DOI Heft:
Nr. 1-4
DOI Artikel:Brusewicz, Lech: On the perception of paintings in 17th century Holland
DOI Seite / Zitierlink:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.18898#0014
a par with literaturę or as unsuccessful caricatures or vulgar deviations from the literary princi-
ples of the art of representation. They had to use the same figurative language of naturalistic
forms as was used in representations openly based on signs and allegories or of an illustrative
and literary character. Still van Mander made no distinction when he recommended painters
use various „Poetelijck' advijsen, die eenen sin beteyckenend' aenwijsen", symbolically-allegorical
images called uutbeeldinghen, versieringhen and other hieroglyphic signals meant to indicate
metaphoric or additional meanings of individual themes. The degree to which he found the ability
to use allegoric language necessary for the creation and perccption of paintings is evidenced by his
dedication of a large pait of Het Schilder-Boeck to the symbolism of various uutbeeldinghen and
motifs from. Ovid's Metamorphoses that he interpreted by means of Christian ethics and Renai-
ssance hieroglyphics! He also explained the use of colours that, in suitable juxtapositions, carry
hidden meanings, in the same way34. A few decades later S. van Hoogstraeten even more strongly
stressed the importance of the symbolism of colours used in painting: „Apart from the knowledge
of paints, you must also knoW something of their symbolic meanings, in order that — if you
happen to work on alegorical and symbolic pictures — with the help of colours used in the cloth-
ing you can confirm the meanings of your images"35.
Contemporary poetry and belles lettres were not indifferent to the symblism of paintings
either; for instance H.L. Spicgal extolled a house fuli of pictures, rich in a symblic figurative
script he had seen, and J. vau den Vondel, who was familiar with C. Ripa's Iconologia, dwelled
on the assets of Lutma the goldsmith's invention which allowed him to create rebus figures36.
Earlier Erasmus and Dirck V. Coornhert, the Netherlandish humanists who had a great influence
on 17th century Dutch culture, advised artists that, in addition to faithfulness to naturę, the
objects depicted should also have a hidden allegoric meaning. Coornhert, whose collaboration
with the very popular graphic artist M. Heemskerck on the invention of sin-rijcke buduytselen,
was much appreeciated by van Mander, recommended the continual creation of new sonder-
linghe Figueren met beteyckeninghe37. According to him, they were not to be based on pre-esta-
blished rules but on the artists' individual invention inspired by the reading of poetry, in the
broad understanding of the word. This postulate was an inseparable element of all the theories
of Dutch painting, beginning with van Mander's work up to Houbraken's Groote Schouburgh der
Nederlandsche Konstschilders ofl718—1721. Not only learned books or allegorical plays mounted
by numerous associations of rhetoricians and the Amsterdam theatre Schouivburg together with
their vertooningen in which „with the help of mute personators, affairs and works of ancestors
and contemporaries are set before our eyes as in pictures"38 accounted, however, for the fascina-
tion with symbolism, unprecedented in contemporary Europę. The lemma of one ofthekey emb-
lems of R. Visscher's famous work Sinnepoppen read, Nihil est in rebus inane, which instructed
the reader that every object of everyday life, in addition to its ordinary meaning, can also have
a symbolic meaning that can be instrumental in edification. Even laughter could have this
meaning and perform this function, not only thanks to the comic principle of ridendo dicere
verum33.
34. Cf. C. van Mander, op. cit., Chapter XIV.
35. S. van Hoogstraeten, op. cit.. p. 222: ,,Gij moet nevens de kennisse der Verwen ook iets van hacre beduidingen weetert
om of*t u voorviel in verzieringen en zinnebeelden, door de koleuren der kleederen, uw uitbeeldingen te bekrachtigen.
36. Cf. G. Brom, op. cit.. p. 203.
37. Cf. I.M. Veldman, op. cit., p. 56; E.K. J. Reznicek, Hendrick Goltzius Zeichnungen, Utrecht, 1961, p. 193 ff.
38. Quoted after G. Kalff,, ,Bijdrage tot de geschiedenis van het Amsterdamach toneel in de 17de eeuw", Oud Holland, XIII.
895, p. 25.
39. Cf. II. Miedema, „Realism..." op. cit., p. 211 ff.
8
ples of the art of representation. They had to use the same figurative language of naturalistic
forms as was used in representations openly based on signs and allegories or of an illustrative
and literary character. Still van Mander made no distinction when he recommended painters
use various „Poetelijck' advijsen, die eenen sin beteyckenend' aenwijsen", symbolically-allegorical
images called uutbeeldinghen, versieringhen and other hieroglyphic signals meant to indicate
metaphoric or additional meanings of individual themes. The degree to which he found the ability
to use allegoric language necessary for the creation and perccption of paintings is evidenced by his
dedication of a large pait of Het Schilder-Boeck to the symbolism of various uutbeeldinghen and
motifs from. Ovid's Metamorphoses that he interpreted by means of Christian ethics and Renai-
ssance hieroglyphics! He also explained the use of colours that, in suitable juxtapositions, carry
hidden meanings, in the same way34. A few decades later S. van Hoogstraeten even more strongly
stressed the importance of the symbolism of colours used in painting: „Apart from the knowledge
of paints, you must also knoW something of their symbolic meanings, in order that — if you
happen to work on alegorical and symbolic pictures — with the help of colours used in the cloth-
ing you can confirm the meanings of your images"35.
Contemporary poetry and belles lettres were not indifferent to the symblism of paintings
either; for instance H.L. Spicgal extolled a house fuli of pictures, rich in a symblic figurative
script he had seen, and J. vau den Vondel, who was familiar with C. Ripa's Iconologia, dwelled
on the assets of Lutma the goldsmith's invention which allowed him to create rebus figures36.
Earlier Erasmus and Dirck V. Coornhert, the Netherlandish humanists who had a great influence
on 17th century Dutch culture, advised artists that, in addition to faithfulness to naturę, the
objects depicted should also have a hidden allegoric meaning. Coornhert, whose collaboration
with the very popular graphic artist M. Heemskerck on the invention of sin-rijcke buduytselen,
was much appreeciated by van Mander, recommended the continual creation of new sonder-
linghe Figueren met beteyckeninghe37. According to him, they were not to be based on pre-esta-
blished rules but on the artists' individual invention inspired by the reading of poetry, in the
broad understanding of the word. This postulate was an inseparable element of all the theories
of Dutch painting, beginning with van Mander's work up to Houbraken's Groote Schouburgh der
Nederlandsche Konstschilders ofl718—1721. Not only learned books or allegorical plays mounted
by numerous associations of rhetoricians and the Amsterdam theatre Schouivburg together with
their vertooningen in which „with the help of mute personators, affairs and works of ancestors
and contemporaries are set before our eyes as in pictures"38 accounted, however, for the fascina-
tion with symbolism, unprecedented in contemporary Europę. The lemma of one ofthekey emb-
lems of R. Visscher's famous work Sinnepoppen read, Nihil est in rebus inane, which instructed
the reader that every object of everyday life, in addition to its ordinary meaning, can also have
a symbolic meaning that can be instrumental in edification. Even laughter could have this
meaning and perform this function, not only thanks to the comic principle of ridendo dicere
verum33.
34. Cf. C. van Mander, op. cit., Chapter XIV.
35. S. van Hoogstraeten, op. cit.. p. 222: ,,Gij moet nevens de kennisse der Verwen ook iets van hacre beduidingen weetert
om of*t u voorviel in verzieringen en zinnebeelden, door de koleuren der kleederen, uw uitbeeldingen te bekrachtigen.
36. Cf. G. Brom, op. cit.. p. 203.
37. Cf. I.M. Veldman, op. cit., p. 56; E.K. J. Reznicek, Hendrick Goltzius Zeichnungen, Utrecht, 1961, p. 193 ff.
38. Quoted after G. Kalff,, ,Bijdrage tot de geschiedenis van het Amsterdamach toneel in de 17de eeuw", Oud Holland, XIII.
895, p. 25.
39. Cf. II. Miedema, „Realism..." op. cit., p. 211 ff.
8