.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
Although Schelfhout lived his whole life in The Hague, he often found inspiration for his panoramas - one of his regular genres - in the dunes near Haarlem. He also painted extensive river landscapes, seen from a raised viewpoint, in Gelderland.
The present lot may well be compared with the masterpiece; Gezicht op Haarlem, 1840 (private collection, The Netherlands), with a wood worker resting on a tree trunk in the foreground.
Similar use of motives and composition lay-out can be seen in a painting dating from 1835 (Zomers rivierlandschap in Gelderland, Dordrechts Museum). In comparison with other similar panoramas it seems justified to date the present lot between 1835 and 1845, although a more precise date of execution would be after 1840, when the artist style and technique had come to full maturity.
Many paralels can ofcourse be seen in the work of his equally famous collegue Barend Cornelis Koekkoek. Already during their lifetime both artists were already by their life reputed the two foremost landscape artists of the Netherlands.
they shared the same preferences with regard to their choice of subject matter; both artists excellerated in panoramic river landscapes and wintery scenes. Strikingly they featured identical landscape charateristics. For the summer landscape they chose a raised viewpoint looking towards distant towns along meandering rivers.
Both artists chose the flat landscape of Holland for their winters, with overpowering skies over a low arranged horizon.
The applied staffage and motives in the present lot are all highly typical for Schelfhout. Whereas Koekkoek never missed an opportunity to place an abundant tree in the foreground, to serve him as a repoussoir, the role of the tree in Schelfhout's summer landscapes is less important in the middle and later stage of his career.
In the present lot only shrubs appear to grow in the foreground; all larger trees are pushed back and only to be seen in the distance.
Schelfhout on the other hand frequently integrated cut-down tree trunks as can be seen in the lower left foreground. Koekkoek in his lesson book on landscape painting disapproved of this, what he called "disfigurement of nature" and thought of them as not suitable for the landscaping art (B.C. Koekkoek, Herinneringen en Mededeelingen van een Landschapschilder, 1841, pp. 187-188).
The quality of Schelfhout's skie is unchallenged and is unmistakably examplified by the subtile rendering of that in the present lot.
Contemporaries considered Schelfhout's rendering of the sky vastly superior to that of his colleague Koekkoek (Roeder, "Eene morgen op de tentoonstelling te s'Hage", De Beeldende Kunsten, 1841 2).
Koekkoek himself qualified the work of Schelfhout as excellent: "Valt uwe keuze op vlakke, eenvoudige landschappen, dan vindt gij immers in Holland allen daartoe de rijkste stof? Wilt gij zien wat er van een vlak, eenvoudig landelijk tafereel, als hetzelve den stempel der natuur het merk der waarheid draagt, schoons en bevalligs gemaakt kan worden? Beschouwt dan den werken van onzen grooten Schelfhout. Daarin zult gij de eenvoudige natuur op het sierlijkst, maar tevens met eene getrouwheid en waarheid, wat alleen Schelfhout vermag, voorgesteld vinden" (B.C. Koekkoek, op.cit., p.243).
The present lot may well be compared with the masterpiece; Gezicht op Haarlem, 1840 (private collection, The Netherlands), with a wood worker resting on a tree trunk in the foreground.
Similar use of motives and composition lay-out can be seen in a painting dating from 1835 (Zomers rivierlandschap in Gelderland, Dordrechts Museum). In comparison with other similar panoramas it seems justified to date the present lot between 1835 and 1845, although a more precise date of execution would be after 1840, when the artist style and technique had come to full maturity.
Many paralels can ofcourse be seen in the work of his equally famous collegue Barend Cornelis Koekkoek. Already during their lifetime both artists were already by their life reputed the two foremost landscape artists of the Netherlands.
they shared the same preferences with regard to their choice of subject matter; both artists excellerated in panoramic river landscapes and wintery scenes. Strikingly they featured identical landscape charateristics. For the summer landscape they chose a raised viewpoint looking towards distant towns along meandering rivers.
Both artists chose the flat landscape of Holland for their winters, with overpowering skies over a low arranged horizon.
The applied staffage and motives in the present lot are all highly typical for Schelfhout. Whereas Koekkoek never missed an opportunity to place an abundant tree in the foreground, to serve him as a repoussoir, the role of the tree in Schelfhout's summer landscapes is less important in the middle and later stage of his career.
In the present lot only shrubs appear to grow in the foreground; all larger trees are pushed back and only to be seen in the distance.
Schelfhout on the other hand frequently integrated cut-down tree trunks as can be seen in the lower left foreground. Koekkoek in his lesson book on landscape painting disapproved of this, what he called "disfigurement of nature" and thought of them as not suitable for the landscaping art (B.C. Koekkoek, Herinneringen en Mededeelingen van een Landschapschilder, 1841, pp. 187-188).
The quality of Schelfhout's skie is unchallenged and is unmistakably examplified by the subtile rendering of that in the present lot.
Contemporaries considered Schelfhout's rendering of the sky vastly superior to that of his colleague Koekkoek (Roeder, "Eene morgen op de tentoonstelling te s'Hage", De Beeldende Kunsten, 1841 2).
Koekkoek himself qualified the work of Schelfhout as excellent: "Valt uwe keuze op vlakke, eenvoudige landschappen, dan vindt gij immers in Holland allen daartoe de rijkste stof? Wilt gij zien wat er van een vlak, eenvoudig landelijk tafereel, als hetzelve den stempel der natuur het merk der waarheid draagt, schoons en bevalligs gemaakt kan worden? Beschouwt dan den werken van onzen grooten Schelfhout. Daarin zult gij de eenvoudige natuur op het sierlijkst, maar tevens met eene getrouwheid en waarheid, wat alleen Schelfhout vermag, voorgesteld vinden" (B.C. Koekkoek, op.cit., p.243).