I haven’t quite decided just yet on the layout of these write-ups. They are very much a work in progress, and I would be most grateful for any and all constructive criticism. That being said, please forgive me if any of this comes off as confusing.
Before I write anything critical, I would just like to say that I wholeheartedly enjoyed this exhibit, not simply because I have a proclivity for Netherlandish art, but because it was a wonderful opportunity to examine with greater detail the oeuvre of a single artist who has, in my opinion, been given too little attention by the art historical community in the course of the last century. Hopefully, this exhibit will change some of this.
Merrymakers at Shrovetide, ca. 1616-17. Oil on canvas. 51 3/4 x 39 1/4 in. (131.4 x 99.7 cm)
From the outset, it is clear that Hals had extreme confidence in creating a very unique and individual style. On the scene before Rembrandt and Vermeer, Hals helped mark the beginning of the Golden Age of Dutch Painting. Yet, a study of his works shows a moderate, sometimes minimal, use of tenebrism and an inconspicuous veneer that leaves his paintings with a more matted look; an attribute not normally associated with Dutch art. Though sis works may be less dramatic or austere than that of his contemporaries and subsequent masters, his smooth transitions between warm “stage-light” and fire lit shadows (as demonstrated in the painting above) creates an atmosphere of contentment not to be overlooked. I should add that it is unclear how much these warm tones are actually a product of aged varnish.
Portrait of a Bearded Man with a Ruff, 1625. Oil on canvas. 30 x 25 in. (76.2 x 63.5 cm)
Petrus Scriverius (1576-1660) and Anna van der Aar (b.1576/1577, d. after 1626), 1626. Oil on wood. 8 3/4 x 6 1/2 in. (22.2 x 16.5 cm)
Shown above are a three paintings, but please look at them as really two groups. The painting above is an example of a typical Hals portrait, while the two portraits below are another example of portraits, but substantially smaller in size. All completed within the span of one year, they highlight some interesting features of Hals’ technical work. The photographs above unfortunately give you very little understanding of Hals’ brushwork, so please take my word for my upcoming observations. Though both sets of portraits appear roughly the same, there is a marked difference in the level of detailed brushstrokes between the two. In the large Portrait of a Bearded Man with a Ruff, Hals employs broader, looser strokes that up close seem borderline Impressionistic. He clearly plays with lighting effects the way Monet and others would pioneer in the late 19th century. The two smaller portraits fall back on traditional Dutch practice of fine lines and layering paint to create definition. This is not to say that they are in any way a style other than that of Hals, but they are technically done more conservatively than his usual portrait style shown in the previous painting. One factor for this change in technique is almost assuredly due to the dramatic change in canvas space (or wood space to be exact), after all a smaller painting invites a viewer to come up close to examine it. The closer to the painting, the more detailed and finely painted it needs to be to pull off the same quality of realism as its larger counterpart.
The Fisher Girl, ca. 1630-32
This next painting marks a noticeable change in Hals’ approach. One of the few outdoor scenes done by Hals, it provides an opportunity for a change in color palette and lighting. Meant to show a girl on the outskirts of the Haarlem harbor (the city where Hals worked for the majority of his career), Hals creates a gay scene of a carefree goods seller within the environs of a calm seaside backdrop. A close study of the fisher girl’s clothing flaunt Hals’ transition to broader, quicker brushstrokes. He creates a complimentary juxtaposition of smoother, blended strokes in presenting the girl’s anatomy against the vivacious, energetic swipes that form her costume. It is truly amazing how modern this painting is. To look at her clothing only, one could easily mistake this for the work of a painter 200 years younger.
But all technical fascination aside, I absolutely love Hals’ need to insert levity into this composition with the placement of the two figures seated on the bluffs behind the young girl. Hals directs our eyes to them by directing the girl’s gaze at them. Could it be her current ebullience comes from watching them? They certainly brought a smile to my face as I watched them point energetically at the ships returning to port. Is it possibly a little bit of proud advertising on Hals’ part? Maybe he felt his city’s harbor (the main economic engine within Haarlem at the time) deserved its own pictorial tribute of sorts. And what could be more Dutch than hinting at the harbor instead of actually showing it!
Arriving at the last painting on display (actually two paintings of Malle Babbe; the first being a work which impersonated Hals’ style and the second being a photograph of the actual painting done by Hals), the curator of the exhibit created an interesting opportunity to compare the work of a Hals impersonator and the actual master. Though mimicked quite competently, attentive observation quickly showed the imitator’s inherent lack of technical skill when compared with the original. He simply couldn’t capture Hals’ ability to speedily generate emphatic, jagged strokes that maintained a complete semblance of realism. Just as masterful Chinese and Japanese ink painters create recognizable forms out of swipes of black wash, Hals creates a ruff from a lightning slash of white and an owl from a handful of black brushstrokes.
Towards the end of his career Hals had developed a painting style that bordered on the calligraphic. Though never an experimenter with light and shadows like Rembrandt, Hals played with human perception of shapes and forms that would eventually be picked up again by the Impressionists, Post Impressionists, and Abstract Expressionists. Upon finishing this exhibit I concluded that, while Hals will never top Rembrandt or Vermeer in my book in terms of Dutch painters, he gains a new place of honor as one of the few artists I consider almost entirely non-derivative in the creation of his style; Cézanne being another who matches this description. His work seriously needs to be reevaluated by the academic community as playing a role in the work of Degas, Manet, Cézanne, and many others in the 19th century. This statement will only be vindicated after some extensive research, but one final painting by Robert Henri that was exhibited had a wall text stating clearly Henri’s travels in Europe had facilitated his becoming influenced by the work of Hals and Degas (Velázquez was also mentioned). It’s not much, but it’s a start.
Thank you for taking the time to read this and please please comment to your heart’s content. Let’s work together to make me a better and more interesting writer on art! For your sake ^_^
