Sluit menu
Sluit menu
Nachdem viele Besucher des Amsterdamer Rijksmuseums Rembrandts Gemälde bewundert haben, werfen sie immer einen Blick auf die berühmten niederländischen Stillleben aus dem 17. Jahrhundert (Show) in all ihrer Farbe und Vielfalt. Der damalige Künstler muss über viel Fachwissen verfügen, um eine Vielzahl von Objekten einzeln und so „real“ wie möglich zu präsentieren und andererseits eine attraktive und ausgewogene Komposition von Farben, Formen und Materialien zu erzielen. Er musste auch in der Lage sein, das Licht auf jedem Objekt einzeln darzustellen und alle Arten von Materialien und Oberflächen darzustellen: feuchte Trauben, samtige Pfirsiche, rohe glänzende Granatäpfel und tiefrote Erdbeeren mit ihren leicht versunkenen Samen sowie Porzellanvasen, Keramik und Silbergeschirr, Brokatteppiche, Glaswaren und Zinn; Je unterschiedlicher der materielle Ausdruck ist, desto herausfordernder ist er und desto mehr Wertschätzung erhält der Maler. Der Kunde lässt das Gemälde seinen Reichtum zeigen: Der mehr als üppig gefüllte Tisch und das schöne und oft teure Interieur werden der Außenwelt als Zeichen des Status gezeigt. Heute spielt auch die Symbolik der abgebildeten Objekte eine große Rolle: Als eine Art Warnung an den Kunden stellen die Künstler die Vergänglichkeit des Lebens dar, indem sie unter anderem Früchte und Blumen in Stillleben verwenden (die bald umgekommen sein werden) …).
In den folgenden Jahrhunderten erweiterte sich das Genre weiter mit neuen Themen und neben dem Prunkstillleben beispielsweise dem (See-) Bankett, dem Jagdstück, dem Vanitas-Stillleben, dem Esstisch und dem sogenannten “Toebackje” (Stillleben von Pfeifen und anderen Rauchartikeln). Es werden immer mehr Varianten in verschiedenen Stilen und Bewegungen hinzugefügt: in impressionistischen losen Schlüsseln, kubistischen Formen und expressionistischen Farbspritzern – Kunstformen, bei denen die exakte Ähnlichkeit der individuellen Erfahrung des Künstlers untergeordnet ist. Darüber hinaus sehen wir die genaue Wirkung wieder, aber jetzt im Realismus des 20. Jahrhunderts.
When Impressionism gives the artist more freedom to portray, the diversity of types of still lifes increases. For example, more still lifes arise from intimate corners in the room, kitchen, hall in the boudoir or painting studio. The impressionist painter Salomon Garf Still life with strawberries in a basket settles after his education at the Amsterdam Academy in het Gooi. His great talent for painting is evident in all genres that he performs on commission or not. He is known to have a preference for intimate still lifes when painting for pleasure.
After her education, Coba Surie follows painting lessons with Jo Bauer-Stumpff and Coba Ritsema. Lizzy Ansingh then brings her into the circle of Amsterdamse Joffers. Each “Joffer” worked independently and had her own personality and artistic level. but their weekly encounters created lifelong friendships. Surie has a clear preference for still lifes of fish or everyday objects, which she paints in warm, rich shades. Illustrative of this preference over her portraits is her statement: “Give me still lifes, at least that won’t talk.”
The Leiden School painter Chris van der Windt is seen in his time as an all-rounder with a great talent. Together with Arend Jan van Driesten and a few others, he travels through the landscape around Leiden to paint nature. Lucas Verkoren also regularly hooks up. The Leiden School belongs to the afterglow of the Hague School and Van der Windt will always remain loyal to this movement. He also likes to make still lifes, in warm colors and in an impressionistic touch. The subjects are simple, usually flowers, fruit or household goods from his own environment. They are painted by him unadorned and often so close that there is a close-up. He is known for regularly displaying his flowers without a vase to spice up the composition. Lukas Verkoren, who traveled through the surrounding countryside with Chris van der Windt and others in his early years, developed into a valued realist in the late 1930s under the influence of the new businesslike approach. Two still lifes from his realistic period are depicted here.
Almost all 20th century realists prefer painting still lifes. They love the precise, finely detailed representation of their objects, following their illustrious 17th-century predecessors.
In the relatively small, painted oeuvre of Jan Wittenberg his finely elaborated, modest still lifes take a prominent place. From the twenties he is seen as an early representative of the new realism. However, he lacks the melancholy and melancholy that are so characteristic of this movement. He takes a little more distance, pays more attention to division of surfaces, composition and color and starts from the innocence of things. His compositions consist of simple subjects against a dark or dirty white background and are often viewed from above. With this he zooms in and, like the impressionist Chris van der Windt, comes to a close-up of the work. In his simplicity and elaboration, his oeuvre is reminiscent of that of Jan Mankes.
After Gerrit de Jong opted for a life as a self-taught artist in the 1930s, his talent was quickly recognized. When he participated in the group exhibition Our Art of Today in the Rijksmuseum in 1940, the museum purchased three of his exhibited works. De Jong admires the precision of old masters such as Jan van Eyck and Hendrick Avercamp. In the painting depicted we see this in the portrait that probably represents Agatha van Schoonhoven, which was painted in 1529 by Jan van Scorel (1495-1562).
If we now look at the genre of still life through all art movements, we can say that in color and diversity it is not inferior to one of his 17th-century basic pieces, the showpiece still life.
