DOI Heft:
No. 132 (February, 1908)
DOI Artikel:Zilcken, Philippe: Johannes Bosboom
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.28253#0273
Johannes Bosboom
J
OHANNES
ZILCKEN.
BOSBOOM. BY PHILIP
At the beginning of the nineteenth century
art in Holland, as in most countries of Europe, had
fallen into conventionalism and mannerism. The
works of the glorious old masters were no longer
understood ; Frans Hals and Rembrandt were no
longer valued; Vermeer of Delft was unknown.
How great was this decadence of taste at the time
I speak of, is shown by what an old gentleman
told me long ago. In his boyhood, I remember
him saying, he and his sister were wont to play at
ball in the attic of their parents’ house, using as
their target some old, dusty portraits, which after-
wards proved to be by Frans Hals ! Again, the
father of a friend of mine discovered somewhere
that a small ironing board had been made out of
part of a panel painted by Cuyp ! Many other
similar incidents could be
When the clever, but quasi-classic David settled
in Brussels, he succeeded in imposing his own
conceptions so strongly, that the healthy, vigorous
Flemish art was nearly put aside, because, accord-
ing to his ideas, beauty of colour, one of the chief
features of painting, was considered barbarous,
rough, sensual. Himself little of a colourist, he
had a disdain for colour ; and at the same time he
failed to understand that nearly all great artists
have expressed themselves most perfectly through
their own nationality and the age in which they
lived, and he believed that a new expression, a
new ideal, might be created by didactic subjects.
This theory of his was not even based on a right
conception of really great Greek art. Notwith-
standing these convictions of his, however, David
exerted a good influence in the reaction against the
decadent eighteenth century school, by devoting
himself to a close study of nature. This is
quoted.
During the occupation
of the Netherlands by the
French, the Napoleonic
wars left little time for the
pursuit of art, and, when
peace was once more estab-
lished, such painters as there
were worked in an empty,
academical style, under the
influence of the school of
David. Instead of being
inspired by the merits of
their famous ancestors, they
merely studied their tech-
nique ; they looked only
at the surface of their pic-
tures, and failed to pene-
trate the spirit, the concep-
tion of those masters; nor
at the same time did they
value the most individual
among them, but were
attracted only to those
whose qualities of execution
give them a place, though
not a foremost place,
among the great painters
of their country. Thus it
happened in those days
that Gerard Dou, Mieris,
Metsu, etc., came in for
more attention than the
others.
THE ARTIST IN HIS STUDIO
BY J. BOSBOOM
XXXIII. No. 132.—February, 1908.
257
J
OHANNES
ZILCKEN.
BOSBOOM. BY PHILIP
At the beginning of the nineteenth century
art in Holland, as in most countries of Europe, had
fallen into conventionalism and mannerism. The
works of the glorious old masters were no longer
understood ; Frans Hals and Rembrandt were no
longer valued; Vermeer of Delft was unknown.
How great was this decadence of taste at the time
I speak of, is shown by what an old gentleman
told me long ago. In his boyhood, I remember
him saying, he and his sister were wont to play at
ball in the attic of their parents’ house, using as
their target some old, dusty portraits, which after-
wards proved to be by Frans Hals ! Again, the
father of a friend of mine discovered somewhere
that a small ironing board had been made out of
part of a panel painted by Cuyp ! Many other
similar incidents could be
When the clever, but quasi-classic David settled
in Brussels, he succeeded in imposing his own
conceptions so strongly, that the healthy, vigorous
Flemish art was nearly put aside, because, accord-
ing to his ideas, beauty of colour, one of the chief
features of painting, was considered barbarous,
rough, sensual. Himself little of a colourist, he
had a disdain for colour ; and at the same time he
failed to understand that nearly all great artists
have expressed themselves most perfectly through
their own nationality and the age in which they
lived, and he believed that a new expression, a
new ideal, might be created by didactic subjects.
This theory of his was not even based on a right
conception of really great Greek art. Notwith-
standing these convictions of his, however, David
exerted a good influence in the reaction against the
decadent eighteenth century school, by devoting
himself to a close study of nature. This is
quoted.
During the occupation
of the Netherlands by the
French, the Napoleonic
wars left little time for the
pursuit of art, and, when
peace was once more estab-
lished, such painters as there
were worked in an empty,
academical style, under the
influence of the school of
David. Instead of being
inspired by the merits of
their famous ancestors, they
merely studied their tech-
nique ; they looked only
at the surface of their pic-
tures, and failed to pene-
trate the spirit, the concep-
tion of those masters; nor
at the same time did they
value the most individual
among them, but were
attracted only to those
whose qualities of execution
give them a place, though
not a foremost place,
among the great painters
of their country. Thus it
happened in those days
that Gerard Dou, Mieris,
Metsu, etc., came in for
more attention than the
others.
THE ARTIST IN HIS STUDIO
BY J. BOSBOOM
XXXIII. No. 132.—February, 1908.
257