VERMEER EPITAPH

 Also see:

VERMEER AND DE HOOCH The Dynamic Duo of Delft

By Allen Hirsch

By Allen Hirsch

I am an artist and collect and research Dutch art. I had seen the Vermeer show in 1995 at the National Gallery of Art in Washington. The crowds of people waited in long lines daily to enter a show that had the sacred atmosphere of a church. There was a profound silence in the show that echoed Vermeer's meditative women as people moved among the works so beautifully hung. As a young artist, I thought it was the greatest cultural event in my lifetime.

The Rijksmuseum is one of the most impressive museum spaces in the world. The iconic twin spires rise above the grand hall where Vermeer, De Hooch and Rembrandt hang together in alcoves surrounded by the intricate detailing on the walls and ceiling and located a few hours horseback ride from Vermeer’s hometown. A Vermeer exhibit in situ? Things here on Earth just don't get better- it's like seeing Jimi Hendrix at Woodstock or Hamilton on Broadway. I snatched a museum membership a few days before they were sold out and booked my journey from New York.

Vermeer was born in Delft in 1632 into the new Dutch Age of Seeing where the microscope and telescope showed a new perspective of man's place in the Universe. Artists in turn focused their eyes to their own worlds and developed genre, still life and landscape painting which are considered the foundations of these genres in Western Art. Vermeer was inspired by modern studies of optics and the camera obscura which introduced artists for the first time to the visual world on a flat surface. Vermeer internalized these new ways of seeing and incorporated them brilliantly in his work.

But beyond this epoch, Vermeer has a timeless quality in his work which captivates us. Perhaps it is his ability to organize in a universal way the structure of pictorial elements, light, paint and objects beyond the fashionable trappings of his time. Or perhaps it is the slow and meditative way he painted every nuance that is mirrored in the thoughtful expressions of his subjects. The daylight on a table, a woman reading a letter...has a perpetual modernity as he is responding to a new way of seeing purely through the eyes.

I kept postponing the trip but finally left during the last days of the exhibit and checked into the hotel booked next to the Rijksmuseum.

ROOM 1

I walked into the first room and to what is arguably the star of the show.

 

The "View of Delft," called by some the best painting in the world. Proust famously wrote about that "little patch of yellow wall." etc. I entered this smallish room that had no gravitas and the painting was on the front wall and The Little Street was to the right of it. The walls were painted a strong maroon color which I have never seen in a museum before and this cast a maroon fog over my visual field. The basic law of simultaneous contrast states that every color influences in an opposite manner the color next to it. A maroon wall will therefore add a greenish tinge on the Vermeer due to our optic sensors. Couple that with the surprisingly low bluish illumination on the painting and they managed to create the worst presentation of this picture in modern history. The painting had none of the luminosity that impressed me in previous viewings. It is hard to dull down a Vermeer- but the bluish/greenish light coupled with the maroon haze did the trick. The yellows were lost and Proust would not have been inspired to write that famous passage. The Little Street next to it fared better as it had more cool colors and strong whites that overcame the poor illumination.

This low daylight style illumination continued throughout the show. It is not what we are accustomed to when seeing a Vermeer painting which usually sparkles under museum balanced temperature lighting.

ROOM 2

 

In this beautiful long rectangular room, I found the ugliest and most questionable Vermeer painting in the exhibit, Christ in the House of Martha and Mary presented as the centerpiece.

There is nothing here that indicates Vermeer's hand. It is a sloppy alla prima painting with no sensibility to paint layers which Vermeer exhibits in all the other paintings in the gallery. Here- Jesus looks like a lumberjack and his relaxed hand looks like it was painted by Bob Ross. If it is by Vermeer, then it would be a very early work- perhaps one of his first pictures- and certainly not have the dating offered in the exhibit- 1654-55. It would have to be more in the 1640s.

On the left, hangs Saint Praxedis and Diana and Her Companions. One can see in both pictures the young Vermeer experimenting with glazing paint. Saint Praxedis is his first developed and balanced composition and dated 1655. It has nothing in common with the Christ in the House of Martha and Mary which is dated at the same time. One would think will all the reexamination and scholarship going on, that they would have had time to review and update these things.

One the right side of the room hangs the great The Procuress, also one of his few dated pictures at 1656. I would have liked to see this hung as the focal point of the room. This shows Vermeer coming into his own and mastering paint as we know him, with the rich yellows that (in this case) overcome the maroon haze. The painting is one of his larger canvases.Having seen the show many times before writng this, I am able to reassess some of these pictures be:er in context. I was able to see now how bunched up the composition of The Procuress is. It feels as if everything in crammed into this canvas barely fitting. This is unusual and doesn't happen in other Vermeers; he always gives air and balance around things. This is the hallmark of his work. The question now arises in my mind as to whether this picture may have been cut down. If it was- like the Night Watch in the other side of the museum- it would have been a truly breathtaking Vermeer. But since there is no way to recoup lost canvas, there is one thing that could be done- change that very loud gold frame which only exaggerates the cropped feeling to a more traditional black Dutch frame. This will give the composition more air to breathe.

 

ROOM 3

In this rather strongly painted blue green room, sits Woman Reading a Letter. This is the newly restored painting that revealed a Cupid painting behind the white wall. This painting on the wall brings Vermeer even closer to Pieter de Hooch's work as the latter liked to anchor flat pictorial elements firmly on the back wall. After seeing the works in this exhibit, I see that Vermeer almost always did the same.

I met there with Jonathan Janson who runs the well known Essential Vermeer website who said that the uncovered brownish yellow Cupid painting is actually still covered by a varnish applied by Vermeer himself that had now become dirty and yellow. The original Cupid painting can be seen in The Young Woman at the Virginals a few rooms ahead and it has a very cool palette. Ironically, in an attempt to show what Vermeer originally wanted to paint on that canvas, the powers that be in Dresden managed to obscure the basic color balances that Vermeer painted by leaving this discolored 350 year old varnish.

ROOM 4

I am met by the famous 

 

The Milkmaid hung alone. In light of seeing Vermeer's other works now, this white background area is just too big and empty and the whiteness completely overtakes the light in the figure and still life. This stark floating background however presents the Milkmaid as an iconic image and this is probably why the painting was likely altered in the first place. There have been x-rays of this image and there appears to be a jug hanging behind her and maybe a map but I doubt whether the Rijksmuseum would want to change this universally branded cereal-box image by bringing in more pictorial elements- even if they were part of the artist's original intention. This image in the public domain now has its own life.

ROOM 5

There are 3 paintings here of completely different periods. Vermeer went thru 4 general styles in my opinion (post 1656) 1. sparkly light phase, (View of Delft, Milkmaid etc) 2.a tonal phase- mostly muted browns and cool colors(Woman with Lute, Woman Holding a Balance), 3.darker period (Girl w Pearl Earring, Woman with a Letter) .and 4. a brighter more graphic period at the end(Lady Writing a Letter to Maid, A Lady Standing at the Virginals).

Here we have the Woman with a Lute from the Met in the best hanging of it I have seen- thankfully on a large dark grey wall which brings out the subtleties and the yellows.

We have the sparkling Officer and Laughing Girl from the Frick- a brilliant piece and the Lady Writing a Letter to Maid from Dublin at the center of the room, which also looks great. Here we can see 3 of Vermeer's major stylistic shifts together. 

ROOM 6

The side walls have small works from the National Gallery- including the notorious 

 

Girl with a Flute(discredited by the NGA as a Vermeer) and the Leiden Collection picture at the Virginals next to the Lacemaker- also a controversial piece. This is illuminating to show these pieces next to related works. Girl with Red Hat next to the Girl with a Flute is a struggle to untangle. We see the same woman who doesn't appear in any other Vermeers and one balanced composition with what appears to be lapiz lazuli added in the fabric and the other painting which is an out of proportion, unbalanced piece- but with Vermeer's signature touches and colors(but no lapiz in fabric) . Could he have had a student that worked with him and the master retouched the picture? There is a theory out there Vermeer's daughter was a painter and the Girl with a Red Hat is her self-portrait. Girl with a Flute is a puzzling work and doesn't have the organization of the other Vermeers. One possibility is that there are several hands on this including the master. Perhaps there will be a better form of analysis one day to help solve this riddle.

 

Then we have Leiden Collection picture of the A Young Woman Seated at the Virginals. Although some have doubted this, it has the finesse of Vermeer’s other virginal pictures, although it seems more like a sketch. It is a late painting so it is possible it was never properly finished when he died. There is another reason I believe it is a Vermeer. He seems to have purposely alternated painting his more picturesque daughter (Maria?-Girl with Pearl Earring) and the other more homely looking daughter- but with her own beauty. One can match up these pairs of paintings and now the Leiden collection makes sense matching the London picture.

ROOM 7

 Here we have paintings paired to show proximity of execution effectively. The two women at the Virginals from London are presented side by side and appear to be painted close together.

We have the Samuel Hoogstraten- inspired view next to it which Pieter de Hooch famously painted as well. This positioned nearby the virginal pictures and due to similarities of graphic style suggests a proximity of execution as well.

Hung nearby is the Woman in Blue Reading a Letter. Here we see the beautiful nuances of light on the wall peaking behind the forms. It is the opposite of the Milkmaid as the figure is harmonized through the whole composition and not cut out and placed in front it. One can even see the blue reflected light from the dress subtly on the wall.

Next to this is A Lady Writing. A dark piece with a brilliant yellow coat and blue tablecloth that rhymes with the Mistress and Maid from the Frick Collection at the end of the room.

This is a helpful pairing as we can see the similarity of the still lives and tonality which puts them close together in time. Jonathan reminded me that the black background of the Frick painting was originally not this dark: there was apparently a green tapestry behind the figures but all the colors faded due to Vermeer using the unstable verdigris pigment.

Speaking of dark backgrounds: Vermeer's most famous Girl with a Pearl Earring was removed at the end of March and sent back to the Mauritshuis. One wishes to see at least some image left of it to see how and where it would fit in with the rest. .

ROOM 8

 

Here in the final room of the exhibit, we start with an interesting but younger work of Vermeer from Germany, The Glass of Wine. While this work has incredible detail, it does not have the sophisticated organization of his later work. Why this early work is at the end of the show is puzzling but it is grouped appropriately next to the Frick painting of the Girl interrupted by Her Music. Apparently, the right side of the picture with the figures had gone through a sort of "Monkey Christ-style" restoration. It is completely incongruous with the sophistication and clarity of the painted still life, chair and window on the left side of the picture which rhyme with the other German canvas. I heard that there is a fear of removing this restoration as there may be much abrasion and paint loss underneath but I think this overpainting is so bad and confusing that it can only be improved upon by either 1) removing the other hand and showing Vermeer's original but incomplete intention or 2) improving the repainting next time around with better understanding of what would be on the surface.

Next to this is the Geographer, one of two solitary men canvases Vermeer painted in 1668-69(the other is dated 1668).

Here we can wonder about the transition he was making between styles as it has tonal and sparkling light qualities. I don't understand the arrangement of this canvas next to these other paintings. 

On the other side of the room is the Woman with a Pearl Necklace and the large Allegory of Faith painting. In this Berlin canvas, I am taken back again with the unusual white wall which is not painted like any other Vermeer white wall(except the Milkmaid). There are no shadows from the windows and even more notably, there is little gradation of light on the wall as it moves away from the window. This appears again to be a repainted Vermeer to make it more Vermeerish but in reality, takes it farther from the artist's approach to composition, light and balance. In fact, an x-ray analysis shows a map behind the woman which would set it properly among other works of that period. For now, we must wait for the Staatliche Museum to take action.

The Met Museum's Allegory of Faith is at the end of the room. This is a strange dark painting(a cleaning?) that has some of echoes of Vermeer's later works and the Art of Painting. Next to it hangs the Woman Holding a Balance. Another motif famously mirrored in the oeuvre of Pieter de Hooch who is generally considered to have painted his version first.

I expected to turn the corner and see The Art of Painting concluding the show. It is one of the great paintings in the world(granted Vermeer did several) and is the culmination of his artistry as a painter. No doubt he felt the same as he kept it until the end of his life.

But alas, I end up in the gift shop. Show over. I found out later that the Vienna canvas had traveled to Japan and came back slightly damaged so the museum won't lend it anymore. This was a sore loss to this exhibit.

I returned 6 more times to the exhibit however and eventually forgot about all the missing pieces, the lighting and curatorial mixups. I just buried my eyes in the subtle shifts of color, tone and form so artfully orchestrated inside these little rectangles. In the end, the context and architecture doesn't matter and this is where the show succeeds. Every Vermeer is a treasure and every inch of one delights our eyes and hearts like nothing else.