The history of the development of Dutch and Flemish painting
In the 17th century there was a split between the northern and southern regions of the Netherlands. In 1579, Holland separated from Flanders to become their own country.
Holland considered themselves a Protestant nation at odds with Catholic southern provinces. A key reason for the formation of Holland was the secession from the Spanish Crown and Catholicism. Holland is now a largely Protestant country in contrast to southern provinces which have mostly remained Catholic. Naturally, the division of the country has to influence life in everyday home. People have been divided into two parts – north part and south half. A broad separation also influenced art culture as people in a spiritual power over different provinces are gradually found their differences in culture between people abroad.
There were two schools: one Dutch, the other Flemish.
There is a time period in Dutch art that is often referred to as the Golden Age. This falls on the 17th century and signified a time of relative peace and calm that came after a separation from the country.
The Dutch, being a small country, were not exposed to the same influences as other countries and developed their own special style of art.
Protestantism is dissimilar from Catholicism in its style of life. Churches are not as dazzlingly decorated, nor are they as boisterous or authoritative, for instance. They rather seek to follow the “humble way of Jesus” (as Jesuits put it) and impose calmness and self-containment on those in search of something higher. The Church hasn’t issued any orders to artists for the design of temples. There are multiple reasons behind this. One is that a temple’s sole purpose is not to host artistic pieces, unlike what other places do. Another reason is that there shouldn’t be any distraction, with paintings and interior items, which in general makes architectural designing rather challenging.
Most commissions for religious paintings have been cancelled, replaced with many requests for other types of subject matter. This has led some to believe that the art of Holland in the 17th century is about everyday life. The people ordered paintings based on their usual subjects like landscapes and scenes from daily life. The themes of these paintings were not about any religious or mythological issue.
This style of painting was made possible by the new requirements and preferences for images in art, which is echoed in the depiction of life as it is – with muted colors, honest poses and bodies, and paintings with beautiful true-to-life colors. Dutch painting of the 17th century is a conversation about life and comfort, which can seem dull at first but is actually fascinating through their simplicity and lightness.
In addition, the competitive drive to reach new lands and establish new settlements has led Dutch artists to paint portraits of admirals as well as naval scenes with ships and merchant ships.
Anatomical theaters (rooms for educational dissections of corpses and lectures) were also often portrayed on canvases. Holland’s art began to change in response to the times, but it did not stop, as war scenes and everyday life became afashion.
There’s an up and coming genre in art called subject paintings, these scenes show what the artist sees in their everyday life. This was a new type of painting that emerged during the Dutch Renaissance that appealed to townspeople who wanted paintings of things they recognized in their place of living. There was no need to create monumental biblical scenes and court portraits with their inherent splendor and luxury. Dutch society was not interested in such things. That is why the development of the everyday genre falls on the 17th century: there is a greater understanding of private life and its variety in this century and a delight in portraying them.
Every artist had his own area of specialty. And fierce competition didn’t mean that there wasn’t a certain level of variety in genre and subject matter: it was necessary to be one’s best in order to succeed and receive orders on a continuous basis.
Each artist developed his talent in a particular genre and he didn’t compete with what he couldn’t do. What sets Dutch artists apart is their contentment with what they could do well without aiming to emulate more popular styles. He never had to worry about being ambitious and overreaching. He was happy with his position and this showed in the quality of his work.
In Flanders, the rise of commissions for religious paintings continued in contrast to Holland. As we remember, Flanders has traditionally been Catholic, in contrast to the Dutch Protestants. In Flanders, luxury and beauty – in richly decorated cathedrals and altarpieces – were still valued. Flanders wasn’t modest and demanded monumentality, pathos, luxury, and brightness. He would draw on mythical/biblical themes, images of festivity and ceremonial portraits as well as battles and significant events. Also, genre paintings were not particularly popular, unless they depicted still lifes only. Only the ones that were lush and bursting with abundance and happiness were necessary.
Flemish painters follow in the tradition of Michelangelo, Caravaggio, Titian and Tintoretto. They did this through the Baroque era – thirst for life, splendour, luxury. Emotionality is emphasised alongside an idealistic view of the world. The Flemish painters have some beautiful, life-embracing art that seems to transcend death. Their paintings contain a richness with warm colors and vivid details that create an atmosphere of fullness. They are absolutely marvelous from a purely artistic point of view, but the essence often feels like an experience just beyond the veil of this world.
Rubens is credited as the founder and driving force of the Baroque movement. He is known for being hugely influential in terms of creativity, a visionary, an original style and form distortion.
I agree, the style of Dutch painting did not follow the same path as baroque. The Dutch did not adopt baroque characteristics like contrasts and light/shade, but somehow they still managed to paint their own vision of the world. Furthermore, not many Dutch people left their country during the Renaissance, except for artists such as Rembrandt who were unable to work in their fields because the art movement was so new and unfamiliar. People like Rubens who travelled around Europe continued to do so through their diplomatic work. Rubens is to thank for rounding up those lost artworks, like a bunch of Leonardo da Vinci paintings.
What are the consequences? Let’s summarize what was mentioned before and explore the differences between Dutch and Flemish paintings.
Flemish art is life that throws us off balance: passionate, emotional, vibrant. Dutch art is commonplace, familiar and infinitely comfortable.
Belgian art is full of people whereas Dutch art gives the impression of small groups & quiet gatherings.
Flemish art – power and luxuries. Dutch art – less pomp and a simpler life, without much money or glory.
The Flemish school of art – to paint big! Biblical scenes, and mythological ones, with huge still lifes filled mostly with all the delicacies of the world and magnificent ceremonial portraits are just a few examples they left us. The Dutch meanwhile tended to focus on smaller paintings that could be hung in the houses of rich people. Everyday scenes or uncomplicated landscapes were. A light that doesn’t come from a physical source, but instead shines out of someone or something that we can’t see.