Dutch still life style in modern painting. History of painting

Having gone through a series of stages, each of which had its own specific and original significance, Dutch still life widely embraced the world of things and organic nature. From the first stage in the work of artists of the beginning of the century, with the recording of things displayed as if on display, the painters of the next generation moved on to modest “breakfasts” with metal and glass objects grouped on a white tablecloth (Klas, Heda). These “breakfasts” are distinguished by the simplicity of the things depicted: a bun, tin dishes, glass vessels- these are the main components of images in a grayish color palette. Several fish in the paintings of Ormea and Putter, a kitchen still life by the Rotterdam artists reflect the modest Puritan tastes of the democratic strata in the first half of the century.

But as the republican system was established and the subsequent strengthening of the power of the bourgeois class, and then its gradual aristocratization, the requirements for art also changed. Still life loses its modest, simple character. “Breakfasts” become more luxurious and lush, striking in their richness of color. They are now built on a combination of warm tones of carpet tablecloths and orange, yellow, red fruits laid out on dishes of Delft earthenware or Chinese porcelain, enlivened by the sparkle of gilded goblets and glass glasses, on the surface of which light plays. Testifying to complete mastery of the transfer of material and lighting, saturated with color, the still lifes of Kalf, Beyeren, Streck characterize the time of the highest flowering of still life.

Not only time influenced the theme and development of still life, but also much more: local features, economic structure, typical for a particular city, often determine the theme and even the interpretation of the work of a local artist. It is by no means accidental that in the rapidly developing Haarlem with its strong associations of citizens, the type of tonal still life first developed, and in the center of economic and cultural life Holland - Amsterdam - was where the activities of the creators of luxurious desserts Kalf and Strek took place. The proximity of the Scheveningen coast inspired Beyeren, who lives in The Hague, to create a still life with fish, and in the university center - Leiden - a thoughtful still life with the image of a skull and hourglass, which should remind us of the frailty of earthly existence. Paintings depicting a scientist surrounded by tomes, globes and other scientific objects, often filling the entire foreground, were also widespread.”

A strict division of still lifes into genres is impossible, since several motifs were often combined in one picture, however, the most common genres can be identified.

Encyclopedic YouTube

1 / 5

Dutch still life. How to write chrysanthemum

Hermitage Museum. Painting of the Little Dutch

Louvre: The largest museum in the world. 10 Flemish and Dutch painting of the 17th century. Rubens, Rembrandt

Dutch still life.

Hermitage Museum. Art of Flanders and Holland

Subtitles

Flower still life

In flower still lifes, artists depicted tulips, roses, gladioli, hyacinths, carnations, lilies, irises, lilies of the valley, forget-me-nots, violets, violas, daisies, nigella, rosemary, anemones, calendula, gillyflowers, mallows and other flowers.

One of the first seventeenth-century artists to paint vases with flowers was Jacob (Jacques) de Geyn the Younger (1565-1629). His work is characterized by an elongated vertical format of his paintings, a multi-tiered arrangement of flowers with alternating large and small plants, as well as the use of techniques that would become very popular among artists of this genre: embedding a bouquet of flowers in a niche and depicting small animals next to a vase.

The appearance of insects, animals and birds, and shells as auxiliary details in floral still lifes is a reflection of the tradition of using hidden meanings of depicted objects that have symbolic meaning. Various symbols appear in still lifes of all genres.

The followers of Jacob de Geyn the Younger were Jan Baptist van Fornenburg (1585-1649) and Jacob Wouters Vosmar (1584-1641).

Fornenburg painted bouquets of tulips, daffodils, roses, and physalis, while in his paintings there are motifs of “vanity of vanities” and the classic “deception.”

Characteristic feature Vosmar's paintings also feature a motif of “vanity of vanities” in the form of a drooping rose. He often depicted in still lifes a fly, a wren butterfly, a cabbage butterfly, a dragonfly and a bee.

The founder of a whole dynasty of masters of still lifes with flowers and fruit was Ambrosius Bosschaert the Elder (1573-1621). The dynasty included three sons (Johannes, Abraham and Ambrosius), two brothers-in-law (Johannes and Balthasar van der Asty) and a son-in-law (Hieronymus Swerts).

Bosshart painted small still lifes with a bouquet in a vase (in some cases it was a vase made of Chinese porcelain), placed in a niche or on the window sill. In addition to small animals, shells are also used as an entourage in his paintings.

Among Bosschaert's sons, the artist's talent most clearly manifested itself in Johannes Bosschaert (1610/11 - after 1629). Distinctive features his creativity - the arrangement of objects diagonally in the picture and the matte metallic color.

Ambrosius Bosschaert the Younger (1609-1645) used the techniques of cut-off modeling of the Utrecht Caravaggists.

Abraham Bosshart (1612/1613 - 1643) copied the techniques of his brothers.

The brothers of Ambrosius Bosschaert's wife, Johannes and Balthasar van der Asta, continued the traditions of Bosschaert.

Only one painting by Johannes van der Ast is known.

Of great importance for the development of still life was the work of the eldest of the brothers, Balthasar van der Ast (1593/1594 - 1657), who left a rich creative heritage - more than 125 paintings. He liked to depict a basket of flowers or a dish of fruit on the table, and in the foreground along the edge of the table he placed shells, fruits and butterflies. Some of his paintings depict parrots.

Roelant Saverey (1576-1639) belongs to the school of Ambrosius Bosshart the Elder. His still lifes are built on the principle of a bouquet of flowers located in a niche. He added “vanity of vanities” motifs to his paintings; the gravedigger beetle, dung fly, death’s-head butterfly and other insects, as well as lizards, were used as an entourage.

The work of Ambrosius Bosschaert influenced such artists as Anthony Claes I (1592-1636), his namesake Antoni Claes II (1606/1608 - 1652) and Ambrosius Bosschaert the Elder's son-in-law Hieronymus Swerts.

In the works of Hans Bollongier (around 1600 - after 1670), techniques of Utrecht Caravaggism were widely used. Using chiaroscuro, the artist highlighted the flowers against the background of twilight.

The further development of floral still life was observed in the work of Middelburg masters: Christoffel van den Berghe (about 1590 - after 1642), who depicted elements of “vanity of vanities” in floral still lifes: a bottle of wine, a snuff box, a smoking pipe, playing cards and skull; and Johannes Goodart, who widely used insects and birds as surroundings.

The school of Dordrecht masters of floral still life includes Bartholomeus Abrahams Asstein (1607(?) - 1667 or later), Abraham van Kalrath (1642-1722), the father of the famous landscape painter and animal painter Albert Cuyp, Jacob Gerrits Cuyp (1594 - 1651/1652). Their work is characterized by extensive use of chiaroscuro.

“Served tables” (“Breakfasts”, “Desserts”, “Banquets”)

The birthplace and center of "set tables" was Haarlem. The prerequisite for the creation of this type of still life was the widespread distribution in the 16th century of portraits of members of shooting guilds during a banquet. Gradually, the image of a set table became an independent genre.

The set of objects forming the still life initially included traditional Dutch products: cheese, ham, buns, fruit, beer. However, later, in still lifes, dishes characteristic of special occasions or tables of wealthy townspeople began to appear more and more: game, wine, pies (the most expensive was blackberry pie). In addition to traditional herring, lobsters, shrimp, and oysters appeared.

Expensive dishes made of silver and Chinese porcelain, jugs, and tatsas also began to be used. Special attention The artists used glasses: Roemer, Berkemeier, pass glass, flute glass, Venetian glass, akeley glass. The most exquisite was the Nautilus cup.

Frequent attributes of still lifes were a salt shaker and a table knife. Half-peeled lemon was often used as a colorful spot.

One of the earliest still lifes showing Dutch table setting is The Table Set by Nicholas Gillies (c. 1580 - after 1632). The artist used an elevated point of view in his paintings.

The still lifes of Floris Gerrits van Schouten (c. 1590 - after 1655) are characterized by complexity, he used a large number of objects, and the main subject was often a pile of cheeses. In a number of cases, he used the technique of moving the emphasis of the still life group away from the geometric center of the picture.

A significant figure in this type of still life painting was Floris van Dyck (1575-1651). The center of his paintings was a pyramid of cheeses, the background dissolving into haze.

Clara Peters (1594-1657) specialized in this same type of still life. She often depicted expensive, exquisite tableware, lobsters and oysters. In some of her still lifes she used a lowered point of view, almost at table level.

Compositions close to Peters were created by Hans van Essen (1587/1589 - after 1648).

Roelof Coots (1592/1593 - 1655) used the technique of deliberate negligence, the plate or knife in his paintings hung halfway from the edge of the table. He was one of the first to create canvases depicting not a set table, but a table with traces of the finished breakfast, introducing motifs of “vanity of vanities” into the paintings: clocks, books, fallen grapes.

On early stage Peter Klas also created paintings of this genre in his work.

Tonal still life

The tonal Dutch still life was led by Pieter Claes and Willem Claes Heda, who lived in Haarlem.

The tradition of depicting the mistress of the house, cook or servants has been preserved, although they increasingly moved to the background. In the foreground were kitchen utensils and meat, fish and many vegetables brought into the kitchen: pumpkin, turnips, rutabaga, cabbage, carrots, peas, beans, onions and cucumbers. Wealthier people had cauliflower, melons, artichokes and asparagus on their tables.

Pieter Cornelis van Ryck (1568-1628) painted in traditions of the XVI centuries, sometimes with biblical scenes in the background.

Cornelis Jacobs Delff (1571-1643) used an elevated point of view and liked to place kitchen utensils in the foreground.

The famous master of “set tables” Floris Gerrits van Schoten also painted kitchen scenes; sometimes he included genre motifs in his still lifes.

Cornelis Pieters Begi (1631/1632 - 1664) went even further by including a satyr who came to visit the peasants in the still life.

The genre and portrait painter Gottfried Schalken (1643-1706) depicted a storeroom with barrels of wine and supplies.

A group of masters of the everyday genre, brothers Cornelis and Hermann Saftleven (1607/1608 - 1681 and 1609-1685), Pieter de Blot (1601-1658), Hendrik Martens Sorg (1611-1670) and Ecbert van der Poel (1621-1664) also wrote “kitchen” still lifes with genre motifs, but household items still dominated in their paintings.

The still lifes of the famous master of “peasant breakfasts” Philips Angel are also close to the works of Rotterdam genre painters.

Unlike artists who depicted the kitchens of a wealthy burgher with its cleanliness and order, Francois Reykhals (after 1600 - 1647) painted poor peasant kitchens.

The famous master of “luxurious” still lifes, Willem Kalf, dedicated more than 60 of his works to the theme of kitchen still life.

"Fish" still life

The Hague became the cradle of still life with fish. The proximity of Scheveningen encouraged artists not only to paint marinas, but also to create special type still life painting - paintings depicting fish and sea animals.

The founders of this type of still life were: Pieter de Putter, Pieter van Schijenborg and Pieter van Noort.

Pieter de Putter (1600-1659) chose a high point of view from which the table with fish was clearly visible, sometimes a net was added to the still life.

Pieter van Schijenborg (? - after 1657) painted fish on a gray or yellow-brown background.

The paintings of Pieter van Noort (about 1600 - ?), who colorfully conveyed the shine of scales, had a special color.

The main representative of this direction of painting was Abraham van Beyeren (1620/1621 - 1690), who worked in many other genres of still life, and also painted marinas. He depicted fish both on the table and on the seashore.

Perhaps van Beyeren's student was Isaac van Duinen (1628 - 1677/1681).

Landscape painter Albert Cuyp (1620-1691) can also be counted among the masters of “fish” still life.

Utrecht masters Willem Ormea (1611-1673) and his student Jacob Gillig (about 1630 - 1701) were fond of “fish” still life.

“Vanity of vanities” (Vanitas, Memento mori, “scientific” still life)

An important place in Dutch painting was occupied by the philosophical and moral still life, which received the Latin name “vanitas” (“vanity of vanities”).

“The ideological foundations of this movement uniquely intertwine medieval ideas about the frailty of all earthly things, the moralizing tendencies of Calvinism and the humanistic ideal of a wise man striving for truth and beauty.”

The most common symbols of mortality in “vanity of vanities” still lifes were: a skull, an extinguished candle, a clock, books, musical instruments, withered flowers, overturned or broken dishes, playing cards and dice, smoking pipes, soap bubbles, seals, a globe, etc. .d. Sometimes the artist included in the work a sheet of parchment with a Latin saying on the theme “vanity of vanities.”

The first one to reach us still life XVII century, belonging to the “vanity of vanities” genre, was written by Jacob de Geyn the Younger.

“In the upper part of the niche, on the capitals of the pylons flanking it, there are sculptural images women's and male figures, and on the keystone of the arch of the niche there is a Latin inscription: “HUMANA VANA”, which can be translated as “human vanity is in vain”. This motto allows us to understand the symbolism of the figures, of which the first, as if warning about the ephemerality of the soap sphere, points a finger at it, and the second, as if reflecting on the futility of human actions, leaned her head on her arm bent at the elbow in thought. The validity of the Latin saying is confirmed by the image of a skull - a symbol of death, suppressing both good and evil human deeds, and a soap bubble, expressing tragic fate natural matter, doomed to disappear in the whirlpool of existence."

Jacob de Geyn the Younger lived in Leiden, the city in which the first Dutch university was opened and which was the center of book printing. It was Leiden that became the center of “scientific” still life.

The development of still life of the “vanity of vanities” type was greatly influenced by the activities of the Leiden resident David Bayley and the masters grouped around him.

The pioneer of a new type of still life genre was Jan Davids de Hem (1606-1684). He tried himself in various genres: floral, scientific, kitchen still lifes. In 1636 the artist moved to Antwerp and came under the influence of Flemish painting. He began to create luxurious still lifes, overloaded with bright and colorful fruits, lobsters, parrots... Flower still lifes also had a clear Flemish trace, distinguished by a baroque symphony of colors.

Jan Davids de Hem had a workshop with a large number of students and assistants. In addition to the master's son Cornelis de Hem, his direct students were Pieter de Ring, Nicholas van Gelder, Johannes Borman, Martinus Nellius, Matthijs Naive, Jan Mortel, Simon Luttihuis, Cornelis Kik. In turn, Kik raised gifted students - Elias van den Broek and Jacob van Walskapelle.

The techniques of Jan Davids de Hem were well mastered by his son Cornelis de Hem (1631-1695). At the same time, there is more air in his paintings.

The most gifted student of Jan Davids de Hem was Pieter de Ring (1615-1660). A distinctive feature of his still lifes was the indispensable presence of a signet ring, hinting at the artist’s surname (ring in Dutch).

Another outstanding student of Jan Davids de Hem was Nicholas van Gelder (1623/1636 - c. 1676), who created his still lifes under the influence of the work of Willem Kalf.

More simple and intimate are the still lifes of the followers of Jan Davids de Hem - Johannes Bormann and Martinus Nellius (? - after 1706).

Simon Lüttihuis (1610 - ?) also created luxurious still lifes, adding to them motifs of “vanity of vanities.”

Another student of Jan Davids de Hem, Cornelis Kick (1631/1632 - 1681), used outdoor sketches in his paintings. He passed on his plein air techniques to his students Elias van den Broek (1650-1708) and Jacob van Walskapelle (1644-1727), whose still lifes are characterized by a subtle rendering of the light-air environment.

From the workshop of Jan Davids de Hem also came the master of vanity of vanities still lifes Maria van Oosterwijk, and two masters of late floral still lifes, Jacob Rotius (1644 - 1681/1682) and Abraham Mignon.

During the first “luxurious” still lifes of Jan Davids de Heem, a few works on this topic were also written by François Reichals.

The desire for color is characteristic of Abraham van Beyeren's luxurious still lifes. An indispensable attribute of these paintings was a pocket watch.

One of Beyeren's few followers, Abraham Susenir, loved to depict silver dishes.

The “luxurious” still lifes of Willem Kalf (1619-1693) had a great influence on artists. In them, Kalf often used vessels made of gold, silver and Chinese porcelain. At the same time, the paintings were equipped with symbols of “vanity of vanities”: a candlestick and a pocket watch. Kalf often chose a vertical format. His work splits into periods of stay in France and return to Amsterdam. The late period is characterized by a decrease in the number of objects depicted in the picture and a gloomy background.

Kalf's followers were Jurian van Streek, his son Hendrik van Streek (1659 - ?), Christian Jans Streep (1634-1673) and Barent van der Meer (1659 - to 1702).

Another follower of Kalf, Peter Gerrits Rustraten (1627-1698), took the path of bringing “luxurious” still lifes closer to “deceptive” ones.

Along with Aalst, Matthaus Bloom is one of the pioneers of still life with hunting trophies.

A number of paintings on this topic were performed by Nicholas van Gelder (1623/1636 - around 1676).

Melchior de Hondecoeter also depicted hunting trophies.

The theme of hunting still life was touched upon by the famous landscape master Jan Baptist Venix (1621-1660), who depicted killed roe deer and swans. His son Jan Weniks created at least a hundred paintings with images of slaughtered hares against the backdrop of a stone niche or a park landscape.

Another student of Jan Baptist Weenix was Willem Frederik van Rooyen (1645/1654 - 1742), who also incorporated images of animals into the landscape.

Dirk de Bray was also a supporter of the ceremonial hunting still life, like Aalst and Royen. He represented the trophies of falconry, the entertainment of aristocrats and wealthy burghers.

Along with decorative canvases of “hunting trophies,” “chamber” hunting still lifes also became widespread. Jan Vonk (about 1630 - 1660?), Cornelis Lelienberg (1626 - after 1676), Aalst's student Willem Gau Ferguson (about 1633 - after 1695), Hendrik de Fromenthue (1633/1634 - after 1694) and Pieter Harmens Verelst (1618-1678), as well as his son Simon Peters Verelst (1644-1721).

“Chamber” hunting still lifes were created by painters who worked in other genres of still life: Abraham Mignon, Abraham van Beyeren, Jacob Biltius. The famous landscape painter Salomon van Ruisdael (1600/1603 - 1670), who wrote “Still Life with Killed Game” (1661) and “Hunting Trophies” (1662), and the genre painter, student of Adrian van Ostade, Cornelis Dusart (1660-1704) paid tribute to the hunting still life. .

Still life with animals

The founders of the genre were Otto Marceus van Scrieck (1619/1620 - 1678) and Matthias Withos (1627-1703).

Skrik started a terrarium on his estate with insects, spiders, snakes and other animals, which he depicted in his paintings. He loved to create complex compositions with exotic plants and animals, introducing philosophical overtones into them. For example, in the Dresden painting “The Snake at the Bird’s Nest,” butterflies collect nectar from flowers, a thrush catches butterflies and feeds them to its chick, another chick is swallowed by a snake, which is hunted by an ermine.

Vithos preferred to depict thistles and other plants in the foreground of his paintings, among which snakes, lizards, spiders and insects crawl. As a background, he depicted an Italian landscape, a memory of a trip to Italy.

Christian Jans Streep painted Thistles and Moles in the manner of Skrick.

Abraham de Heus very carefully and close to life depicted various species of moles, lizards, snakes and butterflies.

Willem van Aalst has several paintings dedicated to the depiction of animals. His student Rachel Reusch creative career She began by imitating Skrik, but then developed her own style, which is characterized by the depiction of small animals against the backdrop of a golden landscape.

Willem Claes Hedda. Still life with pie, 1627

The “golden” age of still life was the 17th century, when it finally took shape as independent genre painting, especially in the works of Dutch and Flemish artists. At the same time, the term “quiet, frozen life” (Dutch stilleven, German Stilleben, English still-life) appeared to denote still lifes. The first “stillevens” were simple in plot, but even then the objects depicted on them also carried a semantic load: bread, a glass of wine, fish - symbols of Christ, a knife - a symbol of sacrifice, lemon - a symbol of unquenched thirst; nuts in the shell - a soul shackled by sin; the apple is reminiscent of the Fall.

Gradually, the symbolic language of the painting became richer.

Franciscus Geysbrechts, XVII century.

The symbols found on the canvases were intended to remind us of the frailty of human life and the transience of pleasures and achievements:

The skull is a reminder of the inevitability of death.

Rotten fruits are a symbol of aging.

Ripe fruits symbolize fertility, abundance, figuratively wealth and prosperity.

A number of fruits have their own meaning: the Fall is represented by pears, tomatoes, citrus fruits, grapes, peaches and cherries, and of course, the apple. Figs, plums, cherries, apples or peaches have erotic connotations.

Sprouts of grain, branches of ivy or laurel (rarely) are a symbol of rebirth and the cycle of life.

Sea shells, sometimes live snails - a mollusk shell is the remains of a once living animal; it signifies death and mortality.

The creeping snail is the personification of the mortal sin of laziness.

Large clams denote duality of nature, a symbol of lust, another of the deadly sins.

Soap bubbles - the brevity of life and the suddenness of death; a reference to the expression homo bulla - “a person is a soap bubble.”

A dying, smoking candle (cinder) or oil lamp; cap for extinguishing candles - a burning candle is a symbol of the human soul, its extinguishing symbolizes departure.

Cups, playing cards or dice, chess (rarely) - a sign of an erroneous life goal, the search for pleasure and a sinful life. Equality of opportunity in gambling also meant reprehensible anonymity.

A smoking pipe is a symbol of fleeting and elusive earthly pleasures.

A carnival mask is a sign of the absence of a person inside it. Also intended for festive masquerade, irresponsible pleasure.

Mirrors, glass (mirror) balls - a mirror is a symbol of vanity, in addition, it is also a sign of reflection, shadow, and not a real phenomenon.

Beyeren. Still life with lobster, 1667

Broken dishes, usually glass glasses. An empty glass opposed to a full one symbolizes death.

Glass symbolizes fragility, snow-white porcelain symbolizes purity.

The mortar and pestle are symbols of male and female sexuality.

The bottle is a symbol of the sin of drunkenness.

A knife reminds us of human vulnerability and mortality.

Sand and mechanical watches- the transience of time.

Musical instruments, notes - the brevity and ephemeral nature of life, a symbol of the arts.

Books and geographical maps (mappa mundi), a writing pen is a symbol of science. The globe, both the earth and the starry sky.

Palette with brushes, Laurel wreath(usually on the head of the skull) - symbols of painting and poetry.

Letters symbolize human relationships.

Medical instruments are a reminder of the diseases and frailty of the human body.

Coin purses, jewelry boxes - jewelry and cosmetics are designed to create beauty, feminine attractiveness, at the same time they are associated with vanity, narcissism and the mortal sin of arrogance. They also signal the absence of their owners on the canvas.

Weapons and armor are a symbol of power and might, a designation of what cannot be taken with you to the grave.

Crowns and papal tiaras, scepters and orbs, wreaths of leaves are signs of transient earthly domination, which is opposed to the heavenly world order. Like masks, they symbolize the absence of those who wore them.

Keys - symbolize the power of the housewife managing supplies.

Ruins symbolize the transitory life of those who once inhabited them.

Still lifes often depicted insects, birds and animals. Flies and spiders, for example, were considered symbols of stinginess and evil, while lizards and snakes were symbols of deceit. Crayfish or lobsters represented adversity or wisdom.

Jacques Andre Joseph Aved. Around 1670.

Book - Sophocles' tragedy "Electra" - in in this case multi-valued symbol. By placing it in the composition, the artist reminds of the inevitability of retribution for every crime, not on earth, but in heaven, since it is precisely this thought that permeates the tragedy. The antique motif in such still lifes often symbolized the continuity of art. On title page stands the name of the translator, the famous Dutch poet Joost van den Vondel, whose works on ancient and biblical stories were so topical that he was even persecuted. It is unlikely that the artist placed Vondel by accident - it is possible that, speaking about the vanity of the world, he decided to mention the vanity of power.

The sword and helmet are the emblem of transitory military glory.

The white and red plume is the compositional center of the picture. Feathers always mean vanity and vanity. The painting is dated based on the plumed helmet. Lodewijk van der Helst depicted him wearing such a helmet in his posthumous portrait of Admiral Stirlingwerf in 1670. The admiral's helmet is present in several more still lifes by van Streck.

Portrait of a sanguine. Unlike oil, sanguine is very poorly preserved, as is paper in contrast to canvas. This sheet speaks of the futility of the artist’s efforts; the frayed and torn edges are intended to reinforce this idea.

Golden fringe is the vanity of luxury.

Skull - in ancient culture attribute of Kronos (Saturn), that is, a symbol of time. The Wheel of Fortune was also depicted with a skull. For Christians, it is a sign of worldly vanity, mental contemplation of death, an attribute of a hermit’s life. Saint Francis of Assisi, Saint Jerome, Mary Magdalene, and the Apostle Paul were depicted with him. The skull is also a symbol of the eternal life of Christ, crucified on Golgotha, where, according to legend, the skull of Adam was buried. The ear wrapped around the skull is a symbol of the immortality of the soul (“I am the bread of life” - John 6:48), hope for eternal life.

A stack of old papers is the vanity of knowledge.

A powder horn on a chain is a very characteristic subject for Dutch still life. Here it should apparently be interpreted as something bringing death, unlike the cornucopia

Adrian van Utrecht."Vanitas". 1642.

lilies of the valley, violets, forget-me-nots surrounded by roses, carnations, anemones - symbols of modesty and purity;

a large flower in the center of the composition is the “crown of virtue”;

crumbled petals near the vase are signs of frailty;

a withered flower is a hint of the disappearance of feelings;

irises are a sign of the Virgin Mary;

white roses are platonic love and a symbol of purity;

red roses are a symbol of passionate love and a symbol of the Virgin Mary;

red flowers are a symbol of Christ’s atoning sacrifice;

The white lily is not only a beautiful flower, but also a symbol of the purity of the Virgin Mary;

blue and dark blue flowers are a reminder of the azure sky;

thistle is a symbol of evil;

carnation - a symbol of the shed blood of Christ;

poppy - an allegory of sleep, oblivion, a symbol of one of the deadly sins - laziness;

anemone - help in illness;

tulips - a symbol of quickly disappearing beauty; growing these flowers was considered one of the most vain and futile activities; the tulip also symbolized love, sympathy, mutual understanding; white tulip - false love, red tulip - passionate love(in Europe and America, the tulip is associated with spring, light, life, colors and is considered a cozy, welcoming flower; in Iran, Turkey and other countries of the East, the tulip is associated with the feeling of love and eroticism).

The most popular "Dutch still lifes" remained floral still lifes. They inspired the viewer to think about moral and religious subjects. Composed of beautiful and varied flowers (tulips, irises, roses, delphiniums, violets - "pansies", carnations, poppies, anemones, hyacinths, daffodils, bells, lilies of the valley, forget-me-nots, daisies, aquilegia, tacetas), the bouquet was a picturesque hymn to beauty divine creation, and through it - the wisdom and generosity of the Lord, who allowed this beauty to be captured forever.

At first glance, the bouquets seem to be painted from nature, but upon closer inspection it becomes obvious that they are made up of plants that bloom at different times. The impression of naturalness and illusionistic life-likeness arises due to the fact that the images of individual colors are based on individual studies from nature. This was the usual working method for flower still life painters. Artists made careful drawings in watercolor and gouache, drawing flowers from life, from different angles and under different lighting, and these drawings then served them repeatedly - they repeated them in paintings. Drawings by other artists, engravings from printed collections and botanical atlases were also used as working material.

Jan Baptiste von Fornenbruch. Sered. 17th century

Balthasar van der Ast. "Tulip".1690. Paris.

Gerard van Spaendo. "Bouquet".


Jacob Morrel. "Two Tulips"

Tulips.
http://picasaweb.google.com/manon.and.gabrielle/m NpGmI#

Customers, nobles and burghers, appreciated in still lifes that the depicted flowers were “as if they were alive.” But these images were not naturalistic. They are romantic and poetic. Nature in them is transformed by painting.

“Portraits” of flowers, painted on parchment in watercolor and gouache, were created for floristic albums in which gardeners sought to immortalize strange plants. Images of tulips are especially numerous. Almost every Dutch still life contains tulips. In the 17th century There was a real tulip boom in Holland; sometimes a house was mortgaged for a rare tulip bulb.
Tulips came to Europe in 1554. They were sent to Augsburg by the German ambassador to the Turkish court, Busbeck. During his travels around the country, he was fascinated by the sight of these delicate flowers. Soon tulips spread to France and England, Germany and Holland. The owners of tulip bulbs in those days were truly rich people - people of royal blood or those close to them. In Versailles, special celebrations were held in honor of the development of new varieties.
Not only Dutch nobles, but also ordinary burghers could afford to own beautiful still lifes. The number of Dutch flower still lifes is huge, but this does not detract from them artistic value. After the auctions, when the economic situation of Holland became less than brilliant, picturesque collections from the houses of burghers ended up in the palaces of European nobles and kings.
The desire of artists to diversify the composition of their bouquets forced them to travel to different cities and make full-scale drawings in the gardens of flower lovers in Amsterdam, Utrecht, Brussels, Haarlem, and Leiden. Artists also had to wait for the changing seasons to capture the desired flower.