Lot Essay
See colour illustration
An indecent proposal
Details
Jon Popp (1862-?)
An indecent proposal
signed lower left J. Popp
oil on panel
31.5 x 23 cm
An indecent proposal
signed lower left J. Popp
oil on panel
31.5 x 23 cm
Further details
END OF AFTERNOON SESSION
An introduction to the Amsterdam 'impressionists' by Rieta Bergsma and Richard Bionda
In the period that the painters of the Hague School could reap the fruits of considerable, international recognition, a group of the younger generation in Amsterdam got together around 1885 to give artistry a new stature with a keen and totally uncompromising impulse. They armed themselves against the art critics more than against the landscape painters of the Hague School, for whom many of these young artists had an enormous respect. Some had even been trained by them for shorter or longer periods of time. G.H. Breitner, who exchanged The Hague for the capital in 1886 and whose daring and free views ran up against the most resistance, had worked in Willem Maris' studio for some time. Isaac Israels had been started off by his father, Tholen by P.J.C. Gabriel, Willem de Zwart by Jacob Maris, whilst Witsen still worked regularly side by side with Anton Mauve in 1885. Eventhough traces of influence remained and were fortunately visible in some cases with painters of the 'Larense School'. If one looks at work by Tholen, De Zwart or Voerman, one sees they always managed to give a personal portrayal, sometimes thanks to a brusquer palette, or a more emotional brushstroke, or by shifting the accent to the tenuous and primitive
qualities of a river landscape with cattle, so that the images as a
whole was immediately lifted above a banal, impressionistic
interpretation.
Especially in the case of town views, figure studies and still life
paintings, we see, particularly with Breitner, Isaac Israels and Floris Verster, surprising new interpretations which often shocked the
contemporary public. This accent on individualistic interpretation and personal approach has been the most important step forward for this
group, which also included, besides the above mentioned artists, people like Jacobus van Looy, Jan Veth, Eduard Karsen, Maurits van der Valk,
Suze Robertson and Piet Meiners. Individualism was, in this case
strongly linked to key concepts as integrity and sensitivity. Van der
Valk, who just like Witsen and Veth regularly put pen to paper to
divulge new ideas (mostly in the 'Nieuwe Gids', the platform not only
for writers and poets of the movement called 'Tachtig', but especially so for this young generation, with whom they sometimes developed strong
ties of most profoundly and purely, would be the most personally
portrayed ('dat het beste kunstwerk wel dat zal zijn, wat het diepst en schoonst gevoeld, het persoonlijkst is weergegeven'). For that reason
one referred to mood art ('stemmingskunst').
In the first place artistry was understood to be a passionate personal state of being; one worked for oneself and those equally disposed, not necessarily for the general public or commerce. So veth also made a
distinction between artists, labourers and narrators ('artisten,
werklui en vertellers'). Young Willem Witsen defined the term artist as a person who is more than just an ordinary human being. He is the
privileged person who is placed above his fellowmen by nature, not existing for their convenience, but to be considered their superior, someone from whom they have a lot to learn, and who can give them joy and a richer life, if they endeavour to understand him ('meer (was) dan een gewoon mensch (...). Hij is de bevoorrechte die door de natuur gesteld is boven zijn medeschepselen, - die niet bestaat te hunnen gerieve, maar door hen moet beschouwd worden als hun meerdere, van wien ze veel te leeren hebben, en die hun genot en een rijker leven geven kan, wanneer zij willen trachten hem te begrijpen').
That extra which the artist possessed or should possess was, in fact, the greater degree of sensitivity with which reality was seen and felt. Their senses worked continuously at high gear wherever they were, eventhough for some that was preferably Amsterdam, a metropolis where there was so much to do by day as well as by night than in the countryside. The sharpness with which some of the younger generation defended themselves, in articles as well as in letters to individuals, is a sign of the status the artist assumed. It is also no exaggeration to say that the members of the Amsterdam impressionists emphatically presented themselves as 'modern' artists and that, together with the writers and poets of the 'Nieuwe Gids' they saw themselves as a cultural elite, an avantgarde that enjoyed acting like bohemians, and having their picture taken as dandies. This, in contrast to the in the nineties almost classic painters of the Hague School, who seemed to give in easily to the desires and dollars of a well-oiled international art-trade. The easy-going, content expressions with which they were so eager to please photographers in their luxurious studio's around 1900, was quite revealing in this case.
It doesn't help to critisize the concepts Amsterdam 'Impressionism' or Amsterdam 'School', as is often done because of the occasional big differences in their respective views and working methods. The latter, a result of the inclination towards individualism, was actually what linked them. It's not completely fair either to include some painters, such as Floris Arntzenius who soon demonstrated a somewhat free touch and the same preference for urban themes, in the original group, no matter how meritorious their work is.
It can do no harm either to point out once more that the existing criteria for quality, selfimposed by the artist, did not automatically translate itself into present-day price levels. In other words, the prices that the various artists maintained around 1895 were considerably more equal than the sale prices at present would suggest. Artistic criteria do not necessarily translate themselves into commercial criteria. Evening- and night theme's, by Breitner, Karsen or Witsen, tend to be discarded as gloomy and are, for that reason, commercially valued less than their lighter paintings. Eventhough the artists considered them very successful at the time because they managed to capture the ideal of mood in a passionate way.
The younger generation also sought beauty in the ordinary or, if need be, in ugliness; be it in the case of cities, people, animals or plants. Breitners preferance, as from the nineties, for surroundings of the Hague School artsits. The same can be said of Isaac Israels outlook in specialist such as Margatha Roosenboom. We see that willful conception back in their daring technique and palette. The rough, tumulous world outside, but also that of a danscafé inside, seemed to acquire a very personal imagery, a suitable set of techniques such as the quasi steno-type way of sketching so naturally captured the direct impression. The spontaneous quality of such impressions still have something refreshing, definitely in comparison to the more arranged form of visual interpretation that the previous generation demonstrated. In other cases, such as with Karsen or Witsen, unpopulated city areas seemed to balance on the edge of realism and symbolism. The viewer is invited in such cases to look at the whole in a different way. He should experience it, be prepared to take the time to absorb the essence of it.
A reasonable amount of work by this group of artists still seems destined to appeal to small initiated public, including Dutch museums. At the same time experience teaches that works from this period, interesting for their quality can fetch unpredictable prices, which is also the case with drawings and self-made prints from around 1880-1885, techniques which, thanks to the establishment of the Dutch Etchingclub in 1885, got a terrific boost. Internationally the 'Amsterdammers' could never make the same furore as the leaders of the Hague School shared. Regardless of a few exceptions. Recently, the Parisian Musée d'Orsay bought, in these very same rooms, an imposing, almost black canvas titled 'Moonlight' (Christie's Amsterdam, 31 October 1989, lot 30). The work - the only real landscape that Breitner ever made - would not have looked bad in a Dutch museum and would for example have been a perfect link between a Jacob Maris and the moonscape by Jan Sluyters (Christie's Amsterdam, 23 May 1989, lot 87) which by then was well-renowned. The colourful Sluyters fetched about a million at time, the Breitner went for one hundred and fifty thousand Dutch guilders.
(cf. Richard Bionda, Carel Blotkamp, ed., De Schilders van Tachtig. Nederlandse Schilderkunst 1880-1895, Zwolle 1991)
An introduction to the Amsterdam 'impressionists' by Rieta Bergsma and Richard Bionda
In the period that the painters of the Hague School could reap the fruits of considerable, international recognition, a group of the younger generation in Amsterdam got together around 1885 to give artistry a new stature with a keen and totally uncompromising impulse. They armed themselves against the art critics more than against the landscape painters of the Hague School, for whom many of these young artists had an enormous respect. Some had even been trained by them for shorter or longer periods of time. G.H. Breitner, who exchanged The Hague for the capital in 1886 and whose daring and free views ran up against the most resistance, had worked in Willem Maris' studio for some time. Isaac Israels had been started off by his father, Tholen by P.J.C. Gabriel, Willem de Zwart by Jacob Maris, whilst Witsen still worked regularly side by side with Anton Mauve in 1885. Eventhough traces of influence remained and were fortunately visible in some cases with painters of the 'Larense School'. If one looks at work by Tholen, De Zwart or Voerman, one sees they always managed to give a personal portrayal, sometimes thanks to a brusquer palette, or a more emotional brushstroke, or by shifting the accent to the tenuous and primitive
qualities of a river landscape with cattle, so that the images as a
whole was immediately lifted above a banal, impressionistic
interpretation.
Especially in the case of town views, figure studies and still life
paintings, we see, particularly with Breitner, Isaac Israels and Floris Verster, surprising new interpretations which often shocked the
contemporary public. This accent on individualistic interpretation and personal approach has been the most important step forward for this
group, which also included, besides the above mentioned artists, people like Jacobus van Looy, Jan Veth, Eduard Karsen, Maurits van der Valk,
Suze Robertson and Piet Meiners. Individualism was, in this case
strongly linked to key concepts as integrity and sensitivity. Van der
Valk, who just like Witsen and Veth regularly put pen to paper to
divulge new ideas (mostly in the 'Nieuwe Gids', the platform not only
for writers and poets of the movement called 'Tachtig', but especially so for this young generation, with whom they sometimes developed strong
ties of most profoundly and purely, would be the most personally
portrayed ('dat het beste kunstwerk wel dat zal zijn, wat het diepst en schoonst gevoeld, het persoonlijkst is weergegeven'). For that reason
one referred to mood art ('stemmingskunst').
In the first place artistry was understood to be a passionate personal state of being; one worked for oneself and those equally disposed, not necessarily for the general public or commerce. So veth also made a
distinction between artists, labourers and narrators ('artisten,
werklui en vertellers'). Young Willem Witsen defined the term artist as a person who is more than just an ordinary human being. He is the
privileged person who is placed above his fellowmen by nature, not existing for their convenience, but to be considered their superior, someone from whom they have a lot to learn, and who can give them joy and a richer life, if they endeavour to understand him ('meer (was) dan een gewoon mensch (...). Hij is de bevoorrechte die door de natuur gesteld is boven zijn medeschepselen, - die niet bestaat te hunnen gerieve, maar door hen moet beschouwd worden als hun meerdere, van wien ze veel te leeren hebben, en die hun genot en een rijker leven geven kan, wanneer zij willen trachten hem te begrijpen').
That extra which the artist possessed or should possess was, in fact, the greater degree of sensitivity with which reality was seen and felt. Their senses worked continuously at high gear wherever they were, eventhough for some that was preferably Amsterdam, a metropolis where there was so much to do by day as well as by night than in the countryside. The sharpness with which some of the younger generation defended themselves, in articles as well as in letters to individuals, is a sign of the status the artist assumed. It is also no exaggeration to say that the members of the Amsterdam impressionists emphatically presented themselves as 'modern' artists and that, together with the writers and poets of the 'Nieuwe Gids' they saw themselves as a cultural elite, an avantgarde that enjoyed acting like bohemians, and having their picture taken as dandies. This, in contrast to the in the nineties almost classic painters of the Hague School, who seemed to give in easily to the desires and dollars of a well-oiled international art-trade. The easy-going, content expressions with which they were so eager to please photographers in their luxurious studio's around 1900, was quite revealing in this case.
It doesn't help to critisize the concepts Amsterdam 'Impressionism' or Amsterdam 'School', as is often done because of the occasional big differences in their respective views and working methods. The latter, a result of the inclination towards individualism, was actually what linked them. It's not completely fair either to include some painters, such as Floris Arntzenius who soon demonstrated a somewhat free touch and the same preference for urban themes, in the original group, no matter how meritorious their work is.
It can do no harm either to point out once more that the existing criteria for quality, selfimposed by the artist, did not automatically translate itself into present-day price levels. In other words, the prices that the various artists maintained around 1895 were considerably more equal than the sale prices at present would suggest. Artistic criteria do not necessarily translate themselves into commercial criteria. Evening- and night theme's, by Breitner, Karsen or Witsen, tend to be discarded as gloomy and are, for that reason, commercially valued less than their lighter paintings. Eventhough the artists considered them very successful at the time because they managed to capture the ideal of mood in a passionate way.
The younger generation also sought beauty in the ordinary or, if need be, in ugliness; be it in the case of cities, people, animals or plants. Breitners preferance, as from the nineties, for surroundings of the Hague School artsits. The same can be said of Isaac Israels outlook in specialist such as Margatha Roosenboom. We see that willful conception back in their daring technique and palette. The rough, tumulous world outside, but also that of a danscafé inside, seemed to acquire a very personal imagery, a suitable set of techniques such as the quasi steno-type way of sketching so naturally captured the direct impression. The spontaneous quality of such impressions still have something refreshing, definitely in comparison to the more arranged form of visual interpretation that the previous generation demonstrated. In other cases, such as with Karsen or Witsen, unpopulated city areas seemed to balance on the edge of realism and symbolism. The viewer is invited in such cases to look at the whole in a different way. He should experience it, be prepared to take the time to absorb the essence of it.
A reasonable amount of work by this group of artists still seems destined to appeal to small initiated public, including Dutch museums. At the same time experience teaches that works from this period, interesting for their quality can fetch unpredictable prices, which is also the case with drawings and self-made prints from around 1880-1885, techniques which, thanks to the establishment of the Dutch Etchingclub in 1885, got a terrific boost. Internationally the 'Amsterdammers' could never make the same furore as the leaders of the Hague School shared. Regardless of a few exceptions. Recently, the Parisian Musée d'Orsay bought, in these very same rooms, an imposing, almost black canvas titled 'Moonlight' (Christie's Amsterdam, 31 October 1989, lot 30). The work - the only real landscape that Breitner ever made - would not have looked bad in a Dutch museum and would for example have been a perfect link between a Jacob Maris and the moonscape by Jan Sluyters (Christie's Amsterdam, 23 May 1989, lot 87) which by then was well-renowned. The colourful Sluyters fetched about a million at time, the Breitner went for one hundred and fifty thousand Dutch guilders.
(cf. Richard Bionda, Carel Blotkamp, ed., De Schilders van Tachtig. Nederlandse Schilderkunst 1880-1895, Zwolle 1991)