A discussion on Rembrandt in eighteenth-century Amsterdam: Petrus Camper versus Cornelis Ploos van Amstel

5-2-2010

by Jan Baptist Bedaux

On 12 October 1767 De Philosooph, a spectatorial periodical characteristic of the Dutch En-lightenment, published an article which was, to put it mildly, provocative. The author, who signed himself with the initial "C", was severely critical of "the Dutch lack of taste." [1]

"Onze Landgenooten schynen geheel geene lust te hebben om dat aangenaame vermogen onzer Ziele, waar door wy vermaak gevoelen in de gewaarwording van wezenlyk SCHOON , tot welke soort van zaaken of voorwerpen dit dan ook be¬hooren moge, te willen volmaaken ; Zy schynen aan de Franschen en Engelschen voornaamelyk die zorg te willen overlaaten, en onverschillig voor die fyne aandoeningen, die zy niet gevoelen, om dat zy ze nooit hebben aangekweekt, onbekwaam om zelve eenige bepaalingen te maaken, gaan zy by andere Volkeren verneemen, hoe de dingen hun moeten voorkomen of aandoen."

"Our countrymen appear not to have the least ambition to develop that fine quality of our soul which gives us pleasure in experiencing true beauty, no matter in what sphere or object it may be found. They apparently wish to leave this matter to the French and English in particular and, indifferent to the finer sensibilities, which they do not feel since they have never cultivated them, and not qualified to make any judgments themselves, look to other peoples to perceive how they should appraise or be affected by things."

The treatise is of interest not so much because of the author's theoretical ideas on taste, which closely resemble those expressed by Montesquieu and Voltaire in the Encyclopedie, but rather because he introduces us to his personal taste regarding certain Dutch artists and works - a taste that was certainly unorthodox for the period.[2]

After a brief attack on the work of Dutch poets, which he considered to be smothered in "the old junkshop of pagan gods and goddesses," as well as on the products of music, painting and sculpture, he extended his criticism to architecture, which in his opinion most betrayed the lack of taste in the sphere of the fine arts. [3] The article would probably never have provoked a reaction had the name of Jacob van Campen not been mentioned in this context. And it was he, the darling of the Classicist critics, who was berated most severely of all. After belittling the style of Amsterdam houses, the author focused his criticism on the Town Hall on Dam Square (now the Royal Palace), which the proud Amsterdammers claimed to be the eighth wonder of the world.

"Men ziet deze Volgzugt en dit gebrek van Smaak nog duidelyker in het Raadhuis onzer Stad, door VAN CAMPEN gebouwd. Het uitwendige van de Gevel is eenvoudig, de ingang niets minder dan grootsch, en zekerlyk te laag. Als men het geheel beschouwt, ziet men schielyk, dat de Architect niet bekwaam was om een Gebouw zo uitgestrekt, als dit is, te ordonneeren."

"One sees this passion for imitation and lack of taste even more clearly in our Town Hall, built by Van Campen. The exterior of the facade is plain, the entrance by no means grand, and certainly too low. Surveying it as a whole one sees at once that the architect was not competent to proportion such a large building as this."

The interior, too, with the exception of the Citizen's Hall (Burgerzaal), meets with nothing but disapproval. The passage dealing with the Public High Court (Vierschaar) is characteristic of the general tone of the article.

"Nauwelyks is men de enge Poortjes doorgekomen, of men ziet door de kopere tralien, een mar-mere Vierschaar, welker omtrek zeer klein is naar de oneindige hoogte van de Verdieping. Die Vierschaar, hoe kostbaar ook, is, voor zo verre de Schoonheid in eene volmaakte unitas of houding bestaat, zonder eenigen smaak, zo ten aanzien van de Bouworde als de Bas relieven."

"One has hardly passed through the narrow gates before, through the brass lattices, one sees a High Court of marble, the outlines of which are minis¬cule in comparison with its infinite height. This High Court, however costly, is, insofar as beauty exists in a complete unitas or harmony, entirely lacking in taste, both in the architecture and the bas-reliefs" (fig. 1).

1. View of the west wall of the Vierschaar in the Town Hall, with marble reliefs by Artus Quellinus and his workshop (1651-1654). The three scenes of justice, from left to right, are The Judgment of Zaleucus, The Judgment of Solomon and The Judgment of Consul Brutus. Amsterdam, Royal Palace (formerly the Town Hall)

Typical of the author's enlightened spirit are his comments on the sculptural program of this room, which conflicted with his ideas on jurisdiction and sense of justice.

"Ook koomen my de Zinnebeelden niet gepast voor. Op het stuk van SALOMO zal ik niets zeggen, schoon 'er, met betrekking op onze wyze van Regtspleegen, wel wat op te zeggen zoude zyn: Maar dat van SELEUCUS is ten minsten geen voor¬beeld van Regtvaardigheid. De Wet vorderde dat een Overspeeler met blindheid gestraft werde; Hy liet zyn Zoon een Oog uitsteeken, en zich zelven een ander, en by verydelde de Wet, door een schuldigen half of byna geheel te verschoonen, en een onschuldigen een gedeelte van de straf op te leggen. Op het stuk van BRUTUS is ook vry veel te zeggen, dog dit alles betreft myn hoofdoogmerk niet; Ik keere weder tot het Gebouw."

"Nor do the symbols strike me as fitting. I shall not remark on the Solomon, [4] although some objec¬tions might be raised in respect of our manner of administering justice, but the image of Zaleucus is certainly no example of justice. [5] The law stipulated that an adulterer be punished with blindness. He had one of his son's eyes put out and one of his own, and he obstructed the law in that he half or almost completely spared a guilty man, and imposed part of the punishment on an innocent man. There is also a good deal to be said on the Brutus, [6] but none of this is my principal concern. I shall return to the building itself."

2. Bartholomeus van der Helst, The Celebration of the Peace of Munster, 18 June 1648, in the Headquarters of the Crossbowmen's Civic Guard (St George Guard) Amsterdam, signed and dated 1648. Canvas, 232 x 547 cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum (on loan from the City of Amsterdam since 1808)

The article takes a surprising turn when "C" arrives in the Guardrooms of the Town Hall.

"De Krygsraad-Zaalen zyn zeer eenvoudig dog van hoogte en breedte immer zo wel geregeld als de onderste Zaalen; Zommige Schilderstukken zyn overheerlyk, maar de Smaak van den tyd munt in verscheidene derzelver zeer uit. Alle de Burger¬Officieren, van Colonel of tot Adelborsten toe, zit-ten meest te eeten of te drinken; Als men deze Mannen niet voor braave Lieden kende, zoude men zeggen, dat goede Cier en Rhynsche Wyn het voornaamste gedeelte van hun Dienst en Waaken uitmaakten. Daar is nogtans een enkel Stuk hier van uitgezonderd, dat van den grooten REMBRAND, een Man even verheven in Ordonnantie, als in het verkiezen van licht en bruin. De groote, de ver¬wonderlyke Rembrand schildert met een waarlyk stout Penceel, en vertoont Actie en Man¬haftigheid, die schynen te leeven; Men behoort in de Deur aan den ingang van dat Vertrek te staan, om zig over de kracht van dat heerlyk stuk te verwonderen. In alle de Triomfstukken van ALEXANDER door LE BRUN geschilderd, door geheel Europa zo geroemd, en zo geliefkoosd by de Franschen, is niet zo veel verhevenheid van Geest, nog in de Ordonnantie, nog in licht en bruin, en vooral in 't Coloriet, als in dit Meesterwerk van Rembrand.

"Men moet bekennen, dat 'er thans in de Ver¬trekkamer zeer fraaije stukken hangen, door
FLINK, en VAN DER HELST geschilderd, ook boven op de groote Krygsraadskamer, , dog in alle die Schilderyen ontbreekt werking, het geheele Corps doet niet met al; de Schilder is zo verlegen geweest met de Actien zyner Bevelhebberen, dat by den een een Kous laat optrekken, den ander een Laars; e¬Het Coloriet nogthans is heerlyk, en het was te wenschen, dat onze nieuwe Schilder-Academie de Jongelingen het Coloreeren en Tekenen naar die schoone Stukken leeren liet."

"The Guardrooms are very simple, yet in height and width are at least as well proportioned as the lower chambers. Some of the paintings are wondrous, but the taste of their time is particularly manifest in various of their number. All the burgher officers, from colonel to cadet, are mostly eating or drinking. If one did not know these men to have been good honest fellows one would say that merriment and Rhenish wine constituted the most important part of their service and guard [fig. 2]. [7] However, there is one exception, the painting by the great Rembrandt, a man as sublime in composition as in the selection of chiaroscuro [fig. 3]. [8] The great, marvelous Rembrandt paints with a truly bold brush, and portrays action and courage that appear to be alive. One should stand in the doorway of the room to admire the power of that wonderful painting. In all the triumphal scenes of Alexander painted by Le Brun, so renowned throughout Europe and so beloved by the French, there is not so much high invention, [9] neither in the composition, nor in the chiaroscuro, nor, es¬pecially, in the coloring, as there is in this masterpiece by Rembrandt.

"It must be admitted that some very fine paintings now hang in the Guardroom, painted by Flinck [fig. 4] and Van der Helst [fig. 2], also upstairs in the large Council Chamber of the Civic Guard, but all lack efficacy, and the militia group does not form a unity. The artist was so much at a loss as to how to portray the actions of his commanders that he shows one pulling up a stocking, the other a boot [fig. 5]. [10] The colors, however, are wonderful, and it would be desirable for our new Painting Acadmy to teach the young to color and draw after those beautiful paintings." [11]

3. Rembrandt, The Company of Captain Frans Banning Cocq and Lieutenant Willem van Ruytenburch (known as The Nightwatch), signed and dated 1642. Canvas, 363 x 437 cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum (on loan from the City of Amsterdam since 1808)

4. Govert Flinck, The Amsterdam Civic Guard Celebrating the Signing of the Peace of Munster, 1648, signed and dated 1648. Canvas, 265 x 513. Amsterdam, Historisch Museum