space. Despite his accurate way of working, Saenredam was not averse to tweaking reality in order to achieve the effect he was looking for. He did that in this case as well. By making the pillars and arches larger than they are in reality, and the figures proportionally much smaller, Saenredam lends a much more monumental feel to the space. The Nieuwe Kerk may look like a cathedral here, but in reality it’s much more intimate.
56
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
INTERIOR OF THE NIEUWE KERK IN HAARLEM
|
57
Judith Jansdr Leyster Haarlem 1609–Heemstede 1660
Portrait of an Unknown Woman, 1635 Oil on panel, 54 × 41 cm Acquired in 1965 with support from Vereniging Rembrandt Object number os 65-8
Female painters in the 17th century were an exception to the rule. Judith Leyster was one of the most significant female artists from that period. In 1633 she was the only woman admitted to the Haarlem painters’ guild and was declared a ‘master painter’. This gave her the right to open her own studio and take pupils. She probably learnt the painter’s craft from Frans de Grebber and from Frans Hals. Her paintings are closely related to those of Hals; just like him, Leyster painted both accurately and with loose strokes. It is established that they knew one another: Leyster was a witness at the baptism of one of his children in 1631. Could Hals in turn have learnt something from her too? I like to believe that there was a two-way influence. We do not know who the woman depicted by Judith Leyster is. Her amiable smile and her look, which suggests a certain familiarity, leads us to suspect that she was related to the artist, or at least a close acquaintance. Her clothing – austere with expensive accents like the ruff and the lace cuffs – in any case make clear that the woman was a member of the bourgeoisie, just like Leyster herself. Stripped of these attributes, this portrait has an androgynous feel. Leyster was fairly active until she married Jan Miense Molenaer in 1636. He was also a painter, but considerably less gifted than Leyster. With her wedding, her work also ceased; she had a large family to look after and probably did not want to compete with her husband. Her work was then forgotten and, for a long time, many of her paintings, including this portrait, were incorrectly attributed to Hals.
PORTRAIT OF AN UNKNOWN WOMAN
|
59
Judith Jansdr Leyster Haarlem 1609–Heemstede 1660
Portrait of an Unknown Woman, 1635 Oil on panel, 54 × 41 cm Acquired in 1965 with support from Vereniging Rembrandt Object number os 65-8
Female painters in the 17th century were an exception to the rule. Judith Leyster was one of the most significant female artists from that period. In 1633 she was the only woman admitted to the Haarlem painters’ guild and was declared a ‘master painter’. This gave her the right to open her own studio and take pupils. She probably learnt the painter’s craft from Frans de Grebber and from Frans Hals. Her paintings are closely related to those of Hals; just like him, Leyster painted both accurately and with loose strokes. It is established that they knew one another: Leyster was a witness at the baptism of one of his children in 1631. Could Hals in turn have learnt something from her too? I like to believe that there was a two-way influence. We do not know who the woman depicted by Judith Leyster is. Her amiable smile and her look, which suggests a certain familiarity, leads us to suspect that she was related to the artist, or at least a close acquaintance. Her clothing – austere with expensive accents like the ruff and the lace cuffs – in any case make clear that the woman was a member of the bourgeoisie, just like Leyster herself. Stripped of these attributes, this portrait has an androgynous feel. Leyster was fairly active until she married Jan Miense Molenaer in 1636. He was also a painter, but considerably less gifted than Leyster. With her wedding, her work also ceased; she had a large family to look after and probably did not want to compete with her husband. Her work was then forgotten and, for a long time, many of her paintings, including this portrait, were incorrectly attributed to Hals.
PORTRAIT OF AN UNKNOWN WOMAN
|
59
Maerten van Heemskerck Heemskerk 1498–Haarlem 1574
St Luke Painting the Virgin, 1532 Oil on panel, 168 × 235 cm Acquired in 1862 Object number os I-134
Essentially this picture is very much about showing off, since Maerten van Heemskerck focuses here on the virtuosity of painting. The Gospel writer Luke was considered the patron saint of painters and their guilds for centuries. According to tradition, he not only created portrait icons of the Apostles Peter and Paul, but had even painted Mary and her baby son Jesus from life. This would immediately explain why the Gospel that he wrote covers Jesus’ birth and youth in such detail: after all, he had heard the stories from Mary herself when she posed for him! Van Heemskerck shows his extreme concentration as he captures her image in a painting. Van Heemskerck gifted the painting to his fellow guild members, probably shortly before he went on a journey to Rome. It’s a dazzling display of technical craftsmanship. The composition is very dynamic, the various fabrics and other materials are depicted in a particularly delicate way, and it plays with different perspectives. The palette that Luke is holding even appears to project out of the panel. The work was possibly intended for the Great or St Bavo Church on the Grote Markt. In view of the distinctively low angle – the panel is designed to be viewed from below – it must have been intended for a high spot: above the altar or on a pillar. According to a contemporary report the man standing behind Luke represents ‘poetic inspiration’, the power of artistic imagination; with his right hand he guides the painter’s hand. With great self-assurance, Van Heemskerck is said to have used himself as the model for this figure.
60
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
ST LUKE PAINTING THE VIRGIN
|
61
Maerten van Heemskerck Heemskerk 1498–Haarlem 1574
St Luke Painting the Virgin, 1532 Oil on panel, 168 × 235 cm Acquired in 1862 Object number os I-134
Essentially this picture is very much about showing off, since Maerten van Heemskerck focuses here on the virtuosity of painting. The Gospel writer Luke was considered the patron saint of painters and their guilds for centuries. According to tradition, he not only created portrait icons of the Apostles Peter and Paul, but had even painted Mary and her baby son Jesus from life. This would immediately explain why the Gospel that he wrote covers Jesus’ birth and youth in such detail: after all, he had heard the stories from Mary herself when she posed for him! Van Heemskerck shows his extreme concentration as he captures her image in a painting. Van Heemskerck gifted the painting to his fellow guild members, probably shortly before he went on a journey to Rome. It’s a dazzling display of technical craftsmanship. The composition is very dynamic, the various fabrics and other materials are depicted in a particularly delicate way, and it plays with different perspectives. The palette that Luke is holding even appears to project out of the panel. The work was possibly intended for the Great or St Bavo Church on the Grote Markt. In view of the distinctively low angle – the panel is designed to be viewed from below – it must have been intended for a high spot: above the altar or on a pillar. According to a contemporary report the man standing behind Luke represents ‘poetic inspiration’, the power of artistic imagination; with his right hand he guides the painter’s hand. With great self-assurance, Van Heemskerck is said to have used himself as the model for this figure.
60
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
ST LUKE PAINTING THE VIRGIN
|
61
Paul McCarthy Salt Lake City 1945
Bossy Burger, 1991 Digital Betacam video tape PAL, stereo, 59 min 03 sec Acquired in 2003 Object number mav 2003-8
As a child I was dragged to the local carnival, much against my will. Obviously it’s meant to be a festive occasion, an opportunity to mock one another and social conventions in a noisy, caricaturish way. But I always found it exceptionally scary. That also applies to this work by Paul McCarthy. Bossy Burger is an obscene twist on the Muppet Show, with the artist in the role of a perverted Swedish Chef. You have no idea what this grotesque cook is going to do and how things will be disrupted even more. McCarthy criticises the excess and wastage in our consumer society in a subversive way. He thereby makes use of all sorts of clichés from popular culture. The performance was recorded on the set of two American sitcoms; McCarthy combined his chef’s hat with clown shoes and a mask of Alfred E. Neuman, the icon of the satirical magazine MAD. He causes you to constantly switch between repugnance and fascination. His performance starts with a cookery demonstration, but it deteriorates into ever greater chaos. What oil paint was to the Dutch Masters, Heinz ketchup is to McCarthy. He nonchalantly mixes it with mayonnaise, flour and drumsticks. Meanwhile he makes odd sounds and mutters sexual innuendo. Ultimately his performance culminates in an orgy of obscenity, bawdiness and anarchy. The main character becomes a beast without morals or conscience who reacts instinctively. The grin on his mask never fades.
62
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
BOSSY BURGER
|
63
Paul McCarthy Salt Lake City 1945
Bossy Burger, 1991 Digital Betacam video tape PAL, stereo, 59 min 03 sec Acquired in 2003 Object number mav 2003-8
As a child I was dragged to the local carnival, much against my will. Obviously it’s meant to be a festive occasion, an opportunity to mock one another and social conventions in a noisy, caricaturish way. But I always found it exceptionally scary. That also applies to this work by Paul McCarthy. Bossy Burger is an obscene twist on the Muppet Show, with the artist in the role of a perverted Swedish Chef. You have no idea what this grotesque cook is going to do and how things will be disrupted even more. McCarthy criticises the excess and wastage in our consumer society in a subversive way. He thereby makes use of all sorts of clichés from popular culture. The performance was recorded on the set of two American sitcoms; McCarthy combined his chef’s hat with clown shoes and a mask of Alfred E. Neuman, the icon of the satirical magazine MAD. He causes you to constantly switch between repugnance and fascination. His performance starts with a cookery demonstration, but it deteriorates into ever greater chaos. What oil paint was to the Dutch Masters, Heinz ketchup is to McCarthy. He nonchalantly mixes it with mayonnaise, flour and drumsticks. Meanwhile he makes odd sounds and mutters sexual innuendo. Ultimately his performance culminates in an orgy of obscenity, bawdiness and anarchy. The main character becomes a beast without morals or conscience who reacts instinctively. The grin on his mask never fades.
62
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
BOSSY BURGER
|
63
Pieter Fransz de Grebber Haarlem c. 1600–Haarlem 1652/53
Mother and Child, 1622 Oil on panel, 98.5 × 73.4 cm Acquired in 1987 with support from Vereniging Rembrandt Object number os 87-283
A mother who is reading whilst she suckles her child: it appears to be the 17th-century equivalent of a cosy picture of a contemporary mother looking at her iPhone whilst breastfeeding her toddler. Nothing could be further from the truth. At the beginning of the 17th century such a scene – a mother breastfeeding her child – was uncommon in the arts. The woman is also wearing a veil, traditionally a symbol of virginity. For this reason it is very likely that this early work by Pieter de Grebber, the scion of a Catholic family of artists in Haarlem, is more than just a domestic scene. Since early Christianity, depictions of the Virgin Mary feeding her son had been very popular. The theme was known as ‘Maria lactans’, the Nursing Mary. The role of Our Lady as the intermediary between Heaven and Earth, between the divine and the human, was directly expressed in these representations. Towards the end of the 16th century ‘Maria lactans’ gradually disappeared as a theme, probably under the influence of the Reformation. The Protestants focused on the Holy Word and abhorred the Catholic veneration of Mary and other saints. The Catholic Church responded during the Council of Trent (1545–1563) by tightening the rules concerning depictions of the Holy Family: physical beauty and eroticism should play no role in religious art; nudity should be avoided as much as possible. Whether it was a devotional piece that depicted Mary with her son or caritas – the representation of charity under the rules of symbolism – depicted as a breastfeeding mother, this modest painting evokes great tenderness in many museum visitors, particularly because the child, entirely safe in his mother’s arms, looks at us directly.
64
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
MOTHER AND CHILD
|
65
Pieter Fransz de Grebber Haarlem c. 1600–Haarlem 1652/53
Mother and Child, 1622 Oil on panel, 98.5 × 73.4 cm Acquired in 1987 with support from Vereniging Rembrandt Object number os 87-283
A mother who is reading whilst she suckles her child: it appears to be the 17th-century equivalent of a cosy picture of a contemporary mother looking at her iPhone whilst breastfeeding her toddler. Nothing could be further from the truth. At the beginning of the 17th century such a scene – a mother breastfeeding her child – was uncommon in the arts. The woman is also wearing a veil, traditionally a symbol of virginity. For this reason it is very likely that this early work by Pieter de Grebber, the scion of a Catholic family of artists in Haarlem, is more than just a domestic scene. Since early Christianity, depictions of the Virgin Mary feeding her son had been very popular. The theme was known as ‘Maria lactans’, the Nursing Mary. The role of Our Lady as the intermediary between Heaven and Earth, between the divine and the human, was directly expressed in these representations. Towards the end of the 16th century ‘Maria lactans’ gradually disappeared as a theme, probably under the influence of the Reformation. The Protestants focused on the Holy Word and abhorred the Catholic veneration of Mary and other saints. The Catholic Church responded during the Council of Trent (1545–1563) by tightening the rules concerning depictions of the Holy Family: physical beauty and eroticism should play no role in religious art; nudity should be avoided as much as possible. Whether it was a devotional piece that depicted Mary with her son or caritas – the representation of charity under the rules of symbolism – depicted as a breastfeeding mother, this modest painting evokes great tenderness in many museum visitors, particularly because the child, entirely safe in his mother’s arms, looks at us directly.
64
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
MOTHER AND CHILD
|
65
Berndnaut Smilde Groningen 1978
Nimbus De Hallen, 2014 Photograph, 125 × 172 cm Acquired in 2014 with support from the Mondriaan Fund Object number mf 2014-6
I’m fascinated by the grey area between fiction and reality. If there’s one work in our collection that fits with this, it is this cloud by Berndnaut Smilde. The cloud that Smilde has created is like a dream. The location is real, but the moment that the artwork shows did not exist longer than a single breath. Only after lengthy experimentation was Smilde able to create the desired clouds. It’s a complex interplay between nature, technology and the camera. He views the cloud itself as a temporary sculpture. It looks as if you can touch it, can dive into it, but it falls apart again in an instant. The photo that remains is what he considers the final work of art. According to Smilde, the ‘ideal cloud’ floats freely, with a high density and a fine texture – like the Dutch clouds that Jacob van Ruisdael introduced into art in order to suggest drama above the flat landscape. A cloud indoors, says Smilde, evokes a host of new meanings. For example, the cloud can suggest a threat, or represent the Divine – in the Old Testament, God uses clouds to shroud and move himself. I also see this work as a tribute to one of our two museum locations: the early 17th-century Vleeshal, which was built in the Gothic and Renaissance style. The Frans Hals Museum is not only the custodian of a rich collection of art, but also has a collection of very distinguished historic spaces, each with a very different atmosphere. It is the interplay between these that contributes to the charm of our museum.
66
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
NIMBUS DE HALLEN
|
67
Berndnaut Smilde Groningen 1978
Nimbus De Hallen, 2014 Photograph, 125 × 172 cm Acquired in 2014 with support from the Mondriaan Fund Object number mf 2014-6
I’m fascinated by the grey area between fiction and reality. If there’s one work in our collection that fits with this, it is this cloud by Berndnaut Smilde. The cloud that Smilde has created is like a dream. The location is real, but the moment that the artwork shows did not exist longer than a single breath. Only after lengthy experimentation was Smilde able to create the desired clouds. It’s a complex interplay between nature, technology and the camera. He views the cloud itself as a temporary sculpture. It looks as if you can touch it, can dive into it, but it falls apart again in an instant. The photo that remains is what he considers the final work of art. According to Smilde, the ‘ideal cloud’ floats freely, with a high density and a fine texture – like the Dutch clouds that Jacob van Ruisdael introduced into art in order to suggest drama above the flat landscape. A cloud indoors, says Smilde, evokes a host of new meanings. For example, the cloud can suggest a threat, or represent the Divine – in the Old Testament, God uses clouds to shroud and move himself. I also see this work as a tribute to one of our two museum locations: the early 17th-century Vleeshal, which was built in the Gothic and Renaissance style. The Frans Hals Museum is not only the custodian of a rich collection of art, but also has a collection of very distinguished historic spaces, each with a very different atmosphere. It is the interplay between these that contributes to the charm of our museum.
66
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
NIMBUS DE HALLEN
|
67
This edition © Scala Arts & Heritage Publishers Ltd, 2018 Text and photography © Frans Hals Museum, 2018 First published in 2018 by Scala Arts & Heritage Publishers Ltd 10 Lion Yard Tremadoc Road London sw4 7nq, UK www.scalapublishers.com In association with the Frans Hals Museum www.franshalsmuseum.nl ISBN: 978 1 78551 1 615 Project managers: Sandra Pisano (Scala Arts & Heritage Publishers Ltd); Roxana Srodzinski (Frans Hals Museum) Translator: Toby Morse in association with First Edition Translations Ltd, Cambridge, UK Editor: Raymond Frenken (Frans Hals Museum) Designer: Nigel Soper Printed in Turkey 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the written permission of the Frans Hals Museum and Scala Arts & Heritage Publishers Ltd. Every effort has been made to acknowledge correct copyright of images where applicable. Any errors or omissions are unintentional and should be notified to the Publisher, who will arrange for corrections to appear in any reprints.
80
|
FRANS HALS MUSEUM
Courtesy: pp. 8-9: © 2009 Rineke Dijkstra. All rights reserved. pp. 20-21: courtesy Guido van der Werve & Galerie Juliètte Jongma, Amsterdam pp. 28-29: courtesy Alexandra Bachzetsis and kurimanzutto, Mexico City pp. 44-45: courtesy Cécile B. Evans; Galerie Emanuel Layr, Vienna; Barbara Seiler, Zurich pp. 54-55: courtesy Annet Gelink Gallery, Amsterdam Photography credits: René Gerritsen Tom Haartsen Doro Keman Maarten Nauw Thijs Quispel Gert-Jan van Rooij Margareta Svensson Arend Velsink Front cover: Nicolaes Pietersz Berchem, Callisto spied on by Jupiter, c. 1656 Frontispiece: Jacob Isaaksz van Ruisdael, Dune Landscape with a Rabbit Hunt, c. 1650 Back cover: Nan Goldin, Heartbeat, 2001