The most famous cityscape of the Golden Age, View of Delft by Vermeer
- Inna Boukreeva
- May 12
- 12 min read
In the second half of the seventeenth century, a beautifully painted cityscape often adorned the interior of many a better-off family. Despite the increasing popularity of cityscapes as a genre in seventeenth-century art, we only know of two cityscapes by Johannes Vermeer (1632 - 1675). At least that is what we think, because no other cityscapes by this artist are known to us.[1]
This fact does not alter the fact that the cityscape View of Delft (1660-1661) was named by the French writer Marcel Proust in 1902 as the most beautiful cityscape of the seventeenth century.[2]
The painting shows us a view from the south of the city of Delft. The viewer loses his gaze in the infinite blue depth of the sky with large white-grey clouds, a scene that takes up most of the painting. Under the sky, two gates are depicted on the water with adjoining buildings. In the foreground, a barge is moored with a group of people in front of it and two small, unclearly painted female figures on the side.
This article examines to what extent the painting View of Delft by Johannes Vermeer distinguishes itself stylistically from other contemporary well-known cityscapes. In this context, the influence that the Delft elite may have had on the popularity of this genre is also examined. This research will take place within the framework of art history. In order to be able to give shape to this research, the views of contemporary and modern art critics on this subject will first be examined.
Art historian Mariët Westermann argued that after Protestant iconoclasm and the economic developments of the 16th century, the production and reception of art changed forever.[3] The patronage shifted from the churches to the wealthy bourgeoisie and the nobility, which increased the popularity of other genres, including the cityscape, as a testimony of pride in one's own city.
Since Pieter Claesz van Ruijven owned the majority of Vermeer's paintings, it is interesting to see what role this art collector could have played in the creation of this cityscape. [4] In search of the distinctive stylistic and visual means in the View of Delft, one can look at the style of the Delft art school. In Delft, art flourished precisely after 1650, before that this city was not seen as an art center.[5] American art historian Walter Liedtke described the concept of the Delft School of Painting as a synthesis of the qualities of artists from Delft and Haarlem.[6]
According to Liedtke, the migration of artists from Belgian Flanders to Delft also contributed to the development of this synthesis. In this respect, Cornelis de Bie's remark is interesting, in which he draws no boundaries between Dutch and Flemish art in his book from 1662.[7] The shift of the cultural and political centre from The Hague to Amsterdam changed the taste of the courtly to what the Northern schools of Amsterdam and Haarlem dictated in terms of style.[8] What style trends were alive at that time in the Northern art schools we can read for example in the contemporary art critic Philips Angel in his Lof der Schilder-konst (1641). He wrote that one should not neglect an extra effort "if one comes closer to the natural things with it". [9]
Taking into account these statements by modern art historians and 17th-century thinkers, this article examines how the genre of cityscapes developed in Delft after 1650 and what influence this development had on the creation of the painting View of Delft. It examines the distinctive stylistic features in this painting and the possible role of the Delft elite in its creation.
To what extent did the taste of the Delft elite stimulate the creation of View of Delft
After the death of stadtholder Frederick Hendrick van Oranje in 1647, courtly patronage began to show a declining demand. In addition, anti-Orange Amsterdam took over the role of The Hague as the cultural, political and financial centre of the new independent republic.[10]
At this time, challenges in the field of art usually came from art patrons, because if they wanted something new or important, they approached a true master of his craft. [11] Vermeer's most important patron was Pieter Claesz van Ruijven, a wealthy Delft brewer's son. After all, a respectable, erudite and versatile elite gentleman should take an artist under his wing. [12] As did Pieter Spiering in The Hague, who was the patron of a well-known contemporary artist Gerard Dou. Van Ruijven was a cousin by marriage of Pieter Spiering. [13] In the seventeenth century, many artists worked with only one or two patrons. The advance that the artists received from their patrons allowed them to pay for their daily living. [14] According to art historian Chong, Van Ruijven was the client for the View of Delft. [15] Vermeer had only two regular clients. Another important customer of Vermeer was the baker Hendrick van Buyten, but he owned only three paintings by Vermeer. [16]
Liedtke writes that there was an exchange of ideas about art between the elite gentlemen from The Hague and Delft, because it was easy to travel back and forth thanks to the canal barges. [17]
Wealthy gentlemen met for coffee and at the same time visited the studios of artists.[18] Among the collectors and art dealers in Delft was Abraham de Googe, who is known to have worked in collaboration with colleagues from Antwerp and Amsterdam.[19] This may indicate that there were trends that determined the art market and thus the popularity of the art genres among elite clients.
At the time that Vermeer painted the View of Delft, people in Delft were Orange-minded. Despite the fact that the city province of Holland could enjoy its stadtholderless period, the Prince of Orange was on the winning side. In 1660, Charles II of England visited Delft. He started at the Rotterdam gate, exactly the place that Vermeer had depicted. [20] Perhaps Vermeer tried to combine pride in his own city with important national events in his View of Delft. [21] The painting depicts the most important place of Delft with the towers of the New and Old churches. The tower of the New Church is depicted larger than the actual perspective that demands and demands attention by the light that Vermeer had focused on it. The church in general was a place where people got married, believed and were buried or hoped to be buried.[22] The bones of William I of Orange have been kept in the Nieuwe Kerk in Delft since 1622. “The Dutch stadtholder was honoured in Delft in a special way as a hero of the resistance against Spanish rule”. [23]
Delft was proud of its own existence as the centre of resistance and the residence of the murdered stadtholder. [24] It is possible that it was precisely this painting by Vermeer that gave Mr Van Ruijven a sense of pride and joy in his own city, also given the fact that, like his father, he held a position at the City of Delft.[25]
Alan Chong analyses cityscapes and relates Aelbert Cuyp's painting, View of Dordrecht, in composition to Vermeer's painting, pointing out that both paintings were created after ceremonial paintings were made of the same locations (fig. 8).[26] Cityscapes were often made of places where such ceremonial events had taken place, such as the visit of Charles II to the port of Delft. Perhaps Pieter van Ruijven, as an aristocrat and a man who held a position at a charitable institution in the City of Delft, had wanted to immortalize this place as an image of pride in his own city.
Is View of Delft stylistically different from contemporary cityscapes?
After 1650, Delft became increasingly important as an art city.[27] The location in the View of Delft shows the Port of Delft, a place of departure to other cities via Schie and Maas, but also to Flanders, Brabant, France and England.[28] This location of Delft on the river Schie and the easy access via ships and barges attracted many artists from far and wide. This fact is said to have ensured the synthesis of many Southern and Northern art styles.[29] Liedtke speaks of the Delft school and sees architectural painting and perspective painting as some of its stylistic characteristics.[30] Hajo Düchting also wrote that: “Halfway through the 17th century, a new school of painting began to develop in Delft that gave certain places and buildings an important place in the composition of the image.”[31]
Max Friedländer wrote: “The highest, the most imperishable that Delft has produced in the field of art is … the cityscape”. Rosenberg, Slive, Ter Kuile and Stechow also see the cityscape as a result of stylistic changes after 1650 and see the origin of this genre in Delft. They call this new movement architectural painting. [32] Perspective painting was probably the trend in the early 1660s and not only in Delft, but also in Rotterdam, Dordrecht, Middelburg and Antwerp. [33] The genre “perspectives” was often used by Pieter Saenredam. [34] His work in turn may also have influenced the style of Houckgeest. [35]
The modern approach to light within the so-called Delft School was set as a trend after 1650. Artists such as Gerard Houckgeest, Carel Fabritius, Pieter de Hooch and Adam Pijnacker can be counted among this school. Each artist had his own area within this school in which he was notable. Such as Pynacker and his Italianate landscape painting, Fabritius with his illusionistic style as the most talented pupil of Rembrandt. At this time, the ‘imitation of nature’ was the most important task. [36] However, Van Hoogstraten’s description of Fabritius’ wall paintings told of the use of amorphous distorted perspectives, which only seemed to take on a correct form when viewed from the right vantage point.[37] It is known that Vermeer owned three paintings by Fabritius and after his death Vermeer was seen as his successor. [38] Fabritius’ style is also recognisable in Vosmaer’s painting by the perspectivist illusion (fig.3, fig.5). Fabritius’ painting View of Delft “…does contain topographical elements, but belongs more to the perspectivist experiments that were particularly popular in Delft”. [39] Vermeer was also involved in this trend and used pinholes to indicate perspectives, which were found on fifteen of his works.[40]
In the period 1650-1660 cityscapes became increasingly popular.[41] Liedtke notes that Vermeer tried to combine various styles with his own observations and that from this his own refinement in composition, use of light and spatial construction could be distilled.[42] He went a step further in his work, and in Delft there was no other artist who could depict figures so finely.[43] This shows that Vermeer developed his own perfectionist style.
However, the composition in Vermeer's View of Delft is not entirely true to nature. It is an idealized composition of the city. In order to create balance and rhythm in the composition, Vermeer changed the number of people in the painting, extended the shadow of buildings in the water and made the tower of the Nieuwe Kerk somewhat larger and more prominent than the real perspective would require. In order to compare the composition of this painting with that of the Northern artists, in order to be able to speak of a synthesis of styles, we can compare it with, for example, the composition in the painting by Meindert Hobbema Haarlemmersluis en Singel, Amsterdam (1663-1665). This painting is of a similar format to that of Vermeer, with a horizontal position of the city and the water, but then of the canals in Amsterdam (fig. 6).
Because there was artistic exchange between Amsterdam and Delft artists, we can try to view the painting View of Delft by Vermeer as a kind of synthesis of styles, in which Vermeer uses the existing stylistic rules. This includes the illusionistic true-to-life style of Pieter de Hooch, the true-to-life representation of Rembrandt in Fabritius' paintings, but also the perspectivistic architectural style of the Amsterdam artists and the Italianate skies of Adam Pynacker. However, Vermeer adds his own perfectionism and his own talent to this synthesis. [44]
Conclusion
After Delft became an artistic centre after 1650 where many artists
Afbeeldingen
Johannes Vermeer, Gezicht op Delft, c.1660-1661, olieverf op doek, 96,5 x 115,7 cm, Mauritshuis museum, Den Haag, inv.nr. 92 (afb.1).
Jan Josephsz van Goyen, Gezicht op Den Haag vanuit het zuidoosten, 1650-1651, olieverf op doek, 460 x 170 cm, Haags Historisch Museum, Den Haag, inv.nr. 1862-0006-SCH (afb. 2).
Daniel Vosmaer, Gezicht op Delft met een fantasieloggia, 1663, olieverf op doek, 95 cm x 113 cm, Museum Prinsenhof Delft, Delft, inv.cat.nr NK 2927 (afb. 3).
Daniel Vosmaer, De Haven van Delft, 1658 - 1960, olieverf op doek, 85,5 cm x 101 cm, Ponce (Puerto Rico), museum Prinsenhof Delft (afb. 4).
Carel Fabritius, Gezicht in Delft, 1652, olieverf op doek, 15,4 cm x 31,6 cm, Nationale Gallerij London, London (afb. 5).
Meindert Hobbema, Haarlemmersluis en Singel, Amsterdam, 1663 -1665, olieverf op doek, 77 cm x 98 cm, Londen, The National Gallery, inv.nr. NG6138 (afb. 6).
Reinier Nooms, Zuiderkerk, Amsterdam, 1659, olieverf op doek, 40 cm x 48,5 cm, Leipzig, Museum der bildenden Künsten (afb.7).
Aelbert Cuyp, (kopie naar), Gezicht op Dordrecht by zonsondergang, ca. 1700 - ca.1842, olieverf op doek, 67 x 83,7 cm, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv.nr. SK-C-123 (afb. 8).
Pieter Jansz. Saenredam, Het oude stadshuis in Amsterdam, 1657, olieverf op paneel, 65,5 cm x 84,5 cm, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv.nr. SK-C-1409.
Herkomst afbeeldingen
Johannes Vermeer, Gezicht op Delft. [Schilderij]. Geraadpleegd op 1 maart 2021, van https://www.mauritshuis.nl/nl-nl/verdiep/de-collectie/kunstwerken/gezicht-op-delft-92/
Jan Josephsz van Goyen, Gezicht op Den Haag vanuit het zuidoosten. [Schilderij]. Geraadpleegd op 1 maart 2021, van
Daniel Vosmaer, De haven van Delft, [Schilderij]. Geraadpleegd op 1 maart 2021, van https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Daniel_Vosmaer_-_The_Harbour_of_Delft_-_WGA25336.jpg
Daniel Vosmaer, Gezicht op Delft met een fantasieloggia, [Schilderij]. Geraadpleegd op 24 april 2021 van
Carel Fabritius, Gezicht in Delft [Schilderij]. Geraadpleegd op 24 april 2021 van
Meindert Hobbema, Haarlemmersluis en Singel, [Schilderij]. Geraadpleegd op 24 april 2021 van https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/meindert-hobbema-the-haarlem-lock-amsterdam
Reinier Nooms, Zuiderkerk, Amsterdam, [Schilderij]. Foto uit het boek van Lakerveld, C. van. Opkomst en bloei van het Noordnederlandse stadsgezicht in de 17e eeuw. Amsterdam: Amsterdams Historisch Museum, Ontario: Art Gallery of Ontario, 1977.
Literatuurlijst
Arasse, D. Vermeer: faith in painting, trans. Terry Grabar. Princeston: Princeston Universitu Press, 1993.
Bailey, A. Gezicht op Delft: een biografie van Johannes Vermeer. Amsterdam: Uitgeverij Bakker, 2002.
Blankert, A., G. Aillaud, J.M. Montias. Vermeer. Amsterdam: Meulenhoff, 1992.
Boers, Marion. De Noord-Nederlandse kunsthandel in de eerste helft van de zeventiende eeuw, Hilversum: Uitgeverij Verloren, 2012.
Broos. B, D. de Clercq, Y. Kuiper, C. Vermeeren. “Het Gezicht op Delft en het Stinstra-mysterie”. Oud Holland, 110, (1996): 35-46.
Brown, C. “Vermeer: Washington and The Hague.” The Burlington Magazine, vol.138, No., 1117 (1996): 281-283.
Chong, A. Johannes Vermeer, in Palet Serie, H.J.W. Becht. Uittgeverij J.H. Gottmer, Bloemendaal: H.J.W. Becht BV, 1992.
Düchting, H. Jan Vermeer van Delft in de spiegel van zijn tijd. Weert: R&B, 1996.
Dumas, C., J. van der Meer Mohr. Haagse stadsgeszichten 1550-1800: topografische schilderijen van het Haags Historisch Museum. Zwolle: Uitgeverij Wbooks, 2005.
Heppner, A. “Thoré-Bürger en Holland, de ontdekker van Vermeer en zijn liefde voor Neerland’s kunst.” Oud Holland, 55, Brill (1938): 67-82.
Grijzenhout, F. Het straatje van Vermeer. Amsterdam: Rijskmuseum, 2015.
Groot, A. de, G. van Heemstra, C. Plomp. Ed. L.M. Helmus “Pieter Saenredam The Utrecht work: Paintings and Drawings by the 17th century Master of perspective.” The J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles. Mus cat. 2001.
Lakerveld, C. van. Opkomst en bloei van het Noord-Nederlandse stadsgezicht in de 17de eeuw. Amsterdam: Staatsdrukkerij, 1977.
Lokin, D. H.A.C, Michiel. C.C. Kersten. Delftse meesters, tijdgenoten van Vermeer. Zwolle; Waanders, 1996.
Martin, W. De Hollandsche schilderkunst in de 17e eeuw: Rembrandt en zijn tijd. Amsterdam: Meulenhoff, 1936.
Grijzenhout, F, A. Jansen, A. Krekeler, J. van der Veen, W. Weve, A, Jansen, red. Pieter de Hooch in Delf: uit de schaduw van Vermeer. Zwolle: WBOOKS, 2019. Mus.cat. Museum Prinsenhof Delft, Delft.
Miedema, H. “De St. Lucasgilden van Haarlem en Delft in de zestiende eeuw”. Oud Holland, (1985): 77-108
Schama, S. Kunstzaken. Amsterdam: Contact, 1997.
Smith. D.R. “Vermeer and Iconoclasm”. Deutscher Kunstverlag GmbH, (2011): 193-216.
Suchtelen, A. van, Arthur K. Wheelock, K. Wheelock. Hollandse Stadsgezichten uit de gouden eeuw. Zwolle: Uitgeverij WBOOKS, 2008.
Vandivere, A. “The Girl in the Spotlight: A technical re-examination of Vermeer’s Girl with a Pearl Earring.” Heritage Science, 26, (2020).
Velden, van der, B. “Proust, Vermeer en Rembrandt”. Maatstaf, 19, (1971-1972): 185.
Vlieghe, H. G. Kieft. De schilderkunst der Lage Landen, deel 2. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press B.V., 2007.
Westermann, M. “After Iconography and Iconoclasm: Current Research in Netherlandish Art, 1566-1700”. The Art Bulletin, 84, no.2 (2002): 351-372.
Wolf, B.J. Vermeer and the invention of seeing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001.
[1] Chong, Johannes Vermeer, 29. [2] Van der Velden, “Proust, Vermeer en Rembrandt”, 185. [3] Westermann. “After iconography and iconoclasm” current research in Netherlandish art, 1660-1700”, 353. [4] Westermann, 358. [5] Blankert, A., G. Aillaud, J.M. Montias. Vermeer, 79. [6] Liedtke, The Delft school, 101. [7] Westemann, 365. [8] Ibid, 99. [9] Vlieghe, De schilderkunst der Lage Landen, deel 2, blz. 142. [10] Liedtke, 100. [11] Liedtke, The Delft school, 102. [12] Liedtke, The Delft school, 17. [13] Frijhoff, Spies. 1650: bevochten eendracht, 510. [14] Chong, Johannes Vermeer, 28. [15] Chong, Johannes Vermeer, 27 - 30. [16] Ibid. [17] Lidtke, 3. [18] Liedtke, 15. [19] Liedtke, 102. [20] Chong, Johannes Vermeer, 75. [21] Ibid, 81. [22] Liedtke, 103. [23] Düchting, H. Jan Vermeer van Delft in de spiegel van zijn tijd, 20. [24] Ibid. [25] [26] Ibid, 84. [27] Boers, De Noord-Nederlandse kunsthandel in de eerste helft van de zeventiende eeuw, 28. [28] Liedtke, 24. [29] Liedtke, The Delft School, 101. [30] Liedtke, The Delft School. [31] Düchting, H. Jan Vermeer van Delft in de spiegel van zijn tijd, 15. [32] Lakerveld, Opkomst en bloei van het Noord-Nederlandse stadsgezicht in de 17de eeuw, 21. [33] Liedtke, The Delft School, 129. [34] Hans Vlieghen. Kieft.G., C.J.A der Wansink, De schilderkunst van de Lage Landen, 180. [35] Liedtke, The Delft School, 102. [36] Blankert, A., G. Aillaud, J.M. Montias. Vermeer, 79. [37] Liedtke, The Delft School, 120. [38] Blankert, A., G. Aillaud, J.M. Montias. Vermeer, 34. [39] Haak, red. Lakerveld, C. van. Opkomst en bloei van het Noordnederlandse stadsgezicht in de 17e eeuw, 194. [40] Brown, “Vermeer: Washington and The Hague”, 281-283. [41] Ibid, 50. [42] Liedtke, The Delft School,150. [43] Liedtke, The Delft School,150. [44] Blankert, A., G. Aillaud, J.M. Montias. Vermeer, 148. [45] Liedtke, 210. [46] Liedtke, 205.
Comments