ART CATALOGUE // COBRA - The Colour of Freedom by Studio Minke Themans

CoBrA The colour of freedom The Schiedam collection

STEDELIJK MUSEUM SCHIEDAM

NAi PUBLISHERS ROTTERDAM

372

373

374

CoBrA The colour of freedom The Schiedam collection

Edited by: Ludo van Halem With contributions by: Marcel Hummelink Klawa Koppenol Christel Kordes Piet van Dalen, Tania Happel and Jan Stokmans Karin Feenstra Marijke de Groot Ludo van Halem Wil Heins Lies Netel Laura Soutendijk Patricia van Ulzen Marjan de Visser Margot Welle

NAi Publishers Rotterdam Stedelijk Museum Schiedam

CoBrA The colour of freedom The Schiedam collection

This publication was made possible through the financial support of

Contents

6 Preface

8 Introduction A museum for experimental art? 1 2 What was Cobra – and what is it? 20 The Schiedam collection 22 Explanatory notes

24 Pierre Alechinsky

26 Karel Appel

86 Eugène Brands

1 0 0 Constant 1 30 Corneille 1 60 Jan Elburg 1 94 Lotti van der Gaag

206 Stephen Gilbert

208 Lucebert 2 16 Jan Nieuwenhuijs

222 Anders Österlin

224 Anton Rooskens

252 Theo Wolvecamp

260 Documentation 268 CoBrA and Schiedam A city with a proud collection but no ambitions for its museum 280 Custodian, curator, director A century of history of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam 308 1954 Lunsingh Scheurleer’s recommendations 310 The 1950s Collectors and organizations associated with the museum 317 1954 –1956 Daan Schwagermann’s first purchases 323 1955 –1965 Consignment and purchase of Karel Appel’s works 329 1959 –1987 The loan of works by Corneille and Asger Jorn 332 1979 The Schiedam museum row 336 1979 –1982 New appreciation of CoBrA

348

The conservation of works on paper in the CoBrA collection

354 The complex conservation of multi-faceted experiments Paintings in the CoBrA collection of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam

362

Index

364 Authors 366 Colophon

Preface A.H. DE SWART, ALDERMAN FOR CULTURE

9 CoBrA is the backbone, the heart and the face of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam. The staff and everyone involved have put paid to end the languishing hidden existence that this important part of our legacy has been consigned to for far too long. Schiedam can be rightfully proud of its many top-rate CoBrA works and of the sheer range that this wonderful collection represents. This book supersedes the out of print and far smaller collection catalogue published in 1984, and portrays the entire CoBrA collection of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam. This publication has been made possible by the Fonds Schiedam Vlaardingen foundation. The collection has been maintained over the last few years through the support of the European Commission, the Mondriaan Foundation and the Prince Bernhard Cultural Foundation. However, it has also been recently extended. Truus Verweij-de Graaff has donated many magnificent CoBrA works and documents from the estate of her late husband Goos Verweij whose printing business in the Passage provided support and refuge for many artists in the 1950s. Schiedam City Council would like to express its sincere gratitude to all its benefactors. The publication of this book coincides with the opening of a major retrospective of the Schiedam CoBrA collection. For the time being, this will be the final exhibition in the present museum building that still bears its original name of Sint Jacobs Gasthuis, a title that refers to its earliest function as a hospital. Schiedam has been fortunate enough to receive a subsidy for restoring listed buildings from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. This means that the Gasthuis will now be renovated, although it must be completed by the end of 2004! So we are currently facing two intense, intriguing and stimulating years! As Schiedam City Council’s cultural representative, I am fortunate to have a predecessor such as the great Alderman Dinkelaar, who smoothed the way in the 1930s for the Gasthuis’ conversion into a museum. It was a bold decision when councillors opted in the 1950s to focus the museum’s collection on contemporary art. This line has been maintained right up to the present day. Schiedam’s current Mayor and Aldermen also showed considerable courage in reaching such a clear agreement concerning the future of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam and in the clarity of their subsequent program. I am certain that the entire City Council would never pass up an opportunity to reflect its illustrious predecessors and that it will decide the museum’s future with the same progressive and far-sighted vision. CoBrA: the colour of freedom is a worthy prelude to the larger, modern museum that the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam will become once it is renovated and where a part of the CoBrA collection will be on permanent show.

PREFACE

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

On the occasion of its reopening, following a restoration and expansion, in 1966 the museum shows a cross-section of its collection. CoBrA is prominently displayed in the entrance hall, but the experimentalistsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; paintings are overshadowed by the Sint Jacobs Gasthuisâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s architecture. From left to right, works by Gerrit Benner, Corneille, Karel Appel and again Corneille.

Introduction A museum for experimental art? LUDO VAN HALEM

11 Schiedam has played no role in the brief history of the CoBrA

you cherish’ and several of them were prepared to sell to

movement (1948–1951), but since 1954 it is impossible to

Schiedam at relatively low prices.

imagine Schiedam without CoBrA. The Stedelijk Museum

Although the museum’s collection policy in the mid-1950s

Schiedam acquired its first experimental painting: Victory

was not exclusively focused on the ‘experimental artists’, and

Borfimah by Eugène Brands, three years after the end of the

the Bergen school of painting, Dutch Art Nouveau, modern

‘Lien Souple des Groupes Expérimentaux’, as the group of

ceramics and small sculptures were also purchased, among

artists from Copenhagen, Brussels and Amsterdam presented

other things, Schwagermann quickly realized that Schiedam

themselves in the first edition of the Cobra magazine. Fresh

had a unique selling point. ‘And is it of no great benefit to

from the studio,

Schiedam if the idea takes root in the outside world in slow

in 1949 the painting had hung in the illustrious CoBrA

dribs and drabs, that you can see the experimentalists in

exhibition in the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam and, thanks

Schiedam!? In this respect our museum can establish a

to the good relations that the then curator Daan

reputation and fulfil a task (...),’ is how he defended the

Schwagermann had with the artist, for one hundred guilders

importance of this small sub-collection to the museum

it found its way to Schiedam

committee, just before his departure in 1956. Schwagermann

After this acquisition the museum did its utmost ‘to represent

viewed the museum as a kind of experimental station for

“the experimental artists” as comprehensibly as possible,’ as

contemporary art and the CoBrA collection formed the basis

Schwagermann wrote to Corneille in 1955. He worked on a

for the museum’s identity as a museum for contemporary art.

small but complete representation of the artists who where

With the experimental art, it cast off its worn out image of a

members of the Experimental Group in Holland. He

local antiquities’ room and with experimental art it liberated

purchased five paintings by Karel Appel, Corneille and Theo

itself from its provincial past. CoBrA gave colour to a new

Wolvecamp and he acquired four paintings on loan by

freedom. As Schwagermann’s successors added to the

Constant and Anton Rooskens. In addition, the Friends of

collection and art-historical and public recognition for CoBrA

Stedelijk Museum Schiedam donated a painting by Corneille

increased, its importance for the museum has continued to

to the museum. As far as we can gather, Jan Nieuwenhuijs,

grow.

who was only a member of the group for a very short space of time, appeared to fall outside the scope of his collection

The CoBrA collection in the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam has

policy. On the other hand, Schwagermann did all he could to

always remained a lively collection. It has been frequently

obtain work by Lotti van der Gaag who, it is true, never

exhibited but, because the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam – like

exhibited in connection with CoBrA but did have her studio

many other museums – has a constant shortage of space, the

next to that of Appel and Corneille in a warehouse in the

collection has never acquired its own permanent home. The

Rue Santeuil in Paris, but to no avail.

works ‘travelled’ to and fro between hall and depot. During the collection’s history numerous requests have been made

In the mid-1950s the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam

for works on loan. The works have been frequently exhibited

occupied a unique position with this collection in the Dutch

in other museums, at home and abroad. However, all the

museum world. Not only was such a collection and

handling and the many journeys have taken their toll and

exhibition of the very latest, contemporary art quite rare,

adversely affected the condition of the collection. This

unlike today, the artistic quality of the experimental CoBrA

problem has been exacerbated by the often inferior quality

art was controversial to say the least. Only the Stedelijk

of the materials used, the handling of the material which,

Museum Amsterdam, under the leadership of Willem

from an experimental standpoint, was not always according

Sandberg and amidst fierce criticism, had earlier appointed

to the rules of art, and by the far from ideal depot conditions

itself as a platform for the ‘experimental artists’. The fact

in the museum.

that, in the wake of this esteemed, progressive institute,

The moment that the museum obtained command of a

a small museum began to pay attention to experimental

somewhat larger budget for collection management and

art – through acquisitions and exhibitions, and also in

conservation in 1997, a start was made on the restoration

collaboration with the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam nota

of a number of CoBrA works, the precarious state of which

bene –, earned respect among the artists involved.

had been pointed out back in 1980 by Willemijn Stokvis,

Constant spoke of the ‘fresh and enthusiastic plans that

CoBrA expert par excellence. In conjunction with the

INTRODUCTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Vlaardingen based paper restoration studio, Art

The core of the Schiedam collection is formed by the work

Conservation, a pilot project was set up to examine the

of the former members of the Experimental Group in

possibilities of restoring two gouaches by Karel Appel and

Holland: Karel Appel, Eugène Brands, Constant, Corneille,

fixing the extremely fine craquelured paint layer, a problem

Jan Nieuwenhuijs, Anton Rooskens and Theo Wolvecamp.

that seemed insoluble back in 1980. After it subsequently

In addition, the dual talents of Jan Elburg and Lucebert,

emerged that a large part of the works on paper in the

both as poets publishing in Reflex and Cobra, are included

CoBrA collection needed restoring, the municipality of

in the collection. Lotti van der Gaag is also included,

Schiedam submitted an application for a subsidy to the

though whether the term ‘CoBrA’ applies to her work is

European Commission. It appealed to the Raphael

seriously debatable. But her work was collected by the

Programme 1999 that supported the preservation of

Schiedam-based printer Goos Verweij, from whose

European cultural heritage, among other things.

collection the majority of her work is derived, and her work

The subsidy was awarded and in December 1999 the

was exhibited in the museum around 1956 in the same

museum embarked on the CoBrA Collection Conservation

breath as, for example, Rooskens. Finally the non-Dutch

Project. The Mondriaan Foundation, the Foundation Fonds

CoBrA members (Pierre Alechinsky, Stephen Gilbert,

Schiedam Vlaardingen, among others, and the Prince

Anders Österlin) are modestly represented with a few

Bernhard Cultural Foundation offered further financial

works. The works of the artists concerned are not

support. Within the project four objectives were formulated:

exclusively from the experimental period: early work (by

active conservation of the entire CoBrA collection,

Corneille) or later work (Brands, Constant) is also included

improving the passive conservation (depot, packaging,

in the collection, regardless of how far removed this is from

frames and the like), catching up on arrears in registration

CoBrA. In addition to works of art, documents are included

and documentation, and carrying out research into the

that are closely connected to the origins of the collection in

history of the collection. The first two objectives were

the 1950s or are related to CoBrA and the Experimental

aimed at the conservation of the collection, the last two at

Group as art-historical phenomena.

improving public access to the collection, in particular

The research into the history did not concentrate on the

because all copies of the collection catalogue, compiled in

individual objects but on the formation of the collection and

1984, were sold out. Moreover, this catalogue was out of

in particular the context within which this has come into

date because a number of works on loan have been

being and has functioned. In the public debate about the

returned and numerous new acquisitions have been added

policy and functioning of the museum, the museum and

to the collection.

this one extraordinary sub-collection are closely intertwined: whenever the existence of the museum in a

This book is the repercussion of the last two objectives,

poor municipality such as Schiedam is brought up for

and consequently its two parts reflect the different research

discussion, the CoBrA collection is of sufficient

activities. First and foremost, a new documentation system

consequence to silence those who advocate closure, and

was compiled within the museum in which all the

in difficult times CoBrA is considered to have sufficient

information pertaining to the individual objects was

potential not only to raise the museum’s disappointing

collected. This information was used for the re-inventory of

admission figures but also to entice the wavering flow of

the collection. The collection catalogue includes only those

tourists to Schiedam. Sometimes it seems as if Schiedam

works owned by the museum and works on long-term

does not have a museum with a collection, but a collection

loan from the State, because in the past even privately-

that – like a snail – lugs around a museum. The second

owned works on long-term loan had proved to represent

part of the book examines the various historical but also

uncertain ‘ownership’. One specific problem, of course, is

the contemporary processes that are active in and around

the definition of a ‘CoBrA’ collection: who and what should

the museum, with the CoBrA collection as the leitmotif,

be taken into consideration? The problem begins with the

complemented with authentic voices and images.

definition of what CoBrA was or is, and the collection

This (historical) part of the book concludes with the two

catalogue is preceded by an overview of how, with the

reports on the latest adventures of the Schiedam collection:

passing of time, that notion has been subject to shifts in meaning.1

the active and (part of) the passive conservation of all the

INTRODUCTION

CoBrA

art works and documents that were targeted in the first

the colour of freedom

two objectives of the CoBrA Collection Conservation Project. From the spring of 2000 to the autumn of 2002 practically all the objects were examined – and sometimes extremely meticulously in the science laboratory of the Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage (ICN) – and treated in order to remove all the undesirable traces of their busy lives and to improve the condition of the collection considerably. In many cases soiling and surface damage as a result of handling could be repaired satisfactorily, but in a number of cases either the experimental working method of the artist or a brusque intervention in the past have led to a situation that, despite ingenuity and patience, can no longer be rectified. The reports by the restorers who were engaged in this project, however, only reveal a glimpse of the work that was carried out behind the scenes. Moreover, the knowledge that has been gained by studying the physical aspects of the art works and the experience ensuing from the restoration work, were of such proportions and so varied in nature that it was not possible to publish them in this book. This book describes a fraction of the history of CoBrA that has barely been recorded: the history of the reception, or rather perhaps the recognition. Set against the three years that the movement actually existed, and the few subsequent years that the artists involved possibly called themselves ‘experimentalists’, are several decades in which CoBrA time after time in differing forms – from arthistorical study to ‘happy families’ card games – was regenerated. The small avant-garde who wanted to create a new primitive art, seems capable of being popularized effortlessly and endlessly. This vitality is remarkable and worthy of study, but also of importance to the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam: the contemporary art of half a century ago emerges as being anything but a relic of the past that has to be brought to life artificially. Naturally, the approach to the collection and its management has changed. Where decline, study and conservation are under discussion, the ‘experimental station for contemporary art’ becomes a museum for experimental art.

1 With the exception of the overview ‘What was Cobra – and what is it?’ in this book the name is written as ‘CoBrA’ to denote the movement in a general sense. This manner of writing emphasizes the fact that the word was made up of the first letters of the names of the cities in which the participating experimental groups were active, but otherwise it has no single historical precedent. The choice of writing it in this way is particularly inspired by contemporary considerations, namely the need to reinforce the word ‘picture’ and thereby deploy it more effectively in the visual communication of the museum. For the Cobra magazine the normal style of writing is used.

INTRODUCTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Entrance to the ‘International exhibition of experimental art’ in the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, 1949. In the background a large canvas (Barricade) Constant painted especially for the occasion. Christian Dotremont put up the word ‘COBRA’.

What was Cobra – and what is it? MARCEL HUMMELINK

November 1948

association Høst are photographed alongside a number

A new magazine ...

of Danish and Dutch guests on the occasion of their annual

and a new myth

exhibition in Copenhagen. Here we see for the first time a gathering of the people who in the following months will

In November 1948 the Belgian poet Christian Dotremont

produce the art magazine Cobra and thereby make a start

gives the word ‘cobra’ a new meaning: it can be read as

on the creation of the new ‘Cobra myth’: Christian Dotremont,

a combination of the beginning letters of Copenhague,

Asger Jorn, Constant, Karel Appel

Bruxelles and Amsterdam, and therefore could serve as the

and Corneille. However, in the articles published about

title for the international, French-language magazine that

the Høst exhibition the word ‘Cobra’ does not yet appear:

he wants to produce with several Danish and Dutch artists.

in Denmark the ‘Cobra artists’ are known until well into the

Dotremont has the immediate foresight to realize that this

1960s primarily as ‘the abstracts’.

word, in addition to denoting the magazine, should become a label for all sorts of work produced by the artists involved, in order that it might slowly grow into a great and elusive

February 1949

concept, a new myth.

A simplistic-experimental movement

For the title of the international printed magazine I

In Reflex, the magazine of the Dutch Experimental Group,

propose Cobra (Co: penhague; Br: uxelles; A: msterdam)

the word ‘cobra’ appears in February 1949 as a reference

or Isabelle (for rather personal reasons) or Manaja or

to an umbrella organization for artists’ groups. The issue,

Drang or Iris or Lou. We must reach an agreement

otherwise mostly in Dutch, includes an announcement in

quickly.

French for an exhibition set to open in Brussels in March and organized by ‘the revolutionary surrealist group

[…] In addition, I’m in the process of making a little film,

associated with COBRA’.2 The advertisement is composed

a metaphor on experience […]. Naturally the international

by Christian Dotremont, who is now working actively on his

title – “Lou” or “Isabelle” – will appear in the beginning

resolution to create a new myth.

of the film… The title we select must become an

In late February Dotremont then publishes the stencilled

obsession – a myth! 1

magazine LE PETIT COBRA et le Bulletin Intérieur du Surréalisme Révolutionnaire. In it he tells his readers that the new movement may have objectives, but that it is

From a letter from Christian Dotremont to Asger Jorn, Brussels, 13 November 1948

primarily characterized by distaste for over-interpretive November 1948

theorizing about art.

The abstracts Therefore the point is not just to organize experimental art The word ‘cobra’ already carries various meanings in 1948,

in its unity, but also to give it new life through a cruel

of which the name of a particular kind of snake is the most

redefinition of its ways and its instruments, to give it

common. This combination of meanings is an argument in

some air through a pitiless liquidation of its inferiority

favour of naming the new magazine ‘Cobra’. But at the

complexes.

same time, in 1948 the acronym is strongly evocative of

This is the vision of “Cobra”.

the recently coined word ‘Benelux’ – itself denoting

[… ]

cooperation between three European partners (Belgium,

“Cobra” was born of such disgust with parlementarianism

the Netherlands and Luxemburg). In addition the hope is

and explicationism, with personalism and the atonic that

that the international network of artists behind the magazine would not remain limited to the Netherlands, Denmark and Belgium. Dotremont’s initial preference, therefore, is for ‘Lou’, a diminutive for the girl’s name ‘Louise’. Yet in the end ‘Cobra’ wins out. In November 1948 the members of the Danish artists

WHAT WAS COBRA

1 ‘Je propose comme titre du bulletin international imprimé: Cobra (Co: penhague; Br: uxelles; A: msterdam) ou Isabelle (pour une raison un peu personelle) ou Manaja ou Drang ou Iris ou Lou. Il faudrait arriver rapidement à un accord. […] D’autre part, je suis en train de faire un petit film, métaphore sur l’expérience […]. Bien entendu le titre international – “Lou” ou “Isabelle” - figurera au début du film… Il faut que le titre choisi devienne une obsession – un mythe!’ 2 ‘[…] le groupe surréaliste-révolutionnaire adhérent à COBRA.’

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

14 one can confidently define it as much by its ecstasy of action as by its sense of the experimental. “Cobra” is a simplistic-experimental movement.3 Christian Dotremont, ‘Qu’est-ce que c’est?’, LE PETIT COBRA et le Bulletin Intérieur du Surréalisme Révolutionnaire, (20 February 1949) no. 1, p. 1

Spring 1949 – autumn 1950 Seven issues of Cobra From the spring of 1949 to the autumn of 1950 seven issues of the international art magazine Cobra are published. Standing, left to right: Sixten Wiklund, Ernest Mancoba, Carl-Henning Pedersen, Erik Ortvad, Ejler Bille, Knud Nielsen, Tage Mellerup, Åge Vogel-Jørgensen, Erik Thommesen; seated: Karel Appel, Tony Appel, Christian Dotremont, Sonja Ferlov with her daughter and Else Alfelt; on the ground: Asger Jorn, Corneille, Constant and Henry Heerup. Like the three Dutch artists, Nielsen, Ferlov and Mancoba were guests; Høst member Svavar Gudnason is not pictured.

In part because they are alternately produced in

Vignettes from the magazine Cobra, from issues 1 to 7

coordination des investigations artistiques’ [bulletin for the

Copenhagen, Brussels, Amsterdam and Hanover, the issues vary widely from one another. In addition the subtitles appear in all manner of variants: ‘bulletin pour la coordination of artistic investigations], ‘organe du front international des artistes expérimentaux d’avant-garde’ [organ of the international front of avant-garde experimental artists], ‘internationale zeitschrift für moderne kunst’ [international magazine for modern art], ‘revue bimestrielle de l’internationale des artistes expérimentaux’ [bimonthly review of the experimental artists’ international]. Aside from the name only the dimensions of the publication remain consistent – although there are exceptions to that rule as well. November 1949 International exhibition of experimental art In November 1949 the Dutch Experimental Group publishes the only Dutch issue of Cobra, on the occasion of the ‘Internationale tentoonstelling van experimentele kunst’ [International exhibition of experimental art] which the group organizes in the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam. Thanks to Dotremont the word ‘Cobra’ is emblazoned in large letters at the entrance of the exhibition, but in correspondence with the Stedelijk Museum and in articles about the exhibition, it appears solely as the title of the international avant-garde magazine. What’s more, at a meeting in Amsterdam the artists involved name their organization ‘Experimental Artists’ International’. In the Netherlands, the Dutch ‘Cobra artists’ are known until the early 1960s as ‘the experimentalists’.

WHAT WAS COBRA

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

1950

1951

Experimentalists and

The last issue of Cobra

experimental art The back cover of Cobra no. 10 – the eighth instalment A mural by Karel Appel in Amsterdam’s city hall, the first

actually published – bears the notice that this is to be the

issue of the magazine Reflex and the ‘International

last issue of the magazine. This announcement is seen as

exhibition of experimental art’ cause a great deal of

the confirmation of the disbanding (or even the suicide) of

excitement in 1948 and 1949 in the Dutch press. This

the international artists group. Yet this is hardly the result

turns the members of the Dutch Experimental Group

of a joint decision. Dotremont is ill and no longer able to

(Karel Appel, Constant, Corneille, Eugène Brands,

fulfil his tasks as editor-in-chief and foremost contributor to

Anton Rooskens, Jan Nieuwenhuijs, Theo Wolvecamp,

the magazine. In addition he has a falling out with Jorn,

Gerrit Kouwenaar, Jan Elburg and Lucebert) into the most

who is also ill. This makes the magazine’s end inevitable.

famous ‘experimentalists’. At the same time the concepts

On the occasion of a large international exhibition in Liège,

‘experimentalists’ and ‘experimental art’ are broader than

the Belgian painter Pierre Alechinsky produces a last

just these artists and their work. This is clear in 1950, when

instalment of the magazine, which has not been published

a committee chaired by Steef de Vries organizes an

for a year, in the autumn of 1951.

exhibition in the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam on modern currents in the visual arts. One of these new

Early 1962

currents, according to the exhibition committee, is

A living phenomenon

experimental art, and this should include, besides the work of the painters of the Experimental Group, the work of

Once recovered, Dotremont and Jorn again seek contact

Rotterdam painter Piet Stenneberg and Schiedam sculptor

with their artist friends abroad in the mid-1950s, but a

Piet van Stuivenberg. The Dutch Experimental Group, which

reunion of the key figures from the 1948–1950 period

since the exhibition of November 1949 has been reduced

proves impossible. In 1958 several artists make an

to five members, objects to this idea – and sees its

unsuccessful attempt to organize a great exhibition

demands met: Constant, Karel Appel, Corneille and Theo

commemorating the birth of ‘Cobra’, but from 1961 onwards

Wolvecamp eventually show their work in a separate space

museums and galleries take that task over. In addition, an

under the title ‘Kinderen uiten zich’ [Children express

issue of the Museumjournaal is published in 1962, entirely

themselves].

devoted to ‘Cobra’. The articles express not only a great interest in the events of the period immediately after the

The scholastic and doctrinaire attitude of the committee

Second World War, but also a strong feeling that in a certain

finds expression in, among other things, its desire to

sense ‘Cobra’ lives on: the importance of the phenomenon

exhibit even the Experimental Group, which has

would in fact mainly reside in later artistic expressions.

steadfastly resisted any formalism, any aesthetic principle, under the title “experimental art”, a term we never use

We want to know how it was, not just out of curiosity, or

and which we consider in conflict with the intentions of

out of pragmatic considerations, or to derive a nice moral,

our group.

but just to know in the first place: what reality was ‘Cobra’,

Our participation in the exhibition depends on the

then and now. For ‘Cobra’ may have declared itself dead,

satisfaction of the following demands:

but it lives on in cunning and spectacular ways.

1. Removal of the label Experimental Art

2. Exhibition of the Experimental Group in a separate room

From a letter from Appel, Corneille, Constant, Wolvecamp and Aldo van Eyck to the committee of the exhibition ‘Nieuwe stromingen’ [New currents], Amsterdam, 20 March 1950

WHAT WAS COBRA

‘Verantwoording’, Museumjournaal, VII (1962), no. 7-8, p. 139 3 ‘Il s’agit donc non seulement d’organiser l’unité de l’art expérimental mais encore de l’animer par une redéfinition cruelle de ses voies et de ses outils, de l’aérer par une impitoyable liquidation de ses complexes d’infériorité. Telles sont les visées de “Cobra”. […] D’un tel dégoût du parlementarisme et de l’explicationnisme, du personnalisme et de l’atone est né “Cobra” que l’on peut à coup sûr aussi bien le qualifier par le délire de l’action que par le sens expérimental. “Cobra” est un mouvement expérimental-simpliste.’

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

16 To us, art history outsiders, it is increasingly clear that ‘Cobra’ is an exceptional, exciting phenomenon. Aside from the great loners Pollock, Tapies and Dubuffet, ‘Cobra’ was the most significant generator of post-war art. Wim Beeren, ‘Cobra achteraf beschouwd’, Museumjournaal, VII (1962), no. 7-8, pp. 196-197

1963 The Cobra group in Schiedam The growing importance of the concept ‘Cobra’ from the early 1960s onwards drives the concepts ‘experimentalists’ and ‘experimental art’ more or less into the background. This is also the case in Schiedam, where Piet Sanders repeatedly pushes for a plan to assemble a cohesive collection of modern art over several years. In the mid1950s Daan Schwagermann is still focusing on the work of ‘the experimentalists’; in 1963 Piet Sanders declares that the city of Schiedam now owns a small collection of modern Dutch paintings, in which the emphasis is on ‘the Cobra group’.

Poster for the ‘International exhibition of experimental art’ in the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam in 1949, designed by Willem Sandberg, the museum’s director

Over the last several years we have made a respectable start on a collection of works by modern Dutch painters; its emphasis was and is on the Cobra group [… ] Once again I wish to reiterate a request I have made repeatedly in past years, a request for a clear-cut acquisitions plan, based on the original premise of our acquisitions policy: to concentrate on modern Dutch painters, with an emphasis on the Cobra group. Piet Sanders during the 8 March 1963 meeting of the museum committee of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam

1973 History, prelude and significance of an art movement The first art history publications about ‘Cobra’ inspire Willemijn Stokvis to make the movement the subject of her university thesis. Ultimately she is awarded a Ph.D. in 1973 for a study still held as a standard work on the history of ‘Cobra’. The book includes an impressive amount of historical detail, and the author concludes by summing up Back cover of the magazine Cobra, no. 10 (autumn 1951). The Babylonian snake symbol first appeared in 1949, in the catalogue of the Danish artists group Spiralen, which Jorn had joined. Christian Dotremont later used it several times as a CoBrA symbol.

WHAT WAS COBRA

the essence of the movement as follows:

CoBrA

In hindsight the Cobra movement has foremost been

the colour of freedom

this: an attempt to put into practice a belief in

of ‘Cobra’. Attention focuses on the changing significance

spontaneous human creativity, in which the communal

of ‘Cobra’ after 1951 and on the role the ‘Cobra artists’

was seen as a crucial factor while the aesthetic result was

themselves played in the history of its reception. Indeed it

considered of secondary importance.

is when these recent developments are drawn into the

Willemijn Stokvis, Cobra. Geschiedenis, voorspel en betekenis van een beweging in de kunst van na de tweede wereldoorlog, Amsterdam, 1990 (1st ed. 1974), p. 251

picture that it becomes clear how much the image of ‘Cobra’ has evolved over the years. Today [… ] it is difficult to see past the dazzling, loaded

November 1978

image of Cobra to a clear picture of the ‘old’ movement.

To be or not to be

But this new image of Cobra, and the appeal it holds for the artist, the museum, the collector, as well as the art

Christian Dotremont in particular keeps an extremely critical

historian, is part of an artistic history of more recent

eye on the work of art history outsiders like Wim Beeren,

vintage than 1948–1951. This artistic history must be

Willemijn Stokvis and Gunnar Jespersen. In the 1950s he

documented as well.

tried to write a book about ‘Cobra’ himself, but was never

Graham Birtwistle, ‘Terug naar Cobra. Polemiek en problemen in de historiografie van Cobra’, Jong Holland, IV (1988), no. 5, p. 20

able or willing to finish it. He is quick to correct others, however, and even makes repeated calls in short articles for a better understanding of the special significance of ‘Cobra’.

November 1995

In November 1978, 30 years after introducing the acronym,

Opening of the Cobra Museum

Dotremont writes a piece intended to explain to an English-

in Amstelveen

speaking audience what ‘Cobra’ is and was. Asger Jorn’s death in 1973 still casts a shadow on his memories. It

The new ‘image’ of ‘Cobra’ finds emphatic expression in

would be his last piece on ‘Cobra’.

the Cobra Museum for Modern Art which opens in 1995 in Amstelveen. The museum relies initially on a substantial

In 1973, I receive my post in my village in Lapland and

loan of works from the Dutch businessman Karel van

suddenly read, “Asger Jorn is dead”. In remembrance I

Stuijvenberg. His collection is entirely composed of work

offered many of our memories. This memory that never

by artists who were involved in one way or another with

existed. Cobra is becoming, as Jorn felt it, as Jorn lived it

the magazine Cobra and the international exhibitions of

along with us. Cobra that never was, that never is perfect and that never will be. ‘Perfection,’ Jorn said, ‘is death.’ 4

experimental art during the 1948–1951 period. Who would contest the museum’s right to call itself a ‘Cobra Museum’? Ties between the museum and the ‘Cobra artists’ are not

Christian Dotremont, ‘Cobra, qu’est-ce que c’est?’, included in its entirety in the reprint of the magazine Cobra 1948–1951 in 1980

always consistently close. What’s more, the lending agreement between the city of Amstelveen and Karel van Stuijvenberg is for a limited time only. When negotiations over a partial acquisition of the collection break down in

1988

early 2002, the museum loses its most valuable asset.

The new image of ‘Cobra’

However, acquisitions and new loans soon bring in other ‘Cobra works’. For the moment, the museum is thus able to

Celebrations marking the ‘birth of Cobra’ on a grand scale

stick to its original course.

and a seemingly unbridled rise in the value of ‘Cobra art’ confirm the sense that ‘Cobra’ is not quite yet a thing of the past in the 1980s either. The initial attempts to cut through to the essence of the original movement are followed by studies that primarily shed light on the

4 ‘En

1973, je reçois dans mon village lapon mon courrier et brusquement je lis “Asger Jorn er did”. En souvenir, j’ai donné beaucoup de nos souvenirs. Ce souvenir, qui n’a pas existé. Cobra devient, comme Jorn l’avait senti, comme Jorn l’avait vécu avec nous. Cobra qui n’a jamais été, n’est jamais parfait et ne le sera jamais. “La perfection”, dit Jorn, “c’est la mort.”’

contradictions in the history of the 1948–1951 period and on the impossibility of drawing a definitive, original picture

WHAT WAS COBRA

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

18 November 1998 Pioneers and questionable cases In order to determine which artists may be counted as belonging to ‘Cobra’, most museums and collectors take their cues from several exhibitions and publications from the 1948–1951 period. This is hardly a satisfactory criterion, however, especially as the significance of the phenomenon, according to some, can largely be found outside that particular period. This leads to a number of questionable cases, such as that of sculptor Lotti van der Gaag. Following the lead of the drafters of the ‘Cobra’ issue

The Cobra Museum for Modern Art in Amstelveen, designed by the Dutch architect Wim Quist. Some felt Aldo van Eyck, who had designed the large international exhibitions of experimental art in 1949 and 1951 in Amsterdam and Liège, should have designed the museum. Yet this begs the question of whether there is such a thing as ‘Cobra architecture’. In the foreground the sculpture The Fountain by Karel Appel (2002).

of the Museumjournaal, Willemijn Stokvis also becomes convinced that Lotti should be counted as a ‘Cobra’ artist. Constant and Corneille disagree. They hold to the idea that ‘Cobra’ was an exclusive group during the 1948–1951 period – and to Willemijn Stokvis’ thesis, which did not mention Lotti. We object to the inclusion of the Danish sculptor ROBERT JACOBSEN among the members of the group. [… ] We object even more strongly to the fact that LOTTI VAN DER GAAG (known as Lotti) is included in the catalogue. This is a serious historical misrepresentation. Lotti – as a sculptor – never belonged to our group, did not participate in any Cobra event or exhibition, is mentioned nowhere in any of our publications and, what’s more, is

The CoBrA café on the Museumplein in Amsterdam. The walls of the café are decorated with photographs from the 1948–1951 period. The café has a small collection of works by CoBrA artists, which are echoed on the china and the serving staff’s uniforms. The cup-and-saucer sets and the T-shirts are also for sale in the shop below the café. .

never once named in the standard work by Willemijn Stokvis [… ], not even in the index at the back of the book, which totals some 300 names! (facheux oubli de la part de Willemijn Stokvis…)5 In hopes that you will henceforth take the objections listed above into account. We do not wish to see the pioneering strength of Cobra diluted, and definitely not its historical significance distorted. From an open letter by Constant and Corneille in response to the exhibition ‘Cobra en de beeldhouwkunst’ [Cobra and sculpture] in the Cobra Museum for Modern Art, Amstelveen, 8 November 1998

2003 Cobra art and Cobra kitsch Attempts to delineate ‘Cobra’ based on historical grounds are squarely at odds with the rough stylistic conception Corneille’s passion for decoration has become legendary. The ‘products’ now available vary from ball-point pens and shoehorns to more exclusive items such as silk neckties or a bottle of Italian vino spumante in a luxurious packaging complete with matching glasses. One person’s prestigious business gift is another’s CoBrA kitsch.

WHAT WAS COBRA

that is often associated with the term ‘Cobra’. Artists who were in no way whatever involved in the movement in the 1948–1951 period are commonly called ‘Cobra artists’ if

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

their work displays certain stylistic characteristics. At the same time, ‘Cobra history’ is endlessly multiplied by reproductions: the various vignettes that originally appeared in the magazine Cobra are found in mass quantities on souvenir and gift items, even as photographs from the family albums of the ‘Cobra artists’ are splashed bigger than life on the walls of a ‘Cobra café’ that has no direct connection to these artists. With this commercial exploitation the ‘myth of Cobra’ takes a turn Dotremont could not possibly have foreseen in 1948. Since he made a possible title for a magazine in 1948 out of the beginning letters of three European capitals, the ‘Cobra’ concept has acquired countless new applications and meanings.

Selected bibliography Cobra 1951, ex. cat. Paris (Musée d’Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris)/ Chalon-sur-Saône (Maison de la Culture)/Rennes (Musée de Beaux Art) 1983 • J . Bokhoven (ed.), Cobra in het Stedelijk Museum van Schiedam, Schiedam 1984 • Cobra 1948–1951, Amsterdam 1980 (reprint of the magazines Cobra, Le Petit Cobra and other documents with an introduction by Christian Dotremont) • Cobra 1948–1951, ex. cat. Hamburg (Kunstverein) 1982 • Cobra 50 År, ex. cat. Arken (Museum for Moderne Kunst) 1998 • Cobra post Cobra, ex. cat. Oostende (Provinciaal Museum voor Moderne Kunst) 1991 • Cobra au Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, ex. cat. Luxembourg (Musée National d’Histoire et d’Art) 1994 • Cobra: Copenhague, Bruxelles, Amsterdam. Art expérimental 1948–1951, ex. cat. Lausanne (Musée cantonal des Beaux-Arts)/München (Kunsthalle der Hypo-Kulturstiftung)/Wien (KunstHaus) 1997 – 1998 • Jong Holland, 4 (1988) no. 5 (Cobra-issue) • J.-C. Lambert, Cobra, Paris/Anvers 1983; New York s.a. [1984] • R. Miller, Cobra, s.a. [Amsterdam 1995] • Museumjournaal, (1962) no. 7-8 (Cobra-issue) VII • W. Stokvis, Cobra. Geschiedenis, voorspel en betekenis van een beweging in de kunst van na de tweede wereldoorlog, Amsterdam 19741; 19792; 19853; 19904 • W. Stokvis, Cobra, an International movement in art after the Second World War, New York 1988 • W. Stokvis, Cobra. De weg naar spontaniteit, Blaricum 2001 • W. Stokvis, E. Wingen, L. Duppen (ed.), De taal van Cobra. Museumcollectie Van Stuijvenberg, Amstelveen s.a. • E. Wingen (ed.), De A van cobra in woord en beeld, Amsterdam s.a. • 1948

WHAT WAS COBRA

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

The Schiedam collection

The Museum Memorandum issued in 1982 following discussion over the Stedelijk Museum Schiedamâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s policy, leads among other things to the building of an open storage facility, which is to guarantee permanent accessibility to the collection. An exhibition space does have to be sacrificed.

Explanatory notes CHRISTEL KORDES

23 This catalogue contains descriptions of all works in the collection of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam produced by artists who were members of the Experimental Group in Holland and CoBrA, or were or are associated with them. In addition to works of art, this catalogue also includes documents (such as hand-written documents, typed documents, announcements and catalogues of exhibitions, magazines and pamphlets) which relate to individual artists as well as to various historical aspects of CoBrA. The catalogue is arranged in alphabetical order by artist and gives concise descriptions of the pieces. In addition 70 artworks are discussed at length. For each artist the artworks and documents are arranged chronologically by the year of their creation within the inventory categories used by the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam. All paintings, including gouaches and watercolours, are described first, followed by sculptures, textiles and ceramics, and finally drawings, graphics and documents, with a few exceptions. These categories are indicated by an inventory number preceded, respectively, by the letters S/, P/, K/ and G/. For each work the title, date, materials, dimensions, inventory number, method of acquisition and details are listed, in that order. The titles of the works are in principle based on markings on the piece itself or on listings in documents. In many cases, however, titles are based on indications gleaned simply from tradition or listed in descriptions in earlier secondary literature. In some cases, recent research led to a title correction. For recent acquisitions, when no title could be found, the work is listed as â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;untitledâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. Dates are derived from markings on the piece itself or have been determined by research into sources. Undated works are always listed first. When different works bear the same date, the order of the inventory numbers is observed. Dimensions are given in centimetres and rounded to one decimal point. Some inventory numbers include a suffix consisting of a series number that may have various meanings. In a number of cases this relates to an artwork consisting of a recto and a verso side. In other cases it means that there are multiple (nearly identical) copies of one piece or that it refers to a cohesive series, such as a graphic series or a group of documents and archives. In the details the meaning of the series number is explained. Furthermore the details list the issue numbers of magazines or series of graphics or publication print runs, or contain specific remarks about the work. Almost all pieces are illustrated in colour or black-and-white. An illustration is omitted when a document lacks any particular visual value. This is indicated by [not shown]. The catalogue concludes with an overview of all documents in the collection of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam not attributed to any individual artist but relating to the historical aspects of the CoBrA movement and the various experimental groups that belonged to it. No illustrations are included, as these documents have been repeatedly reproduced and reprinted in the literature of CoBrA.

EXPLANATORY NOTES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Pierre Alechinsky

[Brussels 1927]

Untitled 1960 watercolour on paper 100.0 x 152.0 cm S /248 donated by Hoekâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Machine- en Zuurstoffenfabriek N.V., 1962

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel

[Amsterdam 1921]

Christiaan Karel Appel was the son of a barber from the Dapperstraat in Amsterdam, and painted and drew from early childhood. He was naturally gifted and remained exceptionally productive throughout his life. Appel drifted around the Netherlands during the war; he painted landscapes and cityscapes and regularly attempted portraiture. In Amsterdam he attended classes at the State Academy where he met Corneille Guillaume Beverloo, a well-read young man from a well-to-do family from Haarlem. Corneille and the working-class Appel were intellectual opposites yet they soon became best friends. Appel first attracted attention in 1946 during the ‘Young Painters’ exhibition in Amsterdam’s Stedelijk Museum. This show also included Eugène Brands and Anton Rooskens but Appel and Corneille did not get to know them until some time later. An introduction to Constant resulted in the plan to set up an experimental group called Reflex. This led to the inauguration of the Experimental Group in Holland on 16 July 1948 and also involved Rooskens, Theo Wolvecamp and Jan Nieuwenhuijs. Appel wrote a manifesto that was rejected by the others. Instead Constant published his own manifesto in their ‘mouthpiece’ Reflex. Along with Constant and Corneille, Appel was there in Paris, at the founding of CoBrA in November 1948. Meanwhile Appel was working in the Netherlands on a commission that was to make him famous: a mural in the refreshment room of the Amsterdam city hall. The theme was ‘children asking questions’. However, their hungry faces encountered the resistance of the lunching officials. The mural was covered up following a great deal of fuss in the newspapers but by now the whole of Holland had heard of Karel Appel. The narrow-minded Netherlands soon became too small for Appel who felt the lure of cosmopolitan Paris. He moved there in the autumn of 1950 and found studio space in a deserted leather warehouse on the Rue Santeuil together with Corneille and a number of other artists. Appel’s international career soon took off. He exhibited with Martha Jackson in New York, and his work was also shown several years later by well-established art dealers such as Gimpel Fils in London and Rudolf Zwirner in Essen. Although his active and literary contribution to CoBrA was modest, nonetheless his work largely determined its image. As an artist, Appel remained as experimental as when he was a young man. He worked in an intuitive, spontaneous and expressive way and left his mark on every material he laid his hands on. [LvH]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 28 Karel Appel, Kees van Bohemen, Corneille et al.

The Verweij Family Guest Book 1955–1960 paint, ink, pencil on paper 27.5 x 22.2 cm G /1409 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: This guest book belonging to the Verweij family of Schiedam has contributions by Karel Appel, Kees van Bohemen, Corneille, Jan Elburg, Lotti van der Gaag, Frits Klein, Jaap Nanninga, Lotte Ruting, Jan van Vlijmen, Emile Voeten, Theo Wolvecamp, Bouke IJlstra and others. The album also includes separate works consisting a drawing (1959), a hand-drawn New Year’s card (1958), and a photo of Lotti van der Gaag taken by Cor Dekkinga (1960), drawings by ‘J.C.A’ and ‘Koenig’ (1956), and an unsigned drawing on thin paper.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel

Portrait of a Gypsy Woman 1944 gouache on paper 67.5 x 54.5 cm S /11 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 30 Sjaantje 1944 gouache on paper 74.0 x 54.5 cm S /43 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

In 1944, Karel Appel was 23 years old and still at the beginning of his artistic career. He had already made portraits, a genre where he was not only quite proficient but was also able to earn some money. But these naturalistic portraits became a thing of the past once Appel left Amsterdam’s State Academy of Fine Arts in 1945. His work changed with this portrait of Sjaantje. Here, his aim was not to create an attractive likeness; the wrinkles, crow’s-feet and the hint of an incipient moustache are too mercilessly depicted for that. Sjaantje’s sharp features are well suited to an expressionist approach, which is further emphasized by the striking and colourful decorative background. The heavily accentuated contours and the head’s elongated form are strongly reminiscent of the work of the German painter Max Beckmann. Appel had fled the capital in 1944 and, together with Corneille, had found temporary shelter with a jewellery maker who lived on a boat on the Vecht. There, they were delighted to find copies of the French art journal Cahiers d’Arts, which was to influence the creation of the CoBrA movement. The reproductions of Beckmann were a real find and Appel studied them eagerly. By an irony of fate, Beckmann was exiled in Amsterdam at the very same time. Sjaantje is related to the colourful Portrait of a Gypsy Woman, another gouache dating from 1944 that is also a part of the collection (see page 29). [MdG]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 31

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 32 Small Family Group VK

1945 gouache on paper 30.8 x 24.2 cm S /17 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

Head 1945 watercolour, chalk on paper 29.7 x 21 .7 cm S /35 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 33 Fish and Bird 1946 gouache on paper 48.3 x 66.7 cm S /26 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 34 Small Man with the Sun 1947 watercolour, chalk on paper 44.0 x 55.6 cm S /12 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

Like Organ Grinder (see p. 36-37), Small Man with the Sun is one of the first examples of the passion for experimentation that inspired Appel after the end of the Second World War. It already includes a hint of Cubism and African Art. The primitive faces and the dissected and playfully re-assembled image combined with their touchingly mythical character, form an unaffected and particularly spontaneous depiction of a sense of reality. Both gouaches attest to an intense awareness of the moment. Appel’s wartime work was still reminiscent of Van Gogh, Breitner and Werkman. But he abandoned this Amsterdam and French Impressionist approach after the war, and allowed himself to be seduced by the work of Picasso and the savoir vivre of Miró’s oeuvre, which he had discovered through Constant. Small Man with the Sun is remarkable for its lightness of colour in the interplay of the virtually monochrome areas of its accentuated contours. The staging of the small man with his toy car and toy sun makes this depiction look like a child’s drawing. The grotesque and clumsy figures, which Appel turned into a new genre throughout that year, gaze at the viewer with a quizzical and innocent expression. Appel used this childlike innocence to disguise his pent-up artistic and social discontent. [KF]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 35

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 36 Organ Grinder 1947 watercolour, pastel on paper 43.8 x 55.7 cm S /28/1-2 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958 details: on the back is a drawing of a female nude in red chalk.

This gouache of an Amsterdam organ grinder dates from an important period in Appel’s work that occurred right after the Liberation. In the years 1947 and 1948, he was making an increasing effort to free himself from what he described as ‘two thousand years of Europe’. He became acquainted with the École de Paris during a short visit to Paris, and he was also inspired by the first exhibition of Picasso and Kurt Schwitters in Amsterdam’s Stedelijk Museum, which was currently under the impassioned leadership of Willem Sandberg. A number of oil paintings and gouaches by Appel were shown at the ‘Young Painters’ group exhibition, which was also held at the Stedelijk. All the gouaches that date from 1946, 1947 and 1948 are experimental. It was a time of searching where Appel, like so many young painters, had fallen under the spell of not only Picasso but also Matisse and the young French painter Pignon. Organ Grinder even seems to have been influenced by the work of Dubuffet. But despite practising all the latest European styles, the subject matter could hardly have more typical of Amsterdam than this organ grinder. Amsterdam is the city of Appel’s youth and of his early years as a painter. He did not have a penny to his name but was completely happy in his first studio on the Oudezijds Achterburgwal. [KF] ‘I’m still an Amsterdammer,’ wrote Appel in 1990, ‘it’s in your blood. There’s still a particular kind of Jewish humour that makes you who you are.’

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

Karel Appel 38 Grey Forms in Blue 1947 ink, gouache on paper 35.3 x 54.3 cm S /34/1-2 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958 recto details: on the back is a fragment of an abstract composition in yellow, green, blue, purple, grey and off-white.

Grey Forms in Blue is an attractive experiment with materials. Appel clearly created his figures by applying a series of layers. The composition has been brought into balance by covering the form with a final layer of grey so that the blue and purple colours can come into their own. In some places, the gouache is so thick that it has begun to crumble and bits of paint have been lost. There is an even wilder experiment on the back of Grey Forms in Blue. Here, Appel apparently began a painting in Indian ink, over which he added green, yellow and a blue border. Purple paint was then dripped across it, which did not adhere to the yellow and green. The blue border has also been outlined in an off-white, opaque watercolour. The original painting â&#x20AC;&#x201C; on what is now the back of this work â&#x20AC;&#x201C; was once much larger: Appel later divided the sheet into four. [LN]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel

verso

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

Karel Appel 40 Red Cubist Figures 1947 gouache on paper 48.8 x 64.5 cm S /31 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel

41 AK

verso

Three Heads 1948 gouache on paper 34.3 x 50.0 cm S /13/1-2 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958 details: on the back are black abstract signs against a red background.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 42 Fish between Flowers 1948 gouache on paper 49.2 x 63.9 cm S /14 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

After visiting Paris with Corneille in the autumn of 1947, Appel wrote him a short but badly-punctuated letter at the beginning of December: ‘Corneille Just writing to you, I’m working day and night I’ve just started painting now. I suddenly found it (at night) I’m now making a powerful primitive work more powerful than Negro Art and Picasso – Why, because I’m building upon the 20th century am a product of a Picasso Brightly Coloured I have broken through, through the wall of Abstract, Surrealism etc. My work contains (…) everything You mustn’t be pigeon-holed. Won’t come for the time being, no time work hard, throw everything overboard. Your friend Karel.’ The childlike figures, which were created at the end of 1947, acquired bright colours the following year. The reckless brushwork in Fish between Flowers shows that Appel used the medium of gouache so as to give vent to his passion for experimentation. His work of 1948 displays many variations in style ranging from children’s drawings, to which this gouache has the closest affinity, to items of rubbish and humorous fantasy creatures. All in all, it is clear that the artist Karel Appel has left academicism and the Impressionist tradition far behind him. Despite losing his studio at the beginning of 1948 and living like a tramp on the street, his production for that year was extremely high. [KF]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 43

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 44 Eyes, Blue, Red Eyes Eyes The most striking aspect of these three strongly related gouaches, which were all made in the same year, is their hushed atmosphere. There is none of the confusion of scratches, marks and smudges that are so typical of most of Appel’s works from these years. A virtually monochrome painted surface, which has been constructed out of a number of coloured layers, encloses several figures. The word ‘enclose’ is used intentionally here because it is obvious that the figures were painted first and then the surroundings. The top layer of paint leaves only an edge open around the figures. If you look more closely, you will see that the surface of paint around the figures is thick, and consists of many layers of paint. This suggests that the gouaches were initially far less restrained, and that there were probably additional depictions around the visible figures. These depictions were apparently later erased and covered with paint. Indeed, we know that Appel often worked in this way, and this technique can also be seen in other works (see p. 38-39). Hence, the hushed atmosphere of these gouaches is a conscious choice; the maker has imposed silence on his initial painting so as to stop at these few figures. The figures are eyes, according to the title, but they look much more like rudimentary human figures or animals. However, they could also be symbolic signs or letters from some strange alphabet, the meaning of which has been silenced. [PvU]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 45 Eyes, Blue, Red 1948 gouache on paper 33.0 x 49.0 cm S /15 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 46

recto

verso

Eyes 1948 gouache on paper 49.8 x 29.8 cm S /32/1-3 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958 details: on the back is a grey background with a linear composition of stylized human figures. This is probably a variation on â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;the prisonersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; motif.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 47 Eyes 1948 gouache on paper 33.6 x 45.4 cm S /33 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 48 Rearing Animal 1948 watercolour, ink, chalk on paper 53.9 x 46.7 cm S /16 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

Appel’s feet left the ground both literally and figuratively in Rearing Animal. This grotesque fantasy creature seems to be dancing in space because the top and bottom of this work are virtually interchangeable. Appel once said that at the beginning of his career he used to work in the dark. He had no light and no gas: ‘At that time I kept my gouache in jars. I knew roughly where the red, the blue, the yellow, the green and the black all were and I painted in the dark on cardboard. [...] It all became virtually abstract. [...] Then I put the light on, a candle, and picked it up and turned it around because I couldn’t see the top or the bottom. I finished them off in my own way, by covering them with an extra bit of white or by adding a red mark. If a sheet got dirty, I turned it into a red mark and then it was finished so far as I was concerned.’ During this period, Appel also made objects from rubbish that were inspired by the work of Kurt Schwitters. He found his materials amongst the garbage that had been left on the street. Yet painting was always Appel’s first love and he said that it helped him to come closer to the imagination. For him, Expressionism, as he called it, was an attitude rather than a technique: ‘You come with your daubings, and you begin with nothing and you end with nothing. But in the combination of all those daubings that go from nothing to nothing, “in between”, you feel a head or an expression: a sentiment.’ [KF]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 49

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 50 Colour 1948 gouache on paper 50.5 x 20.5 cm S /19 donated by Karel Appel, 1956

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel

Passing Animals 1948 gouache on paper 49.0 x 63.5 cm S /24 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 52 Standing Figure 1948 gouache on paper 48.5 x 20.5 cm S /92/1- Â2 donated by Karel Appel, 1956 details: on the back is a fragment of a composition in blue and black.

Rectangular and round forms have been woven together in Standing Figure, which can be read both from the front and from the side. Karel Appel may have observed this method in the work of Picasso, who was a source of inspiration for many artists after the Second World War. Appel regularly used these playful alternations in other work. Standing Figure displays a working method that is contrary to the process of covering the form in Eyes (see p. 44-47). The structure of white lines effectively highlights the figure against the rich colour nuances of the background. A typical CoBrA creature is depicted on the back of this work: a figure which, depending on the individual imagination, represents a standing figure, a bird or an insect. Appel began this sketch by painting the paper in blue and purple rather than by first drawing the form in ink. This imbues the paperâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s surface with an imaginary space in which the drawing of the figure appears to float. [LN]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 53

recto

verso

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 54 Animal under Stars 1949 ink, pastel on paper 38.2 x 45.8 cm S /25/1-2 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958 details: on the back sketch in ink.

Right after the CoBrA group was set up in November 1948, Appel, Corneille and Constant were invited to participate in an exhibition of the Høst artists association in Copenhagen. They were received with great hospitality: there was a delicious dinner and a great deal of discussion about each other’s work. Corneille wrote enthusiastically to his family: ‘[...] the painters are one big family wherever you go, all over the world. [...] there are emotions in life that are remembered forever and that was how the first glimpse of these paintings felt. Almost without exception, the proof of the vitality of their art was on the walls of this pavilion. Here, horizons open up to a better future.’ The Danish artist Carl-Henning Pedersen clearly had a particular influence on Karel Appel’s work. The humour and pleasure of Appel’s mythical animals disappeared and made way for a touch of abstract indignation. Animal under Stars dates from the same time as Children Asking Questions, a mural in the refreshment room of Amsterdam city hall that caused so much commotion amongst the officials that the painting was covered up. This gouache addresses the same lost and neglected reality as the piercing eyes in the mural and, like Children Asking Questions, it also has a compassionate quality. [KF]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

Karel Appel 55

recto VK

verso AK

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 56 recto VK

verso

Flying Bird 1949 gouache on paper 45.0 x 59.6 cm S /23 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958 details: on the back is a depiction of a bird in a landscape featuring a tree.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 57 Two Figures, Dog 1949 gouache on paper 45.5 x 59.2 cm S /30 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 58 Owl Animal with Bird Beak Sitting Bird The chalk drawing Sitting Bird from 1950 has an obvious connection with two other drawings in the collection: Owl and Animal with Bird Beak (both from 1949). In these works, the influence of the Danish experimental artist Carl-Henning Pedersen can be seen in the scratched lines inside the contours. Pedersen scratched into the gouache or the painting with the back of his brush and Appel adopted the same technique. This Sitting Bird emerges from a grey background, an approach that was first used in 1948. It accentuates the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s incomprehensibility. The work has the same attitude as Animal under Stars from 1949 (see p. 54-55). But there is also a small difference. The bird animal is not only piteous, like the sad animal beneath the starry sky, it also has something proud, something irrepressible. This animal is aware of itself. The innocent and humbled look of both Animal under Stars and Appelâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s famous Children Asking Questions has made way for a single eye that stares critically sideways instead forwards and towards the viewer. This emphasizes reticence and reflection rather than a sense of spontaneity or direct experience. [KF]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 59 Owl 1949 chalk, gouache on paper 43.7 x 53.0 cm G /71 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 60 Animal with Bird Beak 1949 chalk, gouache on paper 41 .0 x 44.5 cm G /100 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel

Sitting Bird 1950 pastel, gouache on paper 50.0 x 52.0 cm S /27 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 62 Primal Animal 1951 oil on linen 90.5 x 114.3 cm S /49/1-2 purchased from Karel Appel, 1955 details: on the back is a depiction of a nude lying down (damaged) (see p. 64).

Appel adopted a painting method in the years 1950 and 1951 where he consciously assembled big, compact areas of colour. Primal Animal consists entirely of powerful touches such as colour, a black line or a thick, coloured contour. After the spontaneous gestures of the earlier work, Appel was to become the epitome of caution at the beginning of the 1950s. At this time he was living with Corneille in Paris, where he had a studio in an old warehouse on the Rue Santeuil. Life was anything but easy for them: sometimes they did not even have the money to buy oils, linen and brushes. Remarkably, it was under these circumstances that Appel discovered the importance of paint mass. He wrote in a letter to Aldo van Eyck: ‘Achieving matter is the new way for painters, architects etc. My work is changing dramatically. Recently in my Amsterdam studio, the creatures begin to emerge, I painted over all those canvases that I brought with me. It’s matter itself. [...] now I paint marks larger marks colours endlessly over each other remove and new colour marks until a concentrated area remains free and yet restrained suddenly a bright red or yellow and canvas and creature are caught in one.’ This work has striking similarities with Carl-Henning Pedersen’s oeuvre both immediately before and at the beginning of the Second World War. [KF]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 63

recto VK

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 64 VK

verso

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 65 Animal 1951 gouache on paper 47.0 x 71 .0 cm S /22 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958 VK

Animal 1953 gouache on paper 51 .0 x 65.6 cm S /38 purchased from a private owner, 1957

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 66 The Wild Boy 1954 oil on linen 195.3 x 113.7 cm S /3 purchased from Karel Appel, 1956

Gone are the heavy contours and the smooth, neat and uncomplicated coloured areas of red, yellow, blue, green and black that typified Appel’s work of the previous few years. By 1954 Appel was painting with increasing ease. He no longer modified his paints, which were applied directly from the tube. He painted with big gestures and could turn his hand to large sizes. He proves himself to be a master of materials in The Wild Boy. Here, the observation in a letter to his architect friend Aldo van Eyck that ‘canvas and creature are caught in one’, is more true than ever before. The paint has been applied wildly across the entire canvas and bursts out of the form. Eyes, nose and mouth acquire a savage expression through an aggressive use of paint. [KF]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 67

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 68 Untitled 1948 painted plaster h. 105.0 cm P/117 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Sanders, 1968

According to an interview with Karel Appel in 1990, making sculpture was always less important to him than his ‘first love’: painting. This statement is certainly borne out by his oeuvre: there are far fewer sculptures than paintings, and moreover almost all of them involve painting. Appel had become acquainted with the modern-classical sculpture of artists such as Picasso and Matisse immediately after the war. By 1947 he had began to experiment with assemblages made of a variety of materials that he collected on the streets of Amsterdam. The examples of these works that have survived consist of distinctly rectangular and crude forms, which are further accentuated by being painted in strongly contrasting colours. However, the plaster-covered constructions involve far more flowing and organic shapes, such as this wall sculpture from 1948. A figure has been created out of elongated, curved threads, which look as if they are made of dough. It is neither a human being nor an animal; rather it is a strange and fabulous creature with characteristics of both species. Its upright posture makes this creature look human but its legs vanish into a curve that contains the form of an animal; its arms turn into what look like antlers. The paint has been strikingly applied in primary colours: black, white, yellow, red and blue. This use of colour dates from De Stijl, an art movement with ideas that directly contradict Appel’s own theory of art. [PvU]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 69

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 70 Untitled 1954 cotton 26.0 x 18.0 cm K/103/1-12 [shown only in part] donated by NV Stoomweverij Nijverheid Holland, Enschede, 1954 details: 12 samples of printed cotton designed by Karel Appel and produced by Stoomweverij Nijverheid Holland of Enschede. Three samples are identical to the inventory numbers K/217, K/218 and K/219.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 72

Untitled 1954 cotton 500.0 x 92.0 cm K/217 donated by NV Stoomweverij Nijverheid Holland, Enschede, 1954

details: remnant of printed cotton designed by Karel Appel (pattern number 26/9193/2) and produced by Stoomweverij Nijverheid Holland of Enschede.

Untitled 1954 cotton 462.0 x 92.0 cm K/218 donated by NV Stoomweverij Nijverheid Holland, Enschede, 1954

details: remnant of printed cotton designed by Karel Appel (pattern number 28/9194/5) and produced by Stoomweverij Nijverheid Holland of Enschede.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 73

Untitled 1954 cotton 500.0 x 92.0 cm K/219 donated by NV Stoomweverij Nijverheid Holland, Enschede, 1954

details: remnant of printed cotton designed by Karel Appel (pattern number 26/9193/3) and produced by Stoomweverij Nijverheid Holland of Enschede.

Untitled 1954 cotton 800.0 cm x 92.0 cm K/220 donated by NV Stoomweverij Nijverheid Holland, Enschede, 1954

details: remnant of printed cotton designed by Karel Appel (pattern number 29/9192/2) and produced by Stoomweverij Nijverheid Holland of Enschede.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 74 Sheet of Studies undated ink, watercolour on paper 66.8 x 49.5 cm G /81 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

The viewer’s attention is initially drawn to the centrally located figure. However, this sheet of studies is particularly interesting in terms of the small figures grouped around it that provide insight into the playful way in which Karel Appel familiarized himself with Picasso’s visual language. This applies explicitly to the middle drawing on the upper edge. Ethnographic art was another important stimulus for his experiments, a fact that is reflected by a sketch of a primitive mask on the right-hand side of the sheet. The central figure, which consists of robust lines in Indian ink, is reminiscent of both a primitive object with nails and the painted wooden sculpture that Appel assembled from driftwood and nails in 1948. Some fragmentary sketches can also be seen beneath the large composition. This sheet of studies provides us with a glimpse of the artist’s working process. We know that in 1947 Appel was exploring the motif of ‘prisoners’ in a series of works on paper. But this little man, with his mouth and eyes so emphatically open and his arms and hands spread in what looks like a plea for help, also refers to the ‘questioning children’ motif. During his train journey to Copenhagen in 1948, Appel passed through Germany and was struck by the misery of children begging for food on station platforms. On a number of occasions, he incorporated this theme into wooden reliefs and drawings. The most sensational example is the 1949 mural in the refreshment room of Amsterdam city hall. This sheet of studies probably dates from 1947–1948. [MdG]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 75

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 76 Small Child with Flowers 1947 chalk, watercolour, ink on paper 44.6 x 53.5 cm G /80/1-2 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958 details: on the back are sketches of fantasy animals in black ink.

Small Child with Flowers is a good example of Karel Appel’s interest in the simplicity of children’s drawings. An oval with two dots can easily be read as a face. The rectangular form beneath the oval is the body so that the image of a child is almost automatically created. Giving your imagination free rein can transfer the round circles next to the head into flowers. Appel concealed the paper’s hard tone beneath the poetic colour surrounding the figure; he depicted the child’s fantasy world and the viewer is encouraged to enter it. On the back of Small Child with Flowers are the forms and lines that Appel typically used for his fantasy animals. He created creatures by adding just a dot, a line or a shaded area to ovals, rounded rectangles or triangles. Between 1948 and 1952, Appel used these figures for decorating invitations and book covers and as illustrations for texts by his friends the writers Bert Schierbeek (Het bloed stroomt door [The Blood Flows On] p. 82), Hugo Claus (De blijde en onvoorziene week [The Happy and Unforeseen Week]) and Hans Andreus (De ronde kant van de aarde [The Round Side of the Earth] p. 81). [LN]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 77

recto VK

verso AK

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 78 Figures in the Wood 1949 chalk, watercolour on paper 46.4 x 62.8 cm G /82 purchased from Karel Appel, 1958

Karel Appel’s work in the collection of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam was only signed and dated some years after it was made. We know this for reasons including the fact that he sometimes added his signature across a damaged area. In many cases, the titles were only attributed at a later point in time. They are mentioned neither on the work itself nor in the artist’s correspondence, and are not always accurate. Hence, there are doubts about both the title and the date of the chalk drawing Figures in the Wood. Two forms on the right-hand side of the drawing could be interpreted as trees but there is certainly no question of any other ‘figures’. The drawn creature is a cross between a bird and a person, and its colour has been constructed in a striking way. Probably Appel first filled the entire sheet with yellow, red, orange, green and blue triangles and rectangles before drawing in the contours and covering the background with black. The official date of Figures in the Wood is 1949, but it was probably made a year earlier. In terms of form and particularly colour, it is extremely reminiscent of Appel’s famous 1948 painting Cry for Freedom that was loaned to Amsterdam’s Stedelijk Museum by the Bijenkorf department store before it was sold to a private collector abroad in the mid-1990s. It was one of the most frequently reproduced CoBrA paintings, and for many years it determined the image that the public had of this movement through, for instance, the many reproductions made by the Verkerke company. There is also a preliminary study of it in the collection of Gemeentemuseum in The Hague, which is strikingly similar to the drawing in Schiedam. Both the preliminary study and the painting are dated as 1948 so that the dating and the title of Figures in the Wood should actually be revised. [LvH]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 79

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 80

Untitled 1948 lithography on paper 30.0 x 23.5 cm G /1319 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991

details: originally part of Reflex (1948) 1 .

Untitled 1951 letterpress 10.1 x 26.7 cm G /1442 archive of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam details: invitation to an exhibition by Karel Appel in Kunstzaal Van Lier, Amsterdam.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel

Untitled 1952 letterpress 10.1 x 26.7 cm G /1441 purchased from a private owner, 2000

details: invitation to an exhibition of gouaches by Karel Appel in â&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Venster, Rotterdam.

Karel Appel and Hans Andreus

De ronde kant van de aarde

[The Round Side of the Earth]

1952 letterpress 21 .9 x 22 cm G /1345 [shown only in part] purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions, 1991 details: edition number 28/100.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 82 Karel Appel and Bert Schierbeek

Het bloed stroomt door

[The Blood Flows On]

1954 letterpress 23.8 x 16.1 cm G /1343/1-2 [shown only in part] purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions, 1991

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 84 Karel Appel 1956 letterpress 25.9 x 19.0 cm G /1443/1-2 [not shown] purchased from a private owner, 2000 details: catalogue of a 1956 one-man exhibition by Karel Appel in Galerie Rive Droite, Paris, the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam and the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam. Inventory number G /1443/2 refers to a separate list of works exhibited at the Schiedam exposition, which was held from 28 January to 27 February 1956.

Karel Appel and Emmanuel Looten

Rhapsodie de ma nuit

[My Nightâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Rhapsody]

1958 lithography on paper and letterpress in cover 33.0 x 25.0 cm G /103/1-8 [shown only in part] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Sanders, 1958 details: edition number 12/75.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Karel Appel 85 Musique barbare

[Barbaric Music]

1963 lithography on paper and gramophone record in book cover various sizes G /371/1-3 purchased from Karel Appel, 1969

Untitled 1976 lithography on paper 88.5 x 74.3 cm G /2535 donated by the Altena Boswinkel Collection Foundation, 1999 details: edition number 8/110.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

EugĂ¨ne Brands

Eugène Brands

[Amsterdam 1913 – Amsterdam 2002]

Following a three-year course in illustration for advertising at the Amsterdam Institute for Applied Art, Eugène Brands worked for a few months as a commercial illustrator, but definitely did not enjoy it. Brands then made his decision and took the leap into the fine arts. Out of principle, he always referred to himself as self-taught, and he experimented with a variety of techniques and materials. He participated with a very considerable body of work at the Amsterdam Stedelijk Museum’s ‘Young Painters’ exhibition, where he met Corneille and Appel. In 1948, they convinced him to join the Dutch Experimental Group, which became part of the CoBrA group that same year. Brands knew Willem Sandberg, director of the Stedelijk Museum, and when Sandberg invited him to do an exhibition, Brands arranged for the entire group to take part. The exhibition led to a dispute and Brands withdrew from the group. Nonetheless, two favoured themes of the CoBrA artists – children’s drawings and African art – continued to preoccupy Brands for years to come. Similarly, he was also intrigued by the magical aspects of primitive cultures. This same period resulted in countless small paintings, often in oils on paper, which presented a reality all his own. They evolved as though of their own accord, which was precisely what Brands considered to be the essence of painting. The mysterious and the universe were themes that continued to exert their hold on him. He painted until his death on his own birthday in 2002, usually working in gouache, and giving himself ample space for his talent for colour. [MW]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Eugène Brands 88 Two Forms 1949 oil on canvas 71 .0 x 110.0 cm B S /336 on loan from the Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage (ICN), 1964 details: dated 9/49.

During his brief adventure with CoBrA, Brands found his inspiration in the same sources as his experimental artist friends had, in children’s drawings, African art, the materials themselves and to a lesser degree, art made by the mentally ill. It may be that the somewhat older Brands was swept along by Karel Appel’s enthusiasm and emphatic use of colour. Although Brands was not a group artist, he was still a man who believed in the mysterious. For him, reality as we know it was merely an illusion. He found his inspiration in simple things, observing nature, the sunrise and the heavens with the wonderment of a child, intrigued by the never-ending motion of everything around him. Panta rhei, or ‘everything flows’, was consequently a theme that would continue to inspire Brands for the rest of his life. Two Forms, a painting Brands completed in 1949, is remarkable for the way the paint is applied. With very little paint, he succeeded in making the forms flow into one another, melting together to produce an exceptionally light, nearly transparent effect. The two principle motifs in the painting are in fact built up from geometric forms, but together they also have an animal quality and even seem to be actively communicating with one another. They stand in stark contrast to the background, which is composed of varying tints of white and grey. Brands used different shades of reddish-brown to give the painting an unexpected sense of depth. [MW]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

EugÃ¨ne Brands 89

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Eugène Brands 90 Victory Borfimah 1949 oil on jute 125.0 x 115.0 cm S /5 purchased from Eugène Brands, 1954 details: dated 10/49.

The major CoBrA exhibition held in 1949 at the Amsterdam Stedelijk Museum included a number of large paintings by Eugène Brands. Among these, Victory Borfimah – which five years later would be the Schiedam Stedelijk Museum’s first CoBrA purchase – is unusual not only because of its subtle use of colour. The work was Brands’ answer to Victory Boogie Woogie (1943–1944), Piet Mondrian’s uncompleted final work, a painting given a place of honour in a 1945 exhibition organized by Willem Sandberg at the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam. While Corneille was able to sense some vibration in Victory Boogie Woogie, for Brands it was an ultimate example of ‘anti-painting’. Nor did Mondrian’s work fare much better in Contant’s statement in the forth issue of Cobra: ‘Let us fill up that virginal canvas of Mondrian’s, with our poverty if need be.’ Brands did just that, in a manner all his own. His work at the time was dominated by lyrical abstraction, guided by colour and form. Borfimah is a reference to the magic bundle of spices and herbs carried by medicine men in Africa. Magical and healing powers were attributed to the herbs. For Brands, Victory Borfimah was in fact a magical counterpoint to what to his eye was the cold and pragmatic work of Mondrian. Brands was very interested in primitive cultures, particularly the magical elements that he found in them. He collected African masks and often let himself be carried away by the singing of Pygmy women as he worked. [MW]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

EugÃ¨ne Brands

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Eugène Brands 92 Untitled 1949 gouache on paper 43.0 x 64.0 cm S /2313 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: dated 11/49.

As were the other CoBrA artists, Brands was attracted to the materials he worked with. Painting with gouache gave him greater freedom than oils. He felt he had to work hard at oil painting, while gouache seemed to paint by itself. Oils demanded the constant attention of the painter. They could not be immediately painted over, and decisions therefore had to be made that could impede the artist’s spontaneity and improvisation. As early as the CoBrA years, Brands was already painting a world all his own, expressing his interest in children’s drawings. In this 1949 untitled gouache, we see a spotted fantasy animal, applied in simple patches of colour, with black lines added afterwards. The work radiates a tangible innocence. It is exceptional that this gouache was not given a title, as Brands considered titles a necessary second reference. Later in his career, he developed a certain preference for English titles. Dutch rang harsh to the ear, certainly when it came to Brands’ favourite themes of mystery and the universe. Brands’ gouache paintings were primarily produced in his Amsterdam studio, which was considerably smaller than the studio in Nunspeet, where he painted on canvas. During the course of his life, he painted a total of over 10,000 gouaches. [MW]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

EugÃ¨ne Brands 93

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

EugĂ¨ne Brands 94 Abstract Landscape 1971 oil on hardboard 96.5 x 96.5 cm S /654 donated by the Friends of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, 1973

Untitled 1976 gouache on paper 70.0 x 100.2 cm S /2259 donated by the Altena Boswinkel Collection Foundation, 1999 details: dated 21 September, 1976.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Eugène Brands 95 House at Night 1985 oil on canvas 140.0 x 200.0 cm S /766 donated by Eugène Brands, 1986

Universal Palette 1989 oil on canvas 170.0 x 200.0 cm S /814 donated by the Friends of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, 1990

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

EugÃ¨ne Brands 96

Untitled 1949 lithography on paper 29.7 x 23.0 cm G /1315 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991 details: originally part of Reflex (1949) 2.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Eugène Brands 97

Untitled 1951 lithography, letterpress on paper 11 .3 x 15.2 cm G /1378 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: invitation for the opening of an exhibition by Brands at Galerie Le Canard in Amsterdam, 29 September, 1951 .

Untitled 1952 ink on paper 14.5 x 12.0 cm G /1709/1-2 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: New Year’s greeting for Goos Verweij.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Eugène Brands 98

Untitled 1954 watercolour, ink on paper 9.7 x 22.7 cm G /1710/1-2 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: New Year’s greeting for Goos Verweij.

Untitled 1955 watercolour, ink on paper 10.0 x 22.2 cm G /1410 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: New Year’s greeting for Goos Verweij.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Eugène Brands 99 Untitled 1963 ink on paper 14.9 x 23.0 cm G /1712 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: New Year’s greeting for Goos Verweij.

Untitled 1956 ink on paper 20.0 x 22.6 cm G /1711 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002

details: New Year’s greeting for Goos Verweij.

Untitled 1951–1963 correspondence various sizes G /1455/1-12 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: correspondence from Eugène Brands to Goos Verweij, including seven letters, six with envelopes, two invitations and three postcards.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

[Amsterdam 1920]

But for a single course at the State Academy in 1939–1940, Constant (the artist’s name of Constant Anton Nieuwenhuijs) was self-taught as an artist. He painted portraits and still-lifes, and the influence of Picasso and Braque is evident in his work from just after the war. A turning point came with a visit to Paris in autumn 1946, when he saw work by Joan Miró and met the Danish artist Asger Jorn, with whom he developed close contact. Constant now found a form of his own; he developed a colourful, expressive style, subtle in its rawness, in which animals were the predominant subject matter. In late 1947, he met Karel Appel and Corneille, and they decided to seal the kinship they immediately felt by starting a group. The three artists established the Experimental Group in Holland at Constant’s home on 16 July 1948, together with Anton Rooskens, Theo Wolvecamp and Constant’s brother Jan Nieuwenhuijs; Eugène Brands joined in August that year. The poets Jan Elburg, Lucebert and Gerrit Kouwenaar also became involved. They produced two issues of the journal Reflex. Constant emerged as the theorist of the group and wrote a ‘Manifesto’, and a critical text on ‘Culture and counterculture’. For the rest of his career, he would continue to express his views verbally on art and its relation to society. Together with Appel and Corneille, Constant represented the Experimental Group at the Paris conference ‘Centre International de Documentation sur l’Art d’Avant-garde’ in early November 1948. The following day, the Danes, Belgians and Dutch representatives decided to establish their own ‘Internationale’ of experimental groups, excluding the French. CoBrA was born. When CoBrA disintegrated in 1951, Constant took a new stylistic path. He explored the spatial use of colour in a geometrical, abstract form language. This subsequently led to his first coloured models for the urban and social utopia New Babylon. This brought him once again into connection with an international avant garde movement, l’Internationale Situationniste. The New Babylon project continued to occupy him until 1974. Painting as an free art form became secondary to this activity although it never really disappeared; and by the early 1970s it returned in full force. Since then, Constant has shown himself to be a painter with a great love for the metier, but one who does not shun a social, critical attitude in his work. [LvH]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant 102 Birds 1949 gouache, ink, pencil on paper 53.5 x 51 .8 cm S /882/1-2 purchased from Sotheby’s, 1999 details: acquired with support of the Friends of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam on the occasion of the museum’s centenary. Text on back board of original frame: ‘Benno: / Melle f 42 / Constant rood 55 / Constant blauw 55 / Appel 41 / totaal 193 / Ik hoop dat je ze mooi vindt/ heel veel groeten / Martin [Visser]’ [‘Benno: / Melle f 42 / Constant red 55 / Constant blue 55 / Appel 41 / total 193 / I hope you think they are beautiful/ all the best / Martin [Visser]’].

As a young artist in 1946, Constant turned in a radically new direction. Stilllifes, portraits and occasional townscapes, hitherto his favourite themes, vanished from his work for a long period or even for good, and until 1950 he painted mainly animals. He did not do so naturalistically, but using flat shapes in bright colours and almost coarse brushstrokes. Animals were also a favoured motif, indeed a recurrent theme, among other experimental artists. The animal was regarded as a symbol which anyone could understand, and as such expressive of the longing for a universal folk art. By painting animals one could convey his deepest and most authentic emotions to others: ‘We must describe ourselves as animals,’ Asger Jorn wrote to Constant in 1950, ‘That is our way.’ Constant’s predilection for birds is striking. Many of the paintings from the period 1946–1949 have birds as their sole theme, but birds in some or other guise are also prominent among the fabulous beings that appear in many other paintings. They often have an equivocal identity, and show traits of insects, mammals or people. The gouache Birds of 1949, which the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam acquired at auction from the estate of the late industrial designer Benno Premsela, is in this respect work which is representative of Constant’s oeuvre during this period. The large bird which flies towards a chick between bright red, rather aggressive-looking vegetation, has the features of an insect, while the chick’s head pokes up like an amaryllis shoot sprouting from a bulb. [LvH]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant 103

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant 104 Scorched Earth 1951 oil on canvas 120.0 x 75.0 cm S /68 purchased from Goos Verweij, 1963 details: on loan from 1956 onwards. Verweij received the painting from Constant as payment in kind for printing Het uitzicht van de duif [The Dove’s View] at the G.A. Verweij printing workshop in the Passage, Schiedam, in 1952.

Scorched Earth, which forms a series together with two similarly named paintings at Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, is one of the group of war paintings in which Constant left behind him the colourful, magical world of animals that marked the early CoBrA years. They were shown under the title La Guerre at the second and last CoBrA exhibition in Liège in 1951. In these paintings, he impressively portrays the despair, destruction and horror of war. Although Constant’s war paintings do not refer explicitly to the Second World War, the title Scorched Earth invites an obvious association with the grim tactics employed by the German army on the Eastern Front, an uncomfortably topical exploit that had resulted in the devastation of large areas of the Soviet Union. Barely five years after the end of the Second World War, in 1950, similar large-scale destruction threatened once again with the outbreak of war in Korea. Potential escalation of the conflict between North and South Korea into a new world war between the Capitalist West and the Communist East made the deployment of nuclear weapons, and the consequent prospect of a vastly greater area of ‘scorched earth’, not inconceivable. Constant was not prepared to shut his eyes to these perils. In his manifesto on the new, ‘experimental’ art, he had already shown himself to be an impassioned proponent of socially relevant painting. He increasingly strove towards a social realism capable of contributing to ‘the battle humanity is fighting to establish a new form of society’ (in Reflex 1, 1948). The chaotic, dark composition of Scorched Earth is thus not a depiction of some concrete historical event, but a raw, confrontational warning about the terrible forms war can take. [LvH]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant 105

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant 106 Untitled 1948 lithography on paper 29.7 x 23.0 cm G /1316 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991 details: originally part of Reflex (1948) 1 .

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant 107

Untitled 1952 letterpress 32.0 x 24.5 cm G /1360/1-2 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2000 details: two identical copies. Printing: G.A. Verweij, Schiedam.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant 108 Het uitzicht van de duif

[The Dove’s View]

Untitled The nine woodcuts in Het uitzicht van de duif [The Dove’s View] represent a phase in Constant’s oeuvre in which the complexity of paintings like Scorched Earth is condensed into simple, powerful images. The suggestion of space vanishes, and the black, brown and ochre colours make way for intense and saturated blue, red, purple and orange. Details are magnified and stylized to such an extent that, even at this modest scale, become monumental icons of war and peace. The plans for this graphics portfolio date from February 1951. At the opening of Constant’s exhibition in the gallery Le Canard, Jan Elburg read his new three-part poem Het uitzicht van de duif, and plans immediately developed to produce it as an illustrated edition. Concrete steps to do this were not taken until a year later, however. Constant approached the printer Goos Verweij, of Schiedam, who had printed the poster for Constant’s second exhibition in Le Canard (see p. 107). Verweij was a board member of this Amsterdam gallery and provided printing services at a discount. The atmosphere of the poster was exactly what Constant had in mind as an illustration to the poem, and in this case Verweij was even prepared to accept payment in kind. The portfolio of woodcuts was printed in October, and was paid for with the painting Scorched Earth. The painting was placed on loan to the museum in 1956, and eventually sold to the museum for a reduced price in 1963. The museum has since come into possession, by gift, of all correspondence and documentation about the printing of Het uitzicht van de duif, including a layout with Constant’s sketches and all the printing work that Verweij executed for Le Canard. [LvH]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant 109

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

110

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

111

Constant and Jan Elburg

Het uitzicht van de duif

[The Dove’s View]

1952 woodcut and letterpress on paper 34.5 x 27.2 cm [graphics portfolio] 34.0 x 54.0 cm [graphic sheets] G /94/1-10 and G /1352/1-10 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1959 and 1997 details: two copies, edition numbers 100/125 and HC IV/ IV (personal copy of Goos Verweij).

Untitled 1952 pencil, ink, watercolour and typescript on paper 22.0 x 36.5 cm G /1286/1-10 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: layout design for Het uitzicht van de duif [The Dove’s View]. Nine sheets in a cardboard portfolio with pasted-in colophon and typescript by Jan Elburg. The layout also shows some child’s drawings, probably by Constant’s son Victor.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

112

Untitled 1952 manuscript 25.0 x 30.0 cm G /1277/1-31 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: correspondence between Constant and Goos Verweij on preparation of the portfolio for Het uitzicht van de duif [The Dove’s View], consisting of 31 letters.

Untitled 1952 typescript 33.7 x 21 .3 cm G /1278/ 1-2 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998

details: contract between Constant, Jan Elburg, Hans Rooduijn and Goos Verweij concerning printing and sale of Het uitzicht van de duif [The Dove’s View].

Untitled 1952 letterpress 9.0 x 13.1 cm G /1279/ 1-2 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: two reply cards for ordering copies of Het uitzicht van de duif [The Dove’s View] by Constant and Jan Elburg at a special subscription price.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

113

Untitled 1952 letterpress 23.5 x 15.1 cm G /1280 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: printer’s proof of the Colophon for Het uitzicht van de duif [The Dove’s View].

Untitled 1952 letterpress 24.7 x 32.4 cm G /1282/1-4 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: three sales brochures (including printer’s proof) for Het uitzicht van de duif [The Dove’s View].

Untitled 1952 letterpress 25.0 x 32.0 cm G /1283/1-5 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: five similar printer’s proofs of Het uitzicht van de duif [The Dove’s View].

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

114

Untitled 1952 manuscript 14.7 x 9.9 cm G /1284/ 1-2 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: design of the text of the colophon of Het uitzicht van de duif [The Dove’s View] on the back of an invitation card. The rear shows a sketch for the position of the colophon.

Untitled 1952 pencil on paper 17.0 x 16.6 cm G /1285 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: torn paper with a sketch of the format of Het uitzicht van de duif [The Dove’s View] with dimensions given.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

115

Untitled 1952 woodcut on paper 34.0 x 27.3 cm G /1412/1-3 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: three different woodcuts from Het uitzicht van de duif [The Doveâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s View], one of them signed.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

116

Voor een spatiaal colorisme

[For a Spatial Colourism]

Untitled Constant compiled the graphics portfolio Voor een spatiaal colorisme [For a Spatial Colourism] in connection with a collaborative project with the architect Aldo van Eyck. Van Eyck designed a square room for the exhibition ‘Mens en huis’ (about modern domestic design) in the Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam (1952–1953); he painted the room half in blue and half in purple. Constant was invited to provide a large mural painting, and Van Eyck placed some lines of poetry by Lucebert in blood-red letters on the wall opposite. A slatted wooden bench and a bare lightbulb complete the ensemble. This rather strange-looking ‘space/colour experiment’ prompted Constant to write a text about the significant part he though colour could play in modern architecture. He himself started working with colour in three dimensions from 1953 onwards, initially in abstract compositions and later in his first models for the urban design project New Babylon. Constant illustrated his argument with a photograph and three screen prints representing, respectively, the mural, the opened-out walls of the coloured room and an abstract composition based on the same colours. They formed, in a nutshell, his artistic programme during these years. Constant had bought the screen-printing equipment from the printer Goos Verweij of Schiedam, who had been unable to find a commercial application for it. Together with his friend Stephen Gilbert, Constant tried several experiments in this relatively new technique (see also p. 123, 107), which was not widely adopted by artists until the 1960s. The remaining printing work for the graphics portfolio was carried out by Verweij’s press. The design drawings, printer’s proofs and correspondence were donated to the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam in 1998. [LvH]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

117

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

118

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

119

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

120

Constant and Aldo van Eyck

Voor een spatiaal colorisme

[For a Spatial Colourism]

1953 screen print and letterpress on paper 25.7 x 35.0 cm G /1292/1-4 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: edition number 3/50.

Untitled 1953 pencil on paper 25.0 x 17.5 cm G /1288/1-7 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: pencil-drawn layout, showing a portfolio containing six loose sheets and one sheet folded double, for Een Ruimte in Kleur [A Space in Colour], later titled Voor een spatiaal colorisme [For a Spatial Colourism].

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

121

Untitled 1953 manuscript 28.0 x 21 .0 cm G /1287/1-12 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: correspondence between Constant and Goos Verweij about preparation of Voor een spatiaal colorisme [For a Spatial Colourism], consisting of one postcard and eleven letters, five with original envelopes.

Untitled 1953 manuscript 28.0 x 21 .0 cm G /1289/1-5 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: manuscript by Constant of Voor een spatiaal colorisme [For a Spatial Colourism]. The five-page text is written in pen on one page and in pencil on the remaining four.

Untitled 1953 manuscript 10.0 x 21 .2 cm G /1290 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: letter with a short memorandum by Constant to Goos Verweij about the printing of Voor een spatiaal colorisme [For a Spatial Colourism].

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

122

Untitled 1953 printer’s proof 32.0 x 25.0 cm G /1291/1-15 [shown only in part] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: set of fifteen printer’s proofs in relief of Voor een spatiaal colorisme [For a Spatial Colourism] with pencilled notes.

Untitled 1953 screen print 26.0 x 19.8 cm G /1293/1-4 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: four proofs of screen prints from Voor een spatiaal colorisme [For a Spatial Colourism]. Five colours were used in the process.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

123

Untitled 1953 manuscript 10.0 x 12.9 cm G /1294 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: handwritten Colophon for Voor een spatiaal colorisme [For a Spatial Colourism] on a small piece of paper.

Composition 1953 screen print 10.2 x 15.0 cm G /1322 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998

Untitled 1953â&#x20AC;&#x201C;1958 correspondence 28.0 x 22.0 cm G /1295/1-11 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: one postcard and ten letters with original envelopes. The correspondence took place between Constant and Goos Verweij on various matters.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

124

New Babylon 1963 lithography on paper 40.0 x 40.0 cm [graphics portfolio] 40.0 x 76.0 cm [graphic sheets] G /234/1-11 donated by Galerie dâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Eendt, 1964

details: edition number 26/50.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

125

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

126

Labyrisms 1969 lithography on paper 40.0 x 50.0 cm [graphics portfolio] 37.5 x 47.5 cm [graphic sheets] G /362/1-11 [shown only in part] purchased from Boekenimport W.A. Palm, 1969

details: edition number 33/73.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

127

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

128

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Constant

129

Massacre 1977 lithography on paper 57.1 x 77.5 cm G /2131 donated by Altena Boswinkel Collectie Foundation, 1999 details: edition number XX/XXX.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille

[Liège 1922]

Corneille Guillaume Beverloo was born to Dutch parents in Liège, Belgium, on 3 July 1922. The family returned to the Netherlands in 1937 and settled in Haarlem, where Corneille trained as a commercial artist. After the start of World War II, he moved to Amsterdam, where he followed some courses at the State Academy of Fine Arts. The teaching displeased him greatly because he was obliged to draw from plaster casts. He met Karel Appel there and they began a long-lasting friendship. In 1948, he helped found the Dutch Experimental Group; this group was absorbed into the CoBrA movement in Paris later that year. Corneille was the editor of the fourth issue of Cobra, which appeared in conjunction with the controversial exhibition of experimental art in the Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam. He travelled on various occasions to North Africa, Sweden and Denmark. These journeys influenced his artistic development considerably. He settled permanently in Paris in 1950, and has several studios there. Years after the demise of CoBrA, he is inspired by children’s art and still collects primitive art. His interests started shifting around 1952 to the subject matter of the African earth, and his work became increasing abstract. After this, he returned to his own form of realism, in which women were a favoured theme. Besides painting, he made ceramics in locations such as Albisola in 1954 and engaged in lithography, poetry, drawing and photography. [MW]

Horseman 1948 gouache on paper 41 .4 x 50.0 cm S /98 purchased from Corneille with support of Vereniging Rembrandt, 1986

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille Le port en tête

132 [The Port Overhead]

1949 watercolour, ink on paper 48.0 x 37.0 cm S /93 donated by Muys & de Winter’s Bouw- en Aannemingsbedrijf, 1964

A striking number of references to the sea and to water began to appear in Corneille’s work around 1949. He was in close touch at the time with the Dane Carl-Henning Pedersen, whom he had met on a trip to Denmark with CoBrA friends. Pedersen’s own work contains numerous sea-related motifs. He painted many mythical and fabulous creatures, including sea gods which generally have oversized heads, a feature that also appears in Corneille’s images. Given this resemblance, the existence of a mutual influence seems unarguable. Corneille painted Le port en tête [The Port Overhead] in 1949. A small, laughing figure is drawn in ink between pieces torn, apparently at random, from a French newspaper. The figure’s head is disproportionately large and its arms are raised as though in elation. The right-hand side of the laughing face is filled in with blue and the left with red. Numerous tiny boats appear above the head. The work is a fine example of the CoBrA artists’ experimental approach. The experimentation concerned not only the subject matter and in some cases the unconventional sources of inspiration, but the materials used. Various painting techniques were tried out, and experiments also took place with combinations of materials, as here with newspaper, ink and gouache. This not only contributes to a surprising effect but places the work in a context. The French newspapers clearly refer to Corneille’s many trips to France, where he was to settle permanently the next year. [MW]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille

133

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 134 Black Street 1949 gouache on paper 39.0 x 41 .5 cm S /97 purchased from Corneille with support of Vereniging Rembrandt, 1986

In a large area of black, Corneille paints an intriguing scene in gouache. A small human figure seems to be posing for a photograph next to a bicycle, apparently proud of having completed the long slog up the hill. His companion has laid down his own bicycle, in the background, so as to take the photo. Colour and line together form a complex pattern but remain nonetheless independent. Corneille only needs a few colours. Patches of beige and yellow form the basis of the bicycles and the figure, and quasi-casually, the artist has painted red and brown lines over the colour patches to further elucidate his intended scene. The background contains a red arrow, pointing upwards, like a misplaced road sign warning us that the only way is up. The childlike simplicity of the work is disarming, and typical of the way he worked during the CoBrA period. Children’s art constitutes a rich source of inspiration for Corneille, perhaps even more so than for other CoBrA artists. In an interview fifty years later, he added the following comments: ‘Even now, I still get inspiration from children’s drawings. A group of youngsters were recently asked to paint pictures of cats. I must admit, I am still amazed at the outcome. They painted magnificent cats. I think they were even better than the ones I did.’ An amusing detail is that, beforehand, the children had been shown a book of reproductions of cat paintings by Corneille. [MW]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 135

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 136 La belle journée

[The Fine Day]

1950 watercolour on paper 42.0 x 49.0 cm S /95 donated by Muys & de Winter’s Bouw- en Aannemingsbedrijf, 1964

This work from the CoBrA period was clearly inspired by the spontaneous way young children deal with their relatively confined world. They are still unhindered by any compulsion to depict the world realistically or in a way restrained by the experience of adulthood. The CoBrA artists strove to achieve the same spontaneity, and Corneille had a particular talent in this respect. A number of children’s pictures were reproduced in the fourth issue of the Cobra journal. Important were the freedom to experiment and the expression of feelings. Corneille painted his figures in La belle journée [The Fine Day] in a truly childlike way. They are depicted with large heads from which legs and little arms project, thrashing wildly about them. The hands consist of short lines, with further short lines appended as fingers. Two curled lines form a nose. The childlike simplicity is striking. One fish consists of a continuous line, and a second fish consists of a patch of colour with a black stripe ending in a V shape. The colours used are also typically childlike. Young children do not use colour in a naturalistic way, but subjectively; it depends largely on how the child feels about the subject matter and the colour concerned. A young child will have no qualms about filling in a face in yellow. Children are also free of the compulsion to fill up the whole sheet. They paint whatever they have in mind – and then it is finished and time to do something else. [MW]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 137

Fish 1950 watercolour on paper 38.6 x 50.3 cm S /110 donated by Muys & de Winterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Bouw- en Aannemingsbedrijf, 1964

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 138 Habitants du désert

[Desert Dwellers]

1951–1952 oil on canvas 54.0 x 81 .5 cm B S /90 on loan from the Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage (ICN), 1955

Corneille was a keen traveller. Shortly after the liberation of the Netherlands, he travelled clandestinely to Paris with his friend Karel Appel, curious as to what had happened there in the art scene during the war. He later went on journeys to Hungary, North Africa and South America. In each case he fell under the spell of the country and its culture and inhabitants. These journeys were of considerable influence on his method and on his choice of subject matter. In the company of the architect Aldo van Eyck and others, he undertook a trip to the Hoggar Mountains in Southern Algeria. It was probably his experiences on this journey that inspired Habitants du désert [Desert Dwellers]. Corneille painted a typical southern market scene where day-to-day life plays out mainly in the streets. Five figures with strongly distorted heads appear in the foreground. They are made up of a number of black lines, and the resulting areas are blocked in with earth colours, namely yellow ochre and brown. The colours Corneille used here are less bright than in the CoBrA period and are related to his surroundings. Like most other CoBrA artists, Corneille was much interested in primitive art, especially African art, whose geometrical motifs he borrowed, for example. This interest was mainly stimulated by the work of Paul Klee, with which Corneille made acquaintance in Budapest in 1947, and which made an overwhelming impression on him. [MW]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 139

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 140 Espace animé

[Animated Space]

1952 oil on canvas 69.0 x 102.5 cm S /91 purchased from Corneille, 1956

At first sight Espace animé [Animated Space] is a splendid abstract composition with well-chosen colours. On closer examination, however, it is less abstract than it looks. The painting is populated with all kinds of birds, represented schematically with quick black strokes. They are depicted from various angles – from above, from the front and from the side. The bird is a favourite, recurrent theme in Corneille’s work. To him, birds stood for movement. In an interview in 1961, he said: ‘My movements always turn into birds on the canvas. The bird is the perfect image of movement. It is not just the movement towards the goal but the elation of that movement.’ The bird was a symbol of freedom, a freedom that Corneille himself felt when setting off on a journey. The sense of freedom was essential to Corneille to be able to paint. He was, as he himself put it, a ‘happy painter’, and he thus stands in contrast to many other painters who are incapable of picking up a brush unless spurred by misery. This attitude is evident in his paintings, especially his choice of subject matter. Unlike Constant, for example, Corneille never felt impelled to paint wars or to tackle momentous social issues. He much preferred to occupy himself with more cheerful motifs such as cats and, his favourite theme, women. [MW]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 141

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 142 Sun 1953 watercolour on paper 30.5 x 43.0 cm S /108 donated by Muys & de Winter’s Bouw- en Aannemingsbedrijf, 1964

From 1952 onwards, the big-headed figures which had so long populated Corneille’s work gradually disappeared, and his focus moved to earth as a primal element. Africa particularly captivated his interest. In the watercolour Sun, painted in 1953, Corneille portrayed the African soil, with which he quickly formed an enduring emotional bond. It is the land as he himself experienced and felt it, in the light of a blazing sun lying low on the horizon. Here, Corneille plays with perspective and uses it as he sees fit. No longer constrained to reality as others perceive it, he leaves things out, adds and changes things, and gives some things a heavier emphasis than others. The outcome is a scene that vibrates with energy and life, sometimes recalling an enlarged aerial photo. The colours Corneille used for the rocky outcrops, with their suggestion of cities, are warm and dazzling, while his strokes are direct and powerful. The paint as the material, the earth as his subject and a viewpoint like that of a soaring bird forms a splendid combination for Corneille, enabling him to introduce a striking rhythm and a sweeping movement into his paintings. This work seems to set out a route, marked by a thick blue line, which appears from nowhere, conducts us along the sources of Corneille’s inspiration, and vanishes again leaving us to our fate. [MW]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 143

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 144 Pierres et fleurs

[Stones and Flowers]

1955 oil on canvas 53.1 x 76.5 cm S /46 donated by the Friends of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, 1956

Geometrical shapes and bold, heavy lines are largely responsible for the impetus of this work from 1955, titled Pierres et fleurs [Stones and Flowers]. Corneille uses colour in this painting to refer to aspects of a landscape. Blue for the sky and ochre for the sand formations make up the basis. Between these elements, amid rocky outcrops, an abstractly treated vegetation flourishes in bright colours that immediately suggest spring, when new life emerges and the flora and fauna return in their full glory. Corneille memorized and photographed landscapes on his many journeys, and was time and again delighted by what nature had to offer him as a painter. He extracted what he considered the most striking elements, stored them in his memory and was able to recombine them in inventive ways. They reappeared in oil paintings and gouaches, often greatly magnified, sometimes many months later. Corneille recorded his travel experiences in several diaries and described them in letters to his close friends. Some of these descriptions and letters were later published. Around 1955, a gradual change began to take place in the way Corneille painted. The poetic lightness of touch of the preceding years vanished and a broader painterly style came in its place. A feature that remained, though, was the round shape that appeared as the enlarged heads of the figures in his early work. Later, it reappears in forms such as the sun and moon, or, here, as stones and flowers. [MW]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 145

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 146

Heure matinale

[Early Hour]

1956 oil on canvas 65.3 x 54.0 cm S /45 purchased from Corneille, 1956 details: original title Le Port Blanc [The White Port].

Untitled undated contĂŠ on paper 30.5 x 24.0 cm G /224 manner of acquisition unknown

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 147

Le voyage du grand soleil rouge

[The Voyage of the Big Red Sun]

1963 oil on canvas 114.5 x 162.5 cm B S /334 on loan from the Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage (ICN), 1969

Untitled undated lithography on paper 65.5 x 51 .0 cm G /917 manner of acquisition unknown

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 148 Untitled 1938 watercolour on paper 15.8 x 11 .1 cm G /429 donated by H. Pilger, 1963? details: this watercolour and the works listed below (inventory nos. G /1423 to G /1432) relate to the year Corneille studied at the Commercial Art school in Haarlem.

Untitled 1938 watercolour on paper 14.0 x 10.0 cm G /1423 donated by H. Pilger, 1963?

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

Untitled 1938 watercolour on paper 18.7 x 14.4 cm G /1424 donated by H. Pilger, 1963?

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 149 Untitled 1938 chalk on paper 25.2 x 14.9 cm G /1425 donated by H. Pilger, 1963?

Untitled 1938 watercolour on paper 22.8 x 19.8 cm G /1426 donated by H. Pilger, 1963?

Untitled 1938 white and black chalk on paper 19.9 x 17.3 cm G /1427 donated by H. Pilger, 1963?

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 150 Untitled 1938 watercolour on paper 16.0 x 9.3 cm G /1428 donated by H. Pilger, 1963?

Untitled 1938 pencil on paper 13.3 x 8.2 cm G /1429 donated by H. Pilger, 1963?

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille

151

Untitled

1938 ink on paper 25.0 x 16.7 cm G /1430 donated by H. Pilger, 1963?

1938 watercolour on paper 28.1 x 15.4 cm G /1432 donated by H. Pilger, 1963?

Zonder titel 1938 watercolour op papier 21 .1 x 24.0 cm G /1431 donated by H. Pilger 1963?

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 152

Untitled 1948 lithography on paper 30.0 x 23.0 cm G /1313 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991 details: originally part of Reflex (1948) 1 .

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 153

Untitled 1949 lithography on paper 30.0 x 22.5 cm G /1314 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991 details: originally part of Reflex (1949) 2.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 154 Corneille and Simon Vinkenoog

Driehoogballade

[Garret Ballad]

1950 watercolour, ink on paper 28.0 x 22.5 cm G /1716/1-2 purchased from Sothebyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s, Amsterdam, 2002 details: double-sided pamphlet with ink and watercolour drawings by Corneille and texts by Simon Vinkenoog. Edition number 29/60.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 155

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 156 Corneille and Hugo Claus

Paal en Perk

[Setting Limits]

1955 letterpress 20.9 x 16.0 cm G /1351 [shown only in part] purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions BV 1991 details: text and drawings date from 1951 but were published in 1955.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 157

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 158 Corneille and Goos Verweij

Untitled 1952â&#x20AC;&#x201C;1957 manuscript and print various sizes G /1454/1-7 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: correspondence of Corneille with Goos Verweij and various printed matter.

Corneille 1956 letterpress 27.0 x 19.0 cm G /1435 [not shown] purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions BV, 1991 details: catalogue for Corneille exhibition in Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam and Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, 1956.

ScĂ¨ne Mexicane [Mexican Scene] 1971 lithography on paper 50.0 x 65.5 cm G /558 purchased from Galerie T, 1977

details: E /A, no edition number.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Corneille 159

Vol dâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;oiseaux

[Flight of Birds]

1960 lithography on paper 67.0 x 51 .0 cm [graphics portfolio] 56.0 x 38.0 cm [graphic sheets] G /134/1-7 donated by the Friends of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, 1960

details: edition numbers e.a. IX/X.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg

[Wemeldinge 1919 – Amsterdam 1991]

Joannes Gommert Elburg successfully exercised his twin talents as the poet Jan G. Elburg and the artist ELB. A twofold name for his twofold metier. What these different creative activities, one in the field of art the other in the field of word craft, have in common is an experimental mindset. When the ‘Experimental Group in Holland’ was launched on 16 July 1948 at the initiative of Constant in Amsterdam, Elburg signed on. It must have been a pleasant surprise to him at the time to discover how others, like himself, were searching for new ways in art and literature, but had managed to express themselves more convincingly than he was accustomed to in the literary circles in which he moved. On 8 November 1948 CoBrA was founded in Paris as an international art movement; the Experimental Group merged into it to become its Dutch section. Elburg was one of the movement’s active participants. His poems were published in Reflex, the organ of the Experimental Group, and in the fourth number of the Cobra journal. His collages, objects and poetic fragments of text provided a sensational contribution to the great CoBrA exhibition held at the Stedelijk Museum in November 1949. The thing that characterized Elburg as a CoBrA artist was well summarized by Constant in his manifesto (published in Reflex): ‘Since we consider the principal task of art to be the activation of the creative urge, our aim in the days that lie ahead will be to achieve as physical and so as evocative an effect as possible. Looked at this way, the act of creation has much greater significance than the object created, though the more traces it displays of the labour involved in its creation and the less emphasis there is on the creation achieved, the more significance that object will attain.’ As Elburg was later to express it: ‘Being true to life is death. In art as well.’ His art showed how the materials used – ink, gouache, pastel or candle wax – inspired him to achieve results which were certainly evocative, often with a surrealistic undertone. After 1953, Jan Elburg was associated for thirty years as lecturer in spatial design and material testing with the Institute for Applied Art, later the Rietveld Academy. His aim in this function was to convey to his students the pleasure of making things, of experimenting with different materials. [WH]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 162 Untitled undated gouache, pastel on paper 50.0 x 32.5 cm S /901 purchased from a private owner, 2000

Use was made of a mixed technique involving the superimposition of a drawing in pastel on a darker background of black over red watercolour. The white figures, rapidly drawn and profusely coloured in red, yellow, purple, green and blue, bear witness to the spontaneous gesture. Any rapid method of working must get things right first time. Later additions can only damage the vivid effect produced by immediate expression; in this case the only addition was the application of one colour on top of another. The linear character of ELBâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s lineation is plain to see in the two fishes at the foot and the angular geometrical figures in the middle of the left side of the drawing. The evocative shape of this drawing is composed of three continuous lines produced by three rapid mechanical movements of the hand, laying clear tracks of white crayon over the dark background. No less evocative is the large red shape somewhat resembling a house. [WH]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 163

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 164 Untitled c. 1946 oil on linen 40.0 x 50.0 cm S /907 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 165

Untitled 1952 gouache on paper 50.0 x 32.5 cm S /902 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 166 Untitled 1952 gouache, pastel on paper 50.0 x 32.5 cm S /903 purchased from a private owner, 2000 details: dated Jan. â&#x20AC;&#x2122;52.

The work in gouache and pastel, which dates from 1952, shows a figurative rendering of a bird, accompanied by abstract motifs. The abstract shapes suggest a birdâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s-eye view of a flower garden. The various shapes, figurative and abstract, all serve to convey colour. The gradations of the finely subdued colour mixtures make the composition a visually consistent whole, quite independent of its intrinsic significance. Even the flow of dark colours in the lighter parts of the gouache is charming. Here, like other CoBrA painters of the day, Elburg coloured in the contours. [WH]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 167

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 168 Untitled 1953 gouache on paper 50.0 x 32.5 cm S /894 purchased from a private owner, 2000

Untitled 1953 gouache on paper 50.0 x 32.5 cm S /895 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 169 Untitled 1953 gouache on paper 50.0 x 32.5 cm S /896 purchased from a private owner, 2000

Untitled 1953 gouache on paper 50.0 x 32.5 cm S /897 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 170 Untitled 1953 gouache on paper 50.0 x 32.5 cm S /898 purchased from a private owner, 2000

This gouache, dating from 1953, ties in with Red/Yellow Sign and Blue Sign (private collection), two other gouaches painted in primary colours in the same year. In this example – Schiedam’s Stedelijk Museum has several variants in its collection – the green derived from mixing blue and yellow is more prominent than in Blue Sign, in which the green is only a minor element. The colours, spontaneously delineated and scattered over the paper, are complemented by black shapes. For ELB such shapes and signs are never completely abstract. Thus here it is possible to recognize a green figure with legs and feet, and a plant standing against a red background. The abstract green figure sits on its abstract chair, its outstretched arms seeming to be involved in some way with the leaves of the plant. The gouache owes its expressionistic character to the strong shapes and vivid colours. [WH]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 171

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 172 Untitled 1953 gouache on paper 50.0 x 32.5 cm S /899 purchased from a private owner, 2000

Untitled 1953 gouache on paper 50.0 x 32.5 cm S /900 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 173

Untitled 1946 ink on paper 24.0 x 32.0 cm G /1246 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 174 Untitled 1951 typescript 27.4 x 21 .0 cm G /1281/1-4 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1998 details: typescript of the poem Het uitzicht van de duif [The Doveâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s View].

Untitled 1953 monotype 27.5 x 21 .5 cm G /1247 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 175 Untitled 1953 monotype 27.0 x 19.5 cm G /1248 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 176 Untitled 1953 monotype 27.0 x 19.5 cm G /1249 purchased from a private owner, 2000

Elburgâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s preference for simple materials stems from the time during the war, when he had to make do with stencils and a little watercolour. This was the origin of the monoprint process. Elburg uses the English term monoprint, not the Dutch monoprent, to commemorate the hot printings produced by the famous Groningen printer H.N. Werkman. A monoprint is made by using a rubber roller to spread viscous printers ink, unthinned, over a mirror surface, then laying on that surface a thin sheet of a paper so lightweight that the viscous ink is only taken up at points where the upper surface has been drawn on by gentle pressure from a finger or matchstick. Monoprinting is a manual printing technique such that it is impossible to create more examples identical to the original print. This monoprint, in green ink, contains a drawing of a manâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s head intersected by a horned bullâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s head drawn in thinner lines. The two figures share their hair and a single eye. The print was produced in two stages. First some of the ink on the mirror surface was scratched away. Next thin semitransparent paper was laid on the ink, and a drawing was made with matchsticks on the upper surface of the paper, i.e. the back of the monoprint. The vivid background structure with its transitions from light to dark was obtained by rubbing the paper unevenly, so affecting the amount of ink it was able to absorb. In the print the scratches come out as white lines, where the ink has been previously been removed. This shows that a monoprint is the mirror image of a drawing. [WH]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 177

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 178 Untitled 1953 monotype 27.0 x 19.5 cm G /1250 purchased from a private owner, 2000

Untitled 1953 monotype 32.0 x 22.5 cm G /1251 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 179 Untitled 1953 monotype 27.0 x 19.5 cm G /1252 purchased from a private owner, 2000

Untitled 1953 monotype 27.0 x 19.5 cm G /1253 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 180 Untitled Untitled Untitled These prints represent the construction in wire of toy puppets or marionettes. The harlequin on the small table in the first print wears a cap from which a large ear emerges. A toy dog lies at the end of a chain. The projections on each paw are intended to hook on clothing, as can be seen from the two small round clips on the harlequin’s cap. The large cylindrical bar resembles the print roller used by ELB to make his monoprints. Moreover the cylindrical shape projects the kind of surrealistic inscrutability that often turns up in the work of the poet-artist Jan Elburg. His affinity with surrealism is also evoked here by the overturned table with its five pointed feet, reminiscent of the iron by the dadaïst-surrealist Man Ray, whose underside is studded with a ridiculous row of upright nails. The wire puppet in the second print wears a jacket whose buttons are made of unbent hooks. The curved lines in the monoprint provide a powerful contrast to the jagged saw-teeth of the straight lines. The monoprint went through two stages of printing: first blue ink was rolled over the mirror surface and a drawing was made on the back of the print in the making laid over it. The second printing stage involved removing the blue from the mirror surface, using the roller to roll on red ink, then laying the paper containing the blue drawing on the red ink. The red colour was transferred by carefully rubbing the back of the print. The red smudges on the puppet are in fact the fingerprints of the monoprinter. Colour mixtures, here produced by superimposing red on blue, were only acceptable to ELB when they happened accidentally during the process of making the print. The third print contains a marionette holding a pendulum with a bob. The arm from which the weight hangs is supported by a clamp. The head of the kindly soul on the left has been provided by the poetic hand of ELB, the artist, with the letters T P P, probably a reference to the ‘Théâtre (de) petits pantins’. [WH]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg

181

Untitled undated [1953] monotype 33.0 x 22.0 cm G /1255 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 182

Untitled 1953 monotype 33.0 x 22.0 cm G /1256 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 183

Untitled 1953 monotype 33.0 x 22.0 cm G /1261 purchased from a private owner, 2000

Untitled THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 184 1953 monotype 33.0 x 22.0 cm G /1254 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 185

Untitled 1953 monotype 33.0 x 22.0 cm G /1258 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 186 Untitled Untitled The first print was drawn on a mirror surface in black ink, then reworked on a clean plate by rubbing and drawing in red ink. A few subtle green accents were then added. The figure of a girl is seen looking over her shoulder, her arms stretched out in front of her. She’s moving along on wheels, recalling another ELB monoprint dating from 1953 with the title Je zuster op wieltjes [Your Wheeled Sister]. As in a child’s drawing of a big head with no body, the arms are drawn sticking out from the leg, like branches from a tree trunk. A similar kind of ‘anatomy’ is found on the second print, though it was made quite differently. In this rare example the background, with its dark mixture of colours, was most probably obtained during the process of cleaning up the mirror surface at the end of a working day. Before polishing away the printers ink, heavily thinned with turpentine, in preparation for the coming day, a paper was laid on the plate to suck up the thin ink, producing the saturated colours seen in the background of the print. Lines were then made in the wet ink with a piece of soft wood, revealing the white paper background. The monoprint was completed the following day by applying red ink to the mirror surface. [WH]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 187

Untitled undated [1953] monotype 27.5 x 22.0 cm G /1257 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 188

Untitled 1953 monotype 33.0 x 22.0 cm G /1259 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 189 Untitled 1953 monotype 27.5 x 21 .0 cm G /1260 purchased from a private owner, 2000

Untitled 1953 sgraffito 33.0 x 22.0 cm G /1262 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 190 Untitled 1953 monotype 33.0 x 22.0 cm G /1263 purchased from a private owner, 2000

ELB also used the surrealistic motif which appears in this monoprint in Fish Women, a print dating from 1953 (private collection). The motif is an enigmatic combination of what are in themselves naturalistic images, comparable with the surrealism of RenĂŠ Magritte and Max Ernst. The print was produced in three stages. The lines of a figure were drawn with a matchstick on thin semitransparent paper, so that the drawing was left behind as ink-free lines in the viscous ink on the mirror surface. Next a new sheet of the same thin paper was laid on the ink. The monoprint was produced by rubbing carefully on the paper. The red colour was applied in the third stage. [WH]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 191

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 192 Untitled 1953 monotype 33.0 x 22.0 cm G /1264 purchased from a private owner, 2000

Untitled 1953 monotype 22.0 x 33.0 cm G /1265 purchased from a private owner, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Elburg 193 Untitled 1953 monotype 21 .5 x 27.5 cm G /1266 purchased from a private owner, 2000

Untitled undated ink on paper 18.4 x 28.0 cm G /1411 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: New Yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greeting from Lotte Ruting and Jan Elburg to Goos Verweij.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lotti van der Gaag

[The Hague 1923 – Nieuwegein 1999]

Charlotte van der Gaag, known as Lotti, is one of the generation of post-war artists who broke with tradition. She studied with Livinus van de Bundt at the Free Academy in the Hague, and after 1948, with a rich imagination, she created fantastic figures in almost childlike forms, first in clay and later also on canvas. Impressed by international sculpture, Lotti moved to Paris in late 1950, where she remained, with occasional periods in the Netherlands. The building she moved into on Rue Santeuil was an important meeting point for CoBrA artists. In Paris, she studied under Ossip Zadkine. Largely through his influence, by the end of 1950, she had broken open her initially compact figures, letting space become part of the image. A French study grant, awarded on the recommendation of Zadkine and art historian Hans Jaffé, her participation in the pioneering exhibitions organized by Frits Becht and in the Salon de Mai in Paris all contributed to a certain early recognition for her work. After 1955, Lotti’s fantasy figures were abstracted into more complex forms. With her more or less abstract paintings in earth tones, which are entirely consistent with these sculptures from her so-called ‘vegetative period’, she can be considered one of the innovative, informal material painters of the period around 1960. In about 1962, more recognizable human or animal forms returned in both her sculptures and her by now colourful paintings, this time combined with a variety of symbols and moving parts. For a large part, Lotti van der Gaag found her inspiration in her interest in nature. Her work is characterized by very coarse handling of the materials, giving her work a worn, rough and natural character. Her work as a whole, which always retained its personal character, can be referred to as primitive, with the fantastic figures in simple and bold lines relating to the ‘children’s’ drawings and the work of the primitive artists. Her work is the result of spontaneous handling of the materials, which themselves play an active and creative role. It developed in a manner all its own, consistent with the informal art of the post-war years. Her sculpture in particular, usually fantastic creatures, relate to the work of the CoBrA movement, which also contributed international developments in informal art. [LS]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lotti van der Gaag 196

Forest God 1966 casein paint, resin laquer on jute 62.5 x 45.0 cm S /833 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Sanders, 1992

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lotti van der Gaag 197 Human Figure undated terracotta h. 25.5 cm P/161 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lotti van der Gaag 198 The Thinker Head The 1951 sculpture, The Thinker, is a completely original version of Auguste Rodinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s famous Penseur, completed in 1880. Lotti van der Gaag much admired Rodin for his rough modelling in clay. This seated fantasy figure has a long neck, with an open space left in the head. As with Rodinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s figure, the chin rests on the hand, expressing the contemplative posture. An enlarged version of the sculpture was installed on the Maliebaan in Utrecht in 1990. The Head also dates from 1951, and in expressive terms, is consistent with The Thinker. It is, however, not moulded from clay, but carved directly in stone. Lotti seldom worked in stone, which makes Head an exceptional sculpture.

The Thinker 1951 bronze h. 39.5 cm P/74 purchased from Lotti van der Gaag, 1963

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lotti van der Gaag 199

The influence of Lottiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s teacher, Zadkine, is clearly perceptible. From the end of 1950, Lotti left negative, open spaces in her sculpture, which had previously been very compact in form. Unlike Zadkine, however, she preferred to model directly in clay or plaster. Consequently, the resulting sculptures, many of which were later cast in bronze, had a rough, unpolished surface, a trait that characterizes her work as a whole. By the end of the 1950s, she was making sculptures of a complexity comparable to those of the man who had inspired her. Thanks to the means by which Lotti introduced Parisian ideas about art to the Netherlands, she holds a unique position in Dutch sculpture. [LS]

Head 1951 stone h. 34.0 cm P/160 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lotti van der Gaag

200

Animal 1956 terracotta with white engobe h. 23.0 cm P/162 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002

The Animal, from 1956, is a dog-like sculptural form similar to many she produced during the first half of the 1950s. It is from a period in which her sculpture largely resembled human or animal figures, predominantly composed of irregular planes. Similar friendly creatures are also found in the work, for example, of Karel Appel, but also in Dubuffet’s paintings and in the early work of the American abstract expressionists. Lotti van der Gaag’s work can perhaps best be seen in the context of informal art, the post-1945 movement in modern art for which powerful and uninhibited expression was fundamental issue. It is beyond doubt that mutual influences were taking place between Lotti and the CoBrA artists during the many years that she was at the Rue Santeuil. It is therefore surprising that she was not invited to show her work in the various CoBrA exhibitions or publications, whereas others were invited to do so. The question of whether or not Lotti van der Gaag was a CoBrA artist still generates heated debate. The idea is opposed, for example, by Corneille, who is of the opinion that only the artists who took part in the 1948–1951 exhibitions and publications were actually CoBrA artists. There are, however, arguments to support a wider definition of the group. Lotti van der Gaag must in any case be seen as a talented artist who made a unique contribution to informal art. [LS]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lotti van der Gaag

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

201

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lotti van der Gaag

202

Untitled 1950 poster 41 .0 x 30.5 cm G /1422 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: poster for an exhibition by Lotti van der Gaag at Galerie de Posthoorn, The Hague.

Untitled 1954? chalk on paper 25.0 x 19.3 cm G /1413/1-2 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: on the back is a drawing of a mother and child.

recto

verso

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lotti van der Gaag

203

Untitled 1958 chalk on paper 10.5 x 14.0 cm G /1713 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002

details: New Year’s greeting from Lotti van der Gaag to Goos Verweij.

Untitled 1959 chalk, watercolour on paper 10.5 x 14.0 cm G /1714 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: New Year’s greeting from Lotti van der Gaag to Goos Verweij.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lotti van der Gaag

204

Untitled 1960 ink on paper 14.0 x 10.5 cm G /1715 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij details: New Year’s greeting from Lotti van der Gaag to Goos Verweij.

Untitled 1958–1967 typescript various sizes G /1453/1-7 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: this correspondence from Lotti van der Gaag to Goos Verweij includes two postcards, two letters with envelopes and preliminary sketches for an invitation and poster for an exhibition of Lotti’s work in Paris in 1967.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lotti van der Gaag

205

Untitled 1972 pastel on paper 36.5 x 49.0 cm G /2814 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Stephen Gilbert

[Fife 1910]

Untitled 1951 letterpress 31 .2 x 24.4 cm G /1361 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2000 details: exhibition poster for Galerie Le Canard, Amsterdam. Printing: G.A. Verweij, Schiedam.

Composition 1953

1953 screen print on paper 10.2 x 15.2 cm G /1439 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

1953 screen print on paper 10.2 x 15.2 cm G /1440 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lucebert

[Amsterdam 1924 – Alkmaar 1994]

Painting and literature began to interest Lucebert (pseudonym of Lambertus Jacobus Swaanswijk) from an early age. In 1938 he studied for six months at the Amsterdam Institute for Applied Art, but as a painter he is in fact selftaught. After the war he decided to be a free artist, changed his name, Lambertus, to Luce(= light)bert, and began roaming through Amsterdam as a bohemian. In 1948 he met the experimental poet Gerrit Kouwenaar, who introduced him to the members of the Experimental Group. Lucebert took the stage as poet and draughtsman at the first CoBrA exhibition at the Stedelijk Museum, but did not make his mark as a painter until the end of the 1950s. In 1958 he had his first solo exhibition at Galerie Espace. Shortly thereafter Lucebert achieved international fame. In 1959 he took part in Documenta II in Kassel. In 1964 his work was shown at the Venice Biennale and he made his debut in New York. From 1961 onwards a contract with the Marlborough Gallery in London afforded Lucebert more financial elbow room. Lucebert’s extensive visual oeuvre is suffused with CoBrA attributes, such as abstraction, a multiplicity of colours and spontaneity, to which he adds humour and the gaze of a social critic. His great inspirations, aside from the painters Picasso, Klee, Ernst and Dubuffet, are primarily the critical writers in pre-war Germany, such as Tucholsky, but also the poets from the history of classical German literature, such as Hölderlin. In addition Lucebert was a great fan of contemporary jazz music. The sounds of jazz musicians Chet Baker, Dizzy Gillespie and Bessie Smith echo through his associative fusion of images. Lucebert was unfettered by stylistic classifications and had no desire to be innovative per se: ‘Anything that crosses my mind I paint; I sketch and paint anything on anything; I take in all notions simultaneously; I don’t make a selection among motivations and I don’t strive for syntheses; I simply allow opposites to come to me and while they struggle with one another I offer no resistance – I stay out of the line of fire and I experience the freedom that only they hold out to me, my paintings, my poems, these joyful playgrounds where no seesaws crowd out swings, where Saharas and great oceans come together in sandboxes.’ [LN]

Beast Tamer THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lucebert

210

1959 oil on canvas 88.0 x 128.5 cm S /134 acquisition from Lucebert, 1959 details: dated VIII ’59.

With the painting Beast Tamer Lucebert shows himself at once a painter and a draughtsman. The large head and shoulders on the right and the mysterious creature on the left are painted with black drawing lines. They are the result of Lucebert’s extensive study of Paul Klee’s drawing technique. Startling combinations give the individual lines distinctive, surreal significations. The two bodies (beast and man) seem to share one head. Or are there actually two: one face spherical with two circles as if drawn by a child and one head with a snout and floppy ears? On the right side of the canvas horizontal lines drive aggressively into the square figure. This gives this figure a mouth with teeth, and from the appropriate distance it stands in relation to the beast with two bodies, it naturally becomes the beast tamer Lucebert alludes to in the title. The associative visual language is characteristic of Lucebert’s painting and fits in with CoBrA’s spontaneous paintings, anchored in coincidence. The variegated foundation upon which the creatures are painted is testament to the pleasure Lucebert took in painting. Putting down layer upon layer of colour was something Lucebert was familiar with from the work of his father, who had a painting business in Amsterdam’s Jordaan district, where he learned the painter’s craft in his youth. In 1959 Lucebert produced for the first time a large number of oil paintings in sizeable dimensions, and Beast Tamer is just one of them. The affinity with oils that Lucebert displays in these associative and caricatural paintings sets the tone for his extensive body of work. [LN]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lucebert

211

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lucebert

212

Untitled 1959 oil on hardboard 122.0 x 144.0 cm S /159 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Sanders, 1960 details: dated 1 IX ’59.

At the end of the 1950s Lucebert brought the CoBrA language back to life with his strongly associative painting style. His unfettered expression of form fits in seamlessly with what Constant wrote as early as in 1948: ‘An art that does not resolve the problem posed by a predetermined conception of beauty, but acknowledges no norm other than expressiveness and spontaneously creates what intuition points out.’ Lucebert made his paintings without preliminary studies and let no aesthetic ideal stand in his way. He applied lines and blots spontaneously. Associating from the composition which this created he patiently accentuated volumes and lines and paints over fragments that were too distracting. This painting, which has no title, is a colourful panel over which round wheels roll and other, non-figurative shapes emerge out of a light blue-grey world. The playfulness of children’s drawing was an inspiration to Lucebert. Round shapes become wheels; here and there ladders and arrows appear. It is a purely associative play of line, colour and form, without any single signification. In 1961 Lucebert wrote about his work method: ‘Anyone who, while painting eggs, remembers the Easter eggs of years gone by no longer feels like celebrating Easter. A good painting, a good poem, in fact comes into being in no-man’s-land, a border zone between design and perception, a zone where neither conventions of memory nor the wishful dream dictates of any Utopia can play their restrictive parts.’ [LN]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lucebert

213

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lucebert

214

Vluchtschrift voor Anton Rooskens [Pamphlet for Anton Rooskens] 1962 letterpress 21 .1 x 13.6 cm G /1414/1-2 [shown only in part] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: two copies.

Untitled 1964 lithography on paper 33.0 x 21 .0 cm G /1717 donated by Lucebert, 1964 details: 1964 New Year’s greeting from Lucebert and his wife, Tony, ‘to all works of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam’.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Lucebert

215

Girlfriends 1969 lithography on paper 78.0 x 57.0 cm G /435 donated by the Ministry of Culture, Recreation and Social Work, 1972 details: edition number 9/60.

Untitled 1972â&#x20AC;&#x201C;1973 silkscreen 55.4 x 75.9 cm G /2117 donated by the Altena Boswinkel Collectie Foundation, 1999 details: edition number 178/200.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Nieuwenhuijs

[Amsterdam 1922 – Amsterdam 1986]

The career of Jan Nieuwenhuijs was much less successful than that of his brother Constant, who was two years his elder. He only had a few one-man exhibitions during his lifetime and no independent publications about his work were printed. At the beginning of the war Jan Nieuwenhuijs studied for a while at the State Academy of Fine Arts in Amsterdam. Shortly after the war he was still working in a Cubist idiom, but in around 1947 he switched to an expressionist approach, often combined with a childlike-linear style. His paintings mainly consisted of fantastic scenes, sometimes dreamlike, sometimes emotional and expressive, in which animals played a principal role. The influence of Joan Miró can clearly be seen in the paintings with a number of small figures in a cosmic or ill-defined space. In 1948 he participated in two group exhibitions in Amsterdam where work by Appel, Corneille and his brother Constant was also on view and, partly as a result, he became closely involved with the Experimental Group attending its foundation in his brother’s house on 16 July 1948. He also joined CoBrA but withdrew again in 1949 and from then on he pursued a comparatively isolated artistic career. His style changed somewhat in the 1950s – against a background of wildly painted and expressive colours, he usually set a single large fantasy figure, distinctly evocative of non-western or prehistoric painting. In around 1960 he came visibly under the influence of the French equivalent of Lyrical Abstraction. From then on, making use of an automatic style, he painted scenes in which figuration was almost entirely absorbed by abstract forms. In order to maintain himself, he made use of the Dutch ‘Contraprestatie’ system, by which artists were guaranteed a small allowance in return for works. [PvU]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Nieuwenhuijs

218

The title of this painting, Sleepwalking Cock, suggests an unreal world. Normally speaking, cocks symbolize a state of alertness, of wakening and being awake. With its pronounced squint and distorted anatomy, however, Jan Nieuwenhuijs’ cock is all too clearly in a semiconscious state. Nonetheless he performs acrobatic feats on a slack cord, while around him stars and planets shine brightly in the night sky. The cord is suspended between a flagpole and a ladder that reaches the top of the moon, while its base disappears in the dark void. On the back of the cock is a dog and on the dog a girl is dancing. The three are performing a daring circus act, such as one would only be capable of in a fantasy world or dream. Like a picture puzzle, the fluttering pennant on the left turns out to be a fourth acrobat. And when the lights are out the painting turns out to have another fairytale dimension: then the little dancer, a star and the moon light up because they are painted with phosphorescent paint. Although the cock is painted in Expressionist style, with rapid untidy brushstrokes, the other figures are done in a childlike, stiffly linear fashion that reminds one of Joan Miró. With regard to the scene as a whole – a nighttime fantasy world with stars and moons, the work of Miró, that Nieuwenhuijs may have seen both actually (in Paris) and in reproduction, seems to have been a source of inspiration.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Nieuwenhuijs

219

Sleepwalking Cock undated [1949] oil, resin varnish and cardboard on hardboard 69.8 x 99.5 cm S /537 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1970

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Nieuwenhuijs

Untitled

220

Untitled

1948 lithography on paper 30.0 x 22.6 cm G /1317 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991

1952 letterpress 56.0 x 35.0 cm G /1363 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991

details: originally part of Reflex (1948) 1 .

details: exhibition poster for Galerie Le Canard, Amsterdam. Printing: G.A. Verweij, Schiedam.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Jan Nieuwenhuijs

221

Untitled 1952 ink on paper 10.5 x 11 .4 cm G /1377 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: invitation for an exhibition in Galerie Le Canard, Amsterdam. Printing: G.A. Verweij, Schiedam.

Untitled 1956â&#x20AC;&#x201C;1957 watercolour on paper 14.0 x 10.0 cm G /1456 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: change of address card addressed to Goos Verweij.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anders Ă&#x2013;sterlin

Anders ร sterlin

[Malmรถ 1916]

Animal devant une tour et devant le soleil [Animal Before a Tower and Before the Sun] 1950 linocut on paper 31 .2 x 24.0 cm G /1300/1-2/2 purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions BV, 1991 details: originally part of Cobra (1950) 6.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens

[Griendtsveen 1906 – Amsterdam 1976]

After leaving the technical school in Venlo, Anton Rooskens worked as an instrument maker in the 1930s. In 1935 he moved to Amsterdam, where he taught electrical engineering and instrument making at a technical college. As an artist Rooskens was self-taught. Inspired by Van Gogh and Constant Permeke, in his spare time he painted expressionistic landscapes. In 1940 he made his debut with a small solo exhibition at Kunsthandel Aalderink. In 1945 Rooskens became fascinated by non-Western art, especially African folk art and the New Guinean ancestor sculpture he saw at the exhibition ‘Art in Freedom’. He also became interested in Picasso’s Cubist painting. Rooskens gave up painting landscapes and started to experiment with abstract forms. His new style was characterized by a new angular formal idiom. Through his abstract painting Rooskens came in contact with other young artists. In 1946 he took part in the exhibition ‘Young Painters’ at the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam. Other artists to participate in this exhibition were Karel Appel and Corneille, who were to co-found the CoBrA movement in 1948, and Willy Boers and Ger Gerrits, with whom Rooskens undertook a trip to Paris in 1947. In 1948 he joined the Experimental Group and exhibited the following year at the CoBrA exhibition at Amsterdam’s Stedelijk Museum. Shortly afterwards, he distanced himself from the CoBrA movement. He felt a greater affinity with the abstract artists grouped around Willy Boers, who founded the artists’ association Creatie in 1951. The early 1950s were a fruitful period for Anton Rooskens. During these years he built up a network of international contacts and exhibited in Denmark and Germany. In 1954 he realized his dream, and undertook a trip to Africa. He came back disappointed: Africa proved less pure than he had expected. In the ensuing years Rooskens’ canvases were dark and highly expressive. Like the matter painters, he applied his oils in an impasto manner to the canvas. As a result of renewed interest in CoBrA art in the 1960s, Rooskens’ palette took on lighter and more playful tone. [LN]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens Danse macabre

226

[Dance of Death]

1949 oil on linen 119.0 x 145.0 cm S /77 donated by the Friends of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, 1959 details: on loan from the Friends of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam since 1955.

Rooskens painted Danse macabre [Dance of Death] in 1949 for the CoBrA exhibition at the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam. Working in an unrestrained manner, Rooskens allows an array of colourful creatures to emerge from a dark ground. In the centre is a terrifying, large white-grey beast with tentacles that extend to the edges of the canvas. Surrounding it, smaller birdlike and fishlike creatures seem to be inquisitively examining how aggressive the beast is. These creatures Rooskens scatters playfully over the canvas. With the circles he adds here and there, like the red and blue ball in the upper right of the painting and the scratched sphere in the middle, Rooskens creates a veritable universe. Rooskens is a master in evoking a magical world. Allowing himself to be seduced by the abstract and unpredictable in painting, he tackles the work with a blend of spontaneity and correction. Working freely and without restraint, Rooskens first applies lines and planes to the canvas. He then overpaints large areas in black to temper the wildness of the colour composition, creating this dark world and the creatures that inhabit it. This painting of Rooskens is a good illustration of CoBrA’s ideas on painting, as expressed by Constant in the manifest: ‘A painting is not a construction of colours and lines, but an animal, a night, a cry, a human being, or all those things put together.’ But Rooskens did not feel entirely in place in the CoBrA movement. Shortly after the group exhibition in Amsterdam he left the movement. His paintings subsequently took on a more lyrical quality and the mythical creatures disappeared. [LN]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

227

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens

228

Composition for a Wall 1949 gouache on paper 22.5 x 55.0 cm (3x) S /2342/1-3 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002

In the years following World War II, Rooskens pursued a contemporary form of folk art and felt involved with the postwar debate on the position of the fine artist in the assignment of major art commissions. Rooskens was among those who advocated that fine abstract art should also play a role in the embellishment of public space. As a teacher of instrument making at the Don Bosco School in Amsterdam, Rooskens encouraged where possible cultural awareness in his students. In 1949 his own school commissioned from him several large wall paintings, which he executed with his artist friends Eugène Brands, Willy Boers and Ger Gerrits. The three compositions for a wall were presumably made for this assignment. The second sketch shows close similarities with the final design, which was realized on wooden panels and hung in the school in 1950. The three designs are lyrical, non-figurative compositions. Each gouache is a play of round and oval coloured planes, linked here and there by white and black arches. The circles, arches and ellipses join in a spontaneous, rhythmic dance across the sheet of paper. The lyrical style is reminiscent of the surreal painting of Joan Miró, whose work was admired by the CoBrA artists. The design was ultimately divided into two and painted on two panels measuring 115 x 186 cm. Rooskens’ panels were then mounted on the school wall, alternated with similarly-sized abstract compositions by Brands. [LN]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

229

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens

230

Untitled 1950 gouache on paper 10.0 x 49.0 cm S /2345 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002

Symbols undated [c. 1950 –1952] oil on linen 60.0 x 50.0 cm S /2345 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002

In this modest work Rooskens uses black lines to crisply divide the picture plane into smaller planes. Pink, green, mauve, yellow, orange, blue and white are linked together by the black. The figurative element is totally absent. The image is built up of abstract symbols. Their significance lies in the contrast between the black lines and the coloured planes, between densification and space, between order and disorder. With this lyrical, abstract work Rooskens set the tone in abstract expressionist painting in The Netherlands, which was partly represented by CoBrA and to a similar extent by the artists grouped in Vrij Beelden and Creatie, with which Rooskens was associated before and after his CoBrA time. This painting reveals a clear affinity with the symbolism of Willy Boers, founder of Vrij Beelden. Boers subscribed to the artistic theories of Wassily Kandinsky, particularly those expounded in Concerning the Spiritual in Art. Rooskens was a ‘doer’ rather than a theoretician, and he put the theoretical principles of Vrij Beelden effectively into practice. This small painting reflects the enormous pleasure Rooskens derived from painting and shows how easy it was for him to abandon traditional figurative painting. Around 1950 Rooskens was way ahead of his time with his lyrical, abstract painting. The oval colour planes, which are partly outlined in black, were to become typical features of 1950s design. The eye-shapes, like the green oval in the lower left, also later recur in Rooskens’ large-scale abstract work. [LN]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

231

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens

232

Composition 1952 oil on linen 95.2 x 114.7 cm S /84 donated by the Friends of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, 1959 details: on loan from the the Friends of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam since 1955.

This abstract composition, realized in 1952, has striking details which are typical of the CoBrA idiom. The wing-like form in the middle and the figures around it recall the mythical CoBrA creatures. Similarly, the expressive use of the primary colours yellow, blue and red, and the impassioned, intuitive application of lines are reminiscent of CoBrA. The whimsical forms are partially overpainted in black. Then, scratching in the black â&#x20AC;&#x201C; as does a child in a wax crayon drawing, he re-exposes the colourful ground. Finally, Rooskens adds restful planes of grey and green which restore a playful balance to the composition. The play of overpainting and re-exposing the energetic interplay of colour and lines are characteristic of Rooskensâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; autonomous work during and just after his CoBrA period. Self-taught, Rooskens was untrammelled by any art historical tradition. He was, however, inspired by French postwar abstract art and sought to create an original folk art such as he discovered in the artefacts from Africa and New Guinea. This painting, in which Rooskens actually articulates a new primitive formal idiom, ranks among the highlights of his oeuvre. In 1954 Rooskens undertook a trip to Africa to study contemporary folk art there. He came back disappointed: to his mind the authentic African culture was far too contaminated by Western mentality. Painted in 1952, this composition, clearly predates his visit to Africa, for it still projects an optimistic view of non-Western folk art. [LN]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens

233

Red Spot 1952 oil on linen 73.0 x 82.0 cm S /854 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1997

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens

234

This painting is one of the most harmonious abstract canvases Rooskens ever painted. After his CoBrA period, in the early 1950s, Rooskens painted exciting, totally abstract compositions. The chaotic and vehement application of lines and choice of colours continue to provide an important foundation for these works. Fragments of these blue, red and green lines and the stark white ground can be seen in the centre, lower left and lower right of this canvas. Rooskens subsequently introduced a certain order by overpainting the whimsicality in beige and brown. This does not make the canvas dull: for within these fields Rooskens paints, on the left, a blue and a red oval and, on the right, a yellow square, inside of which two small ovals with chaotic, colourful structures are left visible. Finally, Rooskens added black lines connecting the forms. The red spot is encircled, as is the yellow. The vertical lines seem to give the volumes legs. At the same time, the black lines resemble an indecipherable calligraphic script recalling the carved rune characters of ancient Celtic cultures. Red Spot and other works Rooskens painted in this period attest to his interest in non-Western art. Through these paintings Rooskens developed a style akin to a universal primitive formal language. The CoBrA artists, like many other modern painters after World War II, showed an interest in primitive â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;blackâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; art, as art from Africa was known in the 1950s. [LN]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

235

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens

236

Untitled 1952 gouache on paper 41 .0 x 52.5 cm S /2346 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002

After having turned to experimental painting, Rooskens produced a prolific number of gouaches. This fast-drying, opaque watercolour lends itself particularly well to exploring free forms and loose brushstrokes. This gouache with lots of green, pale blue-grey, red and black is a good example of Rooskens’ experimental painting. Nowhere is there any reference to the visible reality. The gouache is an explosion of paint, in which Rooskens uses the non-colour black as a binding agent for the variously and brightly coloured ground. The scratching in the black lends the abstract composition extra relief and tension. The large oval and the surrounding circles enclosing projecting forms recalling a fighting hand or a raised fist, are pictorial elements which repeatedly recur in Rooskens’ work around 1950. Like the half-moon shapes and the grids, these abstract elements are typical of the Dutch CoBrA style in general. Rooskens’ interest in the abstract reality of a painting was largely due to his contact with the French Réalistes Nouvelles painters. Rooskens was a member of the Parisian Salon des Realités Nouvelles. These French artists redefined the concept of realism. They pointed to the expressivity of the matter and thus to the reality of the work itself. Influenced by these ideas, Rooskens attached great importance to the expressive quality and the handling of the paint. [LN]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

237

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens

238

Untitled 1952 gouache on paper 58.5 x 60.0 cm S /2347 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens

239

No. 1 1955 oil on linen 95.5 x 105.0 cm S /2 donated by the Friends of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, 1959 details: on loan from the the Friends of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam since 1955.

Whistling Birds 1968 gouache on paper 32.0 x 41 .5 cm S /2344 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2000

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens 240 Untitled 1948 earthenware ø 34.8 cm K/29 donated by Anton Rooskens, 1955

After World War II, the traditional Dutch ceramics company Russel-Tiglia in Tegelen was looking for fresh ideas. To this end, the company invited modern artists to work in its studio. Anton Rooskens learnt of this initiative through family connections in Tegelen. He took advantage of the opportunity to experiment with ceramics on several occasions. He also invited his artist friends, including Frieda Hunziker, Karel Appel and Corneille, to go along with him. The idea of painting saucers and beakers from Russel-Tiglia’s standard collection like true folk artists appealed to Rooskens and his friends. Rooskens decorated this wall plate with interlocking angular and wavy abstract forms. Here and there he has scratched away the paint to reveal the terracotta underneath. On the left a mask with an elongated nose and two eyes can be made out. The style is in keeping with his autonomous painting of the same period. In the latter 1940s, Rooskens sought to trace the origins of painting and he tracked these back, among others, to Picasso’s Cubist masks which were inspired by African art. He was also fascinated by the sense of authenticity emanated by non-Western folk art, like the ancestor sculpture from New Guinea. Rooskens continued to pursue his experiments with free, abstract forms. The idea of working with the ceramics studio was in step with CoBrA’s ideal of creating a contemporary folk art. [LN]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens 241

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens 242 Untitled undated letterpress 53.0 x 38.0 cm G /1371 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2000 details: exhibition poster for â&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Venster, Rotterdam.

Untitled 1948 lithography on paper 30.0 x 23.5 cm G /1318 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991 details: originally part of Reflex (1949) 2.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens 243 Untitled 1950 letterpress 13.6 x 9.5 cm G /1415/ 1- 2 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: moving card after a design by Anton Rooskens, one specimen without text. Printing: G.A. Verweij, Schiedam.

Untitled 1952 letterpress 35.0 x 20.0 cm G /1362 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2000 details: exhibition poster for Galerie Le Canard, Amsterdam. Printing: G.A. Verweij, Schiedam.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens 244 Untitled 1952â&#x20AC;&#x201C;1976 typescript, manuscript and printed matter various sizes G /1359/1-72 [not shown] donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij details: 72 letters, postcards and other forms of correspondence from Anton Rooskens to Goos Verweij, funeral cards announcing Rooskens death, various printed matter and newspaper clippings.

Untitled 1954 linocut on paper 29.5 x 19.9 cm G /1416/1-2 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: two copies.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens 245

Untitled 1953â&#x20AC;&#x201C;1955 screen print, gouache on paper 60.8 x 43.0 cm G /120 donated by Anton Rooskens, 1955 details: edition number 2/15.

Untitled 1955 linocut on paper 24.5 x 32.0 cm G /1417 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens 246 Untitled 1964 gouache on paper 32.4 x 10.2 cm G /1275/1-2 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002

details: two virtually identical copies of a New Yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s card by Anton Rooskens, one addressed to the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam and the other to the Verweij family.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens 247 Anton Rooskens: 12 Original Lithographies 1967 lithography on paper 38.7 x 30.2 cm [graphics portfolio] 38.5 x 30.0 cm [graphic sheets] G /1420/1-15 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002

details: edition number 13/100.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens 248

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens 249

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens 250 Group 1967 lithography on paper 32.7 x 40.8 cm G /2828 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002

details: edition number 77/250.

Birdman 1975 screen print on paper 24.0 x 18.5 cm G /2826 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: edition number 236/250.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Anton Rooskens 251

Bird Singing 1975 screen print on paper 18.0 x 24.0 cm G /2827 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 2002 details: edition number 236/250.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Theo Wolvecamp

[Hengelo 1925 – Amsterdam 1992]

When he was only 23, Theo Wolvecamp’s artistic career was off to an explosive start, when he joined the Experimental Group in 1948. The destitute young painter from the Twente region, in the east of the Netherlands, was discovered in Amsterdam by Corneille, who in turn introduced him to Appel and Constant. Wolvecamp had known an impoverished youth in the city of Hengelo and had enjoyed little schooling. When not wandering through the woods, he studied reproductions in magazines in libraries or was busy drawing. With the exception of two years at the art academy in Arnhem, which he considered mere ballast, he developed his work on his own initiative, using Kandinsky’s abstractions as a point of departure. Wolvecamp is referred to as the ‘silent strength behind CoBrA’ because of the consistency of his work and his loyalty to the CoBrA roots. That loyalty concerned the artistic principles of experimentation and improvization, for he was less able to muster affinity for radical theoretical formulas. In his younger years, he shortened his name to the more lighthearted and international sounding Wolvé. In 1953, his effort to further develop his work in Paris with the help of a study grant came to naught – he was miserable there. Wolvecamp proved unable to work without the familiar décor of his youth, and he moved back to Hengelo permanently in 1954, where he was taken into the circle of art collectors Alice and Hans de Jong. Wolvecamp’s paintings were at times produced with difficulty. He was famous for his severe criticism of his own work, a considerable percentage of which was painted over, if not altogether destroyed. Wolvecamp also shunned publicity, feeling more comfortable in the shadows of the art world. [MdG]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Theo Wolvecamp

254

Composition with White Spot 1955 oil on jute 101 .2 x 99.9 cm S /66 purchased from Theo Wolvecamp 1955

For this robust composition, Wolvecamp used raw jute. Against a dark background, a broad mesh of horizontal and vertical lines was applied with wide, strong strokes in muddy white. In the middle of the canvas, one discovers a bright red accent, and a little above that, a wide green stroke. A black stick figure in supple lines meanders across the canvas like a ball of twine. The paint has been squeezed directly from the tube and worked with the back of a brush or pallet knife. Wolvecamp here demonstrates his not-insignificant ability as a material painter, but he was not merely concerned with purely formal issues. In an interview in 1955, the year this painting was made, he said: ‘Starting with the material, I try to arrive at an expression of life in the form of a painting, which is not just a brew of colour and lines, but in which a spontaneous human sentiment conquers the material and every aesthetic concept.’ In this context, the titles that Wolvecamp gave his paintings are significant. A 1954 painting that related to the Schiedam composition was entitled Souvenir de Bretagne. It is a heavy, somber work that reflects Wolvecamp’s disillusioned frame of mind during his stay in France. The fact that in retrospect, by the 1980s, Wolvecamp would be known as a pioneer amongst the informal artists failed to make an impression on him. [MdG]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Theo Wolvecamp

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

255

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Theo Wolvecamp

256

Night Birds 1958 oil on canvas 120.1 x 110.4 cm B S /329 on loan from the Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage (ICN)

Despite the title, Night Birds, it is evident in this painting that Wolvecamp was not concerned about any easily identified representation. As was often the case, this painting does not reveal its secrets at a single glance. From the volume of paint loom forms that could might be associated with ‘night birds’. On looking again, the colour planes, which seem surrounded by black contours, will not be forced into a specific form. They drift and float away, and can at best only barely be contained by a network of fat, black lines. It is a battle taking place in paint, and the intensity of the work is further increased by the contrast between the glowing colours and the deep black. This dynamic is reminiscent of the work of the action painters, such as Pollock and De Kooning, whom Wolvecamp particularly admired. Compared with the ‘hard core’ Dutch CoBrA artists, Appel, Corneille and Constant, Wolvecamp’s oeuvre is remarkably compact and thematically consistent. In 1992, not long before he died, the then 67-year-old painter again picked up the night birds theme, in a thickly painted canvas, with less movement than the Schiedam painting, but it still remains loyal to the CoBrA idiom. [MdG]

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Theo Wolvecamp

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

257

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Theo Wolvecamp

258 Saturn 1960 oil on canvas 120 x 94.5 cm B S /335 on loan from the Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage (ICN)

Untitled undated shawl 70.0 x 69.0 cm K/188 donated by Theo Wolvecamp, 1985 details: the shawl was produced by Texoprint, in Boekelo, after a design by Wolvecamp.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Theo Wolvecamp

259

Untitled undated lithography on paper 29.5 x 22.5 cm G /1320 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991 details: originally part of Reflex (1949) 2.

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Documentation

260

Reflex, orgaan van de Experimentele Groep in Holland [Reflex, organ of the Experimental Group in Holland] unnumbered [number 1] undated [1948] magazine 30.0 x 23.1 cm G /1311 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991 details: copy without original lithographs by Corneille, Jan Nieuwenhuijs, Karel Appel and Constant.

Reflex, orgaan van de Experimentele Groep in Holland [Reflex, organ of the Experimental Group in Holland] number 2 undated [1949] magazine 31 .0 x 34.0 cm G /1312/1-2 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991 details: copy without original lithographs by Corneille, Brands, Rooskens and Wolvecamp. Second copy with original lithographs was previously in the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam library.

Le Surrealisme revolutionaire [Revolutionary Surrealism]

unnumbered [number 1] undated [1948] magazine 26.5 x 21 .5 cm G /1348 purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions BV, 1991

Bulletin International du SurrĂŠalisme RĂŠvolutionnaire, Organe du bureau international du surrealisme revolutionaire [International Bulletin of Revolutionary Surrealism, Organ of the international revolutionary surrealism bureau] number 1 1948 bulletin 36.3 x 27.4 cm G /1349 purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions BV, 1991

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Documentation

261

Cobra. Bulletin pour la coordination des investigations artistiques [Cobra. Bulletin for the coordination of artistic investigations] unnumbered [number 1] undated [1949] magazine 31 .0 x 34.0 cm G /1296 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991

Cobra. Bulletin pour la coordination des investigations artistiques [Cobra. Bulletin for the coordination of artistic investigations] unnumbered [number 3] undated [1949] magazine 27.4 x 21 .9 cm G /1297/1-2 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991 details: second copy was previously in the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam library.

Cobra. Organe du front International des Artistes Experimentaux dâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;avantgarde [Cobra. Organ of the International Experimental Avant- Garde Artists Front] unnumbered [number 4] undated [1949] magazine 30.4 x 24.5 cm G /1298 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991

Cobra. Internationale Zeitschrift fĂźr Moderne Kunst [Cobra. International Magazine for Modern Art] number 5 1950 magazine 21 .0 x 29.6 cm G /1299 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Documentation 262 Cobra. Revue bimestrielle de L’Internationale des Artistes Experimentaux [Bimonthly Review of the Experimental Artists International] unnumbered [number 6] 1950 magazine 32.2 x 25.0 cm G /1300/1-2/1 purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions BV, 1991 details: includes linocut by Anders Österlin as loose supplement (G /1300/1-2/2).

Cobra. Revue internationale de l’art experimental [Cobra. International Review of Experimental Art]

number 7 undated [1950] magazine 32.2 x 24.9 cm G /1301 purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions BV, 1991

Cobra. Revue Internationale de l’art experimental [International Review of Experimental Art]

number 10 undated [1951] magazine 32.2 x 24.5 cm G /996 purchased from Antiquariaat André Swertz, 1995

Le Petit Cobra, Bulletin International d’Informations Artistiques [The Little Cobra. International Bulletin of Artistic News] number 3 1950 magazine 21 .4 x 13.1 cm G /1302 purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions BV, 1991

Le petit Cobra. Bulletin International d’Informations Artistiques [The Little Cobra. International Bulletin of Artistic News] number 4 1950–1951 bulletin 21 .4 x 13.6 cm G /1303 purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions BV, 1991

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Documentation 263 Braak unnumbered [number 6] undated [1951] magazine 21 .5 x 17.0 cm G /1347 purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions BV, 1991

Meta number 5 1951 magazine 18.4 x 19.9 cm G /1304 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991 details: Karl Otto Götz published the magazine under the pseudonym André Tamm.

Meta number 6 1951 magazine 18.5 x 19.9 cm G /1305 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991 details: hand-coloured cover by Ger Gerrits.

Le groupe experimental Hollandais [The Experimental Group Holland]

undated [1949] book 15.6 x 12.2 cm G /1308 purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions BV, 1991

Manifestations décentralisantes et unificatives. Cobra pour le contact [Decentralizing and unifying demonstrations. Cobra for contact] 1950 pamphlet 14.9 x 11 .9 cm G /1310 purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions BV, 1991

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Documentation 264 Een appèl aan de verbeelding. Experimentele groep Holland [An appeal to the imagination. Experimental Group Holland)] 1950 pamphlet 47.0 x 63.2 cm G /1344 purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions BV, 1991 details: the pamphlet was published on Aldo van Eyck’s initiative.

Le ‘Realisme-Socialiste’ contre la revolution [‘Socialist Realism’ against revolution]

1950 pamphlet 22.3 x 14.1 cm G /1306 purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions BV, 1991

Artistes Libres Première serie du bibliotheque de Cobra [Free Artists First Cobra Library Series]

1950 book 17.0 x 13.0 cm G /1326/1-2; G /1327/1-2; G /1328/1-2; G /1329/1-2; G /1330/1-2; G /1331/1-2; G /1332/1-2; G /1333/1-2; G /1334/1-2; G /1335/1-2; G /1336/1-2; G /1337/1-2; G /1338/1-2; G /1339/1-2; G /1340/1-2; G /1341/1-2; G /1342 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991 details: 16 illustrated booklets in a cassette on Pierre Alechinsky, Else Alfeldt, Karel Appel, Atlan, Ejler Bille, Constant, Corneille, Jacques Doucet, Sonja Ferlov, Stephen Gilbert, Svavar Gudnason, Henry Heerup, Egill Jacobsen, Asger Jorn, Carl-Henning Pedersen. The section on Erik Ortvad was published separately in 1979. Includes a loose-leaf foreword. Published as Première serie du bibliotheque de Cobra in French and Danish in 1950. This is the French edition. Second copy was previously in the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam library.

IIe Exposition Internationale d’art Experimental [2nd International Experimental Art Exhibition]

1951 poster 56.2 x 37.1 cm G /1324 purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions BV, 1991 details: poster for the exhibition in the Palais des Beaux Arts in Liège, 6 October to 6 November 1951 .

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Documentation 265 4 Holländische Maler [Four Dutch Painters]

1951 catalogue 20.9 x 14.8 cm G /1307 donated by Mr. & Mrs. Verweij, 1991 details: catalogue with Willy Boers, Eugène Brands, Ger Gerrits and Anton Rooskens.

Invitation à la premiere conference internationale du surrealisme révolutionair [Invitation to the first international revolutionary surrealism conference] 1947 pamphlet 21 .7 x 13.3 cm G /1309 purchased from Van Gendt Book Auctions BV, 1991

THE SCHIEDAM COLLECTION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

The art hall of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam about 1956. The original, stately art hall of 1940 transformed into a white box along the lines of the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam, complete with fatsia plant. Experimental work by Anton Rooskens (left) and Lotti van der Gaag (foreground) is combined with contemporary ceramics and textiles. Rooskensâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; two paintings, Danse macabre and Composition, are on loan from the Friends of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam; Lotti van der Gaagâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s sculpture does not end up in the collection, despite the serious efforts Daan Schwagermann makes to acquire her work in 1955.

CoBrA and Schiedam A city with a proud collection but no ambitions for its museum

MARCEL HUMMELINK

269

‘social relevance’ of museum policy. In all this the limited

would be required to conform when selecting items for or

acquisition budget and the cost of the purchase and

disposing of items from their collections.

conservation management of art objects which rarely came

By the beginning of the 21st century this development had

out of the depository, were given less weight than the fact

had little effect on the discussion on the future of

that not all social groups were equally interested in what

Schiedam’s museum. Since the time at the end of the

the museum had to offer. Thus Bakker en Konings’ paper

1970s when two Schiedam socialists made the national

was not concerned with the question of whether the

press with the idea that some or all of the museum’s

municipal collection might still be available for public

collection might be sold, the idea had become a typical

display after it had been sold. Partly under the influence of

Schiedam cliché. Not surprisingly the passage in Leefbaar

the Schiedam museum row and a few later scandals

Schiedam’s election program which suggested a partial

occasioned by the proposed sale of valuable paintings from

sale of this kind failed to unleash a national discussion over

public collections, a discussion was started about possible

the question of whether cultural conservation could safely

justifiable ways of ‘decollecting’ – a new word for the sale

be left in the hands of that party: the idea was simply

or disposal in some other way of collections or parts of

recognized as a piece of electoral rhetoric for local,

collections – the main issue being the physical accessibility

Schiedam, consumption. While reverberations continued of

and the consistence and quality of the public collections.

the echos of the museum riot which cast a slur on the

As became apparent as long ago as 1987, when, despite

city’s cultural image at the end of the 1970s, Schiedam

fierce criticism, the Hilversum city council decided to put a

would be the last Dutch municipality to stick its neck out

Piet Mondrian painting on the market, there were never

on the subject of decollecting.

any legal obstacles to selling works of art from public The end of the museum?

collections. There was however great social resistance to the idea that all kinds of major works could disappear from the sight of the general public if government and the

The policy accord reached after the Schiedam council

museums were to use cultural heritage to stop up gaps in

elections in 2002, confirmed the council’s proposal to

their budgets. This again became apparent in 1989 and

physically separate its historical collection from its

1999, when first The Hague’s Gemeentemuseum wanted

collection of modern art. By so doing Schiedam would to

to sell two works by Picasso and one by Monet and then

some extent follow the example set by various other cities:

subsequently the Boijmans Van Beuningen Museum

after all most municipal museums were set up in the

wanted to dispose of a painting by Mark Rothko. In each

nineteenth century as historical museums, but during the

case public agitation was such that the plans ultimately fell

course of the twentieth century several of them, including

through. Moreover the reaction was so strong that the

Amsterdam’s Stedelijk Museum in particular, developed

museums lost the ability that they had previously enjoyed

into art museums with large depots.

to exchange or dispose of items in their collections: no

The proposal to split the existing museum into two new

government would be happy with the kind of public

institutions cannot disguise the fact that Schiedam still

agitation that could be provoked by controversial

lacks any great ambition for its museum. The decision

transactions.

made by the council in February 2000, based on the

Thus while in the first instance the effect on the museums

Berenschot report, implied that there was no wish to

of the to-do about the proposed sale of a number of

accommodate the historical collection in a separate

famous paintings was to encourage conservation, from the

museum, but rather to store it away in a ‘historical

end of the 1990s a growing conviction that too much work

warehouse’. At the same time the art collection was not to

was gathering dust in expensive but inaccessible museum

become the basis of an art museum, but to merge into a

depots led to an official attempt to increase the efficiency

‘Centre for modern Dutch art’, with more of an eye on

of museum expenditure. The Netherlands Institute for

vitality and ‘becoming a part of Schiedam’ than on the

Cultural Heritage (ICN) was set up to improve the way the

quality of the collection and the exhibitions. In short the

various public collections were attuned to one another.

council decision meant that Schiedam threatened to bid

Subsequently, from 1999 onwards, that same agency

farewell not only to a historical museum founded in 1899,

developed a code of conduct to which the museums

but also to an art museum that developed out of it in the

COBRA AND SCHIEDAM

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

270

Introduction

Museum dividing its attention between the history of Schiedam and the history of modern and contemporary

Schiedam is proud of its art collection. Its Stedelijk

Dutch art, there should in future be two institutions, each

Museum looks after a collection ‘which enjoys a wide

of which would take a part of the collection under its wing.

reputation in the world of culture’, according to the book

The municipal CoBrA collection played an important part in

published by the city council in 2001 on the occasion of

forming the various ideas about the museum’s future,

the city’s 725th anniversary. The art collection consists only

sufficient reason to look back once more at the history of

in part of works by Schiedam artists, though the city

that collection: after all, Daan Schwagermann’s first CoBrA

houses a flourishing artistic community. ‘Happily

acquisitions, like recent thinking about the museum, form

Schiedam’s love of art is not blinded by chauvinism,’ as the

part of a broad historic development that was difficult to

commemorative book puts it. The identity of the city of

grasp and even more difficult to predict.

Schiedam, as disseminated by the city council at least, is Berenschot and Lunsingh Scheurleer

to a significant extent determined by the broad cultural style of the municipal art collection. Schiedam’s art collection contains more than 200 works by

Schiedam’s plans to split the collection in the Stedelijk

artists involved in the international CoBrA group at the end

Museum resulted from the Berenschot report, which the

of the 1940s. The reputation of these artists extends far

city commissioned in 1999 from Jan-Willem van Giessen

beyond the boundaries of the cultural world. Is there

and Ocker van Munster, two research workers from the

anyone in the Netherlands who has never heard of Karel

Berenschot firm of management consultants. Their report

Appel? CoBrA is a phenomenon in the history of art that

belonged to a series of ‘independent’ recommendations

continues to excite both fanatical art lovers and the general

that the city council had accumulated over the years to

public. For this reason the Schiedam museum would gladly

support its policy on the museum.

put its CoBrA collection on permanent exhibition: this

Thus for example in 1925 Hendrik van Gelder, director of

section of the collection is seen as an important attraction

The Hague’s Gemeentemuseum and member of the

for the city.

national museum advisory committee, gave his verdict on

However the link between CoBrA and Schiedam has by no

the museum and its collection, which at the time was

means always been so close. There was a time when

mainly historical. He found not only that the museum

CoBrA artists had no more than a small group of admirers,

owned ‘very many things’ of the kind that justified the

not only in Schiedam but also in the outside world. Daan

existence of a local museum, but also that this collection

Schwagermann, the curator who acquired the first CoBrA

was urgently in need of different accommodation: as he

works for the museum in the mid-1950s, was given

saw it, the Sint Joris Doelen, in which the Stedelijk

permission – but no money – to form a significant

Museum had been housed since its foundation in 1899,

collection of works by ‘living artists’. Later, at the end of

was ‘totally unsuitable’. Subsequently the external advisory

the 1970s, the idea that Schiedam might sell its art

committee set up in 1954 under the direction of Daan

collection led to fierce countrywide discussion of socialist

Lunsingh Scheurleer, the Government Inspector for

art policy. Thus the history of Schiedam’s CoBrA collection

Movable Monuments, found that the museum would be

is tied to the changing perception of CoBrA and the cultural

of interest to the public, ‘even more than is the case today’,

policy of the country’s dominant political movements.

if it were to form a collection of works of art by ‘living

Schiedam started considering the future of its Stedelijk

artists’. It should also hold regular exhibitions of the work

Museum around the turn of the century. In February 2000

of young artists ‘as a way of developing live contact

the city council decided in principle to store away the

between artist and public’, to quote the Lunsingh

historic collection in a ‘historical warehouse’ and to

Scheurleer report.

incorporate the art collection in a ‘Centre for modern Dutch

As a rule, ambitious changes cost money. At the beginning

art’. Subsequently the policy accord for 2002–2006 again

of the twenty-first century the costs involved in the various

laid down that the historical collection and the art collection

plans for the Stedelijk Museum had still not been worked

should indeed be separated and given a place in two

out, but it could already be predicted that in future it would

different institutions. Thus instead of a single Stedelijk

still be difficult to continue to carry out the museum’s

COBRA AND SCHIEDAM

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

271

Group, but certainly counted amongst the experimentalists.

attention between painted images, reliefs, landscape

Pierre Janssen, who succeeded Schwagermann as curator

impressions and figure studies: in the course of his career

in 1956, also collected works that did derive not exclusively

Appel has left behind studios and depositories bulging with

from the ‘historic’ CoBrA period. This became apparent in

his work at various places round the world. This productivity

1958 in particular, when Janssen had the opportunity to

does not mean that Appel had no interest in the

buy a number of works from the extensive Appel

conservation and restoration of his work. For example, he

consignment. The work in this consignment, which thanks

enormously resented Amsterdam’s 1949 decision to cover

to Daan Schwagermann and Goos Verweij landed up in

up his mural in the city hall. And in 1958 he was so

Schiedam in 1955, stemmed from the period before

impressed by the measures taken by Pierre Janssen to

September 1950: originally Appel had left them behind in

preserve his work in the Appel consignment, that he

his studio in Amsterdam when he moved to Paris. In 1958,

temporarily called off his proposal to take back this work.

with the support of the art critic Cornelis Doelman and the

As the local politician Jolie Hakkert wrote more than

chief curator of the Gemeentemuseum in The Hague, Karel

40 years later in her commentary on a number of papers

Schuurman, Janssen selected from the 295 works in the

and recommendations on the future of the Stedelijk

consignment a series of works on paper which provided a

Museum, ‘If I were Karel Appel, I would recover all my

broad survey of Appel’s artistic development prior to 1950;

paintings in a hurry because, who knows, maybe the next

since then the Schiedam museum’s collection has acquired

idea will be to sell them all to finance something or other!’.

works dating from before 1948, besides work dating from

In this she completely ignored the fact that it had been a

the time when Appel was a member of the Experimental

long time since the museum had any work that Appel was

Group and CoBrA.

still entitled to remove, but nonetheless her words

In 1959 Pierre Janssen reached agreement with Corneille

summarized in a single unthinkable thought the fear felt

too to lend an important group of works to the museum.

by many art lovers that Schiedam would baulk at the costs

But Appel and Corneille took back their loans in 1965 and

involved in the proper management and conservation of

1986, so marking the beginning of the end of the contact

its art collection.

between the CoBrA artists and the Schiedam museum. In Stigma of cultural barbarism

the early 1960s Hans Paalman, who became the museum’s first director in 1962, decided to concentrate his acquisition policy (and consequently his exhibition policy) on Dutch

Jolie Hakkert’s observation undeniably referred to the 1979

artists who had not yet made a name for themselves, so

Schiedam museum row, which was provoked by a paper

shifting the museum’s attention from ‘living artists’ to

by Hans Bakker and Hans Konings, two members of the

‘artists so far unknown’. In the Netherlands since then

board of the Schiedam branch of the PvdA, in which a

Amsterdam’s Stedelijk Museum, The Hague’s

proposal was made to sell the municipal art collection.

Gemeentemuseum and later also the Cobra Museum in

Herman Posthoorn, who had sat on the Schiedam city

Amstelveen, have closely followed the development of the

council as a member of the PvdA since 1975 and alderman

CoBrA artists, regularly giving them space to show their

for Culture, Education and Sport, had been responsible for

recent work and regularly buying recent work from them.

the Stedelijk Museum since 1976, was bitterly opposed to

The Schiedam museum still organizes a retrospective

the proposal. Subsequently the PvdA members of the

exhibition now and then. The museum’s CoBrA collection

Schiedam council also refused to adopt the proposal which

benefited from further incidental expansion mainly thanks

in fact was never discussed either by the city executive or

to donations and loans. Since the late 1990s the museum

the city council. The press however immediately presented

has presented itself in a way that emphasizes its efforts in

the proposal as an example of the contemptible ideas the

the field of conservation and restoration of CoBrA work.

PvdA entertained on art and culture. The result was a fierce

Karel Appel has always been an artist with an enormous

countrywide discussion of socialist artistic policy.

creative urge. This was the case as far back as the

Later, looking back on the Schiedam museum row, Herman

beginning of the 1940s, when he was still painting mainly

Posthoorn declared that the plan proposed by his fellow

landscapes and portraits. And it remained the case round

party members mainly arose from a widely felt

the turn of the century, by which time he was dividing his

dissatisfaction with the way in which Hans Paalman was

COBRA AND SCHIEDAM

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

272

various tasks (collecting, preserving and exhibiting) in

into a ‘platform or centre to be used as a multifunctional

a proper manner. Why after all should things go any

cultural complex.’ Supporters of the art museum were all

differently this time from how they went on previous

set to put the city council back in an imaginary pillory.

occasions? Although Van Gelder wrote off the Sint Joris CoBrA or the experimentalists

Doelen as a museum building as far back as 1925, in 1926 the city council decided to keep the museum – provisionally – in its existing location: only in 1940 was it

Ever since 1954, when the Schiedam museum began to

moved to the Sint Jacobs Gasthuis, the present building

concentrate on the work of ‘living artists’ various CoBrA

which Van Gelder had had in mind. Subsequently the

artists have resisted the direction taken over the years by

Lunsingh Scheurleer Commission found that an increase in

the interest in the ‘experimentalists’ – which also left its

the museum’s acquisition and exhibition budgets was

mark on the museum’s acquisition and exhibition policy.

necessary to make it possible for its advice to be put into

While the Dutch Experimental Group and the international

effect, but the city council decided to make extra money

CoBrA group had not been in existence for more than a

available only for the organization of exhibitions: any

few years, various experimental artists involved in those

ambition to create a collection of art works of by ‘living

groups had already a long and flourishing career behind

artists’ would have to be put on the back burner for the

them. Some CoBrA artist felt that CoBrA owed its fame

time being – unless funds could be found from some other

more to their individual success than vice versa. The

source. Thus in the period 1954–1956 only five CoBrA

‘CoBrA myth’ not only benefited one or two less successful

works came into the museum’s possession through

artists, but also led to a disproportionate amount of

purchase, the remainder originating from loans or

attention being paid to the brief history of a shaky

donations.

organization of artists. Looked at like this, the attention paid

‘Must Schiedam set up the gallows again?’ wondered the

to the CoBrA movement disguised a deficiency. Displaying

art critic Dolf Welling ominously in the mid-1960s. As he

a living history of modern art in a museum or ‘Centre for

saw it, Schiedam’s city council had for so long allocated so

modern Dutch art’, would require active contact with

little money to the purchase of modern art, that it might as

contemporary artists, but Schiedam had lost most of its

well bring out the historical collection again, which included

contacts with CoBrA artists in the course of the 1960s.

a gallows ‘with facilities for eight persons’: this old-

The purchase by Daan Schwagermann of the painting

fashioned unique selling point would serve as a striking

Victory Borfimah from stock in the studio of Eugène

illustration of the city’s cultural philistinism.

Brands in 1954, laid the foundation for the Schiedam

Today there are many who have regretted and still regret

museum’s CoBrA collection. By that time CoBrA and the

that Schiedam, with its history extending over more than

Experimental Group had already ceased to exist as artists’

seven centuries, has not managed to maintain an

organizations some years back. Brands himself had

independent historical museum – and, according to a

decisively turned his back on the Experimental Group as far

recent council paper, a library of historical objects would

back as 1949. By the mid 1950s Karel Appel in particular

even have to start lending out the gallows, to avoid its

had come to be regarded in the Netherlands as the

spending the rest of its life gathering dust in a warehouse.

figurehead of an informal group of modern artists known

Meanwhile the city council has a dubious reputation to

as the ‘experimentalists’. Schwagermann directed his

keep up for its museum policy. In 1979 for example, there

attention to the contemporary work of this group of artists,

was a countrywide commotion about the idea that

but at the same time did his best to lay his hands on work

Schiedam might sell its art collection (which should by

by every member of the Experimental Group, including

then be worth millions of guilders) to allow it to set up a

work from their ‘experimental period’. Thus Victory

cultural centre in the museum building. The plans which

Borfimah dated from 1949, while the second example of

started to be developed at the end of the 1990s arose

Brands’ paintings that Schwagermann wanted to buy –

directly from the problems of that time. The municipality

which was rejected by the acquisition committee – was

still had no great ambitions for its museum: in fact a paper

from a later date. Schwagermann’s interest also extended

by two local PvdA [the Dutch Labour Party] politicians

to artists like Jaap Nanninga, Piet Ouborg and Lotti van der

proposed in so many words that the museum be converted

Gaag, who were never members of the Dutch Experimental

COBRA AND SCHIEDAM

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

273

the local socialist party. At the end of the 1970s the PvdA

museum’s collection, exemplified, in its most extreme form,

enjoyed enormous support. While the party had not

this conflict between a ‘bourgeois’ cultural policy directed

participated in national government since 1977, it was still

at reverence and preservation and a ‘socialist’ cultural

represented on a number of municipal governing bodies.

policy directed at participation and innovation. The proposal

Thus in Schiedam, where the socialists had been the

was a textbook example of the political polarization present

largest party in the council since 1935, in 1979 three of the

in the thinking at the end of the 1970s.

four aldermen were socialist. The fact that the alderman for

The Schiedam museum row provided the occasion for a

Culture, Education and Sport was against the proposal

thorough study of artistic and cultural policy inside the

made less impression on the press than the fact that Chris

PvdA: in 1982 the party’s research department published

Zijdeveld, alderman for Urban Development and

the study De kunst van het socialisme [The art of

Environmental Affairs, also a socialist, was very much in

socialism], in which the only observation at all related to

favour. Nor did Zijdeveld improve the situation significantly

museums was that in cultural policy ‘the relationship

by ‘urgently recommending’ the museum to make the main

between old and new’ had been ‘problematical’ since the

hall available for an exhibition on domestic insulation.

end of the nineteenth century. In the same year Schiedam

Some critics believed that these plans were typical of

produced an official Museumnota [Museum Memorandum]

‘leftist artistic thought’ and concluded that cultural heritage

which once again defined the priorities which affected

could not safely be left in the hands of the socialists. Thus

museum policy: in practice economies would have to be

the columnist Gerrit Komrij poured scorn on Zijdeveld as

made under the headings ‘exhibitions’ and ‘acquisitions’,

‘a gross populist, the kind of person who thinks that Mozart

to make it possible to restore the CoBrA collection within

can be thrown out with the rubbish because he can play

the existing budget and to install better lighting equipment

the Internationale so beautifully on the accordion himself

in the museum basement. So long as echoes of the

and because the people who vote for him are more taken

Schiedam museum row continued to reverberate, the

with Corry en de Rekels [a Dutch pop group].’

Schiedam council wished to remove all doubt about its

Afterwards even Herman Posthoorn was prepared to admit

intentions concerning the municipal art collection in general

that the relationship between the PvdA and art was

and the CoBrA collection in particular, which thanks in part

‘traditionally difficult’. The socialists had always been more

to the nationwide discussion had come to rank as the

interested in working men’s physical problems than in their

museum’s most important possession. Thus until his

spiritual development. A cautious change in this attitude

departure in 1990, the director, Hans Paalman, found

began to come about at the beginning of the 1960s, when

himself forced to satisfy increasing demands within a

the PvdA established that the time had come for ‘other

budget which increased only gradually.

things besides money’. In 1967 a new generation of

Whereas in the 1980s the ‘liberal/socialist’ cultural policy of

socialists sketched in a paper entitled De meeste mensen

the Schiedam city council was mainly characterized by

willen meer [Most people want more] the outlines of a

‘expenditure limitation’ and ‘economies’, under the liberal

new socialist cultural policy, which presented the

councillor who was responsible for cultural matters in the

encouragement of contemporary cultural life as a direct

eight years following 1994 in a council ruled by a left/right

alternative to the preservation of culture: ‘A socialist cultural

coalition, the museum was given rather more financial

policy is more concerned with things which arise today

elbow room. Supported by a favourable economic climate,

and tomorrow than on preserving and cherishing things

Schiedam made one or two significant investments in its

which belong to yesterday.’ Finally the PvdA’s 1971 election

‘cultural infrastructure’ and seemed prepared to make a

programme showed that the socialists had begun to realize

massive investment in the future of the Stedelijk Museum.

that government should do its best to improve not only its

At the same time the appointment of Diana Wind as

citizens’ physical well-being, but also their spiritual well-

director marked a turnround in the way of thinking about

being. This meant that they should no longer, as in the

the museum: from then on the institution was considered

1950s, do their best to propagate ‘Art with a capital A’,

a cultural ‘business’, needing to be managed by someone

but to develop ‘creativity, critical awareness, political

knowledgeable not only in the history of art but also in

consciousness and relaxed social relationships.’ The

marketing.

proposal by the two Schiedam socialists to sell the

Even so, the future of the museum once again became an

COBRA AND SCHIEDAM

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

274

governing the museum. In the view of his opponents,

probably attract few tourists from outside Schiedam; on the

Paalman had the habit of organizing expensive exhibitions

other hand tourists sometimes turn up for precisely those

which were only attended by a small elitist public and

activities for which there is relatively little interest within the

made no effort whatsoever to reach broader layers of

city itself. A museum that aims to serve a regional or

Schiedam society. Further, Schiedam’s artists felt that they

national public soon becomes a welcome target for

deserved more attention from the local museum. All in all

criticism, particularly in places where there is a lack of

there seemed to be little advantage to the general public of

other local cultural facilities.

Schiedam to set against the high costs incurred by the

Thus apart from the dissatisfaction with the policy of Hans

municipality to keep the museum in being. In Posthoorn’s

Paalman, there can be no doubt that frustration over the

view, what his party colleagues Bakker and Konings had

plans for a Schiedam ‘cultural centre’ led to the plan to sell

wanted was to have a substantive discussion on the

the municipal art collection. The proposal to set up such a

subject. But unfortunately this wish came to be linked with

centre had been on the municipal agenda since the end of

an unworkable proposal, and that too was misinterpreted

the 1940s and so dated from the days when the Stedelijk

by the press. The result was that the PvdA in general, and

Museum was still mainly a historical museum with a single

the Schiedam branch in particular, unjustly became subject

art gallery. This plan was endlessly delayed by all kinds of

to the ‘stigma of cultural barbarism’.

protest actions and financial problems, during which time

Although the idea to sell the municipal art collection was

the Stedelijk Museum managed with limited means to get

new in 1979, the desire of Bakker and Konings to influence

together an art collection of national importance. Bakker

the course of the museum via the city council derived

and Konings’ aim was to effect a radical reversal of what

directly from the power struggle over the museum which

they saw as an unfortunate development: the museum

had raged in Schiedam since at least the 1920s. The

should be transformed into a multifunctional centre for the

Schiedam museum, like many other museums, is a public

people of Schiedam. The proceeds from the sale of the art

institution and therefore responsible, directly or indirectly, to

collection would be used to build community centres.

the city council. To carry out executive tasks the city

Meanwhile, since the 1970s Schiedam’s ‘cultural

council naturally makes use of specialist services. So for

infrastructure’ has improved remarkably: ‘Pand Paulus’

example in 1926 Cord Schwagermann, father of Daan

provides exhibition space for Schiedam artists and cultural

Schwagermann, was appointed custodian of the museum

nightlife has been enriched by the arrival of the Theater

because he was knowledgeable about art and antiques.

aan de Schie. Yet the feeling that Schiedam has more need

Unfortunately these specialists often demanded more

for a centre or platform than for a museum has still not

freedom of action than the city council was prepared to

disappeared entirely. As a result of the Berenschot report

allow, if they were to be able to do those things which in

the city council even made an explicit decision in favour of

their professional view needed to be done. Conversely, the

a living ‘centre’ instead of a prestigious ‘museum’. The

city council sometimes regretted its choice of a particular

council appeared to be ready to dig deep into its pockets

custodian, curator or director. Thus by 1979 the Schiedam

to provide this centre with suitable new accommodation.

museum was already able to look back on a whole series of

And one of the locations the council thought should be

conflicts with the city council and the museum committee.

considered for the possible new building, was the Kop van

Seen from the point of view of the general local interest

de Plantage: the very spot that the council had in mind at

which the city council and executive committee were

the end of the 1940s for a cultural centre to accompany

pledged to uphold, the encouragement of local cultural life,

the Stedelijk Museum.

the interest of the local population in the activities of the Leftist art

city’s cultural institutions and the power of these activities to attract tourists, lay at the heart of cultural policy. Unfortunately, and particularly in a medium-sized

Previous local history played no part whatsoever in the

municipality like Schiedam, these three matters are not

nationwide discussion that broke out at the end of the

necessarily mutually consistent. Thus an excess of local

1970s in response to the idea of selling off the municipal

chauvinism in the museum’s acquisition and exhibition

art collection. The national press concentrated all its

policy would certainly benefit local artists, but would

attention on the fact that the proposal was dreamed up by

COBRA AND SCHIEDAM

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

275

1956. This consideration was probably mainly due to the

founded and 14 years after the first CoBrA painting found

fact that experimental art was seen as something that

its way into the museum.

happened outside Schiedam. The Schiedammers were

The ‘canonization’ of CoBrA had the effect of increasing the

mainly grateful to their museum for giving them the

prices put on works by CoBrA artists, while larger sums

opportunity to form their own opinions about an artistic

came to be paid by the trade for works dating from the

phenomenon that had already ruffled so many feathers, as

‘historic’ CoBrA period than for their contemporary work.

might be concluded from the relatively large numbers that

As far as the Schiedam museum was concerned, this

came to visit the Appel exhibition. An additional factor was

meant that the CoBrA artists were pricing themselves out

that in the mid-1950s criticism of the experimentalists was

of the market: its limited budget made it impossible to buy

to some extent muted by the international success of Karel

any more important works by CoBrA artists. At the same

Appel in particular. While in 1950 Appel left Amsterdam

time the rising market value of the CoBrA works that

more or less penniless, on a visit in 1955 he impressed his

Schiedam’s museum already had in its possession

acquaintances by his distinguished presence: Appel

provided a significant argument for an ‘avant-gardist’

gradually became accepted as a successful Dutch example

collection policy. Any collector who was prepared to stick

of an artistic movement which was setting the trend

out his neck and be daring enough to buy work in which

internationally. In the end Schiedam brought in a number of

almost no one so far saw any merit, could well find himself

examples of this international art for relatively little money:

in the possession of a collection which would later attract

in 1954 Eindhoven’s Van Abbemuseum brought on itself a

jealous glances from collectors with a much larger budget.

wave of criticism for buying Picasso’s Femme en vert for

‘So it seems that Schiedam’s avant-garde policy was wise,

the ‘exorbitantly high sum’ of almost 114,000 guilders. For

commercially forward-looking,’ as a Museumjournaal

the Schiedam museum, that bought two paintings by

editorial put it in the mid-1960s.

Appel in 1955 and 1956 for 1000 and 2500 guilders

It is true that Hans Paalman’s acquisition and exhibition

respectively, received two more works from him and looked

policy was for a long time permeated by this avant-gardist

after no fewer than 295 works on his behalf, the mid-

way of thinking. ‘Partly because of the various

1950s remained a period of calm.

developments in the visual arts new fields have come into existence from which the museum could collect: Abstract-

Avant-garde as an investment

Expressionism, Constructivism, New Figuration, Pop-Art, Photorealism, Fundamental Painting, Conceptual Art,

The continuing growth in international appreciation for Karel

monumental ceramics and new forms of painting,’ wrote

Appel, Corneille and Asger Jorn in particular, brought with

Paalman shortly before his departure in 1990. This

it, from around 1960, a growing interest in the ‘historic’

statement could be read as a summary of virtually all the

CoBrA group, that had organized one or two memorable

‘neo-avant-gardist’ movements that had attracted the

exhibitions in the period 1948–1951 and had published a

attention of lovers of modern art during his time as director.

varied journal. A few exhibitions and articles on the history

Regrettably the developments that took place round CoBrA

of art looked back at the period shortly after the Second

were not to be repeated: while the CoBrA works acquired

World War, when CoBrA was to make an important

by Schwagermann in the period 1954–1956 experienced a

contribution to international artistic development. Thus in

striking increase in value from as far back as the early

the first half of the 1960s CoBrA was written into the

1960s, the interest in most of the other ‘neo-avant-gardist’

‘canon’ of the modern history of art. At the same time the

movements remained limited. Moreover Paalman’s faith in

narrowly defined term CoBrA – to which ultimately only

the avant-garde provided insufficient answer to the

those artists were held to belong who had contributed to

criticism advanced by a growing democratization

the exhibitions and the journal of the CoBrA group in the

movement: although the museum attracted a relatively

period 1949–1951 – displaced the much more broadly

large number of visitors during his period as director, it

defined term ‘experimentalists’, to which Appel and his

remained vulnerable to the charge that it only reflected the

associates had previously been held to belong. The

interests of a small, elitist clique.

Schiedam museum went along with this, organizing its first

Meanwhile it was inevitable that there would be some

CoBrA exhibition in 1968, 20 years after the group was

reaction from the CoBrA artists to the canonization of those

COBRA AND SCHIEDAM

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

276

issue in local party politics. At the beginning of 2002

first experimental works reached the museum, the

Leefbaar Schiedam [Liveable Schiedam] was the big

experimentalists owed a part of their national reputation to

winner in Schiedam’s council elections. In its election

the excitement created at the end of the 1940s by their

programme this ‘new’ party pleaded for a referendum on a

work’s artistic and political content. At the end of 1949

possible new building for a ‘Centre for modern Dutch art’.

Amsterdam’s city council executive committee had decided

Leefbaar Schiedam argued that the art library could be

to cover over a Karel Appel mural in the refreshment room

closed down, and refused to exclude the possibility of

of the city hall because the council officials found it

selling part of the municipal art collection. The policy

insufficiently artistic. A little earlier, Willem Sandberg,

accord reached with the other parties represented in the

director of Amsterdam’s Stedelijk Museum, had been

council (CDA, VVD and Gemeente Belangen Schiedam)

required to write a report on a literary evening in the

after the election explicitly laid down that the municipality

museum that had ended in a scuffle, so that in answer to

would in no event contribute more than half the cost of

questions from the city council the city executive could

any new building which might prove to be necessary to

confirm that the experimentalists had not been using the

accommodate either the historical collection or the art

municipal museum for the dissemination of communist

collection. Theo Schoenmakers, who headed Leefbaar

propaganda. In the eyes of some critics the experimentalists

Schiedam’s list of election candidates, became the

were charlatans and communists.

alderman for cultural matters.

While doubts about the party political intentions of the experimentalists could quickly be removed by the explicit

CoBrA and artistic policy

distancing of the members of the Dutch Experimental Group from the communist movement, in the mid-1950s,

In the different discussions on the future of the Schiedam

when Daan Schwagermann began to be interested in the

museum the significance of CoBrA and living artists was

work of the experimentalists, there was still much resistance

usually measured in economic terms. When in 1954 the

to the experimentalists’ ‘visual vocabulary’. This resistance

museum, following the recommendations of the Lunsingh

was to some extent provoked by the experimentalists them

Scheurleer report, decided to set up a collection of works

selves. As far back as the 1940s the Dutch Experimental

of art by ‘living artists’, the decision was mainly supported

Group had announced their aim to liberate art from all

by economic arguments: quite simply, works by ‘living

existing ideals of beauty, to enable attention to be attracted

artists’ were much cheaper than ‘art from the past’. The

to the improvisation involved in the making of works of art

budget that the city council was prepared to make

and to the stimulation of the imagination involved in their

available to form a public art collection would have made it

contemplation. Later, in the mid-1950s, Karel Appel again

impossible to buy anything but contemporary art. There

declared explicitly that as an artist all he really did was

after no deliberate decision was ever made to point the

‘rubbish things a bit’ – a statement that would continue to

collection in a particular direction or towards a particular

dog him as a personal motto. In the mid-1950s the art

type of art within the contemporary field. On the contrary:

world was still involved in a battle between different

Daan Schwagermann, the museum committee and the

movements, in particular the conflict between ‘realism’ and

external advisory committee for art acquisitions judged that

‘abstraction’, in which the artistic and aesthetic significance

the collection would become too specialized if it were to

of experimental art was constantly being brought into

become more concentrated on a particular artistic

doubt.

movement or art form. Only in the 1960s, when CoBrA

The fact that in Schiedam’s reactions to the work of the

became more and more famous, did it gradually come to

experimentalists little was to be heard of the continuing

be appreciated, even in Schiedam, that part of the

resistance to an ‘abstract’ visual vocabulary, was probably

municipal collection represented a major economic asset.

not due to any special Schiedam sensitivity to the

Although Schiedam’s CoBrA acquisitions in the 1950s form

modernists’ argument that ‘the thunderous breaking of the

part of a much wider collection policy, it is striking that

sound barrier and the imminent appearance of an atomic

those acquisitions – and the museum’s experimentalist

cloud could not be reflected artistically by picture of ducks

exhibitions – never gave rise to any criticism in the local

beside a ditch,’ as Daan Schwagermann put it in his

press or the council. After all, in the mid-1950s, when the

speech at the opening of the Karel Appel exhibition in

COBRA AND SCHIEDAM

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

277

COBRA AND SCHIEDAM

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

278

of their works which dated from the period 1948–1951.

be preserved with the necessary degree of care.

Karel Appel for example was repeatedly heard to grumble

Subsequently, in 1980, it turned out that the CoBrA

that he had no wish to be thought of as a CoBrA artist.

collection in particular had suffered badly from an intensive

Constant too, who had been the Experimental Group’s

lending programme: at the beginning of the 1980s a

most important spokesman in the late 1940s, moved well

substantial sum was reserved in the museum’s budget for

away from the visual work he had done in the days of

the restoration of a few CoBrA works. Finally, under the

CoBrA: the work that was shown in the Schiedam museum

direction of Diana Wind, a CoBrA conservation project was

in 1962 at his ‘New Babylon’ exhibition, could easily have

started, a significant part of which was financed by the

been taken to be by a different artist than the painting

Mondriaan Foundation and the European Union, while a

Scorched Earth, on loan to the museum since 1956. For

growing realization of the inadequacy of the museum’s

Constant the fact that collectors were more interested in

storage space was one of the reasons for fresh discussion

the work he had done in the CoBrA period than in his

about the museum’s future.

current work, only confirmed that his development as an

Society’s support for conservation and restoration has

artist was unaffected by the market. At the same time he

always been even more limited than its support for setting

lashed out violently against artists who ‘as paid jesters of

up a public art collection. Although the importance of

big business’ seemed to be concerned only with securing

cultural conservation is rarely denied, it is generally

themselves a place in the art market – while at the same

considered a form of charity. The laconic reaction of

time still daring to call themselves ‘progressive’ or ‘avant-

Constant to the city of Amsterdam’s plans to cover up the

gardist’. ‘There has never been a time when “artists” were

Karel Appel mural, made a beautiful example, when in late

as reactionary as they are today,’ as he wrote in 1964 in

1949 he wrote ‘a living work of art does not need to be

his article ‘Rise and fall of the avant-garde’.

preserved […] because it has an enormous procreative power. It does not need to be restored because it is

Conservation and restoration

eternally young and is constantly being reborn […] Only the weak and sickly, the impotent and the dying, are

Ever since the first CoBrA exhibition in 1968 ‘CoBrA’ has

conserved, and there are art institutions and authorities to

appeared regularly in the Schiedam museum’s exhibition

do that sort of thing.’ As with other forms of charity, little

programme: the CoBrA collection counts more and more

money is made available for cultural conservation on a

as one of the most important parts of the collection and

permanent basis, but fortunately it now and then happens

therefore as one of the museum’s most important

that unexpected pieces of economic good fortune are used

attractions. But as the CoBrA works become older –

as an incidental way of dealing with the most serious

and most interest is reserved for works from the period

arrears. For example, at the end of the 1990s the Dutch

1948–1951 – it steadily becomes clearer that the

government launched the Delta plan for cultural

possession of such a valuable collection also brings

conservation and the European Community set up the

specific costs with it.

Raphael programme. Schiedam also seemed prepared to

The Hoogstraat property taken over by the museum in

make an extra incidental contribution, over and above its

1940 was not built as a museum and not surprisingly

contribution to the CoBrA Conservation Project, and to

contains no facilities whatsoever for the proper preservation

increase the budget for restoration: ‘Adequate storage

of the municipal collection. True, by comparison with the

space will be provided’, so at least promised the policy

Sint Joris Doelen, where the museum started in 1899, the

accord for 2002–2006.

Sint Jacobs Gasthuis in 1940 represented significant Decollecting

progress. But as larger and larger parts of the museum’s own collection were moved to the building’s attics and cellars, while at the same time standards for managing and

Apart from the change in the political and economic

preserving cultural heritage were becoming stricter,

climate, since the end of the 1970s there has also been a

increasing investment in the building became necessary.

change in thinking about the role of government in cultural

Thus Pierre Janssen set up a new depot with a primitive

conservation. The paper by Hans Bakker and Hans Konings

climate control system to enable the Appel consignment to

at the end of the 1970s formed part of a discussion on the

COBRA AND SCHIEDAM

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

279

course of the twentieth century. This antipathy towards museums was also the dominant feature of the paper Stedelijk Museum in de toekomst? [A future for the Stedelijk Museum?], which was produced as a sequel to the council decision but ultimately was never handled by the council. In the preceding discussions a ‘ruling group’ and a ‘reference group’ had concluded that there was no room to add yet another institution of national importance, concerning itself exclusively with the visual arts, to the museums of modern and contemporary art which had by then appeared in so many other cities. A new art museum would just be ‘yet more of the same’; the plans made by the Dutch museums were based on ‘marketing expectations which, taken together, provide a completely illusory view of the future’; and the end of the museum as a cultural phenomenon was in sight: the views of a number of those involved were summarized in a single sentence: ‘By 2015 a new use will have to be found for the first new museum building; museums will become the churches of the twenty-first century.’ Schiedam is proud of its art collection. But a number of typical museum tasks, such as collecting and conservation, have never enjoyed wide support from the Schiedam community. This is why at the beginning of the twenty-first century the city council toyed with the idea of transferring the valuable art collection that the museum had built up with limited means, to a different kind of institution. Unfortunately the pros and cons of a museum are difficult to separate from one another. Moreover the reputation and tradition built up by Schiedam’s museum provided more reason to cherish the museum than to anticipate its supposedly unavoidable demise. The end of Schiedam’s Stedelijk Museum is by no means imminent.

COBRA AND SCHIEDAM

Bibliography

• 1945–1985. Veertig jaar verzamelen in het Stedelijk Museum Schiedam. Hoogtepunten uit de schilderijen- en beeldenverzameling, Schiedam 1985 • Y. van Baarle, De kunst van het socialisme. Beschouwingen over kunst- en kultuurbeleid, Deventer 1982 • J. Bokhoven (ed.), Cobra in het Stedelijk Museum van Schiedam, Schiedam 1984 • Collegeakkoord 2002-2006 tussen de fracties van Leefbaar Schiedam, CDA, VVD en Gemeente Belangen Schiedam gesloten op 9 april 2002 • H. van den Doel et al. (ed.), Tien over rood. Uitdaging van Nieuw Links aan de PvdA, Amsterdam 1966 • M. Duursma, ‘Kunstmusea zijn er al genoeg’, NRC Handelsblad, 19 July 2002 • G. van der Feijst, Geschiedenis van Schiedam, Schiedam 1975 • J.W. van Giessen, O. van Munster, De toekomst van de Schiedamse musea. Onderzoek in opdracht van de Gemeente Schiedam, Utrecht 1999 • P. Groot, ‘Museumdirecteur in conflict met B&W. Uitverkoop dreigt voor het Schiedams Stedelijk Museum’, NRC Handelsblad, 14 March 1979 • G. Komrij, ‘Een en ander’, NRC Handelsblad, 28 March 1979 • De kunst van links, Amsterdam 1979 • H. Lammers, A. van der Louw, T. Pauka (eds.), De meeste mensen willen meer. Het betere leven van tien over rood, Amsterdam 1967 • G. Lutke Meijer, Het levend verleden van Schiedam. Autobiografie van de brandersstad, Zaltbommel 1981 • G. Mak, De eeuw van mijn vader, Amsterdam/Antwerp 1999 • Museumnota, Schiedam 1982 • M. Nagtegaal-Reedijk, P.Th. Tjabbes (eds.), Van Appel tot Zadkine. 95 hoogtepunten uit de collectie, Schiedam 1995 • H. Paalman, M. Nagtegaal-Reedijk (eds.), 90 jaar Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, Schiedam 1990 • H. Posthoorn, ‘Ik herinner mij nog…’, Ach lieve tijd. Schiedam, 2002, no. 9, p. 221 • M. Schenke, ‘Rel rond museum. Gemeente Schiedam vraagt om beleid’, Algemeen Dagblad, 20 March 1979 • Schiedammers tonen hun kunstbezit, Schiedam 1959 • Schiedam versterkt; van ambitie naar actie. Council programme 2002-2006, Schiedam 2002 • H. Schmitz, Schiedam in de tweede helft van de negentiende eeuw. Een onderzoek naar enige aspecten van de economische en sociale geschiedenis van de stad in de jaren 1850–1890, Schiedam 1962 • D. Schwagermann, ‘Het Stedelijk Museum in zijn beginfase’, Scyedam, XI (1985) no. 4, pp. 187-189 • Stadsvisie Grotestedenbeleid Schiedam. Schiedam naar 2010 … de daad bij het woord, Schiedam 1999 • Stedelijk Museum Schiedam in de toekomst? Paper prepared by Schiedam council’s cultural department, Schiedam s.a. • C. van der Velden, Schiedam, Schiedam 2001 • ‘Verantwoording’, Museumjournaal, IX (1964) no. 7, p. 155 • G. Verweij, ‘Schiedam en Cobra’, Scyedam, VIII (1982) no. 5, pp. 167-170 • De weg naar vrijheid, 1951 • D. Welling, ‘Moet Schiedam de galg weer oprichten?’, Museumjournaal, IX (1964) no. 7, pp. 156-159

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

Cord Schwagermann in the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;art hallâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; at the reopening of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam in the Sint Jacobs Gasthuis on 5 October 1940, flanked by the Portrait of Isabella Angus by Matthijs Maris (1887), acquired in 1939, and a landscape of unknown origin.

Custodian, curator, director

A century of history of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam

KLAWA KOPPENOL

281

1899 – 1916:

Nationwide, instituted in 1919.5 A first external advisory

Gerrit Visser Bastiaansz.

report on the future of the museum was the result. Van Gelder’s judgment was severe and he directed most of

The Stedelijk Museum Schiedam has its roots in the

his fire at the Sint Joris Doelen. He found the building’s

collection of weapons, antiquities and archaeological

location highly detrimental: it stood in a remote industrial

objects and curiosa set up at the end of the nineteenth

area and therefore could not attract the attention of

century by Gerrit Visser Bastiaansz. [1838–1916], major-

potential visitors. Moreover he considered the guard

commandant of the Schiedam Civic Guard and municipal

building entirely unsuited to housing the museum

alderman. On his own initiative ‘Majoor Visser’ assembled a

collection. He advised that the museum be transferred to

large number of historical objects in the Sint Joris Doelen, the building in which the guard held meetings and drills.1

the Sint Jacobs Gasthuis, a stately, spacious, centrally

He also managed to lay his hands on a number of portrait

located building built in 1786 and designed by the famous Rotterdam-Italian architect Jan Giudici.6 However, this

paintings of Schiedam dignitaries from various periods,

building still served its original function as a house for

works of art that in his view belonged in the collection

elderly people. Thus in 1926 it was decided to undertake a

primarily for historical reasons. The collection was adopted

reorganization on site, including an expansion and cleaning

in 1899 as a ‘Municipal Museum’ by the city of Schiedam:

of the available space in the Sint Joris Doelen and a

henceforth the city would bear the costs of its maintenance.

redistribution of the objects on exhibit. An inventory of the

‘Majoor Visser’ continued to manage the museum for some

collection was also deemed necessary, but for that a

time thereafter according to his own lights, until the city in

properly qualified person would have to be solicited in due time.7

1906 formed a three-person ‘Committee for the Administration and Management of the Stedelijk Museum’, on which sat local notables appointed by the city council.2

1927 – 1952:

In order to be able to open the new Stedelijk Museum to

C.H. Schwagermann

the public a caretaker was also appointed in 1909. He opened the doors for the weekly opening hours on

Following the death of the museum’s caretaker in 1926,

Wednesday afternoons, kept an eye on things and performed what maintenance was needed.3 And so the

the museum committee decided to appoint a museum

Stedelijk Museum Schiedam gradually became an

the inventory of the collection as well as the day-to-day

independent, public institution.

supervision of the museum. The committee quickly found a

By founding its own municipal museum the city of

suitable and enthusiastic candidate in the Schiedam

Schiedam was following the lead of a series of Dutch municipalities. These municipal museums usually housed

auctioneer and art dealer Cord Hendrik Schwagermann [1885–1973].8 Schwagermann had already demonstrated

disparate collections of objects selected more or less at

his commitment to the Stedelijk Museum over the

manager or custodian with sufficient expertise to take on

random. Around 1920 various art historians and museum specialists therefore endeavoured to arrive at more coherent, more comprehensive offerings for museum visitors through government-supported policy. The city of Schiedam was asked by the Provincial Archaeological Commission of South Holland, which advised the provincial authorities on the maintenance of historical and cultural monuments, what they envisioned for the future of the collection of the Stedelijk Museum. This led the city council to request the museum committee to submit a plan for a reorganization of the museum.4 For its part the museum committee turned to the director of the Gemeentemuseum in The Hague, Dr. H.E. van Gelder, a member of the State Advisory Commission on the Reorganization of Museums

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

This text is partly based on original research and writings by Sacha Mols and Marleen Blokhuis. 1 For

a concise history of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam and its installation in the Sint Jacobs Gasthuis, see the article by former city archivist and secretary of the museum committee G. van der Feijst: ‘Kunst in een huis van weldadigheid. Het Sint Jacobs Gasthuis en zijn historie’, De Schiedamse Gemeenschap, 1966, p. 34. Special edition of this monthly publication of the De Schiedamse Gemeenschap Foundation, devoted to the reopening of the restored Sint Jacobs Gasthuis. 2 GAS (Schiedam Municipal Archives), Gemeenteblad van Schiedam, 1906, no. 7. Rules of the committee of administration and management of the Stedelijk Museum. 3 S MS (Stedelijk Museum Schiedam), 1918 Annual Report, Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, p. 1. 4 GAS, Minutes of the Schiedam city council, 1923, p. 10. 5 Van Gelder also sat on the subcommittee that dealt with the reorganization of museum management. See the Rapport der Rijkscommissie van Advies inzake Reorganisatie van het Museumwezen hier te Lande, Instituted by Royal Decree of 5 February 1919, no. 62, The Hague, 1921, p. 11. 6 SMS, 1925 Annual Report, Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, p. 2. 7 J.M.M. Jansen, ‘Geschiedenis van het Stedelijk Museum’, in: H. Paalman, M. Nagtegaal-Reedijk (eds.), 90 jaar Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, Schiedam 1990. See also annual reports, Stedelijk Museum Schiedam 1924–1927. 8 G AS, Minutes of the museum committee, 17 January 1927, archive no. 128, inv. no. A-1.

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

282 letter to the SDAP delegation. This idea concurred with the view on the presentation of museum collections as outlined in the state museum reorganization commission’s 1921 report. This called, in regard to local collections as well, for ‘a thorough distinction between those objects exhibited for their beauty and those with particularly historical impact.’ By having works of artistic value shown separately, the state commission hoped to sharpen the public’s discernment.14 To lure as many Schiedam residents to the museum as possible and acquaint them with the fine arts, Schwagermann held temporary exhibitions of classical and modern art in the ‘art hall’ in conjunction with lectures.15 In spite of the modest acquisitions budget at his disposal, he also assembled a collection of paintings of high quality, including works by such respectable, moderate modernists as Matthijs Maris, Kees Verwey, Jan Toorop and Jan Sluyters. A number of sculptures and handicraft objects were also added to the general culture section, while businesses and individuals donated or lent numerous art objects to the museum. During the German occupation Schwagermann became steadily more autonomous. In accordance with Nazi administration principles the power of representative bodies

The founder of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, Gerrit Visser Bastiaansz., better known as ‘Majoor Visser’, about 1906

in Schiedam, as elsewhere, was circumscribed to the benefit of leading personalities. The city council was made subordinate to the mayor, for instance, while the museum committee was compelled to hand over its responsibilities to the curator in 1943. Roles had now been reversed: until 1950, when the old division of authority was reinstated, the committee had only an advisory role in museum policy.16 Schwagermann went on actively organizing exhibitions throughout the war, and made a number of concessions to the German authorities.17 Only after Dolle Dinsdag [Mad Tuesday], 5 September 1944, when many Germans and NSB [Dutch Nazi Party] members fled eastward, leaving Holland in chaos, was the museum closed and the objects safely put away in the museum building’s cellars.18 Various researchers agree that Schwagermann’s actions during the war years were not heroic, but that neither can he be labelled a collaborator.19 Schwagermann was thus able to stay on as curator after the liberation and was also successful, in the years he had left, in promoting steadily greater interest in the living museum that had grown, under his guidance, out of a local collection of antiquities.20 The

The Sint Joris Doelen on the Doeleplein square. The Stedelijk Museum Schiedam was housed on the first floor and in the attic of this building until 1940. After the museum’s departure it served as a clubhouse for so-called ‘asphalt youth’ in the 1950s.

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

new wave of culture that the liberation set in motion in

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

283

preceding several years: in 1924 he unsuccessfully offered

curator in 1938 and been given a seat on the museum

his services as secretary of the museum committee to the

committee as an advisory member. A certain expansion of

city executive; two years later he wrote a letter with

his powers had been needed in order to bring the

recommendations for museum policy to Jan Dinkelaar, the

relocation and related expansion of the museum to a

chairman of the SDAP [Social Democratic Labour Party]

successful conclusion. After the museum committee had

delegation in the city council, and in August 1926 he

decided, in the course of a difficult meeting, to appoint him

promptly applied for the available post of custodian. He

as curator, Schwagermann addressed the members,

was eventually appointed in January 1927.

expressing his hopes to at last be able to do ‘what he had wanted to do, but been unable to do, for 11 years’.11

Unlike the members of the museum committee, Schwagermann was an art expert. He was keen to put his experience to work in turning the Stedelijk Museum into a

Evidently he expected to have more freedom as curator to set up the museum as he saw fit.12 However, it would be

cultural institution to which the image of a local storehouse

another two years before Schwagermann was to see his

of nostalgic bric-a-brac would no longer cling. The

wish fulfilled, as is clear from the speech he gave at the

museum committee, however, seems initially to have

museum’s reopening: ‘In 1927 I started my work at the

wanted to temper his enthusiasm: it was willing to take

Stedelijk Museum with enthusiasm, which was promptly

him on only after the museum reorganization was

dampened. To have been able to complete this work

complete, and when he took up his post his tasks were meticulously outlined by one of the members of the

after years of waiting has given me the greatest inner satisfaction.’13

committee. He was also offered only a part-time

The committee left the installation of the collection in the

appointment limited to one year. Schwagermann was

museum’s new quarters entirely up to the curator.

undaunted; he accepted the limitations placed upon him

Schwagermann divided the collection into two sections:

by the museum building and his job description. For the

objects of local history on the one hand and objects of

moment, he was forced to hold art exhibitions in his own

general cultural value, for the most part paintings, on the

house: there he showed paintings by such well-known

other, would henceforth be exhibited in separate spaces.

seventeenth-century masters as Albert Cuyp, Isaac van

Initially the general culture section was confined to one

Ostade and Salomon and Jacob van Ruysdael, but also by

‘art hall’ on the first floor of the right wing. This was

contemporary Dutch and foreign painters, including Schiedam’s own Johan Windhorst and Jan Bakker.9

Schwagermann’s implementation of one of the recommendations he had made as far back as 1926 in his

After his temporary appointment as custodian was made permanent in 1928, Schwagermann was to see his opportunities and authority within the museum gradually increase as years went by. The accession of Jan Dinkelaar as alderman for Education and as chairman of the museum

10 11 12

committee in 1932, especially, marked a turning point in Schiedam political circles in favour of the museum and its

custodian. After a new hospice was completed for the elderly residents of the Sint Jacobs Gasthuis in 1934, the museum committee endeavoured, following Van Gelder’s recommendation, to relocate the Stedelijk Museum in the vacant building. The structure, however, was in need of thorough renovation, for which the city was unable to allocate funds in such a period of economic crisis. Eventually state subsidies made it possible to set young unemployed people to work readying the right wing of the

16 17 18 19

Gasthuis, following which the museum could be officially opened at this location on 5 October 1940.10

Cord Schwagermann had in the meantime been named

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

D. Schwagermann, ‘Het Stedelijk Museum in zijn beginfase, de eerste conservator, zijn persoon en zijn werk’, Scyedam, 11 (1985) no. 4, p. 195. G. van der Feijst, op. cit., p. 32-37. Minutes of the museum committee, meeting of 12 July 1938. D. Schwagermann, op. cit., p. 197. Besides the addition of the curator and the archivist as advisory members, the number of museum committee members also rose from three to four in 1938. The arrangement by which the municipal archivist was also secretary and advisory member of the museum committee would be maintained to the end of the committee’s existence. C.H. Schwagermann, speech marking the opening of the museum in the Sint Jacobs Gasthuis, 5 October 1940. GAS, Addenda to the minutes of the museum committee, Archive no. 128, A-6. Rapport der Rijkscommissie van Advies inzake Reorganisatie van het Museumwezen hier te Lande, Instituted by Royal Decree of 5 February 1919, no. 62, The Hague, 1921, pp. 14, 15, 95. A.G., ‘Het Stedelijk Museum te Schiedam’, Nieuwe Rotterdamsche Courant, 25 April 1940 and anon., ‘Wat er in het Stedelijk museum te zien is’, Schiedamsche Courant, 7 October 1940. J.M.M. Jansen, ‘Geschiedenis van het Stedelijk Museum’, in: H. Paalman, M. Nagtegaal-Reedijk (eds.), op. cit. B. van Bochove, S. Louis, H. Noordegraaf (eds.), Schaduwen over Schiedam. Gebeurtenissen en belevenissen tijdens de bezettingsjaren 1940–1945, Schiedam 1995, pp. 185-186. B. van Bochove, S. Louis, H. Noordegraaf (eds.), op. cit., pp. 187-189; J. Bonke, De herkomst van de aanwinsten van het Stedelijk Museum Schiedam 1940–1948, SMS report, 2000, pp. 6-7. B. van Bochove, S. Louis, H. Noordegraaf (eds.), op. cit., p. 189; J. Bonke, op. cit., p. 7; M. Nagtegaal-Reedijk, P.Th. Tjabbes (eds.), Van Appel tot Zadkine. 95 hoogte punten uit de collectie, Schiedam, 1995, p. 9. Visitor numbers, especially following the relocation to the Sint Jacobs Gasthuis, show a steady increase, with a peak during the war years, when other forms of entertainment were not available. See: annual reports of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, 1927–1940.

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

Three arrangements from about 1950: the city gallows and the arms of the civil guard in the entrance hall, a style room (right) and the art hall (left). Cord Schwagermannâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s arrangement of the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;art hallâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; was notably more spartan than the evocative displays of the historical collection. Paintings also hung in the style room, but they were there mainly for decoration; in the art hall the furnishings served a utilitarian function.

286 certain places, however, bypassed the Schiedam museum for the moment. Although the Experimental Group and CoBrA (1948–1951) came into being during the period in which Cord Schwagermann ran the museum in Schiedam, there are no indications that the curator was interested in the work of the experimentalists.21 During a meeting of the museum committee in 1950 he indicated which direction the exhibition policy should take: given its modest resources the museum should concentrate on ‘small, exquisite exhibitions’ of painters such as Koch, Van Veen and Willink.22 Only when Schwagermann’s son was appointed as curator did the museum begin to orient itself toward new developments in Dutch art. 1952 – 1956: Daan Schwagermann When Cord Schwagermann reached retirement age in 1952, he brought his son Daan as a possible successor to the committee’s attention.23 Daan Schwagermann [1920] had qualified as a painter at the Royal Academy for the Visual Arts in The Hague and his work had won several

The 1552 portrait of herring fishing-boat owner and priest Pieter Servaesz. Fabri, founder of the Oude Manhuis, was already part of the museum’s collection back when it focused primarily on local history. The portrait, by an anonymous artist, is still one of the historical collection’s top pieces.

prizes. In addition, his involvement in the restoration and interior design of the Sint Catharina Gasthuis in Gouda had given him the necessary museum experience.24 He was selected as his father’s successor by the Schiedam city council in 1952. As curator, Daan Schwagermann, like his father, had only a half-time appointment: the museum was after all open to the public only in the afternoons. His job description also remained essentially unaltered: the ‘instructions for the curator’ in 1952 included more or less the same directives as those in 1938.25 The Schiedam attorney and art collector Piet Sanders [1912], in particular, was to be indefatigable as a committee member in striving to improve Schwagermann’s position, and in return was to exercise a great deal of influence over museum policy.26 At Sanders’ request the new curator was quick to make his ideas on museum policy known to the committee. Schwagermann argued for maintaining the division of the collection into local history and general culture sections, as his father had devised. Within the cultural section Schwagermann felt that the focus should be on the exhibition and acquisition of modern art. This choice was not only in line with his personal preferences, but also fit

Drawing of the Sint Jacobs Gasthuis in the Hoogstraat, built in 1786 and designed by the architect Jan Giudici. In 1940 the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam was installed in the right wing. The museum’s ‘art hall’ was located on the first floor of the right wing, on the

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

the modest budget the museum had at its disposal: ‘Schiedam will never – the funds involved run into the

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

287

hundreds of thousands – be able to specialize in classical art. Building on our seventeenth-century foundation we can only follow developments along certain lines to modern art,

a few additions. [...]. As I have told you already I expect this letter will mean everything for our museum. It is to be or not to be. Therefore I am deeply indebted to you for it.’30

because this is the only possibility for the Schiedam

The substance of the recommendations of the Lunsingh

Museum from a financial point of view’, said Daan

Scheurleer Commission called for the Schiedam museum

Schwagermann during a meeting of the museum committee on 8 October 1952.27

to concentrate on the collection and exhibition of ‘living

‘Moderne grafische kunst’ [Modern Graphic Art], exhibited

artists’. In addition the museum directors who sat on the commission with Lunsingh Scheurleer 31 declared that they

at the museum from 21 November to 8 December 1952,

were prepared to ‘lend artworks of modern masters, so

was one of the first exhibitions to feature the art on which,

that in the short term a representative collection of

according to Schwagermann, the Stedelijk Museum should concentrate its acquisitions policy. It included work by such

contemporary art will already be on display in your museum.’32 These loans were never actually made, but

progressive artists (for the time) as Hendrik Werkman,

perhaps the promise gave the city executive needed

Wout van Heusden, Harry van Kruiningen, Constant, Piet

confidence in the recommendations. The executive

van Stuivenberg, Jan Wiegers and Ab Sok, ‘a one-of-a-kind

adopted the commission’s recommendations in broad

event for Schiedam’, according to a reviewer from De Rotterdammer.28 The works exhibited were in large part

outline. This laid the foundation, in 1954, for what would

from the collections of Piet Sanders, Steef de Vries and

the most important activities of the Stedelijk Museum

Goos Verweij, three active Schiedam collectors of

Schiedam: the collection and exhibition of contemporary

contemporary art. Whereas Sanders, as a member of the

art.

museum committee, had direct influence on the operation of the museum, De Vries and Verweij initially made their

From 1954 onwards the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam applied itself to a significant extent 33 to the collection of

mark on the direction the museum was to take from 1952

work by artists who were members of the Experimental

onwards in an indirect way. They were co-founders of the VIA, the Vereniging voor Irrealisme en Abstractie in de

Group in Holland or had affinities with it: Schwagermann felt a close kinship with these radical innovators.34 The

beeldende kunst [Association for Irrealism and Abstraction

first acquisition came in 1954: the painting Victory

in the Visual Arts], which was to be an important link in

Borfimah by Eugène Brands was snapped up for the

subsequently – and up to the present day – remain one of

contacts between Schwagermann and a select group of contemporary artists.

Schwagermann’s personal collection, according to his son, did include work by other radical innovators, such as Kurt Schwitters and Aad de Haas. See: D. Schwagermann, op. cit., p. 195. As far as known he did not exhibit this work in the museum. 22 GAS, Minutes of the museum committee, 28 June 1950. 23 Minutes of the Schiedam city council and index of the year 1951, p. 475 and Minutes of the museum committee, 20 November 1951 and 26 March 1952. 24 Anon., ‘Daan Schwagermann conservator’, Nieuwe Schiedamsche Courant, 12 December 1951 and anon., ‘De nieuwe conservator van het Sted. Museum. Daan Schwagermann kent Schiedam’, Het Rotterdamsch Parool/De Schiedammer, 14 December 1951. 25 ‘Instructie voor de Conservator van het Stedelijk Museum’, in: Minutes of the museum committee, 26 March 1952 and ‘Instructie voor den conservator van het Stedelijk Museum’, Gemeenteblad van Schiedam, 1938, no. 22, pp. 1-4. 26 Minutes of the museum committee, 4 February 1953. 27 Minutes of the museum committee, 8 October 1952. 28 H.Gr., ‘Belangwekkende expositie van grafische kunst te Schiedam’, De Rotterdammer, 26 November 1952. 29 According to J. Bokhoven (ed.), Cobra in het Stedelijk Museum van Schiedam, Schiedam, 1984, p. 11, note 9, Piet Sanders advised the city executive on the composition of the commission. See also: G. Verweij, ‘Schiedam en Cobra’, Scyedam, 8 (1982) no. 5, p. 169. 30 Letter from D. Schwagermann to D.F. Lunsingh Scheurleer dated 27 May 1954, duplicate in SMS archives. 31 J.C. Ebbinge Wubben of the Museum Boymans, L.J.F. Wijsenbeek of the Gemeentemuseum The Hague and C. Nooteboom of the Museum voor Land- en Volkenkunde and the Maritiem Museum Prins Hendrik. 32 Recommendation of the Lunsingh Scheurleer Commission to Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Schiedam, dated 10 June 1954, duplicate in GAS, archive no. 128, inv. no. A-8. 33 Another key point in the acquisitions policy was contemporary sculpture. The museum acquired work by the most important twentieth-century Dutch sculptors: Mari Andriessen, Hildo Krop, John Raedecker and Lambertus Zijl. A donation by the Schiedam Wilton-Feyenoord shipyard made it possible to also acquire The return of the prodigal son by Ossip Zadkine. 34 He confided this to P. Janssen; see J. Bokhoven’s unpublished interview with P. Janssen, 3 April 1984. 21

Schwagermann and Sanders were much younger than the other members of the museum committee, and within this company they were also the only ones with a specific interest in contemporary art. Nevertheless they succeeded in winning over the rest of the committee to their recommended change in acquisitions policy. In order to subsequently convince the city executive, they were able to get the city council to move for the appointment of an external advisory commission.29 This commission, named after its chairman, Government Inspector for Movable Monuments, D.F. Lunsingh Scheurleer, held discussions in the spring of 1954 about the future of the museum with the mayor, the alderman for Cultural Affairs and several members of the museum committee. It then presented a draft version of its recommendations to Daan Schwagermann, who sent it back with the words: ‘Mr. Sanders and I have read it through together and find it an excellent piece of work; we are working to flesh it out with

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

288 the committee, he possessed a healthy attitude toward the job and position of a civil servant.44 During his tenure as curator Janssen collaborated a great deal with other small, local museums. The exchange of exhibitions not only kept costs down but also allowed effort and enthusiasm to be shared. But he also maintained good relations with large museums such as the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam and with individuals, making distinctive exhibitions possible. This allowed the museum to display great diversity in exhibitions, as a selection from those on offer in this period shows: an exhibition devoted to the admiral Michiel de Ruyter; a comprehensive exhibition on Hendrik Werkman; paintings and drawings by Vincent van Gogh; an exhibition based on the theme ‘Man and Horse’; the ‘Start’ series, with work by young Dutch artists. As for the CoBrA artists, Janssen organized the first museum exhibition by Lucebert in the Netherlands as well as Constant’s utopian project, New Babylon.45 Janssen opted explicitly for a multi-faceted exhibition programme, because he wanted to appeal to as broad an audience as possible. This meant that under his tenure the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam placed less emphasis on distinguishing itself as a museum for contemporary art, since the work of young artists naturally attracted fewer visitors. Committee member Piet Sanders would therefore continually remind

street side above the entrance.

Janssen of the museum’s specialization and also repeatedly

Matthijs Maris, Portrait of Isabella Angus, 1887. The painting was donated in 1939 by A.J. de Koning, partner in the Bols en De Koning distillery and member of the museum committee. On the occasion of his departure Daan Schwagermann noted ‘that Mr. De Koning actually can be considered the founder of our paintings collection, thanks to his donation of a beautiful and valuable work by Matthijs Maris, the first great piece the museum owned.’

pressed for exhibitions and acquisitions of modern art, which resulted among other things in the acquisition of a painting by Lucebert, 26 works on paper by Karel Appel and in the loan of 24 works on paper by Corneille.46 Janssen, however, preferred to focus his attention on the didactic role of the museum rather than on its function as an exhibition centre. In the annual report of 1959 he supported this shift of emphasis with the assertion that Dutch museums were bent on ‘chasing exhibitions’ in a bid to solicit the attention of the public. After all, few people came to view the permanent inventory of a museum like Schiedam’s.47 It was precisely the artworks in the museum’s possession, however, that Janssen chose to highlight in all sorts of ways, something in which his journalistic skills served him well. Each month a ‘painting of the month’ was put on display in the vestibule and discussed at length by the curator in De Schiedamse Gemeenschap. It is clear again and again from such articles that an appreciation for modern art, of which the museum by then had a remarkable collection, still needed

Cord Schwagermann (centre) bids farewell in 1952, after 26 years as curator of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam.

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

289

bargain sum of a hundred guilders. Works by Theo Wolvecamp, Karel Appel and Corneille followed. Although he only had an acquisitions budget that, in the eyes of the Lunsingh Scheurleer Commission as well, was actually too small to afford the creation of a significant collection of living masters, Schwagermann was laying the foundation for what later would become nationally renowned as the CoBrA collection of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam. He was supported in this, financially and otherwise, by the Friends of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, which had merged with the VIA in 1954. In 1955 this association lent the museum three works by Anton Rooskens, which were subsequently donated in 1959. In addition the museum took a large number of works by Karel Appel from his former studio in Amsterdam for safekeeping in 1955. The exhibitions that Schwagermann organized in Schiedam illustrate his idealistic views on the social significance of art and the role of the museum: entirely in keeping with the prevailing cultural policy of the Dutch government ,35 he felt that the visual arts and the museum, if they could respond to what was going on in society, had an important part to play in educating the populace. This idea was highlighted, for instance, in the ‘Onze woning’ [Our House] exhibition in 1952, which was linked to the large-scale construction of new housing in the city and for which the historical collection of the museum had to make room temporarily for examples of contemporary interior decoration.36 Schwagermann also wanted to introduce the public to as yet rather unknown, original forms of expression, which were meant to offer a spiritual counterpoint to the on-going ‘mechanization and massification’ of society.37 The ‘Negerkunst’ [Negro Art] exhibition in 1953, for example, exposed the Schiedam public to the ‘peculiar beauty and enchantment’ of masks and fetishes out of ‘Darkest Africa’.38 In 1954’s ‘Kinderen uiten zich’ [Children Express Themselves], an exhibition that had previously been held at the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam, the public was able to discover the intuitively expressive qualities of children’s drawings. Finally Schwagermann also cherished the ideal of providing space in the museum for a workshop for ‘aesthetic expression’, an ideal that would only be realized under his successor.39

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

1956 – 1962: Pierre Janssen When Daan Schwagermann left in 1956 for the Gemeentemuseum in The Hague, where he was able to obtain a full-time appointment as head of the pedagogy department, the city of Schiedam had to go in search of a new curator. Finding a suitable successor was not easy, as the candidates, all art historians, were specialists in classical art. Piet Sanders feared that this would mean that the direction set in the museum’s policy by Schwagermann would be abandoned. Through Goos Verweij he came in contact with the journalist Pierre Janssen40 [1926], who was to become the museum’s first full-time curator.41 Janssen was arts editor of Het Vrije Volk for the Rotterdam area, and thanks to the regular visits he had made to Schiedam in that capacity, he knew the museum and its curator fairly well. He had even advised Daan Schwager mann on the acquisition of Corneille’s painting Espace animé [Animated Space] in 1956.42 In his application letter to the museum committee he described his motivation for wanting to become curator in Schiedam as the ‘increasing desire, within the more exact set of standards of a museum, to deepen my expertise and also put it to use in serving the community in ways other than publishing.’43 In the interview with the museum committee Janssen gave the impression of being highly self-sufficient and of daring to take initiative. In addition, in the eyes of 35 In 1951 the Ministry of Education, Arts and Sciences appointed a Commission for the Promotion of Museum Attendance, chaired by Dr. H.E. van Gelder. In its 1953 report the commission made many concrete proposals for expanding the educational work of museums, for instance by organizing special youth exhibitions and including visits to museums in the lesson plans of secondary schools. See Cultuurbeleid in Nederland. Nationaal rapport. Europees programma voor de evaluatie van nationaal cultuurbeleid, published by the Ministry of Welfare, Public Health and Culture, 1993, p. 6. 36 D. Schwagermann, ‘“Onze Woning” huist in het Stedelijk Museum’, De Schiedamse Gemeenschap, 4 (1952) no. 4, pp. 90-91. 37 H. Sabel, PvdA alderman for education, at the opening of the exhibition, quoted in: ‘“Kinderen uiten zich” expositie van creatieve cultivering’, Schiedams Parool, 11 February 1954. 38 Negerkunst, exh. cat. Schiedam (Stedelijk Museum Schiedam), 1953; Mej. H.J Dolk, ‘Kunst uit donker Afrika’, De Schiedamse Gemeenschap, 5 (1953) no. 4, pp. 296-298. H.J. Dolk, scientific associate at Museum voor Land- en Volkenkunde in Rotterdam, wrote an explanatory text on the exhibition for the catalogue. 39 GAS, Minutes of the museum committee, 16 May 1956. 40 T. Verweij-De Graaff, Goos Verweij, drukker te Schiedam, Schiedam, 1999, p. 67. 41 A full-time position had become possible because of the increasing interest of visitors, which meant that the museum was now open to the public in the mornings as well. The museum committee also had plans to start restoration work on the left wing of the museum building and use it as exhibition space. The curator would then have to organize twice as many exhibitions, and so making his a full-time position was deemed necessary. GAS, Minutes of the museum committee, 19 July 1956; anon., ‘Stedelijk Museum de gehele dag open. Een weldadig initiatief’, Nieuwe Schiedamse Courant, 17 December 1956. 42 GAS, P. Janssen in an interview with J. Bokhoven, 3 April 1984. 43 GAS, Candidacy letter by P. Janssen, Addenda to the Minutes of the museum committee, inv. no. 128, A-8. 44 GAS, Letter from the museum committee to the city executive, Addenda. 45 F. Stiemer, in: M. Nagtegaal-Reedijk, P.Th. Tjabbes (eds.), op. cit., p. 216. 46 GAS, Minutes of the museum committee, 28 May1959. 47 S MS, 1959 Stedelijk Museum Schiedam Annual Report.

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

290 to be stimulated among the Schiedam public. Janssen did this in a playful way, for instance by presenting artworks from old and new periods alongside one another – such as a landscape by Jan Breughel the Elder and a photograph of a jazz bassist by the young photographer Hans Buter.48 Moreover he took every opportunity to urge the readers of De Schiedamse Gemeenschap to visit the museum. In this Janssen also advertised low admission fees, 25 cents for adults and 10 cents for children, which were in his eyes akin to ‘what people call “laughable prices” at sales’.49 The Schiedam museum, at the close of the 1950s, had a broad programme of educational activities, through which Janssen attempted ‘to step off the beaten track and make contact with as many groups in the population as possible’.50 He succeeded in reaching his audience with lecture series such as ‘Ontmoetingen met kunst’

Curator Daan Schwagermann (far left) displays contemporary ceramics from the collection to (left to right) Mr. Baunberger, mayor W. Peek, Dr. Kramer and Mr. Renardel de Lavaletta, director of the Schiedam Excelsior metal pipe plant, who donates a mural by Mrs. R. van Oerle-Gorp, 25 June 1954.

[Encounters with Art], introductions and personal conversations. From the lectures Janssen and director Leen Timp developed the successful series of television art programmes Kunstgrepen [Art Takes], in which not just classical art but also the modern art still incomprehensible to many were shown and discussed.51 Thanks to the efforts of the municipal education inspector, M. Holl, who was attached to the museum committee as an advisory member until 1960, more and more schoolchildren also visited the museum’s exhibitions.52 Aside from these ‘passive’ pursuits, members of the public were also able to ‘actively’ develop their own talents in de ‘Art Class’, opened in 1960 in the museum’s former ‘art hall’. Here, Schiedam children and young people from 10 to 19 years of age, and from 1962 onwards adults as well, could get acquainted, under the guidance of an instructor from the Rotterdam Art Academy, with the ‘joy of creation’.53 The art history and practical educational activ ities of the museum both led to a marked increase in the number of visitors.54 Along with the educational resources Pierre Janssen also paid great attention to the condition and accommodations of the artworks in the collection. He felt that the museum’s equipment should be improved first, upon completion of which financial room certainly should be made for the organization of exhibitions. An increase in the acquisitions budget, which totalled 7,000 guilders in 1960, was his lowest priority.55 Janssen preferred to safeguard the

Karel Appel is the first former member of the Experimental Group and CoBrA to exhibit in Schiedam. ‘Will you make up a nice poster as well?’ asks Appel of Schwagermann in a letter on Boxing Day 1955. The latter has little money but has one produced at the Verweij press anyway. He advises Appel a few days later not to come to the opening, for ‘it is more important for you to work hard than [attend] all this museum nonsense.’

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

artworks already on site by equipping the sparse storage spaces in the Sint Jacobs Gasthuis with heat and electricity and by clearing out the cellars, where the objects were

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

291

getting damaged by cold and damp.56 The large collection

to see combined in its first museum director.59 Upon

of paintings, works on paper and wood sculptures by Karel

taking up his post Paalman set himself the task of

Appel, for instance, in storage at the Stedelijk Museum

continuing his predecessor’s educational activities, but he

Schiedam since 1955, was moved to a fire- and damp-

also wanted to put the Schiedam museum on the map as

proof storage facility that Janssen had specially designed for this purpose. Gouaches and water colours were

an exhibition centre, within ‘Greater Rotterdam’ as well as on the national level.60 Paalman’s directorship came to be

mounted in passepartout on acid-free paper and stored in

characterized, in fact, by an increase in the annual number

dust-proof boxes, and the paintings were hung on sliding racks.57 When Appel came to the museum in 1958 in

of exhibitions.

order to take back his loan, he was so satisfied with its

was completed in 1966, allowing the entire building to fulfil

conservation that he changed his mind and left the works

the functions of a museum at last. In the same year the

in Schiedam for some time longer.

National Distillery Museum was opened in the cellar of the

After six very successful years at the museum, Pierre

right wing, illustrating the history of Schiedam’s gin

Janssen decided to leave in 1962, to hear him tell it

industry. In this expanded museum Paalman held an

because he could not stand the idea that builders would

average of 20 exhibitions a year, placing a premium on

be at work in the museum for years to come and would

abstract geometric trends in current painting, while also

destroy the order he had instituted with so much devotion.

highlighting the innovative work of painters from abroad.

On the day government approval for the complete

He also organized a number of special events, which were

restoration of the museum arrived in the post, he tendered

to be repeated several times due to their success. In 1964,

his resignation to alderman M.J.M. van Kinderen. In 1965

for instance, renowned galleries for modern art from across

he became director of the Academy of Visual Arts in

the country took part in the ‘Balans’ [Balance] modern art

Rotterdam, and from 1969 through 1982 he was director of

fair, first held in 1964; a ‘Salon van de Maassteden’ [Salon

the Gemeentemuseum Arnhem. Janssen’s appearances on

of the Cities of the Maas], to which artists from Rotterdam

television contributed to an important extent to the Stedelijk

and its surrounding region could contribute work, was held

Museum Schiedam and its modern art collection gaining

every two years from 1963 until 1975; a number of

national renown. Although less conspicuous, his actions

exhibitions were scheduled under the name ‘Konfrontaties’

behind the scenes at the museum were what truly ensured

[Confrontations] from 1968 through 1977, each showing recent work by various contemporary artists61; and from

that it became the cultural open house of Schiedam.

The restoration of the left wing of the Sint Jacobs Gasthuis

1976 to 1988 the museum held an annual exhibition 1962 – 1990:

specifically devoted to the work of artists residing in

Hans Paalman

Schiedam, under the title ‘Schiedamse Ateliers’ [Schiedam Studios].

Pierre Janssen himself presented his successor to the museum committee: on 1 December 1962 Hans Paalman [1932] became the first director of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam. Paalman had worked at the Museum of Education (now the Museon) in The Hague from 1952 until 1960, where he had organized exhibitions with the greatest diversity of subjects. In 1960, as assistant to the State Inspector for Movable Monuments he was particularly charged with the State Art Collection Service, for which, within the scope of the Visual Artists Adjustment legislation (BKR), he selected works by contemporary artists.58 His previous job experience has thus acquainted him with the educational function of a museum and meant that he was well informed about the current state of affairs in Dutch visual arts – qualities which the city of Schiedam was keen

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

P. Janssen, ‘Schilderij van de maand. Verstild verleden, gespannen heden’, De Schiedamse Gemeenschap, 9 (1957) no. 1, p. 13. 49 P. Janssen, ‘Brief uit het museum. Op zijn drukkerij maakte Werkman kunstwerken. Bijzondere expositie – eind mei open’, De Schiedamse Gemeenschap, 9 (1957) no. 3, p. 57. 50 S MS, 1958 Annual Report. 51 S MS, 1958 Annual Report; P. Janssen in an interview with J. Bokhoven, 3 April 1984, in which Janssen confuses the lecture series with the ‘Verkenningen van kunst’, which were to be held at the museum in 1960; Ch. Kijne, ‘De leukste leraar kunstgeschiedenis van Nederland’, VPRO-gids, 8 July 1988, pp. 3-8. 52 G AS, Minutes of the museum committee, 28 January and 18 June 1957. 53 GAS, Minutes of the museum committee, 30 September 1960. 54 SMS, 1962 Annual Report. 55 GAS, Minutes of the museum committee, 13 May 1960. 56 F. Stiemer, ‘Inleiding’, in: M. Nagtegaal-Reedijk, P.Th. Tjabbes (eds.), op. cit., p. 14. 57 J. Bokhoven, op. cit., p. 10; P. Janssen in an interview with J. Bokhoven, 3 April 1984. 58 Rotterdams Nieuwsblad, 18 October 1962. 59 Gemeenteblad Schiedam, Instructie voor de Directeur van het Stedelijk Museum te Schiedam, Number 11, Section XVIII.19, Art. 2.3. 60 H. Paalman, ‘Het Stedelijk Museum 90 jaar’, in: H. Paalman, M. Nagtegaal-Reedijk (eds.), op. cit. 61 GAS, Minutes of the museum committee, 10 April 1967. 48

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

Under the title ‘Constant Nieuwenhuys. Nieuw Babylon, project voor een samenleving’ [project for a community’] the museum exhibits New Babylon, Constant’s urbanist Utopia. Janssen achieves a scoop: it is its first presentation of this project in a Dutch museum.

294 to meet the demands of local artists for more participation, decided to appoint Schiedam artist Sjef Henderickx as replacement. The museum committee was also hearing more and more about the desirability of making the museum more accessible to broader sections of the local population. Alderwoman De Graaff, who would later wed Goos Verweij, argued regularly for lowering the museum threshold as much as possible, for example by continuing the free admission instituted in 1970.69 At the request of the city executive, in the spirit of democratization, the

In 1956 a large overview exhibition of Corneille’s work moves from the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam to Schiedam. The combined catalogue totals 77 items. At the time the Schiedam museum owns two Corneille paintings, the Amsterdam museum three and Museum Boymans in Rotterdam one. Many therefore come from individuals, including Piet Sanders of Schiedam.

meetings of the committee were made open to the public 70: this meant the press, too, could monitor the recurring disputes between committee and director.71 In the course of the following years it became increasingly obvious that the director actually handled all the museum’s responsibilities himself, including the budget and the personnel policy, and that the museum committee merely exercised a regularizing function. This was why, in 1977, the new chairman of the committee, Herman Posthoorn, PvdA alderman for culture, set out a new arrangement for the committee, transforming it from a management organ to an advisory one: henceforth the city executive would be directly responsible for the museum. This new arrangement was viewed by many as a power grab by the PvdA, which dominated the city executive at the time. Indeed within the museum committee a schism had emerged between a

In 1956 Pierre Janssen (right) succeeds Daan Schwagermann as curator. Shortly before Janssen’s own departure in 1962, Queen Juliana honours the museum with a visit and is given a tour by mayor J.W. Peek (left).

number of members who were active members of the PvdA and criticized the acquisition and exhibition policies of the museum as too one-sided and of too little social relevance, and the others, primarily the artist members, who supported Paalman’s policies. The museum committee got bogged down in differences of opinion over museum policy and increasingly mirrored the Schiedam political climate, under which a strong PvdA delegation traditionally went up against everyone else.72 The differences of opinion reached a climax in the ‘Schiedam museum row’ in 1979. This was sparked when two young members of the Schiedam PvdA executive, Hans Bakker and Hans Konings, sent a memorandum to their council delegation in which they proposed doing away with the museum’s exhibition function and selling its entire collection; the profits, estimated at about 4 million guilders,

After Gerrit Benner and Ed van der Elsken, Lucebert is the third young artist of whom Janssen organizes an exhibition. When the acquisition of Beast Tamer is considered in October 1959, Lucebert, who needs money for an etching press, makes an urgent appeal to the curator. On the gorgeously painted envelope to his letter he already promotes Janssen to director: ‘i hope that you can help me out in the very short term. yes, pierre, all my hopes are resting on you, how does that grab you, doesn’t that give you a special feeling; awful, isn’t it. but still, damn it all, pierre, don’t scrimp! it’s ART we’re talking about, DO (even more) EVERYTHING you can for ART. there is no better life than a life of art, no better leg than an artificial leg!’

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

would be used to fund community centres. The memorandum sparked fierce reactions in the local and national press: the plan was seen as typical of the lack of appreciation within the PvdA for the value of culture. At the same time the incident led to a turnaround in relations

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

295

In the course of the 1960s interest in CoBrA grew steadily.

set a museum for contemporary art as a museum

At the same time the price of works by CoBrA artists rose

objective. However, the chairwoman of the committee,

rapidly, making it increasingly difficult for the Schiedam

Truus de Graaff, PvdA [Labour Party] alderwoman for

museum to acquire them: at this point the collection could only be expanded by means of donations, loans and

culture, did plead for avoiding any provocative issues in the near future.66 This calmed things down, at least for a

subsidies. Thus in acquisitions policy Paalman focused on

while.

younger artists. He showed a preference for the so-called

The confrontation in 1967 can be seen as a harbinger of

‘koele abstracten’ [‘cool abstracts’, Dutch geometric

the gap that began to grow between the policy of the

abstract painters], but he also saw his acquisition of the

Stedelijk Museum and the cultural demands of the

work of the ‘nieuwe figuratieven’ [the Dutch movement of

Schiedam population. Hans Paalman wanted the museum

young figurative painters from the late 1970s] as a sequel

to reflect the latest developments in art, and initially the

to the CoBrA acquisitions of his predecessors. Meanwhile

committee approved each of his proposals. In a 1969

the museum highlighted CoBrA in its exhibition programme

interview Paalman let it be known that he was offering few

with some regularity: from 1968 onwards anniversary

opportunities for exhibition to Schiedam artists, because he

exhibitions were organized to commemorate the founding

found the work of most to be under par. To him the

of the CoBrA group in 1948, and there were also regular

Stedelijk Museum was first and foremost a serious

exhibitions of individual members of the group. Because

institution for contemporary art, which just happened to be

the CoBrA works were often loaned to museums around

located in that city. He wanted to bring the public face to

the country and abroad, the Schiedam CoBrA collection

face with the new, without having to provide too much in

gained wide renown. But the collection also suffered heavily because of this lending traffic. After the Dutch

the way of patronizing explanation: ‘If people don’t get it, well, they don’t get it.’67 Clearly, for Paalman the artists

CoBrA expert par excellence, Dr. Willemijn Stokvis, wrote

and their work came first. He worked on their behalf

a report about the state of the collection in 1980, the

outside his job as museum director as well, including as

realization slowly got filtered through that this needed

chairman of the jury for the Royal Prize for Painting and advocate of the BKR.68

particular attention. In 1984 restoration began on several works in the collection.62 The first catalogue of the

In the course of the 1970s the museum’s policy attracted

Schiedam CoBrA collection was published in the same year.

more and more criticism in Schiedam, as many found it too

During Paalman’s tenure as director, spanning almost 28

one-sided and elitist, as well as failing to correspond to the

years, Dutch society became steadily more democratic and

experience of Schiedam residents. In the spirit of the time,

outspoken. Indeed the Paalman period at the Stedelijk

the museum was challenged to justify its actions before

Museum Schiedam was marked by an increasing number

the people. At the same time relations between the director

of conflicts. The combative association of professional

and the museum committee were deteriorating. When one

artists, BBK, for instance, protested against the jury

of the older committee members stepped down in 1971,

adjudication of the ‘Salon van de Maassteden’, which they considered undemocratic, in 1972.63 And when the

the committee, hoping to shed its elitist image and in order

Japanese artist Yayoi Kusama, at the opening of the

62 That year E.F. Mösenbacher restored the Portrait of Bodil by Asger Jorn and Danse Macabre by Anton Rooskens. SMS, Annual Report, 1984; H. Paalman in an interview with K. Koppenol, 30 November 2002. 63 Anon., ‘Paalman trekt van leer tegen Pierre Janssen en aankoop-inspraak. Salon der Maassteden weer met voorselectie’, Het Vrije Volk, 28 August 1972. 64 H. Baaij, ‘De tandarts en de uitklederij. Rel om het Schiedamse Stedelijk Museum’, Rotterdams Nieuwsblad, 7 December 1967. 65 Anon., ‘Thans ook een petitie pro het museumbeleid. Initiatiefnemers motiveren hun actie’, Rotterdams Nieuwsblad, 6 December 1967. 66 GAS, Minutes of the museum committee, 28 November 1967; 1 February 1968. 67 H. Kuyper, ‘Stedelijk Museum 70 jaar. Interview met Hans Paalman’, De Schiedamse Gemeenschap, 21 (1969) no. 7, pp. 151-152. 68 W. Stokvis, ‘Museumdirecteur in Schiedam zijn betekent vechten tegen de bierkaai’, Haagse Courant, 18 April 1979. 69 GAS, Minutes of the museum committee, 13 April 1972. 70 GAS, Minutes of the museum committee, 6 April 1971. 71 See among others: T. Huijssoon, ‘Paalman en de inspraak’, Schiedamse Courant, 29 August 1972; anon., ‘Museumcommissie en Paalman tekenen voorlopige vrede’, Het Vrije Volk, 31 August 1972; anon., ‘Tentoonstellings- en aankoopbeleid: Commissie en directeur Stedelijk vinden elkaar’, Rotterdams Nieuwsblad, 3 August 1972. 72 H. van der Linden, ‘Ter discussie. Het museum en de PvdA’, Schiedams Nieuwsblad, 24 August 1977.

‘Balans’ art fair in 1967, staged a performance in which she painted her entirely nude colleague, Jan Schoonhoven, a group of 39 Schiedam ‘notables’ used the incident as pretext to submit a petition to the city council, in which they attacked the all-too-experimental exhibition and collection policy of the Schiedam museum.64 This was immediately answered by a counter-petition drafted by Schiedam collectors Goos Verweij and Cees van der Geer, signed by numerous Schiedam art lovers.65 In the end the museum committee stood by its director, citing the report of the Lunsingh Scheurleer Commission, which had after all

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

296 between the museum and the city government: all parties quickly realized that differences had to be bridged in order to repair the damage to Schiedam’s political and cultural reputation. Paalman and Posthoorn drafted a museum policy paper in short order, outlining policy plans for the coming years. Subsequently the city council voted to disband the museum committee in 1983: the executive would henceforth consult with a professional acquisitions advisory committee that would be removed from any policy standpoint.73 In the mid-1980s Paalman suffered a serious illness, preventing him from fulfilling his responsibilities as museum director for an extended period. During his absence the city

In 1961 the popular television programme Kunstgrepen, presented by Pierre Janssen,

council turned over authority to determine exhibition policy to the council committee for Culture, Sport and Youth. Once recovered, Paalman adapted his work methods to this decision.74 Relations with the new VVD [Liberal Party] alderman for culture, Luub Hafkamp, also tended to be less tense than with his predecessor, Herman Posthoorn. Yet the conflicts were not entirely over: in 1988 the Schiedam museum again got extensive publicity because of the premature closing of an exhibition about the French writer Joris-Karl Huysmans, who had been accused of antiSemitism, and because of organizational problems with an exhibition of contemporary Antillean and Aruban art. When a reorganization of the Schiedam cultural sector was placed on the city agenda in 1990 and the city considered asking

is made into a book. Although he is pictured on the back cover among objects from the historical collection, he makes only a very modest attempt to advertise his ‘own’ museum. ‘Well, come by my place, in Schiedam, you’ll see,’ he writes ironically about what can be done with Greek-style architecture: ‘you build a hospice for elderly people with it, and when the elderly people have moved to a modern building, you make it into a museum…’. Of the collection only Appel’s Small Man with the Sun finds its way into the book.

Pierre Janssen to come back as interim director, Paalman, a year away from legal retirement age, decided to leave the museum.75 1990 – 1995: Pieter Tjabbes Following Paalman’s departure, Arie Metaal, the commander of the Schiedam fire brigade, was appointed interim director for six months. His experience with the firefighting service was considered sufficient qualification for him to take on the crisis management of the museum.76 For more managerial oversight, and also because of budget cutbacks, all city institutions dealing with culture, namely the public library, the archives, the Schiedam theatres and the Stedelijk Museum, were to jointly fall under a single municipal Department of Arts and Culture.77 Within the museum itself many issues had to be resolved as well. Based on the report about the administrative organization

In 1960 the museum’s art hall is converted into the Art Class. The museum visitors’ exploration of their own expressive potential supplants passive enjoyment of art.

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

of the museum published by the VB Accountants firm in

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

297

July 1989, the city asked the museum’s management to

the Schiedam jenever industry from 1860 to 1993.84 A

draft a concrete action plan to tackle the acute problems

large number of educational exhibitions were held

with staffing and organization, financial record-keeping and the registration of artworks.78 Arie Metaal made a start on

especially for children, such as ‘Stap voor stap’ [Step by

reorganizing the personnel rolls and the records during his

years old (1992). ‘Koppie Koppie!’ [Clever Kids!] in 1992

interim appointment. To permit substantial museum

showed drawings, paintings and sculptures children had

activities to continue during this reorganization, the new

made in the art class.

position of ‘Head of the Museum Department’ was created

The visual art exhibitions also offered a great variety of

in 1991. Pieter Tjabbes [1957] was selected among the many candidates for this post.79 Following Metaal’s

subjects. Tjabbes was keen to show the work of several

departure he was made acting director that same year and

to oblivion. For instance, in 1991 he organized an overview

eventually named director as of 1 May 1993.

of the work of Dora Tuynman, an artist who in the 1950s

Tjabbes, who had earlier worked as European agent for the

had lived and worked in the same former hide warehouse

Saõ Paulo Biennale and as director of the Museu de Arte

in Paris in which Karel Appel and Corneille had their studios

Moderna in Saõ Paulo, made clear upon taking the post of

at the time. With this ‘art history rehabilitation’ he succeed

director that he planned to stay no longer than five years.

ed in instantly grabbing the attention of the national press

He considered himself more a cultural contractor who

for the Schiedam museum. An exhibition on Rotterdam

delivers a product within a short time frame than a

painter and graphic artist Wout van Heusden (1992) and

museum director with a long-term vision. Tjabbes saw

a retrospective on Schiedam sculptor Piet van Stuivenberg

setting the Schiedam museum back on the right track as

(1993) followed in this series. Several expressionist

a challenge. He would have to put into practice a large

‘classics’ were also featured: an overview of Corneille’s

number of plans in the short period he would be

graphic work from 1948 to 1975 and an exhibition of

associated with the museum. Not least among priorities,

graphics by the Belgian CoBrA artist Pierre Alechinsky (both

the staff had to be remotivated to fulfil their responsibilities

in 1992–1993); retrospectives on Bram van Velde (1994)

– and initially this meant that people had to be prepared to

and Jaap Wagemaker (1995); not to mention the exhibition

put in regular overtime, as the museum was understaffed at the beginning of the 1990s.80 In addition the building

of graphic works from 1930 to 1972 by the Spanish

was due for restoration and the collection storage facilities

original exhibitions with contemporary artists, such as

were in dire need of improvements in order to meet minimum requirements for conservation. An exhibition

‘Seven Crimes, One Case’ in the former police station in 1993.85 Finally, the work of Schiedam artists was featured

policy with a broad orientation would have to attract new

in the series ‘Op uitnodiging’ [By Invitation], which can be

visitors to the museum, and Tjabbes wanted to use the acquisitions budget to fill in gaps in the collection.81 The

seen as a successor to Paalman’s ‘Konfrontaties’

Step], an art trail through the museum for children 6 to 12

Dutch post-war artists he felt had been unjustly consigned

surrealist Joan Miró (1995). Tjabbes also held a number of

Schiedam city council approved all of these plans and raised the museum budget for 1991 by an extra 35,000 guilders: this would have to make up the arrears in collection management, maintenance and internal organization.82 Tjabbes’s exhibition program gave more scope to the museum’s historical collection. The 1991 summer exhibition, for example, included a room devoted to antique toys that had not been displayed for decades.83 Exhibitions on archaeological sites in Schiedam (1991) and sixteenth-century maps of the city by Jacques de Gheyn (1992), organized in cooperation with the Schiedam Historical Association, attracted a large audience, as did the ‘Wereldwijd verbreid’ [Distributed Worldwide] exhibition, on

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

73 ‘Museumcommissie wordt opgeheven’, Het Vrije Volk, 5 January 1983. 74 E. Beenker, ‘Een kleine parade van een door de politiek argwanend bekeken museum. Schiedam stalt voor ’n fooi gekochte kunst uit’, de Volkskrant, 17 December 1985. 75 K. Killian, ‘“Onze collectie is me te lief om wrokkig te zijn.” Hans Paalman neemt na ruim 25 jaar afscheid van het Stedelijk Museum in Schiedam’, NRC Handelsblad, 5 May 1990. 76 ‘Brandweerman als museumdirecteur: “Mijn kennis van beeldende kunst is uiterst beperkt”’, Nieuwsblad van het Noorden, 14 June 1990. 77 Schiedam Personnel and Organization Department, Conceptual plan of action on the organization of the cultural sector, January 1989. 78 Decision by the city executive in response to the Investigation into administrative organization of the Stedelijk Museum, 10 August 1989. 79 SMS, Notice no. 91/01, ‘Aanstelling Hoofd Museale Dienst’, 24 January 1991. 80 SMS, Management Report 1992-I, 11 June 1992. 81 Interview with Pieter Tjabbes, October 2002. 82 S MS, Management Report 1992-I, 11 June 1992; D. Welling, ‘Directeur Pieter Tjabbes geeft Schiedams museum nieuw élan’, Rotterdams Dagblad, 14 August 1991. 83 D. Welling, ‘Directeur Pieter Tjabbes geeft Schiedams museum nieuw élan’, Rotterdams Dagblad, 14 August 1991. 84 The exhibition ‘Wereldwijd verbreid’ attracted 7,709 visitors, the highest number for an exhibition in 1993. Next on the 1993 attendance list came the art exhibitions ‘De mensen en de dingen’, with 5,214, and ‘Kleikunst in de Benelux’, with 4,921. 85 SMS, Management Report 1993-II, 28 October 1993.

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

When the left wing of the Sint Jacobs Gasthuis, following a restoration, is completed in 1966, a group portrait of the collection is made for publicity purposes. The museum displays Appel’s The Wild Boy, Constant’s Scorched Earth and Corneille’s Pierres et fleurs as top pieces, alongside classical masters such as Matthijs Maris, Isaac Israels and Jan Sluyters and international greats like Robert Jacobsen and Ossip Zadkine.

300 While the city council was looking for a new director with the help of a headhunting agency, city archivist Charles Jeurgens served as acting director. Meanwhile the city sought someone who had managerial qualities as well as art history expertise to fill the director’s post. Because the city was making an effort to appoint more women to managerial positions within the municipal government, there was also a preference for a woman candidate. Diana Wind [1957], who has been the museum’s director since 1 December 1995, fit into this profile. She had studied art history and business administration at the Free University of

Ten years after the recommendations of the Lunsingh Scheurleer Commission, the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam attracts the interest of the Museumjournaal, which considers it ‘a sort of testing station for modern art museums’. CoBrA works from the collection, by then classics, serve as illustration. The art critic Dolf Welling, however, sees Schiedam’s pioneering work as threatened by outside forces.

Amsterdam, had then worked in the publicity departments of the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam and the city of Groningen, and had founded her own marketing agency for the cultural sector in 1993. In the current exhibition policy the emphasis is more than ever on the museum’s own collection, which is semipermanently on display in various combinations. There is also particular attention paid to the history of the collec tion’s growth. Points of reference to the existing collection are also sought within exhibitions of contemporary artists. In addition, Schiedam artists and art associations past and present are a special point of interest.93 In December 1997, for instance, the museum devoted an exhibition to the production of the graphics portfolio Het uitzicht van de duif [The Dove’s View], consisting of a series of woodcuts by Constant for a poem by Jan Elburg, printed in 1952 by Goos Verweij.94 In the winter of 1998–1999 the Schiedam-Rotterdam art association VIA and its significance to the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam were highlighted.95 The number of exhibitions has been cut back to about nine a year, as the museum wished to shed the ‘art house image’ it had acquired because Hans Paalman and Pieter Tjabbes organized so many exhibitions. Most exhibitions are now put together by the museum itself, whereas in the past exhibitions were often taken on from other institutions.96 Since 1996 the museum has also had more room for exhibitions and the display of its own collection, because the National Distillery Museum, which had been located in the cellar of the Sint Jacobs Gasthuis, was incorporated into a new jenever museum, De Gekroonde Brandersketel, that year. Unfortunately the loss of the Dutch

At the opening of the ‘Balans’ art fair in 1967, Yayoi Kusama paints Jan Schoonhoven (right) and Joop Schafthuizen (left) in the museum’s auditorium (the former French Reformed Chapel of the Sint Jacobs Gasthuis). The performance leads to a row in local politics and strains relations between museum and city authorities.

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

Distillery Museum caused the Stedelijk Museum’s visitor numbers to drop again.

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

301

and ‘Schiedamse ateliers’ series: each year a Schiedam

Marinus Boezem, The Third Exile (1986) by Joseph Semah

artist was invited to put on a joint exhibition with an artist friend from outside Schiedam.86

and Oniwaka Maru Fighting a Giant Carp (1992) by Albert Verkade.90 Tjabbes also made several acquisitions for the

This burst of activity in exhibitions soon bore fruit. Visitor

CoBrA collection: with the financial backing of Goos and

numbers rose. However, though 34,000 visitors had been

Truus Verweij he purchased archival documents and

recorded in 1993, that number was nearly cut in half in

magazines published by the CoBrA group and several

1994. The primary reason for this setback was the

graphic works jointly produced by various CoBrA artists.91

introduction of admission fees as of 1 January 1994. The

In hindsight Tjabbes asserts that he could never have put

city executive had hoped that an admission fee of 3

his packed programme into practice without the

guilders for adults would generate at least 30,000 guilders in museum income 87, but this proved a serious miscalcu

benevolent attitude of the city council and the city

lation. In a survey carried out for the city, it emerged that

culture – during the museum row in 1979 still the

visitors from Schiedam, in particular, who still formed the

personification of socialist cultural barbarism – was his

bulk of the museum’s public, had begun shunning the

greatest supporter. Tjabbes also made a point of seeking

museum because of the introduction of admission fees.88

contact with local politicians: he faithfully attended council

Tjabbes resolved to publish a catalogue and produce a poster for each exhibition. Funds for this purpose were

meetings and invited council members to the museum to discuss what cultural policy should be implemented.92

raised through subsidies from various foundations and

Despite cordial relations with the Schiedam political

sponsoring by individuals and businesses. The catalogues

establishment and the proven results of the Stedelijk

would also be for sale and thus pay for themselves. The

Museum, Tjabbes kept his word: he left as of 1 August

95th anniversary of the museum, for instance, saw the

1995, when he was offered the chance to go work as

publication of the collection catalogue Van Appel tot

international manager for the Saõ Paulo Biennale. Before

Zadkine. 95 hoogtepunten uit het Stedelijk Museum

leaving the Schiedam museum, he set out the exhibition

[From Appel to Zadkine. 95 high points from the Stedelijk

programme up to March 1996, in order to give his

Museum]. This first extensive publication about the history

successors a chance to settle into the job.

of the museum and its collection was not only a fine work

Under his leadership the post of Head of the Museum

of reference but also constituted a justification of the

Department, which had been vacant since 1992, was filled

acquisitions policy that had been pursued over the previous

once more: as of 1 September 1995 Ludo van Halem

25 years. Moreover this book helped in increasing the renown of the collection.89

[1959], whose previous experience included work as art

As far as acquisitions were concerned, Tjabbes opted for a

Research, was appointed. This position has since been

conservative policy. He felt that there were already enough

merged with that of the curator of modern art.

executive. In particular, Chris Zijdeveld, PvdA alderman for

history researcher for the Dutch Organization for Scientific

works in the collection that had not weathered the test of time. Therefore he preferred to buy work by artists who

1995 – present:

had already proven themselves than from artists as yet

Diana Wind

unknown. These works might be more expensive, but the chances of a buying a lemon were also reduced. Among the acquisitions from the Tjabbes period are such beautiful paintings as the expressionist Vision d’Alain Gerbault [Alain Gerbault’s Vision] (1931) by Jan Mulder, a Composition from 1960 by Dora Tuynman, Het uitzicht uit mijn venster I [The View from my Window I] (1964) by Wout van Heusden and De kunst van het overleven [The Art of Survival] (1990–1991) by Otto Egberts. The relatively large share of sculptures and installation Tjabbes acquired for the museum is another salient aspect of his acquisitions policy. This includes works such as Reims I (1988) by

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

86 S MS, Transito. Marjo J.C. van Soest en Patrick Merckaert, exh. cat. Schiedam (Stedelijk Museum Schiedam) 1995, p. 3. Third exhibition in the ‘Op uitnodiging’ series. 87 ‘Museumdirecteur stelt voor: “Verzameling inkrimpen en entreegelden heffen”’, Het Nieuwe Stadsblad, 1 September 1993. 88 City of Schiedam, Municipal Works Department, Research and Statistics Section, Omnibusonderzoek, p. 11. 89 SMS, Management Report 1995-II, 12 October 1995. 90 F. Stiemer, ‘Inleiding’, p. 21, and catalogue, in: M. Nagtegaal-Reedijk, P.Th. Tjabbes (eds.), op. cit. 91 Interview with Pieter Tjabbes, October 2002. 92 Interview with Pieter Tjabbes, October 2002. 93 S MS Management Report 1995-III, 1 February 1996; Management Report 1996-II, 20 September 1996. 94 L. van Halem, Het uitzicht van de duif. Jan Elburg en Constant (een documentaire), exh. cat. Schiedam (Stedelijk Museum Schiedam) 1998. 95 J. Bastian, VIA Schiedam. De Vereniging voor Irrealisme en Abstractie in de beeldende kunst (1950–1954), exh. cat. Schiedam (Stedelijk Museum Schiedam) 1999. 96 I. Veringmeier, ‘Gouden Eeuw van Schiedam in Stedelijk Museum. Begin van reeks eigen tentoonstellingen’, De Maasbode, 16 January1997.

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

CoBrA plays an increasingly greater role in the museum’s external profile. In 1969 the museum has a prominent presence at the ‘Musement’ museum art fair in Utrecht with work by Appel, Brands, Constant and Rooskens.

304 The acquisitions policy is similarly attuned to what the collection already includes. There is no concrete retrospective acquisition programme with regard to the collection’s polar opposites, experimental and informal paintings on the one hand and systematic and fundamental painting on the other. However, the museum does keep well abreast of what comes on offer on the market from these movements. For instance, the 1949 gouache work Birds by Constant, a 1952 gouache by Armando and the 1969 relief R69-22 by Jan Schoonhoven were among recent acquisitions. Work has been acquired from contemporary artists including Aernout Mik, Juul Kraijer, Ansuya Blom and the duo A.P. Komen/Karen Murphy. In addition the museum has received a number of significant donations over the last several years. In 1997 the Schiedam art critic Cees van der Geer donated his private collection to the museum, primarily consisting of drawings by contemporary Dutch artists. That same year the museum received 15 artworks from Mr. and Mrs. De VosAlberts, which were well suited to the systematic and fundamental paintings portion of the collection. In 1999 the museum selected almost 1,100 works from the Altena Boswinkel Collection, including work by JCJ Vanderheyden, Rob van Koningsbruggen, Erik van Lieshout and Henk A defining visual factor in the first years of Hans Paalman’s exhibition programme and acquisitions policy is what he calls the ‘cool abstracts’ and the Pop Art-related ‘new figuration’. Work by Alfred Eikelenboom, Peter Struycken and Ad Dekkers, displayed here in the entrance hall of the museum in 1968, he ascribes to the first movement, the work of Kees van Bohemen, Joop van Meel and Rudi/Jochem van de Wint to the second. In the photograph Paalman poses in front of the 1967 painting Zandvoort Racecourse by Van Bohemen.

Visch. Finally, over the years the museum has received a number of artworks and a collection of documents from the collection of Mr. and Mrs. Verweij. At the end of the 1990s relations between the museum’s management and the Schiedam political establishment soured. During the Tjabbes period the objectives of the city council and those of the director still complemented one another: the city set a high priority on restoring the reputation of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, and Tjabbes came up with a successful approach in the short term. Once his efforts had jump-started the interest of the press and the public for the time being, museum policy slid down the list of political priorities. Diana Wind, however, almost immediately upon taking up her post, started an inventory of the museum’s structural problems and began submitting recommendations for the long term. For instance, the roof of the museum and the attic level, where most storage facilities were located, had long been due for a thorough restoration.97 The museum had an accom

Requests for artwork loans particularly begin to increase in the early 1960s, when CoBrA becomes increasingly valued as a historical ‘movement’. In 1987, for instance, the collection is shown in the Stadsgalerij in Heerlen. But loans also cause problems: ‘Cobra art damaged in transit’, reads the headline of the Rotterdams Nieuwsblad on 30 May 1980. Concerned museum committee members succeed in having CoBrA expert Willemijn Stokvis write a report on the collection’s condition.

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

modations analysis done in 1996, which concluded that the Sint Jacobs Gasthuis would have to be renovated in its entirety in order to provide not only better storage facilities and exhibition rooms, but also space for such public

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

305

functions as a museum café and shop. The cost of such a

public.’ The investigators identified the reasons for the

renovation would amount to more than 20 million guilders,

museum’s poor functioning in the fact it maintained two

even as Diana Wind warned the city council that with the

collections with few points in common: a collection of

new functions of the museum a substantial increase in

modern art and a historical collection. In addition the

exploitation costs was also to be expected. Luub Hafkamp,

modern art exhibitions, according to the report, were too

who since 1994 held the aldermanic culture portfolio for

often aimed at a small audience of connoisseurs who were

the VVD for the second time, was shocked by the new director’s ambitious plans, all the more since visitor

not from Schiedam, and the exhibition policy was too similar to that of other museums.100 To make the Stedelijk

numbers for 1996 and 1997 had been disappointing.

Museum more profitable the collection would have to be

Communications between the museum, the city council,

split into historical and cultural parts, each of which should

the city executive and the municipal culture department

have its own accommodation: the historical objects could

deteriorated, which resulted in several unfortunate

be installed in a warehouse, while the modern art collection

misunderstandings. When Diana Wind was forced by

could become the basis for a Centre for Dutch Modern and

illness to hand over her responsibilities in 1998 to interim

Contemporary Art, which would gain national allure through

director Abe van der Werff, the museum was in danger of

exhibitions that would set tongues wagging, would have to

losing its voice in Schiedam cultural policy.

devote significant attention to ‘edutainment’ and would

At the end of the 1990s the alderman and the head of the

also have to house other Schiedam cultural institutions.

official Culture, Education and Sport sector came to the

Based on the Berenschot report the city council decided on

conclusion that it was high time the ambitions of the city

7 February 2000 to investigate whether the collection of

government and those of Schiedam’s museums

the Stedelijk Museum could indeed be split. The modern

(Nederlands Gedestilleerd Museum, Nederlands Malend

art collection would preferably be housed in a newly

Korenmolen Museum and Coöperatiemuseum) were

constructed building, while a small selection of the cultural

brought in line with one another. From the city

history collection would be on display in a location yet to

government’s side those ambitions involved having the

be determined. A ‘direction group’ of culture civil servants

museums play their part in the total package of amenities

would now, assisted by a broad ‘sounding-board group’

that would improve the image of the impoverished city centre.98 The city turned to the consultancy firm

from the Schiedam community, have to come up with a

Berenschot for an outside assessment. But whereas in

meetings of the direction group did not go smoothly, and

1954 the Lunsingh Scheurleer Commission had primarily

eventually an outsider – Stan Petrusa, curator of

listened to the museum, the Berenschot investigators

contemporary art at the Stedelijk Museum Zwolle – was

focused mainly on the civil servants of the Culture,

instructed to summarize the discussions in order to come

Education and Sport sector and had very little contact with the management of the Stedelijk Museum.99 They set

up with an vision for a potential new museum. Petrusa’s

down the results of their inquiry in November 1999, in the

the museum policy paper Stedelijk Museum Schiedam in

report The future of Schiedam’s museums – course

de toekomst? [Stedelijk Museum Schiedam in the future?],

correction or a change of direction?

published in February 2002 by the municipal culture

The Berenschot report’s assessment of the Stedelijk

department. After the municipal elections of 2002 the

Museum was negative in the extreme: ‘Ties with Schiedam,

political constellation of the Schiedam city council changed

other than the financial relationship, are barely perceptible.

radically, and the policy paper has not reappeared on the

It is therefore inevitable that political representatives will

agenda. In the current situation, operations are based on

plan of action in no more than three years. However, the

memorandum subsequently formed the starting point for

increasingly pose hard questions about whether the exploitation budget of more than 2,2 million guilders (in 1999) made available to the museum can be legitimated any longer. The renovation and expansion plans, which will require more than 20 million guilders, will also raise questions in political circles about whether such an investment in a moribund museum can be explained to the

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

S MS, Management Report 1995-III, 1 February 1996. City centre management, Policy and action plan for 1999-2000. Quoted in J.W. van Giessen, O. van Munster, De toekomst van de Schiedamse musea. Bijsturen of koers verleggen? Onderzoek in opdracht van de gemeente Schiedam, Utrecht 1999, p. 8. 99 J.W. van Giessen, O. van Munster, op. cit., p. 2. 100 Idem, p. 4. 97 98

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

306 the city executive’s coalition agreement for the 2002–2006 term, as signed by the Leefbaar Schiedam [Livable Schiedam), CDA [Christian Democrats), VVD and Gemeentebelangen Schiedam [Schiedam Community Interests) parties. The agreement envisions splitting the museum’s art and historical collections, along with continuing to house one of the collections in the Sint Jacobs Gasthuis and building a new storage facility.101

Peter Tjabbes (right) becomes head of the museum department in 1991 and subsequently director. Along with (left to right) museum employees Karin Bakker, Marijke Nagtegaal and Pim Schenkelaars, he takes Lotti van der Gaag’s The Thinker to the Rotterdam Uitmarkt cultural fair in 1992.

Diana Wind, director since 1995, at the opening of the exhibition ‘Je weet niet wat je ziet’ [You’ll be amazed what you see] on 1 July 2000

Forty-five years after Goos Verweij (right) prints the portfolio Het uitzicht van de duif for Constant, the two meet again in Schiedam. Het Stedelijk Museum Schiedam puts together an exhibition in 1997 to mark the donation by Goos and Truus Verweij of all documents about the portfolio’s production around 1952.

01 See also M. Hummelink, ‘CoBrA and Schiedam. A city with a proud collection but no 1 ambitions for its museum’, elsewhere in this publication.

CUSTODIAN, CURATOR, DIRECTOR

CoBrA

the colour of freeedom

1954 308 Lunsingh Scheurleer’s recommendations ‘Living Artists’

The recommendations made to the Mayor and Aldermen of the city of Schiedam by a committee of museum directors chaired by the Government Inspector for Movable Monuments D.F. Lunsingh Scheurleer was to radically alter the future of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam. Piet Sanders, a member of the museum committee, and curator Daan Schwagermann were highly impressed by the content of the recommendations and had high expectations of them: ‘It is to be or not to be,’ wrote Schwagermann in anticipation of Lunsingh Scheurleer’s definitive text.

To the Mayor and Aldermen of Schiedam Dear Sirs, Further to our meeting of 1 May 1954 with the Mayor, the Alderman for Cultural Affairs and several representatives of the museum committee concerning the future of the Museum in Schiedam, we have pleasure in complying with the Mayor’s request and advising you in writing of our recommendations in this matter. As you know, an Antiquities Room was founded in your municipality in 1899. In 1940 it was fittingly accommodated in its present quarters, the former house for elderly people Sint Jacobs Gasthuis. Over the past 15 years the Antiquities Room has expanded into a full-fledged museum where the visitor can not only gain an insight into the history of your city but can also form an impression of various aspects of the development of painting in our country as well as find good examples of sculpture and applied art. If the museum is to play a significant cultural role in the future, it is imperative that a detailed plan is drawn up for the further expansion of the collections and measures are taken to enable exhibitions to be organized on a fairly large scale in the near future. It is desirable that a start is made in the short term on expanding the collections so that one thing and another is ready by the time the new wing is restored. The museum can also fulfil a significant role in other areas than the visual arts. We refer here to the holding of lectures, the screening of films, e.g., of an educational nature. Your splendid auditorium, where your director organizes concerts from time to time, lends itself particularly well to this. We recommend that you assemble a collection of works of living artists so that your museum can command even more public attention than it already does. In addition, exhibitions of the work of young artists could be held on a regular basis, fostering a lively contact between the artist and the public. The possibility of having access to a space where they can present their work is of crucial significance in making their art more widely known. The latter is all the more important in view of the substantial decline over the years in the number of private venues where artists can show their work.

1954 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

309

As the Municipal Council will know, a report was compiled on behalf of the Minister for Education, Arts and Sciences – several copies of which are enclosed herewith – on how to stimulate museum attendance among adults and young people. It contains numerous suggestions which can no doubt be realized by a museum such as yours. We learn from this report that the museum has a valuable contribution to make in the education of young people and the edification of adults. Your director can also mount exhibitions which tie in with the school syllabus – another point the report makes – and which would permit the museum to contribute to the formation of young people. To enable such a plan to be carried out, the museum’s budget should be adjusted to meet the requirements of the above programme. For 1955 we urge you to seriously consider raising the budget for ‘Acquisitions’ from 3,000 to 7,000 guilders and the budget for ‘Exhibitions’ from 2,075 to 5,000 guilders. In 1955 this should be re-examined to see whether these two budgets need to be further increased for 1956. The undersigned are willing, in so far as this lies within their power, to loan the works of modern masters so that a representative collection of contemporary art can be viewed at your museum in the short term. If your director is to mount exhibitions which, in contrast with the present situation, would constantly involve the storage of its own collection, it is essential that you dispose over the left wing of the museum which is to be restored. This will also enable you to do greater justice to local history, including the ‘Distillery’ section, which to our mind forms a vital component of your museum and which plays an important part in the history of your town. We wish to congratulate the Municipal Council of Schiedam on the beautiful setting which the Stedelijk Museum in Schiedam has created and which will be further enhanced by the restoration of the left wing of the building. We hope that these recommendations will help ensure that these spaces fulfil their purpose in every respect. We are convinced that they will assure Schiedam of a prominent place among the Dutch municipalities active in the cultural arena. Government Inspector for Movable Monuments D.F. Lunsingh Scheurleer For and on behalf of: Mr. L.J.F. Wijsenbeek, Director of the Municipal Department of Fine Arts in The Hague Dr. C. Nooteboom, Director of the Museum voor Land- en Volkenkunde and the Maritiem Museum Prins Hendrik in Rotterdam J.C. Ebbinge Wubben, Director of Museum Boymans in Rotterdam

Recommendations of the Lunsingh Scheurleer Committee to the Mayor and Aldermen of Schiedam on the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, 10 June 1954

1954 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

The 1950s

310

Collectors and organizations associated with the museum KLAWA KOPPENOL

The Schiedam Stedelijk Museum began collecting contemporary art in 1954. This change of course took place in an environment that was rather favourably disposed to modern art. As a matter of fact, Schiedam had a number of forward-thinking collectors of its own. Steef de Vries, Goos Verweij and Piet Sanders in particular were keenly interested in abstract and experimental art in the early 1950s. They made a variety of contributions to helping the Schiedam Stedelijk Museum develop into a museum of modern art. Steef de Vries and Goos Verweij were also co-founders and board members of the VIA, the ‘Vereniging voor Irrealisme en Abstractie in de beeldende kunst’ [Association for Irrealism and Abstraction in the Visual Arts], which tried to stimulate interest in modern, contemporary art. Finally, Gallery C.C.C. and the S’45 artists’ association completed the Schiedam modern art network. Yet the appreciation of modern art in Schiedam during the 1950s remained limited to a small group of people, as it did throughout the Netherlands. Schiedam’s image, moreover, was that of a conservative, culturally impoverished city. Even Schiedammers who were interested in art tended to bypass the Stedelijk Museum. ‘In every art-related activity we undertook beyond our own four walls, we turned towards what was on offer in Rotterdam, The Hague and Delft,’ said art historian and CoBrA expert Dr. Willemijn Stokvis, who spent the most important part of her youth in Schiedam during the years 1940 –1957. She discovered the CoBrA movement, to which she later would devote almost her entire academic career, but not until the early 1960s. ‘And imagine my surprise when I soon discovered that in the town of Schiedam, of all places, which I had relegated to the “grey past” at that point in my life, there had already been a long line of people preceding me in this adventure!’ she wrote in 1984 in the Schiedam Stedelijk Museum’s first CoBrA catalogue.1

Educator Steef de Vries’s love for abstract and experimental art was reflected in an extensive collection. Photos from the 1950s show a house stuffed with works of art. De Vries poses here next to a work by Jaap Wagemaker. His collection was later broken up by various sales.

COLLECTORS AND ORGANIZATIONS

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

311

Steef de Vries

‘A driven and enthusiastic man, a great lover of abstract art’: this is how Steven (‘Steef’) de Vries [1909] was characterized by Goos Verweij in 1997.2 In the years after the Second World War he worked as a learning coach in Schiedam’s secondary schools. He also ran his own teaching institute, De Vries & Huber. Steef de Vries spent all his spare time on the new types of artistic expression of his day. He read everything he could get his hands on in the way of modern art, and he kept abreast of all the latest events in the art world thanks to contacts with artists both in the Netherlands and abroad. Starting in 1946 he began visiting Paris one month a year, spending time in galleries and museums, collecting art books and magazines and visiting artists. He would often stay with the painter Bram Bogart at number 20 Rue Santeuil, where an entire Dutch artists’ colony (including Karel Appel, Corneille and Lotti van der Gaag) had set up camp.3 But De Vries also built up a network closer to home during the forties. At the end of the war, De Vries became acquainted with Goos Verweij when Verweij began attending language courses at the De Vries & Huber teaching institute. It was Goos Verweij who brought De Vries in contact with the Schiedam artist Piet van Stuivenberg and the Rotterdam sculptor Koos van Vlijmen. Wout van Heusden became familiar with the group through Van Stuivenberg. In this way a circle of friends was formed made up of Rotterdam and Schiedam artists and collectors. De Vries often acted as intermediary in selling or organizing exhibitions of the work being produced by the group’s artists. He also organized lectures on art and philosophy that were held in his institute’s one small classroom or at the home of the Rotterdam artist Wim Chabot. The group became the centre of a broad network that came to include the innovative artistic circles of Amsterdam. In 1948, for example, Van Stuivenberg, Van Vlijmen and Van Heusden took part in an exhibition of the ‘Vrij Beelden’ [Free Representations] group at the Amsterdam Stedelijk Museum, and they were members of this group of artists as well. At events like these Steef de Vries often acted as spokesman for the SchiedamRotterdam group.4 De Vries was also largely responsible for the exhibition of the work of Amsterdammer Eugène Brands for the Rotterdam Student Association in March 1952. His correspondence with Brands during these years is of a particularly personal character. In 1954 Brands writes that the curator of the Stedelijk Museum, Daan Schwagermann, had been to visit with his wife and had purchased the painting Victory Borfimah for a hundred guilders: ‘It’s fantastic to use your capital to turn more and more people into collectors. You’ll never hear me complain!’ This remark clearly illustrates how much effort De Vries put into firing people’s enthusiasm for the artists he most appreciated.5 In the meantime he was putting together his own impressive collection of modern art, with work by Piet van Stuivenberg, Wout van Heusden, Constant, Eugène Brands, Anton Rooskens, Bram Bogart, This text is partly based on an initial study undertaken by Sacha Mols and Marleen Blokhuis. 1 ‘De verborgen schatten van Schiedam. Herinneringen aan de start van mijn “Cobra-avontuur”’, in: J. Bokhoven (comp.), Cobra in het Stedelijk Museum van Schiedam, Schiedam 1984, p. 5. 2 Interview by J. Bastian with Goos Verweij, 10 May 1997. In: J. Bastian, VIA Schiedam. De Vereniging voor Irrealisme en Abstractie in de beeldende kunst (1950–1954), exh. cat. Schiedam (Stedelijk Museum Schiedam) 1999, p. 3. 3 M. Leij, ‘Steef de Vries en Goos Verweij, twee kunstpromotors in Schiedam’, Decorum. Tijdschrift voor kunst en cultuur, XVI (1998) no. 2, p. 28. 4 M. Leij, op. cit., p. 26. 5 M. Leij, op. cit., p. 26.

COLLECTORS AND ORGANIZATIONS

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

312 Jaap Wagemaker, Kees van Bohemen and Willem Hussem. He also purchased the work of a number of foreign artists, such as François Arnal, Gianni Bertini, Karl-Fred Dahmen, Karl-Otto Götz, Heinz Kreutz, Marie Raymond and Claude Viseux.6 Goos Verweij

Goos Verweij [1912–1998] was a Schiedam printer who was the first in the city to hold exhibitions of contemporary art. In 1946 the display window of Verweij’s print shop, initially located on the corner of the Broersveld and the Passage, featured etchings by Wout van Heusden, followed by lithographs by Harry van Kruiningen and woodcuts by M.C. Esscher. Verweij accepted printing orders from the artists, who exchanged their works for printed invitations and catalogues when their money ran out. More and more artists came to visit him in Schiedam to seek his assistance, and this led to a great many friendly contacts with the likes of Wout van

In August 1950 printer Goos Verweij (left) and his wife, Nel, travel with the Rotterdam painter and graphic artist Wout van Heusden to Paris for the first time. There they meet Frits Klein and Marie Raymond (Yves Klein’s parents), with whom they would remain friends, and in subsequent years also meet, among others, Serge Poliakoff, Ossip Zadkine, Corneille and his wife, Henny Riemens.

Heusden, Eugène Brands and Anton Rooskens, among others.7 Goos Verweij was also an active organizer. He mounted exhibitions in the Rotterdam cultural centre ’t Venster, where all the members of the former Experimental Group in Holland, as well as kindred artists, showed their work. From 1950 to 1957 Verweij was a board member of the gallery Le Canard, the only Amsterdam gallery at the time that showed work by contemporary, abstract artists. The contacts that Goos made were passed on to the VIA, the Schiedam museum and later the Friends of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam.8 Initially Goos Verweij had almost no contact with the Stedelijk Museum. The situation changed dramatically when curator Cord Schwagermann was succeeded by his son Daan. Daan Schwagermann had heard of the activities of the VIA, he had seen the graphic work in the display window of Verweij’s print shop, and he had heard that Verweij had a collection of contemporary art in his home. So Schwagermann and his wife decided to pay a get-acquainted visit to the Verweijs, which resulted in a long-lasting friendship. The connection between Verweij and the

COLLECTORS AND ORGANIZATIONS

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

313 Schiedam museum remained even after Schwagermann’s departure.9 For many years Verweij took care of the museum’s printed work, and from 1960 to 1968 he was the chairman of the Friends of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam. With both his membership on the board of the Friends and his contacts with artists from The Hague and Amsterdam, he played a crucial role in the formation of the modern art collection in the Schiedam Stedelijk Museum,10 not least of all through the numerous works from his private collection that he donated during his lifetime and as part of his legacy. The contacts that Verweij maintained with experimental artists were plentiful. In his guest book, which was donated to the museum in 2002 (see p. 28), there are drawings and sketches by Karel Appel, Corneille, Theo Wolvecamp, Jaap Nanninga, Jan Elburg and Lotti van der Gaag, all of whom had been guests in his home. He also printed the graphics portfolio Het uitzicht van de duif [The Dove’s View] for Constant in 1952, based on a poem by Elburg. By way of payment in kind, Verweij chose Constant’s canvas Scorched Earth III, which he would offer to the Schiedam Stedelijk Museum on loan in 1956. It was purchased by the museum in 1963. The graphics portfolio Voor een spatiaal colorisme [For a Spatial Colourism], also by Constant, was printed partly by Verweij and partly by the silkscreen press that Constant had taken over from Verweij (see p. 116 ff.). Piet Sanders

The Schiedam lawyer Piet Sanders was born in Schiedam in 1912, son of the architect Piet Sanders who built the new Sint Jacobs Gasthuis in 1934. During the German occupation Sanders was one of the hostages of Sint Michielsgestel, and after the war he played an important role in preparing for the sovereignty of Indonesia. In 1959 he became a professor of private law at the Rotterdam School of Economics (later Erasmus University). The research institute of the Erasmus University law faculty still bears his name. Sanders has a great interest in art and also has always been active in the cultural realm. In 1932, while still a student, he organized a photographic exhibition in De Lakenhal museum in Leiden, by which he intended to demonstrate that photography is also an art form.11 Today in the art world Sanders is mainly known for the art collection that he and his wife Ida put together over the years. Piet and Ida Sanders always tried to buy work by young artists who were not terribly well known, many of whom they were acquainted with personally. Karel Appel, for instance, was one of the first artists that Piet and Ida Sanders supported. They knew him even before the war and bought a number of works from him; Piet Sanders in turn provided him with legal assistance.12 6 7 8 9 10

J. Bastian, op. cit., p. 3. T. Verweij-De Graaff, Goos Verweij, drukker te Schiedam, Schiedam 1999, p. 31. T. Verweij-De Graaff, op. cit., p. 33. T. Verweij-De Graaff, op. cit., p. 63. L. van Halem, Het uitzicht van de duif. Jan Elburg en Constant (een documentaire), exh. cat. Schiedam (Stedelijk Museum Schiedam) 1998, p. 8. 11 T. Meedendorp, ‘Het echtpaar Sanders. “Verzamelen is iets wat wij altijd samen doen”’, Vereniging Rembrandt, autumn 2001, pp. 7-10; M. van Rooy, ‘Met Karel Appel in bad. De kunstcollectie van het Schiedamse echtpaar Sanders’, NRC Handelsblad, 23 February 1996, p. 7. 12 C. van Houts, Karel Appel. De biografie, Amsterdam 2000, p. 200; A. Leffring, ‘Magie Afrikaanse kunst is voor ons onbereikbaar’, de Volkskrant, 31 August 1996; T. Meedendorp, ‘Het echtpaar Sanders. “Verzamelen is iets wat wij altijd samen doen”’, Vereniging Rembrandt, autumn 2001, p. 9.

COLLECTORS AND ORGANIZATIONS

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

314 Schiedam lawyer Piet Sanders is very involved in the museum. As a member of the museum committee (from 1949 to 1965) he not only advises on acquisitions, donations and exhibitions but also is not shy to argue for improvement to the position of the curator. Through his contacts in the art world, the business world and public authorities Sanders is able to do a great deal for the museum behind the scenes as well.

As a member of the museum committee in Schiedam from 1949 to 1965, Sanders achieved prominence time and again. He directed museum policy in a way he considered both proper and desirable, especially during the 1950s. He was also a member of the museum committees of the Amsterdam Stedelijk Museum, the Museum Boymans-van Beuningen and the Kröller-Müller Museum, enabling him more than anyone else to place the purchases of the Schiedam museum within the ‘collection of the Netherlands’. The collection of the Schiedam Stedelijk Museum was also occasionally enriched by gifts from the Sanders collection, including a rare, early plaster sculpture by Appel and a large painting by Lucebert (see p. 68 – 69, 212–213). ‘The acquisitions budgets were often minimal, which accounts for our gifts,’ said Piet and Ida Sanders as a way of explaining this gesture.13 V IA

On 1 February 1950, the VIA [Association for Irrealism and Abstraction in the Visual Arts] was founded. The founding of the group had been sparked by an exhibition of work by a number of young artists organized in 1949 by the Rotterdam Art Foundation in the Schielandshuis. The participants appeared together under the name ‘De Autonomen’ [The Autonomous]. They stood for an autonomous, nonrepresentative art that created new reality instead of portraying existing reality. Most of the press coverage of the exhibition was damning. De Maasbode spoke of the ‘infantility of the “works of art” now on display’ and of a ‘blunder on the part of the Rotterdam Art Foundation’.14 For the participants, the negative criticism was just the stimulation they needed to join forces and strive for the recognition of abstract art. Almost all of them became members of the VIA the following year.15 In a founding manifesto, printed by Goos Verweij, Wout van Heusden and Steef de Vries explained the Association’s goals. They called attention to an ‘advancing numbness’ which was responsible for bringing the culture to a ‘state that can hardly be called enviable’. ‘Via’ means ‘the way’ in Latin, and this way, according to the founders of the Association, lay in abstract art. The Association’s aim was to fight the indifference and ignorance that dominated the public imagination with regard to this artistic path. In the eyes of the VIA members, the spiritual character

COLLECTORS AND ORGANIZATIONS

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

315 of abstract art offered mankind a source of intellectual enrichment. By publishing writings and holding lectures and exhibition tours, the VIA hoped to promote a deeper understanding of non-figurative art among a broader public: ‘We’ll never get anywhere by casting partly admiring, partly regretful looks at the high points of past culture. The eternal way forward, that is our mission. We regard abstract and nonfigurative art, the art of today, as strictly determinative. This is an opinion we have the courage to express, and we will defend it if necessary in the spoken and written word as well as in artistic statements. We will make a conscious effort to work on raising today’s cultural standard, and in doing so we will also attempt to involve a broader circle.’16 The Association consisted mainly of Rotterdam and Schiedam artists and a number of art enthusiasts: Steef de Vries (chairman), Wouter van Heusden (vice-chairman), M. Nesse (secretary), W. Braams (treasurer), Piet van Stuivenberg, Koos van Vlijmen, Emiel Voeten, Wim Chabot, Herman Seij, Goos Verweij and Bas van der Smit.17 In April 1950 the Hague philosopher Guy de Gelder began his close involvement in the Association. He was responsible for the introductions in the folders for exhibitions organized by the VIA, and he frequently gave lectures on art and philosophy during meetings. The members of the VIA maintained close contact with working abstract artists and artist groups in other cities. A few VIA members were also members of the Amsterdam groups known as Vrij Beelden and Creatie [Creation].18 Steef de Vries corresponded with several artists from these group groups (Frieda Hunziker, Ger Gerrits, Piet Ouborg) as well as with artists who belonged to the CoBrA group (Eugène Brands, Anton Rooskens, Constant). Under his leadership, the VIA organized an exhibition at Asker, the Rotterdam student union, in 1951 in cooperation with the Creatie group. This exhibition also featured work by artists associated with Vrij Beelden and a few formers members of the CoBrA group: Willy Boers, Eugène Brands, Dolf Breetvelt, Ger Gerrits, Frieda Hunziker, Willem Hussem, Mark Kolthoff, Jaap Nanninga, Piet Ouborg, Anton Rooskens and Anton Weininger.19 Goos Verweij also kept the VIA members abreast of developments in the Hague art world. He frequented the artists’ café De Posthoorn in the early 1950s, the meeting place for Hague artists and culture devotees, where he met Jaap Nanninga and Willem Hussem. There has never been any direct cooperation between the VIA and the Schiedam Stedelijk Museum. During the years of VIA’s existence, the museum only organized one exhibition of the work of Wout van Heusden.20 Actually, the ambitions of the VIA members did not lie in Schiedam in a small museum whose collection contained hardly any modern art when the 1950s began. They set their sights on more progressive museums in the big cities: Amsterdam, The Hague and Rotterdam. In 1955 those feelings were still very much alive for Van Heusden; he found Schiedam too small for his friends: ‘You [De Vries] and Goos and Daan 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

M. Leij, op. cit., p. 35. G.S., ‘Zwakke beurt van Rotterdamse beeldende kunst. Tentoonstelling in het Schielandshuis’, Maasbode, 11 October 1949. J. Bastian, op. cit. VUA founding manifesto, as facsimile in: J. Bastian, op. cit. Van Vlijmen and Van der Smit were only members until July and May 1950 respectively. Van Vlijmen withdrew his membership rather soon, however. See: J. Bastian, op. cit., p. 14. ‘Catalogue’, private collection. The exhibition was held from 20 January to 10 February 1951. 100 Prenten van Wout van Heusden, exh. cat. Schiedam (Stedelijk Museum Schiedam) 1953.

COLLECTORS AND ORGANIZATIONS

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

316 and Sanders must erase the name “Schiedam” from your minds and face the fact that your work reaches much further than the borders of this little town. You’ve got to be HARD-BOILED ARTIST CHAPS in the good sense of the word.’21 One year earlier, two events had caused the Association to disband. One was the Lunsingh Scheurleer report, on the basis of which the Schiedam city council ratified the plan of the museum to begin collecting contemporary art. In addition, at the request of Piet Sanders a new basis was provided for the Friends of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, which had been started in 1940. The new goal of the Friends was ‘to promote interest in the Stedelijk Museum in Schiedam’ 22 or, as chairman Kamstra put it, ‘to build a bridge between the museum and the citizenry.’ 23 The two most important ways in which the Friends tried to realize that goal were the enrichment of the museum collection by means of donations or loans, and the organizing of lectures, film performances and concerns in the museum auditorium. In this regard the Friends were able to make use of the experience and contacts of the VIA, which was absorbed into the new association. Gallery C.C.C.

Art collector Hans van Dijk began showing the work of avant-garde artists in his Schiedam gallery ‘C.C.C.’, or Cultural Contact Centre, in 1953. ‘A great deal of modern work will be encountered here, symbolic and abstract, and though I do not expect the visitors to regard the work as beautiful as such, I do hope to arouse a bit of understanding for this much-maligned form of expression,’ said Van Dijk in his defence of his work in the gallery.24 In 1955 the gallery organized an exhibition with recent work by Karel Appel. When Appel was honoured a few months later with a solo exhibition in the Stedelijk Museum, the reaction of the Schiedam public was quite composed; the shock of the new was something they had already experienced in the gallery C.C.C. S’ 45

S’45 (the ‘s’ is for ‘studio’) was strictly a Schiedam artists’ association formed in 1945 in which advocates of abstract art such as Piet van Stuivenberg and Goof Smit were represented. S’45 mounted exhibitions in the Schiedam Stedelijk Museum in 1947, 1950 and 1953. Because of a lack of interest on the part of the city council and the business community, S’45 was never able to secure a space of its own, causing it to slowly peter out.

21 22 23 24

Letter from Wout van Heusden to Steef de Vries, January 1955, private collection. Statutes of the Friends of the Schiedam Stedelijk Museum, 1954, art. 3. Cees Gerritse Archive, Boxtel. Anon., ‘Museum-vrienden brengen leven in de culturele brouwerij’, Het Rotterdamsch Parool/De Schiedammer, 6 March 1954. Anon., ‘Contact met de cultuur in het centrum’, De Schiedamse Gemeenschap, 5 (1953) no. 6, p. 334.

COLLECTORS AND ORGANIZATIONS

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

1954 – 1956 Daan Schwagermann’s first purchases ‘If you want to see the Experimentals, you should go to Schiedam!’ Even before the Lunsingh Scheurleer Commission published its report on the policy of the Stedelijk Museum in Schiedam, Daan Schwagermann with the support of the Friends of the Stedelijk Museum had purchased the collection’s first experimental work from Eugène Brands. He pursued this policy energetically the following year, engaging in a correspondence with Theo Wolvecamp, Constant and Corneille with a view to obtaining work from the years of the Experimental Group. In the last meeting of the museum committee that he attended before departing for the Haags Gemeentemuseum, he made a spirited defence of his policy. Purchase, Eugène Brands (1954)

Dear Mr. Brands, Due both to the Society of ‘Friends of the Stedelijk Museum’ and to the Museum, you have had to wait a long while before we have been able to let you know anything for certain. The following is a summary of what has taken place. After the visit of myself and Mr. Verwey and your sending some paintings, we proposed to the Society of the ‘Friends of the Stedelijk Museum’ to purchase your painting ‘Victory Borfinah’ [sic], that you were willing to part with for so small a sum. It was a while before all the board members had a chance to view your work. As expected, by far the larger part had difficulty in understanding your work. In general, the same was also the case with the members of the museum committee. […] Generally speaking, we have had to delay by half a year embarking on forming a collection of modern art. I have no intention however that your ‘Victory Borfinah’ [sic] will be lost to the museum. With regard to your ‘Victory Borfinah’ [sic], I am happy to make use of my right to purchase work for a small sum without having to first go through the museum committee. Please let me know in what way you wish to receive the 100 guilders. Would it be possible for me to keep the reserved Served ‘Fish’ on loan for another half year and to exhibit it in the collection? I am very attached to it. I will return the other paintings and oils on paper, postage paid. […]

Letter from Daan Schwagermann to Eugène Brands, 17 June 1954

Dear Mr. Schwagermann, Many thanks for your letter. It is evident that, ‘official decisions’ take extra time, since they have to go through a number of procedures. That the vast majority of members of both board and museum committee had difficulty in understanding my work, is something that I continue to regard as positive and as no small compliment. I know I can tell you this, since you do not in any way share in that incomprehension. If I have understood it correctly, a great deal depends on the decision that Schiedam Council will be making in November. For you in particular and for modern art in general, I hope the decision will be a positive one. I am looking forward to receiving the fee for ‘Victory Borfimah’, by return of post. I am also willing to let you have the canvas ‘the served fish’, on loan. As for your writing, ‘Reserved fish,’ I wondered, optimist as I am, ‘was Sigmund Freud behind your slip?’ The fact that you propose a term of half a year, bringing us to the historically significant moment when the city fathers of Schiedam etc., might suggest that this is the case. Anyhow, we’ll just have to wait and see. […]

Letter from Eugène Brands to Daan Schwagermann, 18 July 1954

1954 – 1956 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Purchase, Theo Wolvecamp (1955)

Dear Sir I know of your work from some issues of the magazine ‘Reflex’ and from the Amsterdam Stedelijk Museum. I would be glad to have an opportunity to get to know it better. Can you tell me where I can find more work of yours and whether you personally still have work from the so-called Experimental period? […]

Letter from Daan Schwagermann to Theo Wolvecamp, 12 April 1955

Dear Wolvecamp, I am glad that the visit of Mr. Sanders etc. has led you to send in new work […] A few days ago we returned your paintings and kept: Composition with White Spot 100 x 100 500 guilders Could we however delay the payment till the beginning of January1956? I would also like to ask you, should we come across a better painting, whether we could substitute it for this painting, even though we are very happy with it? Unfortunately we do not have the funds to buy more works from a single painter. […]

Letter from Daan Schwagermann to Theo Wolvecamp, 31 October 1955

Dear Schwagermann, I’ve received your letter of 31 Oct. ’55 and noted the purchase of the painting composition with white spot for 500 guilders. Would you be kind enough to transfer the money to N. de Jong he has already paid me up front for it.

1954 – 1956 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

318

319 Regarding what you further write about wanting to exchange this I would rather contact you personally. As you may well know Appel has an exhibition at the Stedelijk in November. I’ve arranged with him to be there at the opening, perhaps I’ll see you there as well if not, next month I’m planning to go to the west anyway and can go via Schiedam. Really curious to see the museum.

Letter from Theo Wolvecamp to Daan Schwagermann, 5 November 1955 Attempt to purchase a painting by Constant (1955)

Dear Mr. Schwagermann, Subsequent to our somewhat inconclusive phone conversation, I have retained such good memories of my visit to your museum and of your fresh and enthusiastic plans, that it is a great pleasure for me to be represented there with one of my paintings. Unfortunately I cannot permit myself to donate a work to the museum, because painters too have to eat; I am however willing to propose a price that is within your reach. I already mentioned the sum of 250 guilders for ‘Snared Bird’, and I would propose 500 guilders for ‘The Dove’. […]

Letter from Constant to Daan Schwagermann, 27 April 1955

Dear Mr. Nieuwenhuys, Due to your proposal in writing of 27–4–1955, I will keep the paintings ‘Snared Bird’ (price, 250 guilders) and ‘The Dove’ (price, 500 guilders) for a while, if you are willing to go along with this. As I told you in our phone conversation yesterday, there is a meeting of the museum committee on 6 May, and I hope I will get a chance to raise the matter there and will inform you about it afterwards.

Letter from Daan Schwagermann to Constant, 27 April 1955

Acquisitions (Loan by Verweij: Constant and others.) With regard to no. 11 (painting by Nieuwenhuijs): the curator showed two other paintings by this painter that had been on loan to the museum for some time. They are ‘The Dove’ and ‘Snared Bird’; the prices were 500 and 250 guilders respectively. However Mr. Verwey’s loan [the painting Scorched Earth], has the same qualities as the two other paintings just mentioned and, given our modest financial means, it was deemed not necessary for the time being to proceed to the purchase of the other two. Mr. Verwey’s gesture was welcomed with great pleasure. From the minutes of the museum committee meeting of 6 May 1955

1954 – 1956 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

320 Purchase, Corneille (1955)

Dear Sir I heard from the painter Theo Wolvekamp [sic] that you still have a painting belonging to him in your studio. At the time, it was on show in the Cobra exhibition in Liège. A friend of mine, Mr. S. de Vries, left for Paris yesterday and he intends if possible to visit your studio. You would be doing Wolvekamp [sic] and me a great favour if you give this canvas to Mr. de Vries. In as far as our modest financial means allow, we are trying to represent the ‘Experimentals’ as well and preferably as fully as possible in our museum. We own work by Brands, Rooskens, Constant Nieuwenhuijs etc. I hope to get in touch with you soon; I have heard for instance about an exhibition of the sculptor Visser in ’t Venster in Rotterdam. […]

Letter from Daan Schwagermann to Corneille, 27 May 1955

Dear Sir It is a pity that I did not get the chance to attend the opening of your exhibition in ‘’t Venster’ last Saturday. […] Luckily my friend Verwey was able to substitute for me to a degree as I heard from his report. On Sunday I saw your exhibition. The three paintings from the Tiessen collection are by far the best. You will appreciate that I aim to acquire an outstanding work of yours for our museum, one that is definitely of the same level as that of Mr. Tiessen. Much to my regret that level was not reached with regard to the rest of the work in your exhibition. The one I liked the best, as you already said yourself to Mr. Verwey, was the painting ‘Le chasseur de poissons’. Would you be able to let us have it on loan for a while once the exhibition is over until we can replace it with a more representative work of yours? […]

Letter from Daan Schwagermann to Corneille, 16 June 1955

Acquisitions The curator shows a work by Corneille, who is exhibiting in Amsterdam right now; this exhibition is expected soon in Schiedam. In the course of personal contacts with the artist, he has persuaded the latter to offer this work to the Schiedam museum for 700 guilders. The curator gave a detailed explanation of the outstanding quality of this work, comparing it with Karel Appel’s method of painting, that is often crude and primitive; Corneille is more refined and restful. As was immediately clear in the work on view. The chairman and other committee members said that they agreed with the proposal to purchase the work; it would be financed out of the museum’s budget, since it was entirely in keeping with our acquisitions policy. […] (Curator:) ‘We are collecting modern art however and the market for it is constantly in flux. Artists who are today nothing more than a name may turn out tomorrow to be amongst the leaders. A development like this can be no means always be

1954 – 1956 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

321 foreseen. If for instance I had had to draw up a purchasing programme five years ago, I would probably not yet have thought of the oeuvre of Appel; today two of his works are in the museum. In our case, the only way to compile a serious collection is to remain constantly on the lookout, to be as well-informed as possible and to keep up with new developments.’

Daan Schwagermann in the museum committee, minutes of meeting 15 May 1956

Acquisitions policy (1956)

Concerning the proposal of Schwagermann for the purchase of a work by the artist Arnal a discussion was held about the acquisitions policy. ‘The Committee (the members were unanimous) fears that the collection that the Stedelijk Museum is gradually acquiring through purchases is in danger of becoming extremely one-sided. Non-figurative work would seem currently to be the only sort that is considered – and for the average museum visitor this form of art has little or no appeal. Given the programme that we have established for the development of the Stedelijk Museum, we have to collect modern art and preferably the artists that are most typical of it. But do these artists really all work in a non-figurative direction? Aren’t there any painters who apply the typical features of the modern idea of art in a figurative way? Take a look at Van Heel for instance. Didn’t the exhibition of his works give a completely different and much more attractive picture than that we are confronted with in Appel and Corneille? Will enough Schiedammers still bother to make their way to the museum, if our collection continues to grow in the current direction? And this has to be our first priority, because this museum exists for the education and service of our fellow-citizens; it must not be allowed to lose touch with the people of this city and this is no imaginary danger, when its contents are slowly beginning to take on the character of a private collection.’ The Curator gave a convincing defence of his position on the acquisitions policy: ‘Figurative art in which the essential features of the modern vision are expressed and that is representative of the current trends? I have never seen it. No painter of international or even national significance works figuratively; everyone looks to abstraction. Of course a man like Van Heel does produce attractive work and personally I have a very high regard for it; but if you ask me whether he is a genuine representative of the current climate as this is expressed in art, I have to answer that he is not. And it definitely looks as though everybody in the museum world thinks and feels the same about this. After all, which are the artists who are currently purchased and collected? They are Appel, Corneille, Arnal and others of the same level, none of whom are figurative. If our museum aims to acquire a collection that is representative of contemporary art, if it indeed aims to be a sort of laboratory for this form of art, we cannot do otherwise than continue to collect as we are doing; and we also have to do so, because the newer work is currently also within our reach, while if we wait until time has sifted through it, the good work will then be too expensive and purchasing the remainder doesn’t make any sense. I am well aware that it is a difficult task to decide here and now what will or will not be

1954 – 1956 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

1955 – 1965 322 of permanent worth, in other words that which is or is not representative and original, from a trend that is still undergoing great changes. I am confident however that I am making the right choices; contacts and discussions with my fellow museum directors are confirming my confidence; in any case this choice will not consist of figurative art.’ ‘To continue, is the Stedelijk Museum a museum for the people of Schiedam? It depends on your point of view. I admit it would be nice if our fellow-citizens soon started going to the museum; but this mustn’t be achieved by making concessions to their taste; or else – and this is the dilemma – we will have to abandon our aspiration to be a museum where one is offered a survey, a sound and welldocumented survey of what is happening in modern art. And isn’t it already a considerable victory for Schiedam if an idea is growing in the outside world that, ‘If you want to see the Experimentals, you should go to Schiedam!’? In this respect our museum can acquire a name and fulfil a task by which it will end up occupying a place all its own and have its own character in the museum world. Finally, we do not only own non-figurative work; there are also important works from earlier periods here which may be ‘easier’ for the average museum visitor and where he may find a welcome recompense for the efforts that modern artists require of him; and when, as we hope, it will be possible to make full use of the left wing, there will be much more room for exhibiting work and it will become clear that the problem of one-sidedness was not that serious after all. Finally this anxiety about becoming one-sided can also be dispelled by referring to the extremely varied programme of exhibitions that are held here and which provide our visitors with something for everyone throughout the year.’

From the minutes of the museum committee meeting of 29 June 1956. These attending are: M.J.M. van Kinderen, alderman for Cultural Affairs (member and chairman); P. Dirkzwager (member and vice-chairman); H.W. Meihuizen, M. Holl, D. Schwagermann, P. Kuyer. P. Sanders is absent with notification; Daan Schwagermann is attending his last committee meeting.

1954 – 1956 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

323 Consignment and purchase of Karel Appel’s works ‘A highly remarkable exponent of Expressionism’

After Daan Schwagermann had taken Karel Appel’s stock of work from his Amsterdam studio on consignment in Schiedam, his successor Pierre Janssen took the initiative to make a purchase of 26 works on paper out of this. The museum already had two paintings from the young star painter, and thanks to Janssen’s careful handling of the situation the museum committee, after some deliberation, enthusiastically supported this large acquisition for which an entire year’s budget was set aside. The remainder was returned in 1965.

[Gerrit Benner] was living there temporarily with his wife at the Amsterdam studio of Karel Appel, who was in Paris at the time. Try and imagine three small interconnecting rooms from which half the space at least was stuffed with Karel’s work: 54 canvases, 224 works on paper, 13 oils on card and 4 wooden sculptures. Benner and his wife could barely move in that small space. Schwagermann and I looked at each other one time and then Daan quickly came up with the suggestion of storing Appel’s work temporarily at the Schiedam museum. Appel agreed to this and in that way 295 early Appels arrived at the museum. Goos Verweij quoted by Flora Stiemer in Van Appel tot Zadkine. 95 hoogtepunten uit de collectie van het Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, Schiedam 1995, p. 11

Part of the inventory, written up by Karel Appel, of the work that he gave the museum to store in 1955

1955 – 1965 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Besides the purchases already made, there was still a large collection of Karel Appel’s work that had still not been bought. In other words, the work lay piled up before me, literally piled up, in order for new decisions to be taken again. [...] When Karel Appel left for Paris he had asked Daan Schwagermann whether he could store the contents of his studio, as far as work was concerned, at the Schiedam museum. [...] I knew it had to be there and at a certain point I got around to taking a look at it. It was lying flat or standing around [...] in piles in an attic on the left side of the museum – as you stand in the Hoogstraat facing the building. [...] I already decided early on that that Appel consignment had to be managed properly. [...] From the beginning of my museum duties, I had a need for structure and order, and I wanted to create something like a white museum interior with well-ordered storage spaces and a certain rational approach towards running the museum. This is a trait I’ve always had and later I did the same at the Arnhem museum, so it was obvious I couldn’t bear all that work from Karel Appel just lying or standing around in that attic. I thus converted a side room of the large upper room on the right [...] into a new storage depot. I sealed off this room from the large one and began putting all the various techniques, like the gouaches and other items I found, into passe-partouts, storing them in dust free boxes obtained from Rotterdam’s municipal archives, making sliding racks to hang up the Appel consignment so that it was decently stored and even added a humidifier – albeit a primitive one, as they were at the time – in order to have a reasonable climate in the depot. Moreover I thought it desirable to dot the i’s more on the draft loan contract with Appel sometime, make descriptions (no matter how brief) of the items again and on the occasion of him dropping by present him with a new loan deed on sealed paper. [...] That was all taken care of and Appel did come later on a visit, saw the entire Appel depot with me and signed every page of the new loan contract, so that was also sorted. [...] It is obvious that by being involved with the arranging of the Appel depot I quickly had the idea that something could be purchased for the museum at some point. The basis for this was so superbly in place, the tradition already existed, even the supervisory committee needn’t imply running into any insurmountable difficulties. [...] There have to be minutes of the committee meeting in which the purchase was proposed. I recall us being previously preoccupied with that, so I again with the support from Mr. Sanders, paved the way, if I can put it that way, in order for the purchase to be made.

From an unpublished interview with Pierre Janssen by Josine Bokhoven on 3 April 1984

1955 – 1965 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

324

325 The chairman announced to the committee that the possibility existed for the museum to purchase some of Appel’s earlier work. Mr. Appel, added the chairman, had turned up at the museum a short time ago in order to pick up all the works he had loaned. He had actually heard that the work was being neglected. When the curator told him this was a nasty rumour and showed him how neatly the works were being stored (mounted in passe-partouts, stored in dust-free boxes in a damp-proof depot), he wholeheartedly approved and was immediately willing to leave the collection here. The possibility of buying something was then raised. The curator would namely like to see that a part of this little known yet extremely typical early work came into the possession of the museum. At first however Mr. Appel asked a price that blocked any chance of making a somewhat extensive purchase: an average 800 guilders per work. In fact a price which according to the curator he could definitely achieve on the international market for these works. The curator, having talked at length to him, succeeded in getting Appel to the point where he would leave the 26 gouaches and drawings, chosen by the curator, to the museum for the sum of 6,000 guilders. The curator has now asked me to present this matter to the committee and has appended the following statement to his proposal for purchase: The proposal to purchase 26 gouaches and drawings by Karel Appel from the artist’s loan to the museum, for which purchase the sum of 6,000 guilders is involved, is based on the fact that Mr. Appel, for the last fifteen years or so, is also seen abroad as a highly remarkable exponent of Expressionism. In view of the fact that the Schiedams Museum wishes to purchase quintessential contemporary artists and also in view of the fact that we, with an eye on the smallness of our budget, should not spread ourselves too thinly, for these reasons alone the purchase is absolutely justified. Moreover, this is about a choice from the earlier work which on the one hand is barely known and on the other depicts the origins of Appel’s artistic concepts in a highly arresting manner. There is no collection in the Netherlands at this time where this can be seen in that manner. The price, which comes down to about 300 guilders per piece, is very low according to current prevailing conditions. Even if you leave aside for the moment the prices which Appel is able to ask (these prices after all can be the result of ephemeral fame only) you come to this conclusion. In fact at Gerrit Benner’s exhibition held this spring at the Schiedam museum, Museum Boymans paid 300 guilders for a black and white drawing as did the Haags Gemeentemuseum, while Benner is generally not known beyond our own borders. Though there are reasons enough to make use of this opportunity to purchase, the curator must emphatically state that in view of the course art history takes he is unable to make any prediction whatsoever concerning the ultimate value or significance of this purchase and of Mr. Appel’s art. It occurs to him that it is better to point out this uncertainty. The advice to purchase is made to the best of a person’s knowledge and this knowledge is determined by a moment in time. But no matter what a later moment in time may provide other viewpoints, as a documentation of ‘experimental art’ this purchase will maintain its value.

1955 – 1965 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

326 Finally, the curator deems it necessary to remark that he will attempt to the best of his ability to take responsibility for the flawless preservation of the purchase. However, the committee should realize that this possibility is still restricted in view of the wretched heating of the building and the far too high degree of humidity in the depot. Only with automatic central heating and a dehumidifier can any guarantee be given that the acquisitions will not go to waste. For every year the council makes money available for buying art, the question of conservation will be ever more pressing. It is the curator’s duty to draw attention continuously to this. (Chairman:) My question to the gentlemen is now:

a. should we decide to purchase? b. if yes, how should we finance the purchase? As far as a. is concerned, in the previous meeting [...] we gave our approval in principle to the curator’s proposal to dispose of any museum item that is of no artistic or historic merit via auctions or art dealers. I have advised the curator to do this in consultation with certain specialist advisors. I would now like to see this consultation extended to the purchase of the Appels which have been chosen by the curator. The curator: I myself wouldn’t like anything better than for you to have the opinion of certain qualified colleagues for this important purchase. And I would like to propose as designated consultants Mr. Schuurman, curator at the Haags Gemeentemuseum, a man who regularly purchases modern works, and who is known in the museum world as a highly competent art connoisseur and appreciated for his honest opinions. Then I suggest Mr. Doelman, art editor of the Nieuwe Rotterdamse Courant, an important expert on modern art and a wellknown critic. I would also have no objection whatsoever in involving Mr. Ebbinge Wubben [director of Museum Boymans] with whom I maintain very good contact. Only we have to take into account that he doesn’t have as much to do with the purchase of modern art as Mr. Schuurman. I would then ask these gentlemen the following questions: a. do you agree with the selection made from Appel’s earlier work, or would you like to see changes made? b. do you consider it important to the Stedelijk Museum of Schiedam to buy this collection? Chairman : Okay then, what does the committee think about this purchase? Of course it is still only a decision in principle, whereby we must also realize that this more or less involves our purchasing budget for a year. Meihuizen: I’ve already asked myself this evening whether it is right that we buy so much from one particular artist, or whether it is preferable to divide our interests and buy something from different artists? However, if I consider that through a remarkable coincidence – the fact that Appel has lent his earlier work in fact to Schiedam – we have the unique opportunity to secure an important acquisition for such a low and affordable price for us, then I have to say, we must grab the opportunity. I’m also in complete agreement that in this case certain advisors need to be involved, although I consider it redundant to consult these gentlemen on the general course we should follow as a museum, since this course has been set in motion and we have already been collecting according to this for several years. Curator: ‘I’ve been asking myself the question for a long time: can we actually do

1955 – 1965 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

327 what we do in our Schiedam museum? Can we hold on to our attempts to be a museum? And if we want to do that, what should we then do with the money, that extremely scant amount – for that is what it is – that is available to us for purchases? Should we buy something here and there, or specialize in a certain person, with all the risks that go with it? In the present case I would choose the latter, since we now have a possibility to purchase something that will markedly distinguish us from other museums. In fact, hardly anyone has Appel’s earlier work, not even the Amsterdam Stedelijk Museum. Anyone who would buy it also runs the risk of making their collection top heavy and bringing it into confusion. But in my view this danger does not lie in wait for us, for our collection isn’t a collection but a mixed bag, although one or two extremely fine pieces can be found within it. In the sense of owning a real collection we lag far behind other museums. If we now acquire something special, and something like an Appel, we do not catch up by so doing, but at least we achieve what I would term a ‘gain of tempo’. Whether Appel’s work in time to come will still be counted among the works of art of our time, or that it will be seen more as a curiosity by people, I cannot say. No definite answer can be given to this question for any modern artist. But what I do know is that this collection from Appel’s earlier work is quite remarkable as it shows in a unique manner where Appel’s art, among others via Van Gogh, stems from. With this collection at least we have a line from the pattern of contemporary art; we will never be able to acquire the entire pattern. Incidentally, the name Appel evokes bad feeling among various people and I can’t disguise the fact that when it is known that Schiedam has bought this collection this will invoke criticism here and there. Holl: Can a development be traced in the earlier work? Curator: Definitely, the entire development he underwent until his Paris period. From this period we already have something here, ‘The Wild Boy’, and perhaps we will have another opportunity to acquire something from him from the later work. Chairman: The attractive aspect of this purchase is that we acquire ownership of something with which we could be taken more seriously by our larger brothers. And with this collection we also acquire a fixed point from which, over time, we can supplement our collection from other directions. Holl: Is it not possible to show Appel’s development from only ten works? Curator: That’s quite a difficult question to answer. I have been looking over the collection several times and always my choice fell on the works I finally selected. These are indeed very typical of his development. And it is completely justifiable to buy them as Appel is now an important artist who stands out head and shoulders above his colleagues. From all the Dutch artists he is the only one with a truly international name. And I can give the undertaking that this work will often not be in Schiedam because many museums will want to exhibit it. Dirkzwager: In recent years we’ve always experienced difficulties in making the right choice for our purchasing budget. Now we have a unique opportunity to put this budget to highly favourable use and we should certainly do that. Meihuizen: Previously there was actually no line running through our collecting. The line has been there only for about four years. Now comes this marvellous opportunity which we should definitely make use of. I listened with delight to what the curator just said: this work will often be not at home. This means that the Schiedam museum can also contribute to the general attempt to show the

1955 – 1965 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

1959 – 1987 328

development of our modern art. And I don’t have any objection at all for using our entire budget for once on this project. Chairman: Assuming that the matter goes ahead, then we will have to inform the town council that we are tying up our budget for 1959 in this way. Holl: I’m still slightly hesitant to declare my endorsement for the entire plan, precisely based on what the curator has said. He gives the impression that he is unsure about this point and yet he is the professional. Otherwise why the experts? Chairman: In my view the curator doesn’t hesitate in his heart about the rightness of the purchase, that is apparent to me, but he wants absolute certainty and that is impossible with this material. No one can say with any certainty what the value of any contemporary artist’s work will be in the distant future. And the fact that the curator wishes to hear the experts is not because he himself feels unsure, but to help the committee form an opinion. For the moment this is nothing more than a decision in principle. Should the advisors’ opinion be radically dismissive then the entire purchase is cancelled. I now propose that we go and take a look sometime at the proposed purchase part of the loan. The Curator showed the relevant works by Appel in his new depot. The Committee was very enthusiastic and absolutely of the opinion that the works should definitely be purchased for Schiedam.

Museum committee minutes, 17 October 1958

The chairman read [...] a letter from Messrs Doelman and Schuurman. They declare their full agreement with the choice of 26 sheets of paper which the curator, for purposes of purchasing by the Stedelijk Museum in Schiedam, has made from works on loan to the museum by Karel Appel. They also consider the price extremely low. The committee agreed with the purchase. Museum committee minutes, 11 December 1958

1955 – 1965 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

329 The loan of works by Corneille and Asger Jorn ‘Borrowing is a more flexible form of possession’

Following his appointment in 1963, director Hans Paalman quickly turned his attention to contemporary art of the moment. The former Experimentalists have already become too expensive. Loaning something is one possibility, but a loan is an uncertain ‘possession’. From the loan of 24 works by Corneille that his predecessor Pierre Janssen had arranged, in 1964 and 1968 he can only acquire in total six works on paper. The remainder are to be returned. The same fate befell the extensive loan from the estate of Asger Jorn [1914–1973]. The loan and purchase of works by Corneille (1959–1984)

A proposal to accept with thanks from the artist Corneille, at Rue Broca 81, Paris, the loan of no fewer than 24 gouaches and watercolours from various periods of his development for an indeterminate period of time. The value of this loan for the Schiedam Museum is extremely high. In fact this series runs parallel to the one by Karel Appel [...]. From the museum committee minutes, meeting 28 May 1959

My dear Pierre Janssen, Thank you for your very kind letter. I’m very pleased to hear that the series of gouaches have been wellreceived (by yourself and other enthusiasts). At the time I took a few sheets out of my portfolio in order to show these at the Schiedam Museum (what has already happened), and it was never my intention to offer these for sale. In fact, I seem to remember having said this when I deposited the gouaches. You can certainly keep them for a long time, can you not? And for the time being it doesn’t really matter that much whether these sheets are really owned or only provisionally owned (borrowing is a more flexible form of possession – albeit temporary). My work has greatly evolved and, apart from a few more recent works, the work reveals the feeling and searching towards an expression, but which is strongly based on a reaction towards all previous movements (also it was searching for an expression which could certainly not be found in the Netherlands). The feeling and searching has not finished (loin de là, mon cher Janssen), but working is more towards a fullness, aimed towards a flowering, and doesn’t so much have rebellion as a starting point. (Also it used to be working with a number of like-minded painters. It is now alone that one works and grafts.) Voilá, loin des groupes, loin des chapelles, le peintre travaille aujourd’hui farouchement seul dans son atelier. We shortly hope to make a quick jaunt to Holland and will certainly look you up. Lots of work, kind regards, Corneille.

Letter from Corneille to Pierre Janssen, 16 November 1959

The Director wishes to inform you that Mr. Corneille is not prepared to sell certain works from those at present on loan to our museum. [...]

1959 – 1987 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

330 The Director has arranged with Mr. Corneille the contract for the loan: this has been signed by him. Everything was talked over in a convivial atmosphere. Mr. Corneille can always claim works from his loan at any time [...]. He has promised to think of Schiedam should he exhibit again in the Netherlands in future.

From the museum committee minutes, meeting, date unknown, 1963

Dear friend Corneille, [...] In particular I would have liked to have spoken to you about the extensive loan we have from you, a loan which we are still very happy about. [...] Although the museum has only a minimum budget for purchases, I would nonetheless like to talk to you some time about acquiring ownership of some of the works on loan. As you no doubt recall, in 1964 we already purchased one or two works from this loan. [...]

Letter from Hans Paalman to Corneille, 10 April 1984

Dear friend Corneille, Following the enjoyable conversation we had in your studio, I would like to thank you very much for allowing us to mention what we have on loan from you in the Cobra catalogue to be published at the end of the year [...] Naturally I understand that new circumstances may make it necessary that part [of the loan] may be offered for sale at some point. In that context I will try to raise funds in the nearby future to purchase from you three of the gouaches on loan for a reasonable price. This will cost a certain amount of time. As we have already agreed, this concerns the numbers 56, 60 and 61 from the to-be-published Cobra catalogue. I was thinking of a purchase price of 25,000 guilders for the three gouaches [...]

Letter from Hans Paalman to Corneille, 1 June 1984

At a certain point, Herman Krikhaar from the Krikhaar Gallery, Amsterdam, was at the door with a letter in his hand from Corneille and wanting to pick up the loaned works. I said: ‘That’s absolutely impossible.’ I had to think on my feet, so I said: ‘I have to consult the city council and a bailiff has to be here before we can make a transfer.’ That was nonsense of course. I then phoned the chairman and said, ‘It is now Thursday afternoon, tonight I’m getting the train to Paris and in the morning I’ll be at Corneille’s door with the photos of the gouaches in my hand.’ Meanwhile, I’d phoned Edy de Wilde [...] he was on the Rembrandt Society [art-funding organization], and he said, ‘You can buy three.’ I then went to Corneille and said, ‘Listen here now, this is all nonsense, and I want to buy that one and that one and that one for a reasonable price’ [...] And after much protest Corneille finally agreed. [...] The remainder still went to Herman Krikhaar and were sold at the FIAC and other art fairs. From an unpublished interview with Hans Paalman by Klawa Koppenol, 30 November 2002

1959 – 1987 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

The loan of works by Asger Jorn (1979 – 1987)

In a large vault in Paris were works by [Asger] Jorn, and Matie [Jorn-van Domselaer] had the keys to this. She could take some of them out, but obviously there was absolutely no documentation. And that was actually not allowed in any case as Jorn’s Danish family were also trying to get their hands on them. You have that all the time with artists. You had that with Wolvecamp and with Kees van Bohemen. As soon as more women and children are involved, forget it. That won’t amount to anything. Anyhow, Matie visited [the museum] a couple of times and said she wanted to give something on loan: ‘Come to Paris and pick it up.’ But obviously we couldn’t do that officially as there were no papers. So I said, ‘I’ll come in my car.’ At the time I was still living with Else Mulder, my wife, who is also a painter, and together we went to pick up the work from the vault in Paris. We had arranged to meet Matie at the bank. [...] We then went to that huge vault. [...] We then chose several works. I had taken sheets and blankets with me. We put the paintings in these and parcelled them up. We then said: ‘As soon as we’re outside we’ll hail a cab, take them to the hotel and then put them in the car again and bring the packaged paintings back to the Netherlands.’ Matie replied: ‘We shouldn’t draw attention to the fact that we’re taking the paintings.’ So we had to wrap them up so that you didn’t really notice they were huge paintings. When we were ready, I thought: ‘Let me now phone the official so that he can open the door for us. I then pressed a button, but it turned out to be the alarm. The entire vault was then sealed off and outside a policeman was waiting and everything. Anyhow, we finally had the items in the hotel. Else had taken watercolours with her and she painted over all Jorn’s signatures and added her own, as we had to take into account that we could be stopped at the border. And of course we were, since that always happens to me. So I said to Else: ‘You drive and I’ll just sit like this with an interested expression. Well, there we are held up by customs and they looked in at the back of the car, ‘What’s this?’ they asked. Els replied, ‘Those are paintings, I’m a painter and those paintings have been in France.’ The official looked as if to say, oh okay, and then told us to drive on. And then we were home! We then set about cleaning [the paintings again] and that was easy as it wasn’t real paint but watercolour. So everything worked out fine in the end. At a certain point Matie came and said: ‘Everything has now got to go to Gerlach [transporters of fine art] and from there I’m going to sell it.’ And what she did then with the works, I don’t know [...] We were unable to buy anything from what was taken, since there was absolutely no question of saying: Jesus, can’t we buy something, somehow or other. From an unpublished interview with Hans Paalman by Klawa Koppenol, 30 November 2002

1959 – 1987 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

331

1979 332 The Schiedam museum row KLAWA KOPPENOL

More than with any other affair, the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam gained national recognition in the Netherlands through the so-called Schiedam museum row. It all started with two young committee members of the Schiedam branch of the PvdA (the Dutch Labour Party), Hans Bakker and Hans Konings sent a memo to the socialist city councillors on 26 February 1976 in which they proposed to abolish the exhibition function of the museum and sell the entire art collection. According to the two writers, with the proceeds, estimated then at approximately four million guilders or a million and half-dollars, one would then be able to finance the funding of community centres. Rejected summarily by the PvdA councillors the memo nonetheless created a storm of criticism and indignation. By their own account, Bakker and Konings wanted to initiate a discussion about the policy of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam. In their view, this public facility attracted far too few visitors with its expensive exhibitions. In addition, the wrong kind at that, as they were mostly from the well to do sections of society. A poor municipality like Schiedam had to prioritize its resources and goals. For Bakker and Konings there was a greater need for a cultural centre with a program appealing to a broad audience than for a museum – which received a subsidy of nine-hundred thousand guilders from the city – that served only ‘the establishment’.1 In fact, they pointed out, the 1978 platform of the Municipal Executive stated expressly that the policy of the city concerning Welfare and Culture needed to concentrate upon disadvantaged groups and individuals. The museum should direct itself towards the interests and desires of the whole population, towards the everyday life of all Schiedammers.2 One of the motivations for Bakker and Konings to write a memo about the future of the museum was its plan of establishing an annex in De Lindenhof, an abandoned orphanage. Hardly ever on view during temporary exhibits, the museum’s historical and archaeological collection was to be housed in this building. However, an extension would require, of course, an extra investment by the city.3 Bakker and Konings were more in favour of a reorientation of the museum rather than an extension. After all, several basic problems and developments had arisen already in the years previous that seemed to demand a fundamentally profound change of cultural policy. Throughout the Netherlands, the position of museums in society had been officially under debate ever since 1976. That was when the Minister for Cultural Affairs, Recreation and Social Welfare, Van Doorn, had published his policy document Naar een nieuwe museumbeleid [Toward a New Museum Policy]. The national government had not produced and issued an integral document on museum policy for more than fifty years – not since the 1923 report of the Government Advisory Committee on the subject of the Reorganization of the Museums in the Netherlands. Therefore, the 1976 document, more an inventory and survey of various viewpoints and positions than a policy paper with one clear vision or view, penetrated the isolation in which the museum world had cocooned itself for a long time. The main issue of the discussion was the social legitimacy of museums, after all largely dependent on public funds. This debate concentrated around the question: Which of the museum’s tasks need to be emphasized? Collecting? Conserving? Presentation? Education? Throughout the nation, the participants in this

1979 THE SCHIEDAM MUSEUM ROW

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

333 discussion roughly fell into two camps. There were those who took the collection as their starting point and basic principle. There were those who considered the public-oriented and audience-aimed function of the museum as its most important responsibility.4 This division would be clearly evident in Schiedam too. Museum director Paalman’s supporters praised his exhibition and acquisition policies. His opponents called for a museum that would be flexible and that could accommodate the needs and wishes of the local population.5 Furthermore, the relations between the museum and the city of Schiedam had been growing tense in the preceding years. Criticisms of Paalman’s policy were sounded in the museum committee. Moreover, because the meetings of this committee had been opened to the public since the beginning of the 1970s, these critical notes also reached the ears of a broader public. On top of that, the director had not written any required annual reports about the museum since 1974. Nor had he complied with the frequent requests of alderman Herman Posthoorn to draft a policy paper for the future.6 PvdA councillors had already accused Paalman of incompetence. In December 1978, during the budget debates, they had taken the initiative to freeze the museum’s acquisition budget for 1979 and/or until both the policy paper and the annual reports were presented, at last.7 Then there was also the matter of a personal conflict between Paalman and Chris Zijdeveld, the PvdA alderman for Urban Planning and Environmental Affairs. Zijdeveld was thwarted in his attempt to display a purely technical exhibition about indoor heating and thermal insulation in the entrance-hall of the museum, as part of a more socially oriented exhibition policy. Initially the substance of Bakker’s and Konings’ memo was rejected by the PvdA councillors of Schiedam but resulted, nonetheless, in a lot of uproar and indignation in the local and national press. Alleged cultural barbarism of the PvdA was attacked and generally deplored, supposedly particularly obvious in the philistine conduct of alderman Zijdeveld.8 For even considering the now notorious memo, Schiedam city council received letters of protest from important official groups, among others, the Netherlands Museum Association and the Dutch Federation of Artists’ Associations. Declarations of support appearing in the newspapers also demonstrated that in the Dutch art world there was great appreciation for the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam and Paalman’s policy.9 In the end even Joop den Uyl, parliamentary leader of the

2 3 4 5

6 7 8 9

H. Bakker, H. Konings, Notitie betreffende het museum en haar kosten, February 1979, and Open brief aan de heer Paalman, directeur van het Stedelijk Museum te Schiedam, 13 March 1979. S MS (Stedelijk Museum Schiedam) box 92:-1.8531 (1978/1984) SMS Directeurenoverleg M 0363, Basis voor het beleid van het college van B&W van Schiedam voor de periode 1978-1982, pp. 34-37. H. Bakker, H. Konings, op. cit., February 1979; W. Stokvis, ‘Museumdirecteur in Schiedam zijn betekent vechten tegen de bierkaai’, Haagse Courant, 18 April 1979; GAS (Schiedam Municipal Archives), Minutes of the museum committee, 4 October 1973, 22 January 1974, 2 February 1976, 22 June 1976. J. Vaessen, Op zoek naar legitimiteit. Een analyse van de Nederlandse museumdiscussie 1974–1979, Tilburg 1979, pp. 10-11. In a subsequent memorandum Bakker and Konings referred specifically both to the policy document of Minister Van Doorn and to the paper Kunstbeleid in Rotterdam by the Rotterdam alderman for culture, Jan Riezekamp. See: H. Bakker, H. Konings, Museum: niet (voor u) weggelegd!? Een tweede notitie over Schiedams museumbeleid, geschreven door Hans Bakker, mede ondersteund door Hans Konings, April 1979. GAS, Minutes of the museum committee, 1 November 1977. T. de Vos, ‘Politiek en kunst, gedrang op de (hoge) drempel van het Stedelijk Museum Schiedam’, Museumjournaal, XXIV (1979) no. 4 (June), p. 182. See for example: G. Komrij, ‘Het een en ander’, NRC Handelsblad, 28 March 1979. Letters of the Nederlandse Museumvereniging and the Federatie van Kunstenaarsverenigingen in in the Archive of the Committee for Education and Recreation, Documental Information Service, City of Schiedam; W. Stokvis, ‘Museumdirecteur in Schiedam zijn betekent vechten tegen de bierkaai’, Haagse Courant, 18 April 1979; Ph. Peters, ‘Schiedams museumdirecteur Paalman: “Kunst heeft geen functie in de maatschappij. Het is meer het zout in de pap”’, De Tijd, 13 April 1979, pp. 52-53; F. Duister, ‘Hans Paalman, directeur omstreden Stedelijk Museum van Schiedam: “Het wezen van de kunst is vrij”. Collectie bewijst gelijk museum’, Het Parool, 24 August 1979.

1979 THE SCHIEDAM MUSEUM ROW

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

334

After the museum row, calls grow louder in Schiedam to exhibit the CoBrA collection on a permanent basis. The museum plays into this with this announcement of the summer show of its own collection in 1981. It reads: ‘Is CoBrA still in Schiedam?’.

1979 THE SCHIEDAM MUSEUM ROW

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

335 PvdA, found it necessary to go to the media and defend socialist cultural policy, yet at the same time condemning the action of Bakker and Konings.10 Thus, the Schiedam museum row sparked off within the ranks of the socialists a review and reconsideration of culture in society and a relevant cultural policy.11 Developments in Schiedam gained additional momentum because of the national uproar. By the end of April 1979, museum director Paalman and alderman Posthoorn had completed the Museumnota als uitgangspunt voor een discussie [Museum Memorandum as a Starting Point for Discussion]. This document was discussed extensively at two well-attended public evenings in May 1979. Incorpor ating the comments voiced at these meetings, the director and the alderman presented another report Kunst is het zout in de pap [Art is the Spice of Life] in January 1980, admitting the museum’s attention had been focused on too limited an audience. From now on, the policy of the museum would be geared to a larger public, and in part to a less expert audience. The extensive Museumnota, defining and determining the policy of the museum for the future, was published eventually in 1982. One of the immediate and direct consequences of this row for the policy of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, was a shift of attention to its instructional task. The educational service of the museum was redefined and ascribed an important, popularizing role in narrowing the gap between the museum and the general population of the town. The exhibition and acquisition budgets were cut. The educational, public-oriented, and audience-aimed functions were given additional allocations. Strengthening the relationship and connection between the museum and Schiedam, there would have to be more exhibitions about local history. At the same time, in the purchasing of art works, preference would be given to works of local or regional artists. The Schiedam museum row also resulted in a renewed interest in the museum’s collection, the CoBrA acquisitions in particular. When selling-off all the municipal art collection was proposed, the Schiedam Tourist Office responded by repeatedly making out a case to the Mayor and Aldermen for a permanent display of the CoBrA art works. They argued that this might be able to attract a lot of visitors to the museum.12 The 1980 report Kunst is het zout in de pap had advocated the establishment of an open depot. This to give the public access to the museum’s complete collection,13 a recommendation adopted in the 1982 Museumnota. The open depository, containing among others all of the CoBrA art works, was completed in 1985. In addition, the Museumnota stipulated the restoration of a number of CoBrA holdings as well as the publication of a CoBrA catalogue.14 Both projects were realized finally in 1984.

10 ‘Joop den Uyl: “Kunst heeft ook een functie als er geen hond komt kijken”’, Schiedamse Courant, 13 July 1979. 11 In 1982 this review and reconsideration resulted in the study De kunst van het socialisme. Beschouwingen over kunst- en kultuurbeleid, published by the Cultural and Educational Policy study-group of the Wiardi Beckman Foundation, headed by Yvonne van Baarle, Deventer, 1982. 12 City of Schiedam, Documental Information Service, Archive of the Committee for Education and Recreation, Appendices minutes of the museum committee, 1979; Letter of Tourist Office director Pillard to the Mayor and Aldermen: ‘Tourist Office wants a permanent display of Cobra works as a draw’, Rotterdams Nieuwsblad, 17 April 1981. 13 H. Paalman, H. Posthoorn, Kunst is het zout in de pap, Schiedam, January 1980. 14 Museumnota, City of Schiedam, August 1982, pp. 7, 10, 11, 13, 17, 19.

1979 THE SCHIEDAM MUSEUM ROW

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

1979 – 1982 336 New appreciation of CoBrA ‘A most unique collection’

Two memoranda from PvdA [Labour] party members, Hans Bakker and Hans Konings, about Schiedam Museum’s policy opened a Pandora’s box. While democratization of the museum was intended, widespread indignation concerning the proposed sale of the collection was the effect. In Schiedam came the realization that the CoBrA collection was a valuable cultural heritage and this again translated into a commotion – this time over the state of the collection. The definitive CoBrA expert, Willemijn Stokvis, reported on this in detail, but more important locally was the great art historical worth she attributed, en passant, to the collection. Upgrading to a tourist and educational attraction lay on the horizon. Two memoranda on the museum’s policy (1979)

A memorandum concerning the museum and its expenditure It will no doubt be regarded as an act of cultural barbarity, but the undersigned feel it is high time to launch a debate about maintaining the most expensive showpiece in Schiedam – its museum. By that, people shouldn’t imagine that a negative result from considering the pros and cons will lead to the museum closing tomorrow and to it being counted among Schiedam’s other unoccupied monuments. [...]

1. Schiedam is a poor city. A thousand-and-one items are filed under the priority scheme, a list of (still to this day) unfulfilled wished. [...] When considering the museum’s exhibition duties, the undersigned would give a very low priority to their preservation. Why? 2. Between 1973–1977 the number of visitors was 45,462 on average. Relatively speaking, this is not only an extremely low return on the financial investment, but it winds up with the probably somewhat higher income groups, which because of the advantages they have within the education system show more interest in abstract art [...] 3. Dispensing with the exhibition duty makes it possible to sell the museum’s own collection, a collection estimated at four million guilders (= how many neighbourhood centres?) kept rock solid invested. This kind of investment is somewhat at odds for a city jumping at the bit for any cash flow. Conclusion: it is recommended to convert the museum into a cultural centre in which there is no place anymore for today’s expensive exhibition organizing, and in which a mixture of enterprises from active culture and the cheaper forms of passive culture, like exhibitions of amateur art, municipal or regional historical exhibitions, technical focused projects (for example the planned insulation exhibition), in short anything of interest for a wider general public, have a platform [...]. But remember, this move doesn’t mean that the entire 900,000 guilders is available to spend as one wants. If the reconsideration of the museum’s role leads to a good cultural

1979 – 1982 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

337 centre, then the money could well be spent on that. [...] A not-to-be-scorned side effect is the one-off proceeds of the sale of the collection, estimated at four million guilders.

From a memorandum from Hans Bakker and Hans Konings to the PvdA council group, February 1979

Museum: not intended for you!? A second memorandum about Schiedams museum policy, written by Hans Bakker with Hans Konings’ support. Introduction Our first memorandum concerning the costs of the museum was born out of dissatisfaction with its policy. [...] The reactions from political circles were mixed – both positive and negative. What surprised and disappointed us most was the scant willingness of certain PvdA party members to consider existing values critically. After all, to do that represents the very essence and being of socialism. In short, it appears that a follow-up memorandum was necessary. [...] We are under the impression that museums often absolve themselves from their social context (there he goes again). Artists perhaps as well. Certainly, it is a good socialist principle to support groups who are productive in a particular sector that doesn’t function all that well within the prevailing supply-and-demand model. These groups, including artists, have to be assured of a reasonable existence. That is a right, but also a privilege. You then ask yourself what do the artists have as an objective? And those artists who with their products in no way reach broad groups of the general public, are they not incredibly frustrated? Why don’t they do something about it? If you have something to say, why doesn’t it touch you if no one listens? But let’s return to the museum. The objective and policy in relation to the general public is in any case politically determined. Although [...] until now what is exhibited is hardly ever judged within a political framework. That has only been changing in recent years – you no longer look at the art for its intrinsic value, but from what it ‘does’ for the general public [...] The collection The requested sale of the museum’s own collection caused much commotion. The request, however, cannot be separated from a changed museum policy. A collection only has a point if you want do something with it. That ‘doing something’ also has to fit in with the objectives. Simply ‘having’ a collection has absolutely no purpose and socialists, moreover, have little concern for acquisitions. The fact that it would be considered barbaric to sell the Cobra collection because it is unique is nonsense. Also simply having a Cobra collection serves no purpose. This is quite separate from the fact that if possibly selling you can best aim to keep this unique collection together. Nowhere did we suggest burning these artworks or

1979 – 1982 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

The Memorandum by PvdA (Labour Party) members Hans Bakker and Hans Konings about policy for the Schiedam museum elicits a great deal of commotion in local, regional and national newspapers. The effect of the so-called museum row is extraordinarily negative. Not only is the culture policy of the socialists heavily criticized, but the city of Schiedam and even the museum – which was adamantly opposed to selling the collection – through no fault of their own bear the epithet of ‘cultural barbarians’ for years to come.

340 putting them with the household refuse. In the museum collection a certain amount of money has been invested. Again it is a question of weighing the pros and cons, whether you find that a more meaningful way of spending than another. Again by a negative response the choice is between no collection or a better collection. The acquisition budget should be spent in a well-considered manner, as part of a total policy and total objective. In our view this money should be spent in the first instance on buying and conserving products related to Schiedam’s cultural history. The government is the guardian of culture and cultural history, and if the Schiedam local government does not preserve Schiedam’s heritage, then who will? The remaining acquisition budget – and that can always be higher – should be spent, as we have already said, within the context of the objectives. Where the same thing can be exhibited without being purchased, then this should have priority. [...] It can also be said that in the heat of a discussion there are sometimes black and white arguments. As far as we’re concerned, of course there can remain space in the Schiedam Museum for experimental and abstract art. But then in somewhat more scrupulous, proportionate measures. On the one hand, there should be as much space for exhibitions about comic strips (once fiercely contested, now the standard bearer of modern museum policy) as about heating insulation. In short: the museum is not a temple anymore, but accessible to everyone.

From a memorandum from Hans Bakker and Hans Konings to the PvdA council group, April 1979

The Stokvis report (1980)

Report regarding the state of the Cobra collection of the Stedelijk Museum in Schiedam, i.e. around 60 art works from the museum’s own collection and around 28 on loan, produced by painters who were members of the Cobra movement (excluding the recent loan of works by Asger Jorn), and which are in the museum. Drawn up by Dr. W.L. Stokvis at the behest of Mr. J. Paalman, director of the Schiedam Museum. I, the undersigned, declare being surprised by the general excellent condition of the relevant art works, in view of the fact that: during this early period of their development the Cobra painters, due to their impoverished state, often used inferior canvas and paint. They very often used straightforward household paint. ‘Decorator’s paint ground with thick oil from Vettewinkel [paint manufacturers], supplied in large pots and immense tubes in a limited colour series. The colour and durability of the work from that time was directly determined by this,’ a contemporary and friend of the group, Frank Gribling, wrote me on 9 March, 1975. Also from others and from they themselves of course, I was told about the materials they used in that difficult early period. Their poverty was the reason they so often applied the gouache technique. For that they often

1979 – 1982 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

used large cheap pots of Eta paint – decorative paint from Talens. Despite this background, the oil paintings from the Schiedam Cobra collection, including the works that have been loaned for some time, reveal no deficiencies, in my view, other than what can generally occur with oil paintings of this age. One painting by Anton Rooskens (S/84) shows cracks in the paint – a small piece of paint even broke off. However, this had already been noticed by the museum staff and the painting will shortly, I presume, be treated by a restorer. Over the years on this canvas an effect has occurred between the paint and support. The reason for this can be twofold: on the one hand the technique used by the artist to make the work, on the other, the unfavourable conditions in which the canvas was stored in the Schiedam depot. The Schiedam Museum depot can only be described as extremely primitive. In the present quarters it is impossible to keep the space in which the art works are stored at the required constant temperature and humidity [...] The gouaches are an entirely different matter

With several of the gouaches, particularly those by Karel Appel, extreme caution must be exercised and for the following reasons: Until 1949 Appel carried out all kinds of experiments on paper, in which he was searching for his own style, but had evidently not yet found. There was a great deal to see of this period at the Schiedam Museum, when a large part of Appel’s earlier work was still in storage there as a friendly gesture to the artist before he finally came to pick it up. Appel worked a lot with various layers of gouache (poster paint) placed over each other. This produced a beautiful effect when the underlayers were visible in places through the upper layer. However, with gouache this is an extremely vulnerable technique. The gouache becomes hard and crumbles where it has no grip on the paper. This process is now visible in a large number of Appel’s early gouaches that are in the Schiedam Museum’s possession. These gouaches should really be preserved flat – restoration is no longer possible. They should not be lent out anymore and when exhibited shown in glass cases. [...] Among a few gouaches I believe I also detected damp patches between the glass of the frame and the paper of the gouache [...] A process probably caused by damp (i.e. improper conservation) has occurred in the gouache S/95 ‘La belle journée’ (1950) by Corneille. This work painted on board appears to be entirely covered with stains associated with ‘weathering’. Also possible here is the effect of a poor kind of glue from the board on the gouache. Whatever the case, nothing anymore can be done about it. The process can only be halted. The entire damp problem, I fear, can be blamed on the circumstances in which these works are stored. Something needs to be done about this quickly. At any rate the works mentioned here behind glass need to be removed. [...]

1979 – 1982 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

341

342 General advice: By again looking at the Cobra collection in Schiedam, I realized

that this is nevertheless a most unique collection in which the early period of the Cobra artists is so well represented. In my view this collection already has important historical value and for that reason it is advisable to be careful with it. At the same time, interest is only increasing for Cobra at the moment, and it is to be applauded that so many possible people can become acquainted with these works. For these reasons I would recommend that not all requests for loans are met, but to make a conscious choice according to degree of importance. Moreover, the vulnerable gouaches by Appel should absolutely not be lent out anymore. In itself this is not such a very bad thing as these gouaches chiefly belong to the very early work in which the ‘Cobra idiom’ has still not broken through. So in my opinion, for a general overview of Cobra work between 1948 and 1951 it isn’t entirely necessary to show these works. Appel’s real Cobra vocabulary begins to come through in the well-preserved gouaches like ‘Small Man with the Sun’ (S/12 1947) and ‘Organ Grinder’ (S/28 1947). [...] Moreover, it is obviously recommended that something is done about improving the depot as quickly as possible. As far as the oil paintings are concerned, the old frames could be exchanged for new ones – although the old are nevertheless well-loved as they were generally made by the artists themselves. At any rate the frames should be monitored sometime concerning the matter of whether they seal off the canvases properly and whether any rusty nails are doing any unnecessary damage. From a report on the condition of the CoBrA collection written by Dr. Willemijn Stokvis, 6 October 1980

Letter from the Schiedam Tourist Office (1981)

Dear Councillors, It is generally known that Schiedam is famous for its gin industry. Many are working hard to make the history of Schiedam, which is often closely tied up with said industry, more widely known. There is however something else that can contribute to making Schiedam better known and a travel destination for a not unimportant group. We allude here to the world-famous Cobra collection. Our Tourist Office board is of the opinion that such a unique and famous collection should be on permanent exhibition. It would undoubtedly be a valuable allure for the Schiedam ‘product’. We urgently request the council to promote the fact that by permanently exhibiting the Cobra collection this would add to the number of important things worth seeing with which our city is blessed. [...]

Letter from R.H. Pillard, director of Schiedam Tourist Office to the municipal council, 5 February 1981. ‘Fantastic idea which in my view deserves much support’ and ‘It seems that “some” discussion is needed with the museum’, were written reactions in the letter’s margin from the aldermen for Financial-Economic Affairs and Transport & Recreation, respectively.

1979 – 1982 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

343 Museumnota [Museum Memorandum] (1982)

Various incidents that occurred were the reasons why an increasingly urgent need arose in Schiedam for a clear and well-founded museum policy [...] The main objectives are described as follows: – the museum’s social policy is aimed at creating possibilities to provide equal chances to everyone in order to develop and evolve. In particular, attention is focused on disadvantaged groups; – the museum’s educational policy is aimed at creating conditions that stimulate a process of awareness in people. Conditions whereby people can develop themselves in an emotional sense, whereby they can sharpen their perceptions, their sense of seeing and listening, thereby developing their creative and associative thinking; – the museum’s stimulation policy is aimed at increasing the possibilities to relax in a spiritual manner. What is chiefly meant by that is the innovative cultural and experimental roles of the museum. [...] Collection

The collection policy should be in keeping with the museum’s objectives, and support these objections. There are various possible arguments to justify acquisitions. However, from the viewpoint of policy objectives it is necessary to draw up criteria. If these criteria are too broad, they become too free of any obligation. Partly based on the fact that the Stedelijk Museum’s purchase budget is extremely modest, any possible acquisition should be carefully subjected to an assessment. [...] In view of the fact that the Cobra collection presents a reasonably cohesive and well-rounded picture (besides which it is financially impossible, seeing the price of the works, to still expand the collection), we consider this part of the collection closed and therefore there is no need to continue collecting. Catalogue

A general descriptive catalogue for the entire collection is still lacking. However, there is no urgent priority to publish one for the time being, seeing that there is scant public interest for this. Much greater is the need for a catalogue in volumes, each of which covers a part of the collection. In particular a catalogue about the Cobra collection is highly desirable, if not necessary, considering the important place this part of the collection has within the museum’s total collection. As far as the attendant costs are concerned, the catalogue can be considered 100 per cent cost-effective (in the long term) due to the huge demand. Conservation

Regarding the Cobra collection the municipal council takes the view that the conservation of this has the highest priority, when we are talking about conservation in the sense of carrying out necessary restoration activities [...]

1979 – 1982 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

344 As regards the earlier mentioned duties regarding the collection and duties to the general public, we come to the following conclusions: [...] As far as the archaeological collection is concerned, a permanent educational display could be considered; the Cobra collection should also be developed educationally. Regarding this part of the collection more possibilities are conceivable, aimed at both individuals and groups, both in the form of small to more extensive temporary exhibitions, as well as in the form of catalogues aimed at different target groups. Also the realization of the already mentioned open depot directly influences possibilities with, and based on, the Cobra collection.

From the 1982 Museum Memorandum

1979 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 1982 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

345

The Museum Memorandum of 1982, in which the museum translates the criticisms of past years into new policy, results in the city council’s loan of 37,000 guilders to the museum to make possible the production of a CoBrA catalogue. The catalogue (left), compiled by Josine Bokhoven, is published that same year and totals 127 items, yet is almost immediately out-ofdate: in 1986 and in 1987 loans by Corneille and by the Jorn estate, respectively, are returned. To mark the catalogue’s publication the exhibition ‘Cobra in the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam’ opens in late 1984, in which the museum displays for the first time – and thus also for the last! – the entire collection as written up.

1979 – 1982 SOURCES

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Overview of the hall of the exhibition ‘Cobra in the Stedelijk Museum of Schiedam’, 1984

Piet van Dalen, restorer for Art Conservation, with a painting by Lucebert

The conservation of works on paper in the CoBrA collection PIET VAN DALEN, TANIA HAPPEL AND JAN STOKMANS (ART CONSERVATION BV)

349

Art Conservation, studio for restoration and conservation

Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage in Amsterdam.

researches and develops modern techniques in the field of

Once the results of this study were known, the work of

passive and active conservation. Our studio specializes in

conservation could begin.

work on paper, ranging from the restoration of books to Three Heads and Standing Figure

large posters; as a result of years of experience, however, various other disciplines have been added. For the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, Art Conservation has conserved all the

Both gouaches are painted on machine-made paper that

art works on paper and also the documents and archive

presumably had already been painted. The top layer shows

records in the CoBrA collection. In the context of the CoBrA

cracking and paint flakes, especially in places where the

Collection Conservation Project a number of paintings,

paint layer is extremely thick. Analysis with the aid of a

textiles and a sculpture have been conserved and the

microscope showed that the image seemed to rest on the

studio has given advice with regard to the passive

ground like dried clay. Gouache is a sort of paint that,

conservation of the collection.

besides pigments, consists of a large amount of filler such as barium sulphate or chalk, a small amount of a binder

CoBrA artists produced their work without in the first

such as gum arabic and a plasticizer in the form of

instance paying much heed to the lasting character of the

glycerine. The quantities of filler and binder have

materials and techniques adopted. The conservation of

implications for the behaviour of the paint in both the short

CoBrA work therefore gives rise to specific problems. It

and the long term. During application too much filler and/

was necessary to find a suitable manner of restoration and

or too little binder give rise to early cracks in the paint layer.

conservation for the gouaches and pastel drawings, the

These early cracks are recognizable from their coarse

chief requirement being that no visual changes should

structure. Later craquelures, cracks in mature paint are

occur in the original.

often finer in structure. In both Three Heads and Standing

Little research appears to have been done into the damage

Figure one can see early cracks; these must have come

resulting from the way that CoBrA artists made their

about during and shortly after the object was made. One

gouaches and pastel drawings. They employed a layer-on-

reason for this is that the last colour applied in Standing

layer technique by which they often also worked on a

Figure (purple) has spilt over into the craquelure. Because

ground that was still wet. A foundation of pastel was also

there was little binding with the ground, the layer of paint

used, something that can give rise to problems of binding

also began to become (partially) unstuck, with loose paint

with the upper layer. Moreover they often painted both

particles as a result.

sides of a sheet. The gouaches in the collection of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam displayed very fine craquelures

Because the choice of materials to restore the damage is

in the upper layer or layers, leading to substantial paint

very much dependent on the components of the paint, Art

loss. The museum has asked the restorers when and how

Conservation decided to ask the Netherlands Institute for

the cracking came about and they were especially anxious

Cultural Heritage to analyze a number of pigment particles.

to find a way of putting a stop to this process.

This analysis was intended to provide an answer to the

The restorers proposed to make a study of the literature on

question of what binder was used in the white paint (the

the subject and to draw up a conservation plan on that

image layer) and the green layer (the ground) of Three

basis. After the plan was approved, a trial project was

Heads. The research was limited because there was little

embarked on, with the choice for treatment falling on

research material available about how to prevent further

Three Heads by Karel Appel (see p. 41). After a quick scan,

damage occurring to the works. Apart from the presence

the damage to a number of gouaches proved not to be

of gum arabic, the most significant result was the discovery

identical. To obtain certainty about the conservation

of significant quantities of linseed oil. It is still a question

method to follow, a second gouache was also included in

then of gouache paint â&#x20AC;&#x201C; that is paint with a water basis.

the project: Standing Figure, also by Appel and dating

The presence of linseed oil might explain the poor binding

from 1948 (see p. 52â&#x20AC;&#x201C;53). Both objects were analyzed and

of some of the layers of paint, and this might have had an

it was decided, partly as a result of the literature study, to

impact on the conservation of the works. With the aid of a

carry out a pigment study; this was contracted out to the

binocular microscope, it was determined that the glossy

CONSERVATION OF WORKS ON PAPER

CoBrA

the colour of freedam

350 character that is typical of white and green paint is comparable with that of the purple and green paint in Standing Figure. On the basis of this discovery it was presumed that the gum used in it also contained linseed oil. Traditionally linseed oil is used in oil paint as a binder, because this oil dries quicker than any others. During the drying process, the oil absorbs the oxygen in the air and thus becomes gradually thick and firm. Raw linseed oil however dries poorly and is therefore used for preserving used paint brushes to prevent them drying out. When it is thinly smeared, raw linseed oil dries in three to five days to First experimental arrangement to treat the gouache Three Heads (1948) by Karel Appel in a climate-controlled room

form an elastic, glossy and transparent layer. We can only guess at why the gouaches of Karel Appel contain linseed oil. It is possible that he always kept his brushes in it, which would explain why there was only a very small amount of it in the gouache. He may also have added it to the gouache to obtain a better binding with the ground and/or to obtain a creamy paint that is easy to spread. Seeing that a gouache contains gum as a binder, it is possible to include small amounts in linseed oil in gouache, that is water-based. It may of course be so that Appel had some remnants of oil paint with a base of linseed oil on his palette which he then mixed with the gouache. Figures in the Wood Figures in the Wood by Karel Appel is done in pastel crayons and gouache (see p. 79). A striking feature of this object, as also of other objects where Appel has used pastels, was the greasy white deposit on the inside of the glass placed immediately over the passe-partout. There was a deposit in those parts where the object was in contact with the glass. There did not appear to be any connection between the place where the deposit on the glass was present and the colour of the pastel crayon underneath. At first sight there seemed to be more deposit on the black and blue areas than on the orange and yellow ones. Temperature and relative humidity (RH) were measured in the depository of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam over a period of nine months in 1997–1998. It appeared that the RH varied between 36.8% to 53.7%, while the temperature ranged from 14.5°C to 30.3°C. Assuming that these fluctuations were not limited to the nine months of the study, the paint would have dried out, resulting in cracks.

Three Heads (1948) and Small Child with Flowers (1947) by Karel Appel in a specially made humidity cabinet. The cabinet can be closed off with the aid of strips of glass. The part that is being worked on remains free. The binocular microscope can be seen behind

Perhaps due to changing and often unfavourable circumstances, tensions occurred between the paper base

CONSERVATION OF WORKS ON PAPER

CoBrA

the colour of freedam

351

gloss should be allowed to occur on a surface that was

concentration of the solution of methocel was boosted

originally mat. The difference between a mat and glossy

from 0.25% to 0.3% to increase effectivity. The reinforcing

surface is a visual effect resulting from the amount of

was increased with filter paper in order to absorb the

binder in the paint. The gumming that is thus introduced

superfluous moisture more rapidly. Larger loose paint

under the paint flakes, and also between and on them,

particles were treated with a brush and a 1% solution,

may cause the mat surface to become glossy and

which proved more effective than the ultrasonic mister.

discoloured. The thinner the gum and the smoother the

As in the case of Three Heads and Standing Figure, the

spreading when it is applied, the smaller the risk of this

porous ground was first of all saturated with a thin solution

phenomenon occurring. Research and experience have

of methocel in order to consolidate the poorly binding

shown that it is necessary to work in a climate-controlled

upper layer with a somewhat thicker solution. The pale

room. With a high RH the gum will evaporate slowly and

blue particles thus treated, proved considerably darker after

form an even layer, whereas with a low RH, the gum

treatment and corresponded to the blue colour of the non-

evaporates rapidly and the consolidant will be drawn to the

powdery parts.

surface. In addition to the high RH, the object has to be Jan Elburg

moist to ensure a more thorough penetration of the consolidant. It is important that the object does not dry too fast if the consolidant is to penetrate effectively.

One of the untitled gouaches by Jan Elburg that was

As a result of a symposium on the restoration of CoBrA

treated, dates from 1952 (see p. 162-163). Microscopic

work held in Schiedam in 1999, the method used earlier by

research seemed to indicate that he had first applied the

Art Conservation was revised and applied in the way

black gouache and left the white areas open. This was only

described above for the gouache, Figures in the Wood.

partially the case because in a number of places one can

The object was placed in a specially made humidity

see white gouache/pastel. It is possible that he did leave

cabinet. The RH was boosted to 75% and the cabinet was

the white areas open, making them larger by scraping

left open to prevent any precipitation of damp on the

away some of the black gouache. One can clearly see a

object. After moistening, the pale blue particles were

number of scraped edges where in fact one would expect

treated a number of times with a 0.25% solution of

to see an overrunning of gouache. The colours green, red,

methocel a-4-c, applied with the ultrasonic mister, an

blue and purple that were used to colour in the white areas

apparatus that converts the fluid into steam or mist

were presumably done in pastel crayon. On the spots

particles with ultrasonic vibrations. It was striking that if the

where the black gouache was laid on thick, cracking has

nozzle was held vertical, more drops remained on the

occurred.

object than when it was used at an angle or even

The object was moistened and treated in the same way as

horizontally. It is vital that the drops of methocel do not get

Figures in the Wood. A reaction that we had not observed

stuck in the middle of a paint flake, because with shrinkage

up till then took place when the consolidant methocel

this can lead to further flaking. The moistening of the

a-4-c was applied for the first time. The gouache fragments

object ensures that the binder, methocel, due to capillary

that had come partially loose like a peninsula curled up

activity (by which the surface is stretched), is distributed

totally. The attempt to restore them to their former position

much more evenly over and in the object. The part treated

with the aid of a mister and a brush, was only partially

with the ultrasonic mister is reinforced with holytex, filter

successful. A small part of the fragment dissolved. The

paper and a glass plate. Holytex, a non-woven material

curling of fragments could to an extent be overcome by

proved not to be smooth enough to prevent adhesion to

using a thicker solution of methocel, namely 1%. This more

the object, after which silicon paper was used. Silicon

concentrated solution was applied again with a brush and

paper is non-adhesive by its nature, but there is a greater

a wooden needle. Any damage that occurred was

risk of glossiness when it is used. During the treatment the

retouched with gouache with the same pigment components as the black gouache. Black gouache had also

1. The research methods employed were Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR), Gas Chromatography Mass Spectometry (GC-MS), X-ray Diffraction (XRD) and X-ray Fluorescence (XRF).

been used on the pastel, and parts of it had become detached. Due to our experience that gouache tends to curl and does not bind with the pastel crayons used, it was

CONSERVATION OF WORKS ON PAPER

CoBrA

the colour of freedam

352 the cabinet.

and the paint layer, as well as between the different layers of paint. In around 1984 the works were placed and framed in passe-partouts. The fact that no loose paint fragments were found in the frame, indicates that the damage must have happened prior to this. The Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage carried out the study into the composition of the white deposit, as it occurred in Figures in the Wood. One of the considerations in the study was that the composition of the deposit might well tell us something about the cause of the damage to the objects over the course of time (powdering of the pastels and their separating from the ground).1 Research showed that the deposit on the glass consisted of fatty acids, paraffin and sodium stearin. Pastels contain oil as a binder from which the free fatty acids have evaporated, and paraffin that is used to control the hardness of the pastel. Sodium stearin is a product of a stearic acid in the oil and the sodium ions in the glass. It is probable that the

Treatment of Colour (1948) by Karel Appel with the ultrasonic mister. The operations are constantly kept under supervision with the microscope.

evaporation of the binder (the free fatty acids) either caused the powdering of the pastel layer or at any rate encouraged it. It is not clear if the evaporation of the particles was caused or furthered by the dryness in the stockroom where the work in question was stored. The whole treatment of those gouaches with the white deposit really revolves around the fixing of the paint flakes. The traditional method of fixing cannot prevent further damage occurring to the object, because the fixative, a binder applied from above, cannot penetrate the paint layer to restore binding with the base. It is likely that the fixative, resting on the paint particles, causes tension, thus furthering the emergence of craquelures. A binder is thus looked for that can be applied under the paint particles. On the basis of earlier experiences, tests and the study of the literature, it was decided to use methyl cellulose because it makes for long-term stability. Furthermore methyl cellulose has excellent flexibility and its components are comparable in physico-chemical terms with gouache paint. During the treatment one has to ensure that the consolidant (the binder, in this case methyl cellulose) does not dissolve the paint so that the image or the structure of the paint are altered. The solvent in methyl cellulose consists of water and/or alcohol, to which organic pigments in particular are sensitive. Secondly attention has been paid to ensuring that the colour does not alter. If the paint contains a great deal of pigment, more, that is, than the Critical Pigment Volume Concentration (CPVC), and only a little binder or filler, the addition of a gum will make the colour darker. Thirdly no

CONSERVATION OF WORKS ON PAPER

CoBrA

the colour of freedam

353

decided to make a mixture of plextol and methocel a-4-c in a ratio of 1:1. Due to this stronger composition, a better binding was achieved with the pastel crayons. Passive conservation The storage and making the work fit to exhibit form an important part in the work of conservation. For correct storage a number of matters have to be taken into account. It is important in one’s choice to aim for uniformity and the creation of space for a further expansion of the collection. To frame an art object according to conservation requirements, suitable high-quality materials must be used. This is certainly the case with such important works as those of CoBrA. Besides the vulnerable technique that makes the sheets extremely fragile, the problem that was observed with the works on paper was that they have often been completely worked on and sometimes even have a painting on the reverse. If one uses a passe-partout, part of the worked-on edges is covered. It was therefore decided to hang the works ‘free’ or ‘floating’ in their frames. Works that have been painted on both sides have also been given glass on both sides, with an open construction to prevent a microclimate forming. For these works a passe-partout has been used, in which the sheets are hung up by means of a border being created around the whole sheet. Because these works are exceptionally vulnerable, it has been decided to store them in the depository. In this connection maple wood which is acid-free has been used. The framing of these works on paper, that dated from

Verso of Three Heads provided with a border of Japan paper so that the object is mounted in a double-sided passe-partout.

around 1984 and consisted of white-varnished frames, was thus completely replaced. In the same period in which the non-reproducible works on paper were framed, in around 1984, various graphic editions were also framed. The graphic work was taken out of the existing covers and framed, often separately from text sheets. Like the gouaches, the framing did not meet up with today’s conservation norms. The graphics, the correspondence and other archive material are packed in acid-free materials, such as passe-partouts, covers and drop-back boxes. The graphic work is returned to the original covers and boxes and the relation with the text, where appropriate, has been restored New maple wood frame, made by The Framing Sisters in Amsterdam, allowing one to see the verso of the object. The frame on the back side is also made of maple wood. To hang the works, Steddies® by Artprotech have been used.

CONSERVATION OF WORKS ON PAPER

CoBrA

the colour of freedam

Marjan de Visser in the studio during the treatment of two CoBrA paintings

The complex conservation of multi-faceted experiments Paintings in the CoBrA-collection of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam

MARJAN DE VISSER

355

Hanging on the wall at my primary school was a

examination I often expose the painting to several kinds of

reproduction of Cry for Freedom, a painting by Karel Appel

light sources such as UV light and daylight, and I look at it

that I found exceptionally beautiful. This reproduction

in a variety of positions with regard to the light source.

aroused my earliest interest in painting. It opened the doors

Primal Animal (see p. 63–64) is painted in opaque layers

of the art world to me, and later to the conservation of that

of oils using the wet-in-wet and wet-on-dry techniques.

art. I could hardly have suspected back then that many

Various dissimilar brushstrokes beneath the upper paint

years later I would come to know those beloved works like

layer reveal an earlier painting made under the composition.

the back of my hand after being asked by the Schiedam

The underpainting consists of something that looks like a

Stedelijk Museum in the summer of 2000 to conserve a

small lorry and circles of brushstrokes. The paint alternates

number of CoBrA paintings from their collection. Nor could

between mat and glossy. There is also a picture on the

I have known that this project, which was to last more than

back of the work. This was probably a rejected painting,

two years, would afford me so many new insights into the

the back of which was later reused for the present

art of conservation as well as into other aspects of the

painting.

trade, such as technical examination and photography.

This unorthodox approach raised a number of questions

Because it was a large project in which many paintings by

that could not be answered by visual examination alone:

the same artists were being treated, I was able to apply

how were the paint layers built up, and why are there

new discoveries and results directly to subsequent

forms and mat areas that are visible under a certain oblique

restorations. The paintings themselves provided me with

angle of light but cannot be seen in the picture itself? What

greater understanding and knowledge, enabling me to

materials did Karel Appel use in the first years after the

tackle the conservation of ensuing works with even more

Second World War? We know that modern manufactured

skill and efficiency. This was true not only for conservation

paints were available to artists at that time.

but also for the designing of the frames.

These questions called for a more thorough examination.

Both the original and the present conditions of the CoBrA

Investigations of mediums and pigments of the various

paintings have now been fully and exhaustively described

materials that were used could be conducted at the

in pictures and text. This can be regarded as a new point

laboratory of the Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage

of reference on which the realization of every future

(ICN). The build-up of the layers of paint was studied by

decision can be based. Those decisions having to do with

the X-Ray Service (RTD) in Rotterdam. The ArtSpect

display, lending and storage will now be more firmly

company photographed the painting with the MuSIS 2007

grounded and easier to make.

camera within a broad colour spectrum ranging from UV

I have been involved in frequent consultation with Ludo van

light, through the visible spectrum, to close-up infrared.

Halem, head of museum services and modern art curator,

With this camera various depths in the paint layer can be

and Christel Kordes, collections curator. Because we

examined.

represent three different disciplines – art history,

What we expected to find was that the CoBrA artists were

management, and conservation and restoration – I am

experimenting with modern materials when producing

convinced that, thanks to our collaboration, the correct

these works. If this were the case, the restorer might find

decisions have been made.

himself faced with several unknown problems. So the ICN was then asked to answer the following questions: was a

Examination of materials:

ground applied to both the back and the front of the

Karel Appel, Primal Animal

painting; what pigments can be found on the front and back; what mediums were used for the ochre, white and

All conservation begins with looking at a painting, feeling it

red passages? To reach a decisive answer a paint sample

and smelling it. What can you see: what materials were

was taken at several points, which showed that the back is

used, how were they applied and by what means, and

grounded with a layer consisting of white lead and a bit of

what about the use of colour? What do you feel: what is

clay. Three white pigments were used in the ground on the

the quality and the condition of the materials; is the work

front of the painting: white lead, zinc white and titanium

dirty or old? And what does the work smell like: nicotine,

dioxide. The fact that titanium dioxide was not found

dust, moisture, mould or varnish? In conducting this

anywhere else in the paint samples may suggest that

COMPLEX CONSERVATION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

356 work to be safely exhibited, the most important factor being the stability of the construction: the battens and the board. These battens must be strong enough to allow the work has to be grasped and hung over and over again. In addition, the work must be able to withstand being transported in a crate to and from the exhibition area without suffering damage. To this end, steps were taken to preserve the work that would not detract from its overall spirit. To make sure that none of the linen or pieces of paper would loosen up again, all the glued shapes were preventatively treated with glue wherever they had come loose. There was a layer of grime covering the entire painting that had become firmly caked through climatic change. The removal of this grime left the image much brighter. After the conservation procedure the work still looks delicate and its tactile character has been preserved, but now it has a sturdy, clean foundation. Conservation problems: Anton Rooskens, The front of Primal Animal (1951) by Karel Appel photographed by raking light, making the relief in the paint more visible. The painting has been turned 45 degrees to the right. The underlying paint strokes are accented with red lines. A small oval head with drooping hair is visible in the upper left. Based on other work by Appel, the circles, lines and triangles can be converted into motifs such as questioning children, a family group or a group of prisoners, which had been common themes a few years before.

Composition and Danse macabre Once upon a time there was no such thing as a professional restorer, and paintings were often restored by painters and artists. But as the twentieth century ran its course the profession of restorer evolved considerably. A great deal more is known about the materials being used and the ageing process, knowledge mainly obtained through scientific research. Nowadays the goal is the

The back of Primal Animal (1951) by Karel Appel. The painting on the back, probably

conservation of the workâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s conditions, with the express wish that interventions be kept to a minimum. Unfortunately this is not always possible. Sometimes intervention is just what is needed to preserve the state of the work; at other times the restorer must deal with an earlier intervention that has drastically altered the conditions and spirit of the painting. The code of ethics within the profession has undergone enormous change as well. The means employed by the restorer must be revisable, that is, it must be possible to undo the effects of any materials and techniques used. A report is also made whenever conservation or restoration work is done, which was not the case in the past. If a painting is still more or less in its original state, we do

from an earlier date, shows numerous gaps (see p. 64). Here they are being digitally retouched by means of a photo editing program. This makes the original composition, a reclining nude, more legible.

COMPLEX CONSERVATION

all we can to keep it that way. In making a record of the conditions of the painting Composition by Anton Rooskens, it was discovered that the stretcher was warped: the work

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

357

Appel himself provided the new front with his own white ground. Also found on the front of this painting were chalk, white lead, lead chromate, barium sulfate, chromium oxide green, cadmium yellow, zinc white, zinc chromate, iron oxide yellow, yellow ochre, cadmium red, vermilion, an organic blue and an organic red. These pigments are not unusual for the period in which the painting was made. Most of the pigments are synthetic; interestingly, the ochre found in one of the passages is a natural ochre. Barium sulfate was frequently used as filler in the paint. Quartz was also analyzed in a few cases. The medium used in the red, white and yellow paint in the samples was untreated or slightly treated linseed oil. This information revealed that Appel used traditional and familiar materials for his painting, meaning that conservation could also employ established methods and materials. The various kind of photography showed that another picture actually must have been made under the present painting. This prompted us to examine the painting under a strong raking light from a variety of angles. When the painting is turned 45 degrees to the right so that it stands vertically, the incongruent strokes of paint are revealed as little eyes, cheeks and hands. These are shapes that Appel frequently used in various works that featured questioning children, prisoners or a family group as their motif.

The battens extend two to three centimetres beyond the board and are glued and nailed at the corners. The entire back is painted white, both the board and the battens. The nails and glue have given way, making the construction wobbly and moveable. On the front, the corners and edges of the board are damaged. The paint layer: the board is painted on the front with predominantly black paint (varnish?). Beneath this varnish other colours of paint are visible; these emerge by means of sgraffito, a scraping technique. The deviating strokes of paint under the black varnish indicate that there is another composition beneath the visible one. A drawing has also been scratched into the board with a sharp object. Painted on the lacquer with primary and secondary colours and white paint, in a few transparent and dry strokes, are a red bird, a moon and a white girl on a mast. On a form cut from linen that has been prepared with phosphorescent paint is a girl painted with black ink. Beside her a moon and a globe have been glued on the canvas, both cut out of structured paper. A phosphorescent ground can also be found on a paper star, five cardboard triangles and two small shapes made of linen. The thick red paint has begun to dry out, resulting in craquelure. The ground layer of the linen on which the girl is drawn shows signs of craquelure and is crumbling away in a few small cracks. The gluing of the linen as a whole is

Technique:

not optimal. The five cardboard triangles are beginning to

Jan Nieuwenhuijs,

exhibit damage; the points have pulled loose and two of

Sleepwalking Cock

the triangles are already missing. One of the small linen shapes with the phosphorescent ground is bent at the

When Jan Nieuwenhuijs painted Sleepwalking Cock (see

edges. The paper globe is partly torn.

p. 219), he didn’t seem all that interested in the work’s life

The painting was examined under the microscope and

expectancy. The material is of inferior quality and applied

photographed, because with the naked eye it was not easy

with a certain nonchalance. Yet it is just that nonchalance

to see what materials some of the shapes were made

that has given this painting its splendid brittle, naive charm,

from. This examination resulted in several discoveries.

fully in keeping with the composition. The work has a

Apparently the artist had to deal with shrinking and cracks

storybook quality that is evident not only by daylight but

in the paint even while he was painting the picture. The

also in the dark when the little girl and the stars light up, a

shapes were first painted and then roughly cut out of

result of the use of phosphorescent paint.

cardboard and linen. The material used for the moon and

In order to preserve the work’s nonchalance it was

the sun could not be determined, but examination of the

important to break the painting down to its component

material indicated plaster.

parts and to note the conditions of each one: first the support/construction, then the paint layer and finally the

Gathering all this information was an essential part of the

finishing touches, if any.

conservation process. Only now were the artist’s intentions

The support/construction: the work is painted on a sheet of

clear, so that decisions could be made concerning how

hardboard, the edges of which are nailed to wooden

and to what extent the condition of the material was to be

battens that are mitred at the corners and painted white.

restored. The goal of this restoration was to enable the

COMPLEX CONSERVATION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

358 did not hang flat against the wall (see p. 233). In this particular case the upper left and the lower right corners protruded out from the wall. The main reason for this was the absence of a cross-batten, which is necessary in a painting of this size. In addition, the stretcher battens had tightened the corners to such an extent that the construction had become weakened. The linen was not being supported by the frame, and the frame was even creating faulty tension in the linen, causing pleats to form in the linen in the upper right and the lower left corners, where the paint skin had split. Because the aim was to preserve the painting in its original Microscopic view of Sleepwalking Cock (1949) by Jan Nieuwenhuijs. Within the highly magnified structure of the linen with its crumbling ground the lines of ink are visible that make up the drawing of the little girl.

state, attempts were made to preserve the stretcher. Several methods were tried and various products used, but without good results. A second option was to loosen the painting from the frame and to treat the frame first separately. After the linen was separated from the frame, it was discovered that the frameâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s two side battens and the lower batten were crooked. Various techniques were used to straighten the battens, but none of them worked. Finally the decision was made to measure a new stretcher with cross-battens of pine glued against the grain. The old frame was packed up and stored separately. Because the original frame was out of square, with a concave curve at the top and bottom due to the absence of cross-battens, the new frame was also planed to produce a concave curve. After the new stretcher was planed to the correct shape, the corner angles were adjusted. Information concerning the previous restoration is not always available, which makes it difficult at times to determine why the restoration was carried out and what means were used. It is also usually not possible to find out what the painting once looked like. This was the case with Anton Rooskensâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Danse macabre (see p. 227). This painting had been given a thick layer of glossy varnish. It had also been relined using the wax-resin method, in which a second canvas is glued to the back of the original with a layer of beeswax mixed with resin. No tears were found in the linen that could have justified the decision to reline. It is possible that the relining was meant to close the cracks in the paint, which may have been the result of an accident. All traces of possible reasons for the restoration were eradicated by the relining and the thick layer of varnish. This is a case of over-restoration.

Microscopic view of Sleepwalking Cock (1949) by Jan Nieuwenhuijs. Even during the painting process the red paint began shrinking due to dryness. Yellow and green paint were then brushed on over the resulting cracks.

COMPLEX CONSERVATION

Danse macabre has a predominantly black background

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

359

(at the 1949 CoBrA exhibition at the Amsterdam Stedelijk

around the painting in a direct and simple way. Examples

Museum it may have been shown under the title Fond

of this can be found in the works of Anton Rooskens and

noir) in which various shapes and lines are linked together.

Karel Appel. The painting Pierres et fleurs by Corneille

The varnish caused the black to shine and reflect a great

featured a type of frame from the fifties that frequently

deal of light, making the composition difficult to see. The

accompanied his work and almost certainly can be said to

relining had pushed in the paint in the raised areas, and

have been selected by the artist himself.

much of the structure created by brushstrokes had been flattened. Fortunately the work of Anton Rooskens is well represented in the collection of the museum, so it was possible to determine what the mood of Danse macabre may have been like based on unrestored paintings. Besides his unique palette of colours, Rooskens had a very personal way of handling paint. His method of applying and scraping off often produced raised paint areas. In the layeron-layer technique, the black layer is often the last to be applied. Black paint has a high proportion of binder (oil) and is absorbed by the lowest layer, giving the black paint a mat to velvety quality.

Several paintings had a simple gilded pine frame that had been supplied earlier by the Schiedam Stedelijk Museum. Another group had been placed in frames made in the style of the original CoBrA frames during a previous conservation campaign. Most of the frames did not satisfy todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s requirements. They should match the work aesthetically. They may have a casual look but only if they are sturdy, since the frame has to protect the work during transport and exhibition. Finally, the work should be equipped with a good hanging system. Before the frames were corrected or replaced, research was carried out on original CoBrA frames based on historic

In order to reconstruct the painting, the restoration had to be undone. The materials and methods were partially revisable. The extra linen could be done away with, and the wax-resin compound partially removed (remnants of the compound are always left in the fibres of the linen). The dented areas of raised paint could be pushed out, but the flattening of the strokes of paint was unfortunately irreversible. The varnish proved to be soluble, but here, too, remnants of the varnish always remain in the porous paint layer, which means that the character of the paint layer will never be the same. Yet the results of the varnish tests were convincing enough to justify continuing the work. The conservation of Danse macabre consisted to a large extent of undoing a previous restoration. The mood of the painting once again strongly resembles the original.

photographs from studios and exhibitions. CoBrA paintings now in the Amsterdam Stedelijk Museum and the Stedelijk Van Abbemuseum in Eindhoven were examined, and the subject of framing was discussed with conservators and restorers. The resulting ideas were then applied with the help of a joiner. After the preliminary work was done, the paintings were reviewed one by one to decide whether the frames should be adjusted or replaced. Various handmade frames were cautiously taken apart and preserved. The frames of Anton Rooskens and Theo Wolvecamp, for instance, were adjusted by lengthening the battens and by strengthening the back with a sturdy construction. They could be preserved and corrected without any major intervention, and the intervention that was carried out can easily be reversed â&#x20AC;&#x201C; it is revisable. Another revisable option was applied in the case of Le voyage du grand soleil rouge by Corneille, in which the existing frame was

Frame and painting:

preserved and a new one added. Here the new frame

Corneille, Pierres et fleurs

envelops the old one and thereby protects the painting and the frame together.

Most of the CoBrA artists fitted their paintings with simple

The frame for Corneilleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Pierres et fleurs was so thoroughly

frames, which in many cases they furnished with an

glued to the work of art that it had become a source of

appropriate colour. Painting and frame grow old together

damage and therefore had to be removed. The frame had

and gradually form an even stronger unit, so in conserving

been patched up and polished several times in the past. It

these works a great deal of attention is focused on the

did not seem possible to remove the frame from the

frames. First an inventory was taken of the existing frames,

painting without damaging the frame, and for this reason

which uncovered both original frames and new ones. With

restoration was no longer feasible. This is the only original

just one exception, the original frames were made by the

frame that was irreparable and had to be abandoned so

artists themselves and consist of pine battens nailed

the painting could be properly preserved.

COMPLEX CONSERVATION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

360 Each and every golden frame that had been custom made by the Schiedam Stedelijk Museum proved damaging to the painted edges of the work it enclosed and was completely incompatible with the CoBrA style. All these frames were removed. In the case of Primal Animal it was replaced with a pine frame painted black on the order of the original frame of The Wild Boy, which was made, painted and nailed by Appel himself. In each new frame, there is still a search for the correct colour and dimensions based on the work. With Primal Animal, several attempts were made before the ultimate choice was reached. Dealing with frames always involves painstaking aesthetic consideration. The painting Victory Borfimah, by EugĂ¨ne Brands, followed a similar course. The size of the picture had been changed as a result of previous conservation work, and the frame was adapted. After the original shape was restored, a suitable frame in the old familiar style was sought. Both the restoration of the original dimensions and the making of the frame were major improvements. The frame and the painting together form a splendid symbiosis.

In three steps, the linen used to reline Danse macabre (1949) by Anton Rooskens is removed

COMPLEX CONSERVATION

My sincere thanks to Theo van Mierlo for his complete support in the making of the frames.

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

361

Pierres et fleurs (1955) by Corneille with the original (top) and the new frames

COMPLEX CONSERVATION

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Index 362 Alechinsky, Pierre 10, 15, 24, 25, 264, 297 Alfelt Else 14, 264 Andreus, Hans 76, 81 Appel, Karel 8-10, 13-15, 18, 26-85, 87, 88, 101, 131, 138, 200, 217, 225, 240, 253, 256, 260, 264, 269-271, 274, 276, 288291, 296-298, 303, 311, 313-316, 319-321, 323-328, 341, 342, 349, 350, 352, 355, 356, 359, 360 Appel, Tony 14 Armando 304 Arnal, François 312, 321 Atlan 264 Baker, Chet 209 Bakker, Hans 271, 272, 276, 277, 295, 332, 333, 335-337, 340 Bakker, Jan 282 Bakker, Karin 306 Baunberger 290 Becht, Frits 195 Beckmann, Max 30 Beeren, Wim 16, 17 Benner, Gerrit 8, 294, 323, 325 Bertini, Gianni 312 Beverloo, Corneille Guillaume see Corneille Bille, Ejler 14, 264 Birtwistle, Graham 17 Blom, Ansuya 304 Boers, Willy 225, 228, 230, 265, 315 Boezem, Marinus 301 Bogart, Bram 311 Bokhoven, Josine 324, 345 Braams, W. 315 Brands, Eugène 9, 10, 15, 27, 86-99, 101, 228, 260, 265, 270, 287, 303, 311, 312, 315, 317, 320, 360 Braque, Georges 101 Breetvelt, Dolf 315 Breitner, G.H. 34 Breughel the Elder, Jan 290 Buter, Hans 290 Chabot, Wim 311, 315 Claus, Hugo 76, 156, 157 Constant 9, 10, 12-15, 18, 27, 34, 54, 90, 100-129, 140, 161, 212, 217, 225, 226, 253, 256, 260, 264, 276, 287, 289, 292-293, 298, 301, 303, 304, 306, 311, 313, 315, 317, 319, 320 Corneille 8-10, 13-15, 18, 27, 28, 30, 42, 54, 62, 87, 90, 101, 130-159, 200, 217, 225, 240, 253, 256, 260, 264, 271, 275, 288, 289, 294, 297, 298, 311, 313, 317, 320, 321, 329, 330, 341, 345, 359, 361 Cuyp, Albert 282 Dahmen, Karl-Fred 312 De Gelder, Guy 315 De Gheyn, Jacques 297 De Graaf, Truus see Verweij-de Graaf, Truus De Jong, Alice 253 De Jong, Hans 253

De Jong, N. 318 De Koning, A.J. 288 De Kooning, Willem 256 De Ruyter, Michiel 290 De Wilde, Edy 330 De Vries, Steef 15, 287, 310, 311, 314, 315, 320 Dekkers, Ad 304 Dekkinga, Cor 28 Den Uyl, Joop 333 Dinkelaar, Jan 7, 282 Dirkzwager, P. 322 Doelman, Cornelis 271, 326, 328 Dotremont, Christian 12-17, 19 Doucet, Jacques 264 Dubuffet, Jean 16, 36, 200, 209 Ebbinge Wubben, J.C. 309, 326 Egberts, Otto 300 Eikelenboom, Alfred 304 Elburg, Jan 10, 15, 28, 101, 108-112, 160-193, 301, 313, 352 Ernst, Max 190, 209 Esscher, M.C. 312 Fabri, Pieter Servaesz. 286 Ferlov, Sonja 14, 264 Freud, Sigmund 317 Gerrits, Ger 225, 228, 263, 265, 315 Gilbert, Stephen 10, 116, 206, 207, 264 Gillespie, Dizzy 209 Giudici, Jan 281, 286 Götz, Karl Otto 263, 312 Gribling, Frank 340 Gudnason, Svavar 14, 264 Hafkamp, Luub 296, 305 Hakkert, Jolie 271 Heerup, Henry 14, 264 Henderickx, Sjef 295 Hölderlin, J.C.F. 209 Holl, M. 290, 322, 327, 328 Hunziker, Frieda 240, 315 Hussem, Willem 312, 315 Huysmans, J.-K. 296 IJlstra, Bouke 28 Jackson, Martha 27 Jacobsen, Egill 264 Jacobsen, Robert 18, 298 Jaffé, Hans 195 Janssen, Pierre 271, 276, 289-292, 294, 296, 323, 324, 329 Jespersen, Gunnar 17 Jeurgens, Charles 301 Jorn, Asger 13-17, 101, 102, 264, 275, 329, 331, 340, 345 Jorn-van Domselaer, Matie 331 Juliana, Queen 294 Kamstra 316 Kandinsky, Wassily 230, 253 Klee, Paul 138, 209, 210 Klein, Frits 28, 312 Klein, Yves 312

INDEX

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Koch, Pyke 286 Koenig 28 Kolthoff, Mark 315 Komen, A.P. 304 Komrij, Gerrit 273 Konings, Hans 271, 272, 276, 277, 295, 332, 333, 335-337, 340 Koppenol, Klawa 330, 331 Kordes, Christel 355 Kouwenaar, Gerrit 15, 101, 209 Kraijer, Juul 304 Kramer 290 Kreutz, Heinz 312 Krikhaar, Herman 330 Kusama, Yayoi 294, 300 Kuyer, P. 322 Looten, Emmanuel 84 Lucebert 10, 15, 101, 116, 208-215, 289, 294, 314 Lunsingh Scheurleer, Daan 269, 287, 308, 309 Magritte, René 190 Mancoba, Ernest 14 Maris, Matthijs 280, 283, 288, 298 Matisse, Henri 36, 68 Meihuizen, H.W. 322 Melle 102 Mellerup, Tage 14 Metaal, Arie 296, 297 Mik, Aernout 304 Miró, Joan 34, 101, 217, 218, 228, 297 Mondrian, Piet 90, 277 Monet, Claude 277 Mulder, Else 331 Mulder, Jan 300 Murphy, Karen 304 Nagtegaal, Marijke 306 Nanninga, Jaap 28, 270, 313, 315 Nesse, M. 315 Nielsen, Knud 14 Nieuwenhuijs, Constant Anton see Constant Nieuwenhuijs, Jan 9, 10, 15, 27, 101, 216221, 260, 356, 358 Nieuwenhuijs, Victor 111 Nooteboom, C. 309 Ortvad, Erik 14, 264 Österlin, Anders 10, 222, 223, 261 Ouborg, Piet 270, 315 Paalman, Hans 271-273, 275, 291, 294-297, 300, 304, 329, 330, 331, 333, 335, 340 Pedersen, Carl-Henning 14, 54, 58, 62, 132, 264 Peek, J.W. 290, 294 Permeke, Constant 225 Petrusa, Stan 305 Picasso, Pablo 34, 36, 42, 52, 68, 74, 101, 209, 225, 240, 275, 277 Pignon, Édouard 36 Pilger, H. 148-151 Pillard, R.H. 342

Poliakoff, Serge 312 Pollock, Jackson 16, 256 Posthoorn, Herman 271, 273, 295, 296, 333, 335 Premsela, Benno 102 Quist, Wim 18 Ray, Man 180 Raymond, Marie 312 Renardel de Lavaletta 290 Riemens, Henny 312 Rodin, Auguste 198 Rooduijn, Hans 112 Rooskens, Anton 9, 10, 15, 27, 101, 214, 224-251, 260, 265, 268, 288, 303, 311, 312, 315, 320, 341, 357-360 Rothko, Mark 277 Ruting, Lotte 28, 193 Ruysdael, Salomon 282 Sandberg, Willem 9, 16, 36, 87, 90, 274 Sanders, Ida 68, 84, 196, 212-314 Sanders, Piet 16, 68, 84, 196, 212, 286, 287, 289, 294, 308, 310, 313, 314, 316, 318, 322, 324 Schafthuizen, Joop 300 Schenkelaars, Pim 306 Schierbeek, Bert 76, 82, 83 Schoenmakers, Theo 274 Schoonhoven, Jan 294, 300, 304 Schuurman, Karel 271, 326, 328 Schwagermann, Cord 272, 280-283, 285, 286, 288, 312 Schwagermann, Daan 9, 16, 268-272, 274, 275, 286-290, 294, 308, 311, 312, 315, 317-324 Schwitters, Kurt 36, 48 Seij, Herman 315 Semah, Joseph 301 Sluyters, Jan 283, 298 Smit, Goof 316 Smith, Bessy 209 Sok, Ab 287 Stenneberg, Piet 15 Stiemer, Flora 323 Stokvis, Willemijn 10, 16-18, 294, 304, 310, 336, 340, 342 Struycken, Peter 304 Swaanswijk, Lambertus Jacobus see Lucebert Swaanswijk, Tony 214 Tamm, André see Götz, Karl Otto Tàpies, Antoni 16 Thommesen, Erik 14 Tiessen 320 Timp, Leen 290 Tjabbes, Pieter 296, 297, 300, 301, 304, 306 Toorop, Jan 283 Tucholsky, Kurt 209 Tuynman, Dora 297, 300 Van Bohemen, Kees 28, 304, 312, 331 Van de Bundt, Livinus 195 Van de Wint, Rudi/Jochem 304

363 Van der Elsken, Ed 294 Van der Gaag, Lotti 9, 10, 18, 28, 194-205, 268, 270, 306, 311, 313 Van der Geer, Cees 294, 304 Van der Smit, Bas 315 Van der Werff, Abe 305 Van Dijk, Hans 316 Van Doorn, H.W. 332 Van Eyck, Aldo 15, 18, 62, 66, 116, 138, 264 Van Gelder, H.E. 269, 270, 281, 282 Van Giessen, Jan-Willem 269 Van Gogh, Vincent 34, 225, 289, 327 Van Halem, Ludo 301, 355 Van Heel 321 Van Heusden, Wout 287, 297, 300, 311, 312, 314, 315 Van Kinderen, M.J.M. 291, 322 Van Koningsbruggen, Rob 304 Van Kruiningen, Harry 287, 312 Van Lieshout, Erik 304 Van Meel, Joop 304 Van Munster, Ocker 269 Van Oerle-Gorp, R. 290 Van Ostade, Isaac 282 Van Ruysdael, Jacob 282 Van Stuijvenberg, Karel 17 Van Stuivenberg, Piet 15, 287, 297, 311, 315, 316 Van Veen 286 Van Velde, Bram 297 Van Vlijmen, Jan 28, 311, 315 Vanderheyden, JCJ 304 Verkade, Albert 301 Verweij, Goos 7, 10, 28, 80, 92, 96-99, 104, 106-108, 111-116, 120-123, 152, 153, 158, 174, 193, 197, 199, 200, 202-205, 207, 218, 220, 221, 230, 234, 236, 238, 239, 242-247, 250, 251, 259-261, 263-265, 271, 287, 289, 294, 295, 301, 304, 306, 310, 312-316, 319, 320 Verweij, Nel 312 Verweij-de Graaf, Truus 7, 28, 80, 92, 96-99, 106-108, 111-115, 120-123, 152, 153, 158, 174, 193, 197, 199, 200, 202-205, 207, 218, 220, 221, 228, 230, 234, 236, 238, 239, 242-247, 250, 251, 259-261, 263265, 295, 301, 304 Verwey, Kees 283 Vinkenoog, Simon 154 Visch, Henk 304 Viseux, Claude 312 Visser Bastiaansz., Gerrit 281, 282 Visser, Carel 320 Visser, Martin 102 Voeten, Emile 28, 315 Vogel-Jørgensen, Åge 14 Vos-Alberts, De 304 Wagemaker, Jaap 297, 310, 312 Weiniger, Anton 315 Welling, Dolf 270, 300

INDEX

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Werkman, H.N. 34, 176, 287, 289 Wiegers, Jan 287 Wijsenbeek, L.J.F. 309 Wiklund, Sixten 14 Willink, Carel 286 Wind, Diana 273, 276, 301, 304-306 Windhorst, Johan 282 Wolvé see Wolvecamp, Theo Wolvecamp, Theo 10, 15, 27, 28, 101, 252-260, 288, 313, 317-320, 331, 359 Zadkine, Ossip 195, 199, 298, 312 Zijdeveld, Chris 273, 301, 333 Zwirner, Rudolf 27

Authors 364 KF

Karin Feenstra

MdG Marijke de Groot LvH

Ludo van Halem

Wil Heins

Lies Netel

Laura Soutendijk

PvU

Patricia van Ulzen

Margot Welle

Art Conservation, based in Vlaardingen, specializes in the restoration, conservation and digitization of paper, from visual art to books and posters. The firm, founded in 1991 by restorers Piet van Dalen [1959] and Jan Stokmans [1951], handles conservation projects for museums, businesses and archives, among others. Co-author Tania Happel [1977] works as account manager at Art Conservation. Karin Feenstra [1955] is an art historian and writer. She teaches art history at the AKI academy for visual arts and design in Enschede. She writes for newspapers, magazines and exhibition catalogues. Marijke de Groot [1947] studied art history at the University of Amsterdam. She is on the faculty of the university’s Institute for Art Research and Cultural Studies. She is also on the editorial staff of the art history magazine Jong Holland, for which she regularly writes. For the Arnhemse Cahiers series in 2002 she wrote Ali Goubitz. De volmaaktheid van het allerkleinste. Ludo van Halem [1959] is head of the museum department/curator of modern art for the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam. He is project manager for the CoBrA Collection Conservation Project. He previously was managing editor of the magazine Jong Holland and affiliated with the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) research programme on Dutch culture in a European context, for which he conducted research into the post-war avant-garde. He writes on Constant, Gerrit Rietveld and Stanley Brouwn, among others. Wil Heins [1932], a mathematician, is interested in modern art and poetry. He was substantially involved in organizing an international CoBrA exhibition in 1984 and in an overview exhibition on Jan Elburg in 1986. He wrote a bio/bibliography of Elburg for the monograph Echt raak is dodelijk. Ook voor de kunst (1999). Marcel Hummelink [1962] is an educator and researcher, specializing in the cultural history of the twentieth century. He studied history at the University of Amsterdam and was awarded a Ph.D. for the thesis Après nous la liberté. Constant en de artistieke avant-garde in de jaren 1946–1960. Klawa Koppenol [1976] studied art history at the University of Leiden, with a specialization in modern visual art. Since 1997 she has been on the board of the LAK gallery in Leiden. In 2002 she was affiliated as junior researcher with the CoBrA Collection Conservation Project at the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam.

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

365

Christel Kordes [1965] is collections curator for the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam. She studied at the Reinwardt Academy, majoring in Management and Conservation. From 1989 to 1997 she worked in various capacities at the Netherlands Office for Fine Arts, and from 1997 to 2000 as registrar/record keeper in the collections department of the Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage (ICN). She was involved in the project ‘Herkomst Gezocht’ and secretary of SIMIN. Lies Netel [1959] is an art historian and specializes in twentieth-century Dutch art. From 1999 to 2001 she worked as curator at the Cobra Museum of Modern Art in Amstelveen and since 2002 has been curator of modern art at the Henriette Polak Museum in Zutphen. In 2002 she organized the exhibition ‘Noord-Hollands expressionisme en de schilders van de Bergense school’ for the Stedelijk Museum Alkmaar. Laura Soutendijk [1970] studied art history and psychology at Leiden. She was involved in the organization of an overview exhibition of the work of Lotti van der Gaag in the Cobra Museum for Modern Art in Amstelveen. Haar monograph on Lotti has recently been published. Patricia van Ulzen [1962] is affiliated as a researcher with the General Culture department at Erasmus University, with support from the Verhagen Foundation. From 1993 through 1999 she was managing editor of the art history magazine Jong Holland. She is currently conducting promotional research into cultural life in Rotterdam between 1970 and 2001. Marjan de Visser [1965] has been working since 1995 as a freelance restorer of paintings in The Hague under the name Restauratieatelier Marjan de Visser. She studied from 1983 to 1989 at the Art Academy of Arnhem. She trained from 1992 to 1995 with Louis Damen, head of conservation at the Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen. She works on commissions from the Government Buildings Agency, municipalities, museums, businesses and individuals. Margot Welle [1969] studied art history at the University of Utrecht. She was affiliated with the Cobra Museum for Modern Art in Amstelveen as a curator and now works as a freelance exhibition organizer and writer.

Acknowledgements The Stedelijk Museum Schiedam wishes to thank the following individuals, institutions and firms for their contributions and support to the CoBrA Collection Conservation Project (including this publication), the exhibition ‘CoBrA: the colour of freedom’ and the museum’s activities: Art Conservation bv, Marleen Blokhuis, Phil Bosch, Evert Bunt (Documental Information Service, City of Schiedam), Henny Burgerhout-Verstrepen, Franny Gijze-Beerman and Siemen de Haan (General and Technical Services, City of Schiedam), Steven Claeyssens, Nita Friedel and Jef Jansen (Schiedam Municipal Archives), City of Schiedam, Cees Gerritse, Marlite Halbertsma (Erasmus University Rotterdam), Marcel Hummelink, Instituto Lina e P.M. Bo Bardi, Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage (ICN), Pierre Janssen, Klawa Koppenol, Sacha Mols, Lies Netel, Arthur Nieuwenhuijs, ONS Groep, Hans Paalman, PK media & PK identiti, Rabobank Schiedam Vlaardingen, Netherlands Institute for Art History (Press Documentation), Piet and Ida Sanders, Restauratieatelier Marjan de Visser, Ron Spronk, Foundation Schiedam Vlaardingen Promotie, TDS Drukwerken, Pieter Tjabbes, TussenRuimte.

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

Colophon 366 The CoBrA Collection Conservation Project of the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam was made possible through the financial support of the European Commission (Raphael Programme 1999), the Mondriaan Foundation for the advancement of Visual Arts, Design and Museums, and the Prince Bernhard Cultural Foundation. Research for this publication was supported by

This publication is part of the CoBrA Collection Conservation Project and is published in conjunction with the exhibition ‘CoBrA: the colour of freedom’ in the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, 29 March – 28 September 2003. Editing/compilation Ludo van Halem Texts Piet van Dalen, Tania Happel and Piet Stokmans (Art Conservation), Karin Feenstra, Marijke de Groot, Ludo van Halem, Wil Heins, Marcel Hummelink, Klawa Koppenol, Lies Netel, Laura Soutendijk, Patricia van Ulzen, Marjan de Visser, Margot Welle Collection catalogue Christel Kordes with contributions by Maaike Boelsma (intern), Phil Bosch, Peter Konings, Truus Verweij-de Graaff Research Marleen Blokhuis, Marcel Hummelink, Klawa Koppenol, Sacha Mols under the direction of Marlite Halbertsma and Ludo van Halem Photo research Klawa Koppenol Translations Pierre Bouvier, Amsterdam (‘What was Cobra – and what is it?’; ‘Explanatory notes’; Lucebert; ‘Custodian, curator, director’; ‘Authors’) Nancy Forest-Flier, Alkmaar (‘The 1950s’; ‘The complex conservation of multi-faceted experiments’) Karen Gamester, Amsterdam (A. Rooskens; ‘1954: Lunsingh Scheurleer’s recommendations’) Donald Gardner, Amsterdam (J. Nieuwenhuijs; ‘1954–1956: Daan Schwagermann’s first purchases’; ‘The conservation of works on paper in the CoBrA collection’) Lynn George, Amsterdam (‘1955–1965: Consignment and purchase of Karel Appel’s works’; ‘1959– 1987: The loan of works by Corneille and Asger Jorn’; ‘1979–1982: New appreciation of CoBrA’) Sarah-Jane Jaeggi-Wood, Wouw (‘Introduction’) Susan Janssen & William Levy, Amsterdam (‘The Schiedam museum row’) Victor Joseph, Amsterdam (Constant, Corneille) Arthur Payman, Bussum (J. Elburg; ‘CoBrA and Schiedam’) Mari Shields, Amsterdam (E. Brands; L. van der Gaag; Th. Wolvecamp) Annie Wright, Amsterdam (‘Preface’; K. Appel) Copy editing Els Brinkman, Amsterdam Production Astrid Vorstermans, NAi Uitgevers/Publishers, Rotterdam

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

367 Graphic design Minke Themans, Rotterdam with Stella Smienk Publisher NAi Uitgevers/Publishers, Rotterdam with Stedelijk Museum Schiedam Lithography and printing TDS drukwerken, Schiedam Binding Jansenbinders, Leyden Photo credits Anpfoto, Amsterdam p. 288 Art Conservation, Vlaardingen p. 350, 352 below, 353 top Henni van Beek, Amsterdam p. 18 Breur-Van Dongen, Schiedam p. 294 Sjef van Duin, Schiedam p. 306 middle Gemeentearchief Schiedam p. 282 top (photo H.M.J. Kamman, Schiedam); p. 282 (photo Studio Dolfijn); p. 314 (photo Steef Zoetmulder (Schiedam, 1961)) Bob Goedewaagen, Rotterdam pp. 16, 18; p. 356 (digital image editing: Marjan de Visser, The Hague); p. 361 Ton de Haan, Rotterdam p. 8 Tom Haartsen, Ouderkerk aan de Amstel p. 288 Hijmans, Schiedam p. 280 Cathy Jacob and Bob Goedewaagen, Rotterdam p. 306 below Peter Konings, Schiedam p. 18 Jannes Linders, Rotterdam p. 22 Netherlands Institute for Art History (RKD), The Hague p. 334 Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage (ICN), p. 358 Private collection p. 296 top, middle, 300 top, 310, 312 Hans Pattist, Rotterdam p. 306 top Spaarnestad Fotoarchief, Haarlem p. 300 below Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam p. 12 Stedelijk Museum Schiedam p. 268, 282 below, 284-286, 290, 292-293, 294 top, below, 296 below, 298-299, 302-304, 318, 323, 338, 339, 344 Marjan de Visser, Den Haag p. 360 Daan Wormsbecher, Waarland p. 348, 352 top, 353 below, 354 Photography catalogue Bob Goedewaagen, Rotterdam except for Tom Haartsen p. 97 top Rob Mostert p. 97 below UV-glaze image on front cover Back of Karel Appel, Small Child with Flowers (1947)

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

It was not possible to find all the copyright holders of the illustrations used. Interested parties are requested to contact Stedelijk Museum Schiedam, Hoogstraat 112, 3111 HL Schiedam, The Netherlands. For works of visual artists affiliated with a CISAC-organization the copyrights have been settled with Beeldrecht in Amsterdam. © 2003, c/o Beeldrecht Amsterdam Karel Appel: © Karel Appel Foundation, c/o Beeldrecht, Amsterdam Corneille: © ADAGP © NAi Publishers, Rotterdam; Stedelijk Museum Schiedam; authors, 2003 All rights reserved. No part of this publication 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 prior written permission of the publisher. Available in North, South and Central America through D.A.P./Distributed Art Publishers Inc, 155 Sixth Avenue 2nd Floor, New York, NY 10013-1507, Tel. 212 6271999, Fax 212 6279484. Available in the United Kingdom and Ireland through Art Data, 12 Bell Industrial Estate, 50 Cunnington Street, London W4 5HB, Tel. 181 7471061, Fax 181 7422319. NAi Publishers is an internationally orientated publisher specialized in developing, producing and distributing books on architecture, visual arts and related disciplines.

NAi Publishers Mauritsweg 23 3012 JR Rotterdam info@naipublishers.nl, www.naipublishers.nl This publication is also available in a Dutch edition:

CoBrA: de kleur van vrijheid De Schiedamse collectie

isbn 90-5662-293-5 English-language edition: isbn 90-5662-294-3

CoBrA

the colour of freedom

369

370

371

375

Printed and bound in the Netherlands

Since the 1950s, the Stedelijk Museum Schiedam has assembled a very extensive collection of Dutch CoBrA art, including the early work of Karel Appel, EugĂ¨ne Brands, Constant, Corneille, Jan Nieuwenhuijs, Anton Rooskens and Theo Wolvecamp. The collection also includes work from this period by the experimental poet-artists Lucebert and Jan Elburg, by Lotti van der Gaag and by several non-Dutch members of CoBrA. This book offers a beautiful, broad and colourful picture of the Schiedam CoBrA collection. Various articles cover the creation of the collection, the question of how a (relatively small) museum deals with such a prestigious collection and recent restoration issues connected with this art. A number of shorter texts focus on individual works and on the artists. With its numerous illustrations and comprehensive approach, this book reveals a unique and largely hitherto unknown picture of CoBrA in the Netherlands. For the more specialist reader the book offers a great deal of art-historical information on such subjects as conservation and art policy.

STEDELIJK MUSEUM SCHIEDAM

NAi PUBLISHERS ROTTERDAM

ART CATALOGUE // COBRA - The Colour of Freedom

Articles inside

Theo Wolvecamp

Jan Nieuwenhuijs

Karel Appel

Stephen Gilbert

Lucebert