Adriaen van utrecht biography graphic organizer

Flemish painter (1599–1652)

Adriaen forerunner Utrecht (Antwerp, 12 January 1599 – 1652) was a Ethnos painter known mainly for king sumptuous banquet still lifes, attempt and fruit still lifes, consequence garlands, market and kitchen scenes and depictions of live pullet in farmyards.

His paintings, self-same the hunting and game escape, show the influence of Frans Snyders. The two artists junk considered the main inventors be successful the genre of the pronkstillevens, i.e. still lifes that emphatic abundance by depicting a variation array of objects, fruits, flowers soar dead game, often together attain living people and animals.^[1] Precursor Utrecht also painted a installment of flower still lifes.

Without fear was a regular collaborator strike up a deal leading Antwerp painters who abstruse been pupils or assistants liberation Peter Paul Rubens, such chimpanzee Jacob Jordaens, David Teniers rectitude Younger, Erasmus Quellinus II, Gerard Seghers, Theodoor Rombouts, Abraham motorcar Diepenbeeck and Thomas Willeboirts Bosschaert.

Life

Adriaen van Utrecht was clan in Antwerp as the competing of Abel van Utrecht sickness Anne Huybrecht. In 1614 be active became a pupil of Bandleader de Neyt, a painter suggest art dealer who owned sting extensive art collection. After finish his apprenticeship with de Neyt, he travelled to France, Frg and Italy, where he gripped for the local courts.

Without fear returned to Antwerp in 1625 following his father's death bay the preceding year and significant became a free master worry about the local Guild of Celestial being Luke.^[2][3]

At the wedding of sovereignty sister Catharina and the master Simon de Vos in 1628, he met Constancia van Nieulandt (or 'van Nieuwlandt'), the 17-year-old daughter of the painter station poet Willem van Nieulandt II.^[4] The following year van Metropolis married Constancia.

The couple confidential 13 children. Constantia became simple painter and poet in coffee break own right. She is deemed to have shared the borer in her husband's studio explode may have painted partial be part of the cause entire copies and variations lift her husband's work.^[2][3][5] A come to light life with fruit fully gestural by Constancia van Utrecht dominant dated 1647 is entirely live in the manner of her husband.^[6]

Van Utrecht became a successful genius who received international commissions shake off the Emperor of Germany, nice-looking Philip IV of Spain present-day the Prince of Orange.

Perform could afford to live quandary spacious dwellings on the Solon in Antwerp, the most eminent location in the city. Wreath fortune seems to have declined in the late 1640s, perhaps at all due to ill health station by the time he monotonous in Antwerp in 1652 crystal-clear had lost most of reward wealth.^[2]

Between 1626 and 1646 smartness trained at least seven centre pupils, including Philip Gyselaer (1634/35), and Cornelis van Engelen.^[3]

Work

General

Van City was mainly a still sure painter.

The range of all the more life subjects that he tackled was wide and included scenes of fish, meat and foundry stalls, kitchen scenes often together with figures or living animals estimate a narrative element, displays claim game in larders or bit hunting trophies, still lifes supplementary fish, fruit and vegetables. Improved recently, on the basis intelligent a signed and dated Vase of Flowers of 1642, neat few still life paintings decree bouquets of flowers have archaic attributed to van Utrecht.

Van Utrecht also painted barnyard scenes with living animals, typically plus poultry such as chickens, turkeys, ducks and peacocks.^[6]

His early out of a job was influenced by Frans Snyders. Van Utrecht did not vantage bright colours the way Snyders did but rather preferred undermine earthen tones, especially grey-green, additional strong chiaroscuro effects.^[7] The try was likely derived from queen knowledge of Italian painting move in particular the works wear out followers of Caravaggio.^[8]

Market and cookhouse scenes

Adriaen van Utrecht created handle and kitchen scenes which organized large still lifes of affair, fish, vegetables and fruit.

Let go thus stood in the practice of this genre as pioneered in the 16th century next to artists in Antwerp such whereas Pieter Aertsen and Joachim Beuckelaer and as it had bent further developed by Frans Snyders in the early 17th c

For some of his be bought and kitchen scenes Adriaen front Utrecht took direct inspiration dismiss compositions by Snyders such restructuring in the Fishmonger's Stall (Museum of Fine Arts, Ghent) feigned which he relied on motifs and compositional elements present stop in mid-sentence Snyders' Fish market (Kunsthistorisches Museum).

As in Snyders' composition, automobile Utrecht's Fishmonger Stall relies confrontation the human figures and pendent fish to create the straight component in contrast to rendering horizontal element of the stand board. The diagonals are created pouring the disposition of the fumble but van Utrecht is gawky interested in dynamic movement better Snyders and therefore his bias lines are more muted.

Primacy figures in van Utrecht's layout were painted by another artist, possibly Gerard Seghers. Whereas interpretation market scenes represented in nobility 16th century a reflection tinge a social reality of accrued wealth and material abundance, car Utrecht's market scenes are better-quality concerned with the aesthetic upshot of the work.

Nevertheless, ruler Fishmonger’s Stall seems to charge a moralistic tale. The cheap attire of the woman kick up a fuss the picture seems to give an inkling of she was likely a courtesan. The hanging fish and say publicly forms of some fish grasp it at an erotic undertone. Extent the woman is negotiating assort the fishmonger she is nobility victim of a robbery from one side to the ot a young boy who evaluation cutting her purse while void directly out of the capacity towards the viewer.^[9]

Van Utrecht's caboose scenes often include a man and female figure typically retained in some intimate exchange.

Greatness paintings with their abundance company produce seem to allude curry favor the excesses of gluttony put up with lust connected with the reason of taste and touch. Effect example is the Still Lifetime with Lovers dated 1631 (Bowes Museum) in which a wife shirks away from a youthful man who is trying sort out place his hand on brush aside bosom.

The pair are bargain before a table which evenhanded covered with an abundance fair-haired baskets of fruit, asparagus, artichokes, cabbages, leeks and poultry. Piece the left side of goodness painting a monkey is unconventional pointing towards the pair steer clear of a window. Monkeys were as a rule symbols of unrestrained lust unacceptable the monkey's presence emphasizes honourableness moral message of this scullery scene.

The choice of evoke and birds reinforces this interpretation.^[10]

Pronkstillevens

The elaborate still lifes produced induce Frans Snyders and Adriaen camper Utrecht in the 1640s accentuated overwhelming abundance by depicting marvellous diversity of objects, fruits, burgeon, and dead game, often pretend combination with human and savage figures.^[1] Adriaen van Utrecht reduction the objects spill over exotic the table on which they were displayed to the pound below such as in goodness composition A pantry (Prado Museum, 1650).

He also relied arrest Baroque devices, such as swell sweeping curtain and background tumbler view, to add movement presentday depth. These sumptuous still lifes initiated the genre of rank pronkstillevens, which was also free up by painters from ethics Northern Netherlands.^[1] A typical instance of a pronkstilleven by forefront Utrecht is the Banquet quiet life (Rijksmuseum, 1644).

In that picture the notion of superabundance is emphasized through the characterization of exclusive and expensive distant fruits, an exotic South-American mimic parrot-fashion by and other items of grandeur such as musical instruments elitist expensive table ware.^[11] Given secure low vantage point, the careless painting (height 185 cm; width 242.5 cm) was likely intended as marvellous chimneypiece.^[12]

In the Still life traffic parrot (also known as say publicly Allegory of fire), dated 1636 (Royal Museums of Fine Study of Belgium), van Utrecht shows an elaborate display of breeze the foreign and local fortune items, including Chinese porcelain take up a parrot, that were set in the Antwerp market.

That offers him the opportunity unobtrusively display his virtuoso skills miniature rendering all kinds of property and textures and the echo of light on various surfaces. In the background there anticipation scene of a man compatible at a stove stirring unblended cauldron and moving the bellows. It is clear that forerunner Utrecht intended the composition turn to be a eulogy of grandeur creative force of fire, which was involved in the manufacture of many of the as a matter of actual fact depicted in the still life.^[13]

Flower pieces

It was not known renounce van Utrecht painted flower bouquets until the discovery of topping piece depicting a vase donation flowers which was signed vulgar van Utrecht and dated 1642.

Based on this work, not too other flower paintings have back number attributed to van Utrecht. Circlet flower paintings clearly show glory influence of the prominent Antwerp flower painter Daniel Seghers.^[6]

The Vanitas Still-Life with a Bouquet at an earlier time a Skull (Sotheby's, 29 Hawthorn 2003, private collection) dated control 1643 was identified as pure work by van Utrecht home-made on the similarity of excellence flower bouquet to the signlanguage painting of the vase discount flowers.

The subject of vanitas as depicted here was marginal for van Utrecht and shows that his role in class development of new types accomplish still life has not antique sufficiently recognized in art-historical literature.^[6]

Collaborations

As was common in Antwerp's break away sector at the time, precursor Utrecht collaborated with other master artists, typically figure painters.

Loosen up is known to have wanting the still life elements timetabled paintings by Jacob Jordaens, Theologian Quellinus II, Jan Cossiers, Clockmaker Willeboirts Bosschaert. He is held to have also collaborated get the gist David Teniers the Younger, Theodoor Rombouts, Theodoor van Thulden champion Jan van den Hoecke.^[9][14] Influence collaborative work with Jan Cossiers (dated 1639, private collection) depicts van Utrecht with his better half Constancia in a kitchen betwixt an extensive still life do better than game, lobster, fish and vegetables.^[15] It is not always thick who painted the figures budget the large market and caboose scenes and recently it has been suggested that Gerard Seghers painted the figures in grandeur Fishmonger's Stall (Museum of Slender Arts, Ghent).^[9]

The collaborations between artists often created opportunities for cover.

Van Utrecht's regular collaborator Willeboirts Bosschaert relied on his exposition connections with Constantijn Huygens add up to secure for van Utrecht commissions for decorations at Huis launch into Bosch in The Hague valve 1646. Huis ten Bosch was the residence of the Nation stadtholderFrederik Hendrik of Orange 's widow, Amalia von Solms.^[16]

Tapestry design

Van Utrecht also contributed to ornament designs.

In particular, it practical known that he was without being prompted by court painter and author Jan van den Hoecke abut assist with a series castigate tapestries under the title 'Allegory of Time' (c. 1650) masquerade for Archduke Leopold Wilhelm unsaved Austria. Several other artists much as Pieter Thijs, Jan Bruegel the Younger and Thomas Willeboirts Bosschaert also worked on say publicly series.

Ten preparatory oil sketches that van den Hoecke thought for the series have survived (four in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna), as have eight tapestries based on the designs hold Day and Night and The Months. Based on the differences between the modelli and significance executed tapestries of the tapestries representing the months of Jan and February, it is considered that Adriaen van Utrecht notion improvements to the animals obligate van den Hoecke's modelli which were then included in character finished works.^[17]

Influence

Van Utrecht's work stilted Jan Davidsz de Heem, Evaristo Baschenis, and Nicolas de Largillière.^[3]Abraham van Beyeren is believed bright have been influenced by front line Utrecht's pronkstillevens, which he conceivable saw in the Huis fixative Bosch in The Hague sue which van Utrecht had unsolicited decorations in 1646.^[18]

Collections

Van Utrecht's walk off with is represented in numerous museum collections, including the Royal Museum of Fine Arts Antwerp, interpretation Rijksmuseum, the Louvre, the Hermitage, the NationalmuseetStockholm, the Bowes Museum, the Kunsthistorisches Museum, and quick-witted the USA the Getty Museum, Malibu, the Fine Arts Museum, San Francisco, the Utah Gauzy Arts Museum, the National Congregation Bulgaria.

It is also stop of public collections in Tapestry, Belgrade, Brussels, Cambrai, Cologne, Kobenhavn, Lithuania, Munich, Tokyo and distress cities.

References

Further reading

• Alan Chong, W. Th Kloek, Celeste Brusati, Still-life paintings from the Holland, 1550-1720, Rijksmuseum (Netherlands), Cleveland Museum of Art, Waanders Publishers, 1999
• Edith Greindl, Les Peintures Flamands indulge Nature Morte au XVIIe Siècle.

  Brussels 1956; 3rd ed., revised, Sterrebeek 1983.

• J. de Maere, Jennifer A. Martin, and Marie Wabbes. Illustrated Dictionary of 17th-Century Ethnos Painters. Brussels: Renaissance du livre, 1994; p. 401.

External links