Painting

Two centuries, two portraits of women. Two fascinating portraits of women [in the Johnson collection] are painted with two seclers apart, by two of their most popular artists, the Dutch portrayal Bartolomeus van der Helst (16131670) [JJ24] and the Finnish painter Albert Edelfelt (18541905) [JJ10]. There is something enigmatic in the women’s facial expressions, as if they both wear a secret. The woman on the 16th century portrait of van der Helst has an underfound smile. But, notice well, she smiles only when you pay her attention! Also the woman on Edelfel’s portrait, dated 1888, smiles somehow, but she does not smile outwards, rather inwards. Even her eyes look inward, look in, towards herself, although they are stuck obliquely forward. On the 16th century, however, the woman directs her gaze to the viewer and she looks at the world with her wise eyes, even though she seems to want to keep what she sees for herself. Although the woman on Edelfel’s portrait looks inward, the picture is full of life and confidence. The portrait of Van der Helst is more restrained and dignified and everything looks very real. This is, of course, underlined by the fact that the light and colours are so diametrically different in the two pictures - the dark and dove front tone in van der Helst’s picture against Edelfelt’s light and light colour scale, where the light and colours are obviously crucial for the overall experience of the picture. The two women are about the same age, around the thirty. They both radiate an awareness but in different ways, very much because they lived in different times and conditions. The repatriated woman on van der Preferably exudes both pride and humility and a deep religiosity. One might think that she ruled over a large household with many tasks and a lot of responsibility. Otherwise, however, she did not have such great opportunities to influence her fate. The woman’s task in the 1600s was to be a spouse and mother. The woman on Edelfel’s portrait shows self-safety, both in facial expression and posture. She lived during a period when women began to question their situation and demand participation in society, outside the walls of her home. We don’t really know much about the two women. According to tradition, the woman is named in the 16th century portrait Mrs van Landsbergen, but it is also all that is known about her. The woman on Edelfel’s portrait is briefly and well known to Young Lady in a care suit, her name is forgotten. The portraits can tell a part about the women themselves. Only the fact that they are repatriated by their most popular artists of the time means that they belong to the higher bourgeoisie. The portrait on Mrs van Landsbergen is probably commissioned and conforms to the ideals that existed for portraits at this time in Holland. Edelfel’s portrait can be a friend or peer portrait. Perhaps the woman on the portrait is an artist, or the wife of one of Edelfel’s artist friends. The portrait should look like it was a snapshot and the intention has been to make a realistic portrait. This is how she looked, we can imagine. For the composition, the artist has obviously been fascinated by her attire, the great white rustic rosette that she wears around her neck, the black hat with a swandun and the red carnation that is highly refined at the top, and that becomes a red exalting accent in the picture. She looks dressed for a Sunday walk, stuck with her straight stance, she seems to be sitting on a cucumber, or in a saddle, but to the latter does not match the upholstery. It is intended that we understand that it has taken several hours to complete the portrait on Mrs van Landsbergen and that she has spent many long hours in front of the artist. What did she think of moon belief? Mrs van Landsbergen’s costume is dark, simple to cut and without major embellishments - but it is precious. Viewed, it is seen that the costume is sewn in the most exclusive material (silk velvet) and that she wears a very beautiful and precious piece of scarf around her neck, and a least as precious and beautiful brooch with which her collar in a strengthened linen is kept. She also wears a main ornament with small pearls that are sewn in a beautiful and intricate pattern. In the religious Holland, where the strict Protestant direction Calvinism had won its way, one was not allowed to stand with its earthly riches. All the exhumations were luxury and thus bannly, prescribed religion. No one wanted to appear as if the spirit of earth life had any significance. But those who had economic possibilities obviously wanted to show this, through exclusive but simple things, as Mrs van Landsbergen’s costume in an expensive fabric but in a simple cut. Therefore, the background of the picture is simple and without embellishments which would give the picture a spare-flavoured front tone. It is certainly true that van der Helst’s image is very realistically painted but it was probably never the artist’s intention to paint what we mean by a portraiture image. Mrs van Landsbergen was certainly similar, but in the picture she is idealized and certainly embellished. The pale almost translucent hyn, the tall forehead and the heavy eyelids belonged to the ideal of beauty that the artist certainly diluted on a little grand. Instead, it was more important that the portrait followed the norms and codes that were in force for the highly bourgeois cultural circle to which Mrs van Landsbergen belonged. The picture is a portrait, to show her position and wealth, or fairer: her husband’s position and wealth. Carlgren, Maria: Among the besieged and conterfey - about portraits. From Bohusländer Konst. YEARBOOK 1996. The art at Bohusläns museum. Bohusläns homestead association and Bohusläns museum. Uddevalla 1996.