![]() "The Age of Rembrandt: Dutch Paintings and Drawings of the Seventeenth Century," January 11–March 2, 1969, no. "The Age of Rembrandt: Dutch Paintings and Drawings of the Seventeenth Century," October 19–December 22, 1968, no. "Metropolitan Museum Masterpieces," June 26–September 1, 1952, no. "Rembrandt," January 12–February 28, 1951, no catalogue? Hempstead, N. ![]() "Loan Exhibition of Paintings by Frans Hals, Rembrandt," November 18–December 31, 1947, no. "Loan Exhibition of Paintings, Drawings, and Etchings by Rembrandt and His Circle," December 19, 1935–January 19, 1936, no. "Thirteenth Loan Exhibition of Old Masters: Paintings by Rembrandt," May 2–31, 1930, no. ![]() "A Loan Exhibition of Twelve Masterpieces of Painting," April 16–28, 1928, no. 132 (as "Portrait of a Lady," lent by the Earl of Egremont). Here the object is also a luxury item, and perhaps another echo of the male portrait, where gold aglets dangle at the waist. Timepieces usually refer to mortality or temperance in Dutch portraits. A gold watch and key, hung on chains, gleam against the black silk of the woman's skirt. It appears possible that Rembrandt painted two quite different portraits of this woman, or of the same couple (if a half-length male portrait is missing), possibly for the man and wife and for his or her parents. The correspondence between the costume and hairdo in this portrait and that in Rembrandt's half-length Portrait of a Young Woman (Museum of Fine Arts, Houston), also dated 1633, is exceptionally close, and the sitters' faces are very similar. Nicolaes Tulp (Mauritshuis, The Hague), and also recalls that of the troubled potentate in Rembrandt's David Playing the Harp to Saul (Städelsches Kunstinstitut, Frankfurt) of about 1629–30. The woman's pose in The Met's canvas may be compared with that of the uppermost figure in The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Rembrandt's experiments in this vein were partly inspired by the Flemish painter and international court portraitist Anthony van Dyck (1599–1641), but more immediate precedents are found in his own work. By contrast, this work and its pendant in Cincinnati represent his stringest departure from the conservative norm. In the Van Beresteyn portraits of 1632 (The Met 29.100.3, 29.100.4), Rembrandt was clearly working for a client who preferred the traditional approach. ![]() In Holland, the design of single and, especially, pair portraits had remained conservative through the 1620s, influenced by the heritage of Spanish court portraiture and formal models from England. During this time, the artist drew upon his earlier experience as a history painter, and on the latest innovations in portraiture by Amsterdam artists Thomas de Keyser (1596/97–1667 see The Met 64.65.4) and Nicolaes Eliasz Pickenoy (1588–1650/56 see The Met 1976.100.22) in order to lend dramatic focus and psychological intensity to the potentially routine task of recording human likenesses. The pendants may be considered key works within Rembrandt's development as a portraitist during his first few years in Amsterdam, from about 1632–34. The canvases are the same size and were probably cut from the same bolt of cloth they are also entirely consistent in style and complementary in composition, and in the pictorial effect of such motifs as lace collars and cuffs, and conspicuous ribbons. That the portraits were painted as a pair is not proven by known documents, but can hardly be doubted. The paintings were separated before 1793, when this work appeared alone in the Paris estate sale of Vincent Donjeux. This large portrait of a vivacious young woman is the pendant to the Portrait of a Man Rising from His Chair in the Taft Museum, Cincinnati, which is signed and dated 1633 together they are two of the boldest formal portraits by any Dutch artist of the period.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |