demand from a rising middle class as well as merchants, connoisseurs and regent who looked to refined art for profit or pleasure. The extent to which these social bodies contributed to demand has been disputed, with some saying that the élite class were the dominating force 12 and others viewing patronage as inferior to market forces 13 . The still life genre of the first half of the seventeenth century (or still-leven in Dutch) became increasingly sumptuous ( proven ) over the course of the third quarter of the seventeenth century with artists such as Jan Davidszoon de Heem, Abraham van Beijeren and Willem Kalf fetching particularly high prices. Seascapes in marine environments also saw a great expansion and provide a relatively accurate historical record of the Anglo-Dutch war due to the realism of the naval scenes depicted by artists such as Ludolf Bakhuysen. These were often hung up in public offices, town halls and admiralty colleges around the maritime cities on the North Sea coast 14 . Another genre characteristic of this period included Italianate landscape and Mediterranean harbour scenes stemming from a revival of Dutch trade in that area. For the wealthy élite, this genre was a favourite, as Italy was seen as the home of classic education, exhibiting Renaissance antiquities. The interior of ordinary, middle class life also became a popular subject for the emerging market, mastered by the likes of Jan Steen. Many observe a conventional didacticism, using the physical surroundings as the subject 15 , but that esoteric knowledge of the artistic language and symbolic significance can still be seen in the grander styles, like Johannes Vermeer iconography 16 . Yet the emergence of portrait genre in Dutch painting, which often featured erotic subjects or scenes of smoking and drinking, gave Dutch painters a renewed colloquial identity. As Price identifies, Dutch culture began to see a clash of progression between ‘symbolic understanding…the prestige of Renaissance classicism’ and the ‘material study of reality’. An historical debate often arises around the status and wealth of painters in this period. For many artists, recognition did not always come with wealth, and many were dependant on demand from patron regents. Artists were often from middle class backgrounds and affluent homes 17 . What is clear is that there was a marked tendency for paintings to be purchased in the same town as they were produced. This is likely to be as a result of a strong sense of civic identity, especially in major towns, in light of the stadholderless political situation. Prices depended largely on demand abroad, as this increased the significance of an artist’s prestige, and therefore how much the wealthiest were willing to pay. An example of an artist of exceptional recognition was Gerrit Dou, a master of the fine painting ( fijnschilder ). He was commissioned by the Dutch States General to paint a gift for Charles II upon his succession to the throne of England in 1660. However, he refused to leave his home town of Leiden, but was visited by many prominent figures like Cosimo III de’ Medici in 1669. For local regents and merchant connoisseurs, it became a mark of political affluence to have a ‘cabinet’ of work from well-known artists. Demands to stock these cabinets perhaps provided many artists with a false sense of security. A grand example of this was the Amsterdam Town Hall (‘ Burgerzaal ’), painted in 1670, locating the virtue of the Dutch Republic in interpretation of Roman history. Many town halls also featured works depicting the revolt against Spain, again showing the sense of civic identity which Dutch society used its own art market to express. Price identifies an art market which ‘had a native independence to draw pride and influence’. By virtue of their middle class background, and the more practical education that it came with, Dutch artists were far less influenced by classicist views of the rules of art, further facilitating this unique nature of its market. It was common for artists to find alternative forms of employment to earn sufficient wages 18 , including crafts like weaving, carpentry and owning taverns. The urban bourgeoisie turned to art-dealing as a more profitable enterprise in which fortune could be made from export to European capitals, but most artists sold their work on the open street market. Famously, Vermeer took over his father’s tavern in Delft. Painters were by no
12 Israel, ‘The Dutch Republic’, Part III, Art and Architecture, 1647-1702 13 Michael North, Art and Commerce in the Dutch Golden Age , New Haven and London, [1997] pp. 82 14 Israel, ‘The Dutch Republic’, Part III, Art and Architecture, 1647-1702 15 Price, ‘Culture and Society’, Painting-The Artist as Craftsman [1974] 16 Price, ‘Dutch Culture in the Golden Age’, Painting and Graphic Art [2012] 17 Wayne Franits, ‘The Cambridge Companion to Vermeer’ pp.2 18 Michael North, ‘ Art and Commerce in the Dutch Golden Age’ , New Haven and London, [1997] pp. 71
41
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker