The Modern Dutch School

(via The Outline of Art) William Orpen writes:

The Art of Joseph Israels, Roelofs, Mauve, Mesdag, Blommers, And the Brothers Maris

1

For more than a hundred years after the deaths of Hobbema and Willem van de Velde, Holland produced no painter of European importance. The Dutch School, which during the seventeenth century had risen, as we have seen, to the highest eminence, sank during the eighteenth century into trivial virtuosity. Pictures became conjuring feats rather than true works of art, for they evoked neither tender sentiments nor noble thoughts, but only excited wonder by their manual dexterity. In craftsmanship many of these paintings were remarkable in their meticulous detail, and while some painters—like Wellem van Mieris (1662-1747), whose ‘Fish and Poultry Shop’ is in the National Gallery—carried on the traditions left by Jan Steen and Gerard Dou, still more made a reputation among their contemporaries by their minute renderings of fruit and flowers. These they painted with the patient skill of miniaturist, and they delighted in introducing into their pictures flies and other small insects whose tiny, but marvelously realistic forms, had to be discerned with the aid of a magnifying-glass. Among the artist who excelled in this style of painting may be mentioned the woman-painter of Amsterdam, Rachel Ruysch (1664-1750), and her contemporary, Jan van Huysum (1682-1749), both of whom are represented in the National Gallery. Here we may see how skillfully they both painted flowers, how cunningly the one introduces a butterfly, the other a snail; but we soon weary of this pettifogging cleverness, which may amuse our eyes for a few moments, but can never touch our hearts.

It was not till towards the middle of the nineteenth century that any great revival of painting showed itself in Holland. One who helped to prepare the ground for the new generation was Johannes Bosboom (1817-91), who painted impressive pictures in oils and water-colors of the interiors of Dutch Churches and cathedrals. He was influenced by the seventeenth-century painter Emanuel de Witte (1607-92), who had also painted these subjects not only with great accuracy of linear perspective but with broad effects of light-and-shade; Bosboom painted these interiors still more broadly and invested them with a dim atmosphere of grave grandeur and solemnity.

Bosboom always gives us a more or less generalized vision, and contrasted with the particularity of the painters who immediately preceded him, he may be said to have given a new direction to Dutch painting.

Another pioneer and forerunner of the modern movement was Willem Roelofs, who was born at Amsterdam in 1822, and went to France, where he made the acquaintance of Corot and other members of the Barbizon School. For some time Roelofs lived with these artists in the now famous village, and painted the forest of Fontainebleau in their company; then he returned to the Netherlands, taking with him new ideals of landscape painting. Though he lived chiefly in Brussels, Roelofs had a considerable influence on Dutch painting. He was never an imitator of Corot, Daubigny, or Troyon, though he learnt something from all of them, as we may see in his picture ‘A Summer’s Day, and it was through him that a knowledge and appreciation of their paitings first spread through Belgium and Holland. Roelofs helped to found at Brussels in 1868 the Société Libre des Beaux Arts (Free Society of Fine Arts), of which Corot, Daubigny, and Millet became honorary members, and to this exhibition both Dutch and Belgian artists contributed. It became the rallying-point of the younger generation and of those painters who were beginning to be affected by the Barbizon pictures which so many of them had seen in Paris. After living in Brussels for forty years Roelofs moved to The Hague, where he died in 1897.

The Modern Dutch School (continued)