Cornelis Ketel. A painter without a brush..pdf

8/11/2019 Cornelis Ketel. A painter without a brush..pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cornelis-ketel-a-painter-without-a-brushpdf 1/15

Cornelis Ketel: A Painter without a Brush

Author(s): Nicolas GalleySource: Artibus et Historiae, Vol. 25, No. 49 (2004), pp. 87-100Published by: IRSA s.c.

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1483749 .

Accessed: 28/09/2014 03:20

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range o

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

IRSA s.c. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Artibus et Historiae.

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=irsa

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1483749?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


http://www.jstor.org/stable/1483749?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=irsa



NICOLAS GALLEY

Cornelis

Ketel:

A Painter

Without

a Brush

"In

he

year

1599

he

got

the

urge

to

paint

without

brushes,

with his

hands,

which

by many

is held

to

be

a

ridiculous,

abominable

urge

such as sometimes

happens

with

pregnant

women who crave to eat

strange,

raw or uncooked food.

But

to

speak

of it in more moderate

terms,

it

is

very

admirable

hat

he

was

so

successful

in

it

and no

misshapen

fruits

came forth.

[...] And what is even stranger,in 1600 it occurred to him to

paint

without

hands,

with his

feet,

to see

if he

could

make

something

of that. This led

many

to vain

laughter

and

ridicule,

even more

so than the

former because feet are even less suit-

ed to and

not intended for

that

work;

but,

after

all,

no

one

would be

harmed

by

this,

except

the brushmaker

...]"1

This

quotation

taken from the Life of Cornelis

Ketel2,

which

appears

in

the Schilderboeck

by

Karel van Mander3

(1604),

at

first

disconcerts

the

reader. On

a number of occa-

sions,

art

historians

have

emphasised

the

uniqueness

of

this

painter's processes,

but without

taking

their

analyses

any

fur-

ther4. The

eccentricity

of

painters

like Piero di

Cosimo,

Paolo

Uccello

and

Pontormo5

had

already

been noted

in the Lives

published by Vasari half a century earlier6.Indeed Vasari's

"Vite" evealed

that

during

the

Quattrocento

and

Cinquecento

some artists behaved

strangely,

sometimes

acting

against

social norms.

Vasari

openly

criticised

the

lifestyle

of these

eccentrics.7

Karelvan Mander seems

to have reacted differ-

ently

to

the

astonishing

acts

of

some

of

his

colleagues.

T

he did not

hesitate

to name

and

to

justify

he

technical

ecc

tricitiesof his friend Cornelis Ketel o whom he

devoted

on

the

longest

Lives

in

the

Schilderboeck.

Van

Mander ta

advantage

of the

eccentricity

of

this

poet-painter

o unde

the

exceptional personality

of the

artist,

although

he

st

short of recommendingthat others should follow inhis ex

mental

footsteps.

The author

of the Schilderboeck had at his

disposal

a

graphical

model

in which the

singularity

of

great persona

was

already

well

represented.

In the Lives

of classical

phil

phers

written

by Diogenes

Laertius

during

the first

half

of

3rd

century8,

and

which

was

republished

a

number

of

tim

the course of the 16th and 17th

centuries9,

great

thinkers

Diogenes,

Democritus,

and

others,

behave

independe

outside

the

social

norms of

their time.

The

eccentricity

of

nent men was

therefore

a

recognised

tradition10 and

Mander's

emphasis

on Ketel's

singularity ntegrates

him

a

prestigious

intellectual

ineage.

Indeed, Karel van Mander tells us that Heraclitus,

especially

Democritus,

were

particularly important

for

work of

this

painter.Although they

did not then

belong

to

collective visual

memory,

Ketel ook

up

the

theme

of

these

philosophers many

times.

In

fact Ketel was one of the

This content downloaded from 200.16.5.202 on Sun, 28 Sep 2014 03:20:24 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions






NICOLAS ALLEY

1)

Cornelis

Ketel,

<<Heraclitus>,,

il on

wood,

coil.

James

O.

Belden,

Washington

D.C.

artists in Northern

Europe

to

depict

these two

personages.11

These

paintings,

of which

only

one Heraclitushas survived

in

the James

O.

Belden

Collection

in

Washington

D.C.

[Fig. 1],

were

characterised

by

a

strong

personal

element. Van Mander

specifies

that Ketel's

pendant

presented

a

self-portrait

of the

artist as

Democritus;

this was carried out at the

request

of an

art-lover,

Hendrick van

Os.12

This

pendant

with

the

self-portrait

as

Democritus was the

first

complete

work executed with

his

fingers,

the culmination of a

series of

experiments.13

Itthere-

fore

assumes a

great

symbolic significance

inthe Life of

Ketel

and

stresses the

parallel

between this

painter

and the

Abderitan

hinker,

both

renowned for their eccentricities.

While Democritus' Life was

known at

this

period

through

the differenteditions of

Diogenes

Laertius, he

mythographic

traits

ascribed to this

figure

also came from

another text

known

today

as

The

Democritus

Letters.14This short text

tells

us,

by

means of a

correspondence

between

Hippocrates

and

various other

persons,

how this famous doctor was

calle

by

the Abderites

to cure their fellow

citizen and local

s

Democritus. The first

letter reveals that an

excess of wis

had led

him

to lose

his minds.15

He lived

alone,

far from c

sation,

staying

awake

night

and

day, laughing

at

everyt

surrounded

by

the

corpses

of animals

which he was

diss

ing.

The next seven

letters,

sent

by

Hippocrates

o various

sonalities,

relate

the

long

discussions

that the latter had

Democritus.

During

hese

dialogues,

the

philosopher

dem

strates to the doctor that

he is

perfectly

sound in mind

and

it

is his fellow citizens

who are mad.16

This

radical reversal was taken

up

by

Erasmus

in

his

Praise of

Folly17.

Erasmus dedicated this work to his hum

friend Thomas

More,

presented

as "a sort of

Democrit

amid the common

run of mortals and the authoralso

speci

that his text

was an

amusing

work which

would find an

ap

priate

reader

in

the

English

humanist whose

name,

Mor

latin,

is

close to

the

word for

folly

in

Greek,

moria.19

Alth

his name

appears only

twice,

the whole

conception

of

book can

be linked to

Democritus,

In

talking

about the

m

ness of

humanity,

Erasmus takes the

part

of

Democr

laughing

at the world's

pretensions

and

observes that

worst art

pleases

the most

people,

for the

simple

reason

the

larger

part

of

mankind,

as I

said

before,

is

subject

to

f

If,therefore,

the less skilled man

is more

pleasing

both

in

own

eyes

and in the

wonderinggaze

of the

many,

what

rea

is there that he

should

prefer

sound

discipline

and true s

In

the first

place,

these

will

cost him

a

great outlay;

in

the

ond

place,

they

will

make him more

affected and

meticul

and

finally, hey

will

please

far fewer of his audience."20

One of

the similarities

between The Democritus

Le

and The

Praise of

Folly

resides

in

this

biting

criticismof so

ty,

considered as foolish and

blind. These two

texts culti

the

myth

which

presents

the man of

exception,

the

genius

misunderstood and

discredited

by

the

community

that

rounds

him.

The

only person

who was

able

adequatel

understand

Democrituswas

Hippocrates,

"the best

of

men

while

Erasmus

dedicated his text to Thomas

More,

a man

considered as

exceptional,

and the writerdid

not

forget

to

that his work would have a lot of detractors.22The

rejectio

society

became

therefore the irrefutable

proof

of their

ex

tional

nature,

of their

genius.23

Since the

Renaissance the notion of

genius

has in

been

closely

linked to the

figure

of Democritus.

Ind

MarsilioFicino

had

already

likened the

melancholy

in

B

XXX.1 of Aristotle's Problems24 to the "divine furor

Democritus,

an

assertion which confirmed

the

genius

of

philosopher.25

The sorrow suffered

by

this

outstanding

came therefore not

only

from his

illness,

his

melancholy

88







CORNELIS

ETEL: PAINTERWITHOUT BRU

also from his

particular

ituation

of

being

exceptional,

misun-

derstood,

"whichever more

urgently

claimed

to be

emancipat-

ed

in

life

and works from the standards

of 'normal'

morality

and

the common rules of art."26

hus,

even

if

the term

"melan-

cholic" does not

appear

in

the Life of

Ketel27,

he

analogy

with

Democritus

was

enough

to underline his

uniqueness

and

to

justify

his

eccentricities

in

the face of the disdainful reactions

which constituted the

very

proof

of his

genius.

The caustic cri-

ticism that Ketel had to endure because

of his

experiments

thus took on

a

positive

connotation.

Going

back to the

text,

we

observe

that

in

the

passage

where he

speaks

about these crit-

ics,

van Mander

pecifies

that Ketel's detractors

compared

his

technical eccentricities to the behaviour of a

pregnant

woman28.

This

comparison permitted

he writer o

emphasize

the

relationship

between creation and

procreation,

the act of

creation

"par

excellence",

the creation of a

human

being.

The

fact that he had decided to

paint directly

with his

fingers

had

already

underlined

this

link

between divine and artistic

cre-

ation. Indeed

the same motif

appears

later and

more

explicitly

in MarcoBoschini'sLaCartadel

Navegar

Pitoresco

published

in

1660.29

In this

text,

Boschini

compares

Titian

painting

with

his

fingers

to God

creating

Adam30,

eferring

o the

passage

of

the Genesis

where

it

is said

that

God

created the first human

with his own hands and

with

clay31.

An

insolent

remark s thus

transformed into a

great

compliment

and

Ketel,

following

Democritus32,

was

indirectlyglorified by

his own detractors.

The

first of The Democritus Letters

expresses

the

idea that

the

philosopher

had become

ill

because of his excess of

wis-

dom.33This

idea

reappears

in

the Life of

Ketel where the use

of his

fingers

as

brushes

is mentioned. Van Mander ells us

for

the first time about this

experiment

while

enumerating

Ketel's

portraits,

all

"very precisely"

and

"very neatly"

realised34.

In

this list we find the

portrait

of the

winegauger

of Amsterdam

described as

"outstandingly

exact"35.

This

portrait

of Vincent

Jacobsen

has reached us

through

a

print[Fig.

2].

Despite

the

fact that we

only

have an indirect

approach

to this

painting,

he

"outstandingly

xact"36

quality

of the work

is noticeable

in

the

costume

and the

glass

that

Vincent

Jacobsen

holds

in

his

right

hand. The

extraordinary

refinement that emanates

from this

print

permits

us to

imagine

the one of

the

original

picture.

The

refinement

of Ketel's

technique

is

already

apparent

in

his

famous

group

portrait eaturing

he

Company

of

Captain

Dirck

Rosecrans

[Fig. 3].

The

shimmering lights

of the various

draperies,

the

glints

on the arms andthe folds of the collarets

that are revealed

in

this

painting

help

us

imagine

what this

"outstandingly

exact"

portraitmight

have looked like. Was it

his extreme

ability,

his excess of technical

ability,

hat led

him

to

abandon his brush? This is

what van Mander eems to

sug-

gest,

in

particular

when he tells

us that for another "outstand-

*/"-D

r

, --, '"/_ ,'

"".

'I,..

/.

.

A

w

/

^

_ of

"

-

Ir

,'

,;-?1

^

r

-

'i

..

,~

,.,,.

~

..,.

....a

(

^

.

,- P

..

-.'r,

I' l

.

?'

...

i%

.........ll..

.

'll"

. l4:1...

']i':~'' '

9li

Ji~

llj'i

ii

l~J'^l"i.. "

i

. '

2)

Jacob

Matham

(after

Cornelis

Ketel),

<Vincent

Jacobsen,, 1602,

print,

25

x

18 cm.

ingly

splendid" portrait,

Ketel

produced

"a

pendant

in

reve

with

his

fingers"37.

Cornelis Ketel had come to some

form

dead end and the

way

he

chose to find a new directionwa

abandon

the tool which had led

him

there: his

brush. L

Democritus,

this artist

had lost

his

way

as a result of

tr

continually

o

surpass

himself.

This

analogy

between a

painter

and a

philosopher

co

not have been fortuitous

for the author

of the first book

northern artists'

Lives.

In

demonstrating

that a

painter

ac

and was sometimes

considered

in

the same

way

as a

pers







NICOLAS ALLEY

3)

Cornelis

Ketel,

<Company

of

Captain

Dirck

Jacobsz.

Rosecrans and Lieutenant

Pauw>, 1588,

208

x

410

cm,

Rijksmuseum,

Amsterdam.

age

famous for his intellectual

skills,

van

Mander tried to

demonstrate that an artist and his art had to be

recognised

within

the LiberalArts. The

example

of

Ketel was all the more

eloquent

since he

was also a

poet.

Moreover,

he fact that he

decided to abandon

his brush could

be understood as an act

of disobedience

against

the

guilds,

a

corporate system

that

relied on a division of the manual

occupations

on the

basis of

the tools and materials

proper

to each one of them38.

In aban-

doning

his work

tool,

Cornelis Ketel demonstrated

in

a

drastic

manner that

painting

did not

depend

on

a tool but on an intel-

lectual

process

and

consequently

that

painters

should not be

subject

to a

system designed

for artisans. Van

Mander was

himself

very

concerned

with

this issue and his Schilderboeck

seems

in

some

passages

a manifesto

against

the

guilds.

This

is the case inthe Lifeof Pieter Vlerick.

"O

Pictura,

noble and

supreme

bearer of

genius

in

Nature,

mother of all

embellishments and wet

nurse of all noble virtu-

ous

arts,

who is not

obliged

to

yield

before

any

of

your

fellow

sisters called the liberal

arts,

who was valued so

highly by

noble Greeks and Romans and whose

art-full

practitio

were so much welcomed and well received

everywhere-a

so

gladly

accepted

as

citizens

by

the

gentlemen

and auth

ties.

0,

far too

ungratefulpresent

times,

that on the

insiste

of

clumsy bunglers

has

established

in

the towns such sha

ful laws and such envious

regulations

so that almost

ev

where

(excepting

almost

only

Rome)

a

guild

is made of

noble art

of

painting,

as is done with all coarse

handicrafts

trades such as

weaving, furriery, arpentry,

mithing

and su

like.

In

Bruges

in

Flanders,

painting

is not

just

a

guild

on

own but the

guild

also includes

harness-making.

In

Haar

where

there have

always

been

many

noble

spirits

in

our

there are

tinkers,

tinsmiths and old clothes

traders include

the

guild.

Although

these two towns

explain

the reason

that has

happened

it

has nonetheless

got

so far that

hardly

distinction is made

between

painting

and

shoe-repair

weaving

or such

things;

for it

has to be a

guild

too

(as

ig

90







CORNELIS ETEL: PAINTERWITHOUT BR

rance

and

injudiciousness

like to have

it)

and

(if

one can

buy

it

all)

be

purchased

with

money.

Then there has to be a

test-just

as is done

by

cabinetmakers,

ailors and other trades

for

(what

sounds even more

ungainly)

it

is also called a trade.

O

noble

art

of

painting,

what have

you finally

come

to?"39

VanManderhoped, therefore,that the status of the artist

would

radicallychange.

As

Jurgen

Muller evealed

in his

study

on the

Schilderboeck,

he seems to have considered the

year

1600 as a

turning

point.40

Muller

explains

that

during

the

Renaissance

a

popular

belief considered human evolution as

cyclical,

the

beginning

of each

new

cycle bringing

a break

with

the

preceding

one.

So,

the

year

1600 marked the

onset

of

a new era.41 Van Mander

wrote

his

Schilderboeck

during

a

phase

that he

considered a

new

cycle,

and

it

is true that this

period

seems to have been

a time

of

profound

change,

mark-

ing

the

end

of

mannerism and the

beginnings

of

what we

today

call the

"Golden

Age"

of Dutch

painting.

Van Mander

was not able to

predict

the direction

that the

painting

of

his

region would take. Nevertheless he marked this new cycle by

giving

the

year

1600 a

symbolic significance

and

sometimes

cheating

with the

dates. Van Mander

ells

us

that

it

was

in

1600

that Goltzius tried to

paint

for the

first

time,

whereas

he was

already

well-knownas a

draughtsman

and

engraver.

"When

Goltzius returned

rom

Italy

he

had

impressed

the

handsome Italian

paintings

as

firmly

n

his

memory

as

in

a

mir-

ror,

so

that

wherever he

went he

still saw them

continuously

before

him;

now

it was

the soft

graciousness

of

Raphael

hat

he

enjoyed,

then

the

natural

leshiness

of

Correggio,

hen the

plas-

tic

highlights

and

deep-retiring,

ubbed-back hadows of

Titian,

the beautiful silken materials and

well-painted

things

of

Veronese and others

in

Venice-so that works from his

native

land could no longer completely satisfy him. Itwas stimulating

and educational or the

painters

o hear

him

speak

of

this,

for

he

spoke

all

about

glowing

flesh

parts,

glowing

shadows and such

unfamiliar r little

heard

expressions.

When he drew

something

then the flesh

parts

in

particular

had

to

be coloured

with

crayons;

and thus

he

eventually

proceeded

to brushes and

oil

paintonly

two

years

after

he

was cured or weaned

from

sucking

the

breast,

when

he was no less than

42

years

old,

in

1600."42

The

emphasis

on the

date

of

1600 is

flagrantly

misleading

as

it

is certain that Goltzius

produced

paintings

before

1600.43

Looking

again

at the

passage

where van

Mander

concludes

with

a reference to

Goltzius

painting,

the

new era which

the

author of the

Schilderboeck defines as

beginning

in

1600,

acquires a special significance. VanMander'spraise of Italian

painting

and

the

disappointment

hat Goltziusfelt when

return-

ing

to his own

country

are

meaningful.

While Italian

painting

might

have been

considered

superior

to Dutch

painting

up

to

this

time,

Goltzius would

change everything.

After

his

journey

to

Italy

and

his

discovery

of

picturality,

Goltzius had al

tools to transcend Italianart.

Jurgen

Mullerhas

already

underlined the

importan

the

structure

of

the

Schilderboeck,

which

puts

forward

suggestion

that the

northern

painters,

having

assimilated

experimentsof the Italians,were to lead the art of painti

summits never

reached before.44

This

claim

also

appea

the

didactic

poem

which introduces van Mander's

Schi

boeck.45 While

in

this

text he

specifies

that Italian

art

i

enced northern

artists46,

he does not

forget

to

add

that it

i

time

to

prove

to Italians hat Dutch artists

are

capable

of

p

ing

human

figures.47

The

will

to

surpass

Italianart is

very

sent in this

poem

which

is

dedicated to

young

novice

pain

who will be able to

take

advantage

of

the innovation

Goltzius and Ketel and

therefore to

surpass

the

Italians.

The

turning point,

1600,

reappears

in a

symbolic wa

the Life of

Cornelis Ketel.

Van Mander tells

us

that

"[...]

in

1

it

occured to

him

to

paint

without

hands,

with his

feet,

to s

he could make something of that."48He claimedtherefore

Goltzius

discovered

painting

the same

year

that

Ketel a

doned the use

of

his

hands. The

new

departure

could no

presented

in

a more

eloquent

way.

Van Mander

specifies

in

1599

Cornelis Ketel

abandoned his brush

to

paint

with

gers,

and then that it

was

in

1600 that he

started to

use

feet. This

gradation

leads

up directly

to

the

point

of

rup

the

moment

of

reversal.

The inversionwas incarnated n

the

figure

of

Ketel.His

s

bolic correlation

with

Democritus inkedhim

ndirectly

o

the

of

"world

upside-down"

to

which the

philosopher

was

b

strongly

associated

during

he 16th

entury,

a

relationship

t

ed

to

by

many

texts49and

illustrations

Fig. 4].

Furthermo

fact thathe notonlypaintedwith he righthand,butalso wit

left and with his

feet,

confirmed

his

relationship.

ndeed

m

prints

reating

he theme of

the "world

upside-down"

epre

ed men

walking

on their

hands,

horses

riding

men,

and

sim

images.

No

representation

f

this

theme

shows

an

artist

pai

with

his feet or his left

hand.

Nevertheless a numberof

texts

to these deviancies. A

passage

from the

"Dreamsof

Quev

presents

the

left-handed

person

as

a

person "upside

dow

and

many

sociological

or

anthropological

tudies deal with

problem

of the

use of the left

hand,

which

suggested

some f

of

malevolent

inversion.51The

use of the

feet

instead of

hands

thus

appears

to be a further

tage

in

this

process

of

s

bolic reversal.

The paintingof the North of the Alps, and more prec

Dutch

painting,

was

going,

therefore,

to

surpass

Italian

p

ing.

In

addition,

the Dutch

painter

would not have to

suffe

affronts

that he had

endured in his own

country.

The

painter, personified

by

Goltzius and

Ketel,

would

profit

f







NICOLAS ALLEY

4) DirckV.Coornhert(afterMartin an Heemskerck),

<<Democritus

nd

Heraclitus),,

1557,

print,

Bibliotheque

d'Arsenal,

Paris.

a new

status,

freed from

the

obligation

to be

subject

to a

guild.

The

very

structure of

the book of

artists' Lives affirmed

this

notion of

individuality

ince

despite

the

topo'

thatcharacterise

this kind of

work,

each

biography

aimed to

reveal its

subject

as a distinct

individual.52

new era would thus

begin,

both

for

the

artist,

and for the

image

as a workof art.

One Ketel work to which van

Mander

gives great impor-

tance is the

painting

that this

artist realised for the

fa;ade

of

his own

house. This form of work

had a tradition

n

the Northof

the

Alps,

and the

facade

of the house of

the

painter

Frans

Floris was

probably

one of the

greatest examples.53

The

facades

of

artists' houses are of

particular

nterest

because no

patron

came into

play

and the work

often had

the

significance

of

a "credo"

or of a "manifesto" orthe artist that

realised it54.

Unfortunately

hese

works

were

mostly destroyed

and

Ketel's

met the

same fate.

Nevertheless van Mander

provides

a

long

description

which

permits

us to

imagine

what

it

looked like:

"Now,

I

shall not

remain silent about the

manner

in

which

he

painted

his house in

various

ways:

on the

right-hand

ide of

the

fagade

Democritus and Heraclituswith a

globe

between

them,

these he

painted

with

his

right

foot.

On the

left-hand

side Momus and

Zoilus,

with

the left foot. Inthe

middle,

direct-

ly

above the entrance

of the

house stands

fast-flying

Time,

crowned with

roses,

in the

one hand a

scythe

or

sickle,

in

other an

hourglass, accompanied by

two

flying

children

one

representing

Intelligence

and the other

Spirit,

becaus

arts

emerge

in due course

from

spirit

and

insight.

This is d

without

brush,

with

the left

hand.

In

these

aforementio

pieces

the

figures are life-sized and

in

paint,that is in co

Between them

are two

pieces

in

copper-coloured

grisaille

which stands on the

right-hand

side of Time

is a

represe

tion of

Pictura

painting

with hand

and

foot;

the

other,

on

left-hand

side,

is

laughing

Patience seated

upon

an

a

under attack from Falsehood who shoots

three arrows

si

taneously,

that

is:

envy, gossip

and slander.

Envy spite

pulls

her backwards

by

the braids

of her

hair;

vicious

sets a

savage dog

on her to devour

her;

Mortal

Viole

a man with a

skull,

fromwhose

eyes

shoot flames of

fire,

resents the

great plague

in

Amsterdam

in

the

year

1602

year

in which this

was made. These

grisly

monsters seem

want to

destroy

Patience,

which

she endures

with

laug

holding

a little lamb

in

her arm and a

cross

in

her

hand

face turned toward

heaven,

as

if to her

Maker."55

Despite

the

length

of this

description,

van Mander

d

not offera

global interpretation

f

the

painting.

He limits

self to

naming

the different

igures

which are

represented

points

out the reasons

which

pressed

Ketel

to

represen

figure

of

Mortal

Violence. Van Mander

eems to tell us tha

epidemic

of

plague

that

ravaged

Amsterdam

in

160256 d

Ketel o realise this

program.

Inthe archives

we find that K

bought

his

house

in

159357,

nine

years

before

realising

mural

painting.

The

many

deaths that had occurred

in

the

of

Amsterdam had

deeply

shocked its

inhabitants,

espec

a fatherwho

had lost four ofhis five children.58The

progra

this

facade

seems, therefore,

to be

closely

linkedto the ev

that had

just

taken

place.

The

private

and

the

public

blended

in

this work and

symbolic

ambitions of the whole are

worthy

of attention

iconography,

and

particularly

its

motives,

recall a

typ

image

which had

earlier become

the

prey

of the

iconocla

the

religious

image

and

especially

the votive

image.

The

structureof this

great

allegory

is derived from

the structu

the "Last

Judgements"

which

appear

on the

pediment

many

churches.59

Indeed,

the

archives tell

us

that

Ke

house was

situated on the

Oude

Zijds

Voorburgwal

where

stands number

77,

just opposite

the Oude

Kerck,

he

anc

principal

church of Amsterdam.60

A

dialogue

could then

place

between this

church,

which

had suffered from

the ic

clastic attacks of

1566,61

and the

fagade

dedicated to the

ure of

Time. The

opposition

between the sacred and

the

fane thus

took

on

its entire

meaning,

Ketel's

fag

symbolising

the

profane

world

and the Oude Kerck the

92







CORNELIS ETEL:

PAINTER

WITHOUT

BR

gious

one.

In

reaction

to

the

iconoclasm,

this

profane

votive

image

recovered the outlines of the

ancient

image

while

proposing

an

iconography

that

could

be

considered a mani-

festo for the

new status

of

Painting.

While he

date

of

the

reali-

sation

of

this

work, 1602,

links it to the

epidemic

of the

plague

in

the same

year,

it also

permitted

Karelvan Mander o

assert

that

the

year

1600 had marked a

turning

point,

the

beginning

of a new

era for

the

Art

of

Painting.

The

importance

that

van

Mander

gave

to the diverse

techniques

that Ketel

supposedly

used

to

realise this

work,

always

specifying

which

part

was

made with

which

limb,

underscores this notion of

image-

object, profane

image

or

rather

profaned

image.

The

artistic

processes

and

indirectly

the

artist as

author,

then assume

their full

importance.

This

change

is

suggested by

the

enumerationof

the differ-

ent

techniques

used. Van

Mander

specifies

that

Ketel realised

the central

group

formed

by

the

figure

of

Time,

Intelligence

and

Spirit,

with

his

left

hand.

The left hand

was the

very

instru-

ment

of the

inversion,of the diabolicaldeviance.62The mode

of realisation of

the main

figure

came down

to

profane

it

in

a

symbolic

way,

to

show Time

as a new

upside

down,

terrestri-

al

god.63

The

use of the

feet to

represent

the two

groups

of

philosophers

had the

same

meaning.

Ketel

painted

person-

ages

admired for their

intellectual

skills,

in

other

words for

their

heads,

with

his feet.

It is

interesting

to notice

that the

fagade

as locus of the world

upside

down

enjoyed

a

precedent

in

the work

of Pieter

Bruegel.

In

his "Netherlandish

Proverbs",

he

placed

the

globe upside

down on the

sign

of a

fagade,

evoking

the attitude

of its

inhabitants.

The

notion of

virtuosity

emanates from

this

impressive

description

and this

criterionwas

intimately

inked to the

new

way of judging a painting.Thus the "compilation" f all the

techniques,

of all the know-how

which

supposedly

end

up

in

this work

confers on it the

status of

chef-d'oeuvre,

but also

that

of a

manifesto of

the

art

of Ketel.

This notion of

manifesto is

underscored

by

the

presence

of the

philosopher

Democritus,

emblematic

personage

of

the Life of

Ketel,

and

by

the

repre-

sentation of Momus

and

Zoilus,

who are

less

familiar.There

seems to be

no other

pictorial

work

combining

these

two

thinkers,

so well

known

for their

caustic

criticisms. Zoiluswas

renowned for his

violent

critiques

of

Homer while

Momus

attempted

to

judge

the

works realised

by

three

divinities,

all

of

them-in his

opinion-displaying

obvious

imperfections.64

Thereforeon

one side of

the

fagade

were

situated the

positive

critics, Heraclitus and Democritus, while on the other side

were

represented

the bad

ones,

namely

Momus

and Zoilus.

This

opposition

that

distinguishes

the

constructive

critic

from the

negative

is

underlined

by

the

figures

which are

repre-

sented beside

Democritus and

Heraclitus,

and

the ones

juxta-

posed

to

Momus and

Zoilus.

Indeed the

scene

represen

Patience attacked

by

falsehood,

envy,

gossip,

slander

hate is

adjacent

to

Momus

and Zoilus. The

many

attacks

Patience has

to suffer

evoke the ones that harm

the A

Painting.65

ndeed,

if

Patience is

the

counterpart

o

Paintin

Ketel's

fagade,

it

is because they are linked. By specifyin

his

description

that

"all

arts

emerge

in due course

from

s

and

insight"66,

an

Mander

also linked

the

representatio

Painting

o that of

Patience,

a notion

intimately

lose

to

tem

rality.

Furthermore the

enumeration of

these

many

v

evokes a

famous

work,

the

"Calumny

of

Apelles"

realise

Apelles

himself.

The

description

of this

painting

in a

tex

Lucianwas

taken

up by

Alberti n

his De Pictura

publishe

1435.67 Alberti

depicts

this

work,

enumerating

the

diffe

personifications-Ignorance, Suspicion,

Envy,

Treach

Truth,

and so

on-which

compose

it,

as the

paradigm

for

notion of

invention,68

which

according

to van

Mander

great

importance

for

Ketel.

The scene

representing

Pati

thus expressed the obstacles that a painterhad to surmou

his

creation,

because of

all the

unjustified

criticisms he

ha

endure.69

Opposite

Momus and

Zoilus

appeared

the

figure

Democritus

and

Heraclitus

adjoining

a

personification

Painting

that van

Mander

only

names.

The

proximity

of

th

figures expressed

the

positive

aspect

of

the

criticism

these two

philosophers

and

the state

of mind in

which

painter

had to

work,

being

critical in order

to find a

cer

Truth.70This

quite

abstract

notion is

important

for

Corn

Ketel and it

appears

at

the end of a

poem

that

he

compo

for

one of his

drawings

which deals with the theme

of

learning

of

Arts:

"Three

hings

induce

everyone

to

learn artmost

of all:

The one is

money,

the second

honour and the

third

ove of

Who seeks

money

will meet

greed

on the

way

Whichhinders

his

advance,

so thathe

only

learns

superfic

But he

who strives

after honour

gains

a little

more

favou

Insofar

as

idle

glory

can

lead to

the tree of

Art;

For if

he is after

the fruit

and not the

tree,

He will

pluck

unripe

and

get

no harvest

of

either.

He whose inborn

desire for it

prepares

the

way

And

whose Love or t

urges

him

constantly

with

arduous

tren

Neither

diligence

nor

patience

shall

abandon

him

So that

through

labour

he

shall be

brought

to

art

AndFamethereafterwillsweeten his efforts withriche

and honour.

Fortune

awakens

Envy.

Malicious

Hatred,

Envy

and

spiteful

Gossip







NICOLAS ALLEY

Line

up against

Fame;

Rumour,

however,

flies

on,

so that

everybody

sees and

hears

Evidence of

everyone's

work.

But Truth

n

Time

comes to

light,

whatever

happens:

Nothing

can

prevent

her."71

Furthermore

van Mander

tells us that for

Burgomaster

Cornelis Florissen van

Teylingen

Ketel

realised an

allegory

on

an "old

morality:

how Time

brings

Truth

o

light".72

n

popular

culturethe

figure

of

Time was

closely

linked to

the

concept

of

Truth.

The

great

success of the

proverb

Veritas ilia

temporis

during

the

16th

century73

s

evidence of this

relationship.

This

commonplace

was

often used at the

beginning

of

Protestan-

tism to illustrate

he future

triumph

of

the new

religion,

which

was

supposed

to

reveal

the

Truth.74A

number of

prints

illus-

trating

books

published

by

the

Protestants have survived

[Fig.

5].

In

these

images,

Truth s

personified

by

a

young

naked

woman

helped

by

the

old man

Time,

to

come

out

of

the cave

where she had been

imprisoned.

In

the

example

that we

have

chosen,

hypocrisy,

incarnated

by

a kind of

flying

devil,

spits

his venom

onto this

fragile

woman,

whose

gaze

is

fixed on the

figure

of

Time,

signifying

that

she no

longer

cares

about

the

aggression

that she has to suffer.

Nevertheless,

while the

proverb

"VeritasFilia

Temporis"

was used

by

the Protestants intheir

struggle against

Rome,

it

was

also a

topos

in

Protestant as well

as Catholic

humanist

circles.75

Cornelis

Ketel was

conscious that

in

representing

the

figure

of

Time,

he

was

referring

directly

to the

concept

of

Truth,

particularly

n

representing

this

personification

along-

side

philosophers

renowned for

their talents of

revelation or of

imposture.

The

place

of the

personification

of

Painting

between

Time and the

group

formed

by

Heraclitus and

Democritusthus

implied

that

Painting

was also

able to

reveal

a

certainform of Truth.Due to the

opposition

between old reli-

gious

image

and the

new

one,

the

worship

that Ketel

seems to

offer to Time is

only

reflected

in

the

Art

of

Painting.

Returning

o the

description by

van

Mander,

we

note that

he

does not dwell on the

figure

of Time

and that the

only

expla-

nation

he

gives

on

the whole of the

fagade

is

in

the

final words

of this

sentence:

"[...]

because all arts

emerge

in

due

course

from

spirit

and

insight."76

t

s

surprising

hat this

interpretation

ensues from an

allegory

with

the

figure

of Time in

its

centre

and

which

only

offers

Painting

a

secondary place, represent-

ing

it in a

monochromatic bas relief and

placing

it in an

inter-

val. Nonetheless to

maintain that

Painting

limits

itself to

a

unique personification

would

prevent

one from

seeing

this

image

as a

manifesto of the new

image

perceived

as an

object.

In

other words a

great

mural

painting,

considered for

what

it

is-an artefact

resulting

from an

artist's use of

different

5)

<<Truth

evealed

by

Time>>,

n:

William

Marshall,

"Good

Prymer

n

Englyshe",

1535,

print.

techniques

and

materials-and

not

only exclusively

for wh

re-presents, praises

the Art of

Painting

in

its own

ri

Therefore the

long

enumeration

of the different

techniq

used

by

Keteland the absence of a

true

iconographic inter

tation

was

justified by

the new

approach

to an

image,

image

that declaimed

itself

as a

full work of art.

A

por

realised

by

Ketel

one

year

before his

fagade [Fig.

6] supp

this

approach.77

Altough

at first this

painting

seems to be

product

of a

"traditional"

echnique,

when

approaching

work

more

closely,

the viewer will

discover an

inscript

94







CORNELIS

ETEL: PAINTERWITHOUT

BRU

6)

Cornelis

Ketel,

<<Portrait

f a

Man,, 1601,

oil on

canvas,

coil. De

Boer,

Amsterdam.

Sonder

Borstel oft Pinseel

/

ben

ick dus

geschildert

heel

/

CK.

/

Aetat. 28.

/

AN

160178. Even

if

the

age

of

the sitter and the

date

of realisation

certify

that

it is not a

self-portrait,

his

por-

trait is

very interesting

for

the new

conception

of

the

image.

Indeed,

it is a

perfect

example

of the kind of

artefact that was

designed

to

engage

a cultured

spectator

who considered an

image

not

only

for what

it

re-presented

but also for what

it

actually

was,

the result of the

virtuosity

of an artist.79

The

disappearance

of

Ketel's

facade

also reminds

us that

the

image-object

is

subjected

to the

torments

of

time,

an idea

which is

already

underlinedin the same work. The new

pro-

fane

god

was

almighty.

In The Democritus

Letters,

Democritus

had

already

revealed that

works of art were

only

vanities.80 t s

probably

not a coincidence that the

personages

of Democritus

7)

Jacob

de

Gheyn,

<Vanitas>,,603,

oil on

wood,

83

x

54

c

Metropolitan

Museum

of

Art,

New York.

and

Heraclitus

sometimes

appear

in Vanitas them

Observing

a

painting by

Jacob

de

Gheyn

[Fig. 7],

we disco

that two

figures

are

represented

in

the

spandrels

of a ni

On the left side of

this niche

appears

Democritus,

pointing

with his

right

hand

to the

soap

bubble

that refers

to the

ea

while on the

right

side Heraclitus

points

out to the same

s

bubble while

touching

his

forehead

with

his

right

hand

a

sign

of affliction.

As

for Ketel's

fagade,

an

opposi

emerges

between

the left and the

right

side

of this

image.

T







NICOLAS ALLEY

8)

Cornelis

Ketel,

<Portrait

f Adam

Wachendorff),,

1574,

oil

on

wood,

diameter 43

cm,

Rijksmuseum,

Amsterdam.

antagonism

underscores the

futility

of the

objects

that sur-

round us. Nevertheless

this Vanitas

by

de

Gheyn

is

exception-

al

in

its innovation

and the

ingenuity

in

representing

the

globe

as a

soap

bubble,

the

very symbol

of

vanity.

The

symbol

of the

soap

bubble

appears

in

a work

by

Ketel

exhibited

in

the

Rijksmuseum

of Amsterdam

[Figs.

8-9].

This

portrait,

considered

today

as the oldest

surviving painting by

Ketel,

was realised

in

1574

during

his

stay

in

England.

The

work is

composed

of two

sides,

one

representing

Adam

Wachendorffat the

age

of

35

[Fig.

8]

and the other

containing

a

putto

blowing

bubbles

[Fig.

9].

The two

sides of this

painting

bear

inscriptions,

some

directly

integrated

within

the

image,

others

appearing

on the

fringe,

on the frame.

On the left of the

face of AdamWachendorff s inscribed the date of realisation

of

this

portrait,

157481,

and on the

right

his

age,

35

years

old82.

Under this

inscription,

Cornelis Ketel

placed

his

monogram,

which is

composed

of his initials:

CK.

9)

Cornelis

Ketel,

Reverse of the

<Portrait

f

Adam

Wachendorff>,, 574,

oil on

wood,

diameter43

cm,

Rijksmuseum,

Amsterdam.

The

underscoring

of the date of realisation of this w

and the

age

of

the man

portrayed

ixes this

portrait

n

a

tem

ral

system,

implying

that the

portrayed

is

subject

to this

tem and so doomed to

grow

old.

The

proximity

between

th

inscriptions

and the

signature

of the artist

seems the

assert this

determination,

ndicating

to the

spectator

tha

image

he has

in

front of

him

is the

product

of an artist

therefore the fruitof a

creative

process

itself

fixed

in

time.

pointing

out

of the

temporality

o which the

image

of

portr

and also the sitter itself is

subject

is

repeated

several time

this

work.

In

the first

place

the

proverb

written on the

fram

"SERMO

DEI AETERNUSCATERNAOMNIA

CADUCA

refers

directly

to this mise en

peinture

of the

concept

of v

ty.

This

proverb

is

illustrated

by

the white sheet of

paper

Adam Wachendorff holds

in

his

right

hand. The

gaze

of

spectator

is

attracted

by

Wachendorff's

gesture,

which

96







CORNELIS ETEL: PAINTERWITHOUT

BR

11)

Cornelis

Norbertus

Gijsbrechts,

<<Vanitas,>,

il on

canvas,

84

x

78

cm,

Museum of Fine

Arts,

Boston.

10)

Hendrick

Hondius,

<<Homo

ulla,,

print,

Bibliotheque

Nationale,

Paris.

sents this sheet to his

eyes.

The

spectator

then tries to read

what is written on the

paper.

The

surprise

is

complete

when

he discovers

that the sheet of

paper

that is shown to him con-

tains no

text,

not a

single

character or

sign.

He then remem-

bers that

only

the words of God are eternal

and that therefore

any

other

writing

s doomed

to

disappear. Although

the

sym-

bolic

system

of this

part

of

the work

may appear

trivial,

Ketel

plays

very subtly

with

the notions

of interior and exte

Indeed,

while the interior of the

frame,

the

image,

cont

a discourse

on

vanity,

the

exterior,

he

frame

itself,

bears

famous

proverb.

The

opposition

between eternal and

t

sient which

appears

in

a

symbolic way

is thus

taken

up ag

in the formal

conception.

The interior

border of the fr

marksthe

limit

between the

physical

world and the

metap

ical

or eternal one.

The reverse of this

painting

reatsalso the theme of

va

An

inscription

n

Greek-nIOMOLYE

O

ANOPQnOE-whic

can translate as "Man s a

soap

bubble" is illustrated

by

representation

of

a

putto

blowing

soap

bubbles.

In

Bergstrom

has

gathered together

a

number of

images

of v

ty

which deal with this

iconographic

theme of the Ho

Bulla.84

A

print

by

Hendrick

Hondius

[Fig.10] showing

a

p

blowing

bubbles falls

directly

within

the

type

of

Homo B

that Ketel realised on the verso of his

portrait

of

A







NICOLAS

GALLEY

Wachendorff. The

comparison

of these two

images permits

us

to note that while Hondius

fills his

print

with

many soap

bub-

bles,

Ketel does not include

a

single

one.

At

first

sight

the

spectator

may

be astonished that Ketel does not

give

us a sin-

gle soap

bubble,

although

the

inscription crowning

this

side of

the

portrait

refers

directly

to this theme.

Recalling

the

way

in

which on the recto of the same work Ketel has used the frame

as

a

frontier

between

the eternal and

the

transient,

the

specta-

tor

discovers

that the artist is

again playing

with

this element

which at first

sight may

not seem

significant.

The

representa-

tion of the

soap

bubble

which is

proper

to this kind of Vanitas

is

symbolised by

the round format of this

portrait.

The work

itself

thus

represents

a

soap

bubble.

In

this

sophisticated play,

Ketel

underscores

the

vanity

of

all works of

art, which,

as

such,

are condemned to

disappear.

1

K.van

Mander,

The lives of

the

illustriousNetherlandish

and

German

painters (1604)

/

H.

Miedema

(ed.),

6

vol.,

Doornspijk

1994-

1999,

vol.

1,

Doornspijk,

1994,

p.

370.

2

Van

Mander,

p.

cit.,

pp.

357-378.

3

Van

Mander,

The

lives...;

K. van

Mander,

Het

Schilder-Boeck,

Haarlem,

1604.

(Reprint:

Utrecht,

1969).

See

H.

Miedema, Kunst,

Kunstenaar,

n Kunstwerk

ij

Karel

van Mander.Een

Analyse

van

zijn

Levensbeschrijvingen,Alphen

van den

Rijn,

1981;

W.

Melion,

Shaping

the

Netherlandish Canon.

Karel

van

Mander's

Schilder-Boeck,

Chicago,

1991;

J.

Muller,

Concordia

Pragensis.

Karel van Manders

Kunsttheorie

m

Schilder-Boeck,Munich,1993;

R.

de

Mambro

Santos,

La

civil Conversazione

pittorica.

Riflessione estetica e

produzione

artistica

nel trattatodi Karelvan

Mander,Rome,

1998.

4

C.

Brusati,

Artificeand illusion:

the art

and

writing

of

Samuel

van

Hoogstraten,Chicago

1995,

p.

249 and

J.

Muller,

p.

cit.,

p.

49.

5

On the Life

of

Piero

di

Cosimo,

see:

S.

Fermor,

Piero di

Cosimo.

Fiction,

Invention and

Fantasia, London,

1993 and

L.

This kind of

thinking

is taken

up

later

during

the 17th

cent

by

artists

such

as Cornelius Norbertus

Gijsbrechts

who

b

it

out

in a

more obvious

way, presenting

the destruction

a

painting by

time as a

trompe-l'oeil,

a corner of the can

torn out

showing

the reverse of the

canvas

[Fig. 11].

The m

riality

of the

work

of art

appears

therefore as visual

play,

ini

ing

a discourse

within

painting

and about

painting.85

The

disappearance

of the mural

painting

realised

Cornelis Ketel on the

fagade

of his

house,

reminds

us

of w

Gijsbrechts

had made

plain,

that the work of art is

an

ob

and one destined to

disappear,

as is the

artistic

process

wh

Ketel reveals

through

an

inscription:

"SERMO DEI AETERN

CATERNAOMNIACADUCA".

Waldmann,

"Fact,

Fiction;

Hearsay:

Notes on Vasari's

Life

of Pie

Cosimo",

in Art

Bulletin, LXXXII,000,

pp.

171-179 On the Lif

Pontormo,

see: E.

Pilliod,Pontormo,

Bronzino,

Allori:

Genealog

Florentine

Art,

New

Haven,

2001.

6

See

the

Lives of Paolo

Uccelo,

Piero di Cosimo and

Jacop

Pontormo,

in

Vasari, G.,

Le

vite dei

piu

eccelenti

pittori,

sculto

architetti

1568)

/

G.

Milanesi,Florence,

1879.

7

Cf. for

example

the

appendix

of

the Life of Piero di Cosim

the

1550

edition of Vasari's

Vite.

8

Diogenes

Laertius,

Lives of Eminent

Philosophers

/

Hick

(trans.), Cambridge,

1980.

9

Diogenes

Laertius,

Vies et doctrines des

philosophes

illus

Goulet-Caze,

M.-O.

trans.),

Paris, 1999, pp. 25-26.

10

P.

Eichel-Lojkine,

Excentricite

et Humanisme. Parodi

detournement

des codes

a

la

Renaissance, Geneve,

2002.

11

See

W.

Weisbach,

"Der

sogenannte Geograph

von V

quez",

in

Jahrbuch

der Preussischen

Kunstsammlungen,

L,1928

98







CORNELIS KETEL:A PAINTER

WITHOUTA

BR

141-158,

C.

Lutz,

"Democritus nd

Heraclitus",

Classical

Journal,

XLIX

(1953-54), pp.

309-314;

T.

Rutter,

Demokrit-Lachender

Philosoph

und

sanguinischer

Melancholiker.

Eine

pseudohippokratische

Geschichte,

Leiden,

1992.

12

Van

Mander,

p.

cit.,

p.

158.

13

Van

Mander,

p.

cit.,

p.

362.

14

Hippocrates,

The

Democritus

Letters,

in:

Hippocrates,

Pseud-

epigraphic Writings W.Smith(ed.), Leiden,1990, pp. 55-105. These

letters

were

written

during

he

first

century

A.D.

by

an

unknownauthor.

Nevertheless

they

were considered

as

authentic

during

he 16th entu-

ry.

Concerning

he various

editions of Letter

17

(Letter

o

Damagetus),

which

is

the most

interesting,

ee: J.

Salem,

La

egende

de

Democrite,

Paris, 1996,

p.

11 f.

and J.

Jehasse,

"Democrite t la renaissance de la

critique",

n Etudes

seiziemistes. Offertes

a

Monsieur

le

Prof.

V-L.

Saulnier

par plusieurs

de ses anciens

doctorants, Geneve,

1980,

pp.

41-64.

15

Hippocrates,op.

cit.,

p.

59.

16

"They

urn

he worthless and the lifeless into

wealth;

with

their

whole

substance

they purchase

statues,

'because

the

pretty

statue

seems

to

speak.'

But

they

hate men that

actually

speak",

in:

Hippocrates,op.

cit.,

p.

83.

17

Erasmus,

The

Praise of

Folly (1509)

/

H.

Hudson

(transl.),

Princeton,

1974.

18

Erasmus,op. cit., p. 2.

19

Erasmus,

op.

cit.,

p.

60.

20

Erasmus,

op.

cit.,

p.

132.

21

Hippocrates,op.

cit.,

p.

57.

22

Erasmus,

op.

cit.,

p.

99.

23

On

the

myth

of

genius,

see:

M.

Kemp,

"From

Mimesis

to

Fantasia: The

Quattrocento

Vocabulary

of

Creation,

Inspiration

and

Genius

in

the Visual

Arts",

in

Viator. Medieval

and Renaissance

Studies, VIII,1997,

pp.

347-398,

and

idem,

"The

'Super-Artist'

as

Genius: The

Sixteenth-Century

View",

n:

R

Murray ed.),

Genius. The

History

of

an

Idea, Oxford,

1989,

pp.

32-53.

24

Aristotle,

"Problems.Book

XXX.1",

n:

Aristotle,

The

Complete

Works f

Aristotle,

. Barnes

(ed.),

vol.

2,

Princeton,

985,

pp.

1498-1502.

25

The

monumental

study

realised

by RaymondKlibansky,

Erwin

Panofsky

and

Fritz

Saxl demonstrated that

during

the 16th

and

17th

centuries

the

notion

of

melancholy

became

indissociable

from the

concept of genius. Cf. R. Klibansky,E. Panofskyand F.SaxI,Saturn

and

Melancholy,

London,

1964. Democritus'

Divine Furor

already

appears

in

the

Life

of

Democritus

written

by Diogenes

Laertius.See

also J.

Salem,

La

legende

de

Democrite, Paris, 1996,

p.

96.

26

R.

Klibansky,

E.

Panofsky

and F.

Saxl,

Saturnand

Melancholy,

Nendeln, 1979,

p.

254.

27

This term

appears

in

the Lifeof

Goltzius.

28

"...which

by many

is held

to be

ridiculous,

abominable

urge

such as

sometimes

happens

with

pregnant

women who

crave

to

eat

strange,

raw or uncooked food."

Van

Mander,

p.

cit.,

vol.

1,

p.

370.

29

M.

Boschini,

La

Carta del

Navegar

Pitoresco,

Venise,

1660

/

reed.

Venice-Rome,

1966.

30

Boschini,

op.

cit.,

p.

712.

See

also

P.

Sohm,

Pittoresco. Marco

Boschini,

his

Critics,

and their

Critiques

of

Painterly

Brushwork

n

Seventeenth-

and

Eighteenth-Century

taly,Cambridge,

1991,

p.

26.

31

Genesis 2:7.

32

P.Eichel-Lojkine, xcentricite t humanisme.Parodie,derision

et

detournement

des

codes

a

la

Renaissance,

Geneve, 2002,

p.

95.

33

"Thatman

of all our

citizens who we

always expected

would

be the fame of

our

city

in

the

present

and future

(All

gods

May

t

not

be

begrudged

in

this

way now ),

that man has been

made

ill

by

the

great

learning

hat

weighs

him

down" n

Hippocrates,

op.

cit.,

pp.

55-

57 and

further:

"Oh,

how even

excessive

good

becomes

dise

Democritus,

as he

had

strength

for the

heights

of

wisdom,

is

equa

danger

of

ruination

by

a stroke to

his mind and

by

silliness. The

Abderites,

many

as

they

are,

who

remained

unlearned,

keep

the

mon

mind,

but,

witless

before,

they

now have

more wit for

judgin

disease of

a wise man" n

Hippocrates,op.

cit.,

p.

59.

34

Van

Mander,

p.

cit.,

p.

361.

35

VanMander, p. cit., p. 362.

36

Ibidem.

37

Ibidem.

38 Z.

Filipczak,

Picturing

Art in

Antwerp

1550-1700,

Princ

1987,

pp.

11-12.

39

Van

Mander,

p.

cit.,

p.

265.

40

Muller,

p.

cit.,

pp.

14-15 and

pp.

65-67.

41

Muller,

p.

cit,

p.

65.

42

Van

Mander,

p.

cit.,

p.

401.

43

Muller,

p.

cit.,

p.

66.

44

Muller,

p.

cit.,

pp.

36-37.

45

Van

Mander,

Den

Grondt

der

edel

vry

Schilder-Cons

Hoecker

(trad.),

Haag,

1915.

46 <<Doch

p

s'lands

soetheyt

soude

men verlieven

Oock

volck van lanus

ghesproten

I Die

oyt

wel veel onse

Conste

verhie

in

Van

Mander,

p.

cit.,

p.

44.

47

<Daty niet meer en segghen op haer spraken/ Vlamin

connen

geen figueren

maken,>

n:

Van

Mander,

p.

cit.,

p.

46.

48

Van Mander

Miedema

(ed.),

vol.

1,

p.

370.

49

M.

Kuper,

Zur

Semiotik der

Inversion:

verkehrte

Wel

Lachkulturm 16.

Jahrhundert,

Berlin,1993;

Die

verkehrteWelt.

M

und

Nonsens

in

der

Bildsatire,

exh. cat.

Amsterdam-Paris-Lo

New

York

1985;

J. Lafon and A.

Redondo

(eds.), L'image

du m

renverse et

ses

representations

itteraireset

para-litteraires:

e

du

XVIe

u milieu du

XVlle

iecle,

Paris,

1979.

50

M.

Gendreau-Massaloux,

"Le

gaucher

selon

Quevedo

homme a

I'envers",

n:

Lafondand

Redondo,

op.

cit.,

pp.

73-81.

51

Cf.

the famous

study by

R.

Hertz,

Sociologie religieuse

et

lore,

Paris

1970,

pp.

84-109.

52

R

Eichel-Lojkine,

e siecle

des

grands

hommes.

Les

rec

de vies

d'hommes illustresavec

portraits

du

XVle

iecle,

Louvain-

Sterling,

2001,

pp.

261-339.

53

Filipczak,op. cit., p. 35. See also: C. King,"Advertis

Theory:

he

houses of

Cornelisvan Dalemand Frans

Floris",

n:

Th

des arts et creation

artistique

ans

I'Europe

u Nord

du

XV/e

u

deb

XVIlle

iecle. Actes du

colloque

international

ille,

14-16.12.2000,

coming;

C. van de

Velde,

"ThePainted

Decoration f

Floris's

Hous

G.

Cavalli-Bjorkmann

ed.),

NetherlandishMannerism.

apers

give

symposium

in

Nationalmuseum

Stockholm,

September

21-22,

1

Stockholm,

1985,

pp.

127-134;

C.

King,

"Artes

Liberalesand the

M

Decorationon

the House of

Frans

Floris,

Antwerp,

.

1565",

Zeits

fir

Kunstgeschichte,

LII,

989,

pp.

239-256.

54

In

1595,

a

sculptor

referred

o the

fa;ade

of

Floris

and

as

ed that

sculpture

was one

of the

Artes

Liberales.

55

Van

Mander,

p.

cit.,

p.

373.

56

See

the

commentary

of

Hessel

Miedema in:

Van Man

Miedema

(ed.),

vol.

5,

p.

154.

57

T.

Schulting,

"Cornelis

Ketel en

zijn

familie:een

revisie"

Holland,no. 4, CVIII,994, p. 198 (n. 45).

58

Schulting,op.

cit.,

pp.

183-184.

59

This

comparison

works

also with

Last

Judgements

in

Flemish

painting,

for

example:

Hans

Memling,

The

Last

Judge

Triptych,

before

1472,

oil

on

wood,

Muzeum

Narodowe,

Gdans

Rogier

van

der

Weyden,

Last

Judgement,

1443-1446,

Hotel

D







NICOLASGALLEY

Beaune. These

Last

Judgements

can also

be

considered emblematic

of the old

religious image.

60

Schulting,

op.

cit.,

p.

198

(note 45).

61

http://www.bmz.amsterdam.nl/adam/uk/groot/oukerk.html

62

R.

Smits,

Alles mit der linken

Hand, Berlin,

1994.

63

L'empire

du

Temps.

Mythes

et

creations,

exh.

cat.

Louvre,

Paris,

2000.

64

Lucian,"Hermotimus",

n Lucian n

eight volumes,

K. Kilburn

(transl.),

vol.

6,

Cambridge

(Ma),

1968,

pp.

297 and

following,

and D.

Cast,

"Marten an

Heemskerck's 'Momus

criticizing

he works of the

gods':

a Problem

of Erasmian

conography",

imiolus,

no.

1, VII,1974,

p.

24

(n.

4).

65

A.

Pigler,

"Neid

und Unwissenheitals Widersacher

der

Kunst",

Acta

Historiae

Artium, ,

1954,

pp.

215-235.

66

Van

Mander,

p.

cit.,

p.

373.

67

J.-M.

Massing,

Du texte

'

l'image:

La calomnie

d'Apelle

et son

iconographie,

Strasbourg,

1990;

D.

Cast,

The

Calumny

of

Apelles:

a

Study

n the Humanist

Tradition,

New-Haven-London,

981.

68

L. B.

Alberti,

On

Painting

1435)

/

C.

Grayson

(transl.),

London,

1991,

pp.

88-89.

69

K.

Boon,

"Patientia

ans les

gravures

de

la Reforme

aux

Pays-

Bas",

Revue de

I'Art, 6,1982,

p.

11.

70

In

Letter15

of the Democritus

Letters,

the

goddess

Truth old

Hippocrates that he would find her at Democritus' house, see

Hippocrates,op.

cit.,

p.

22 and

69.

71

Van

Mander,

p.

cit.,

p.

362.

72

Van

Mander,

p.

cit.,

p.

374.

73

F.

Saxl,

<Veritasilia

emporis,,

in R.

Klibansky

nd

H.

J.

Pa

(eds.), Philosophy

and

history. Essays presented

to Ernst

Cassi

Gloucester

(Ma),

1975,

pp.

197-224.

74

Saxl,

op.

cit.,

pp.

202f.

75

Saxl,

op.

cit.,

pp.

197f.

76

Van

Mander,

p.

cit.,

p.

373.

77

On this portrait,ee: W.Stechow, "SonderBorsteloft Pinse

in:

J.

Bruyn

ed.),

AlbumAmicorum .

G. Van

Gelder,

The

Hague,

19

pp.

310-311.

78

Withouta brush

/

I am here

depicted

/

C[ornelis] K[etel]

the

age

of

28

/

1601.

79

C.

Wood,

"'CuriousPictures'?

and the

art

of

description",

W

and

Image,

vol.

11, 1995,

pp.

332-352.

80

"They

urn he worthless and

the

lifeless

into

wealth;

with

whole substance

they

purchase

statues,

'because the

pretty

sta

seems to

speak.'

But

they

hate

men

that

actually

speak",

Hippocrates,op.

cit.,

p.

83.

81

ANo

DNI

1574

which stands for Anno

Domini

1574.

82

AETATISSUAE

35.

83

"The

word of

the

Lord

s

forever,

all else

is transient".

84

I.

Bergstrom,

Homo

Bulla.La

boule

ransparente

ans

la

pein

hollandaise

a la

fin

du

XVleme

t

au

XVVllme

iecle",

n

Les

Vanites

an

peintureauXVileiecle, exh. cat. Museedes Beaux-Arts, aen,1990.

85

V.

Stoichita,

The Self-Aware

Image.

An

Insight

into

E

Modern

Meta-Painting,Cambridge,

1998.

100

Cornelis Ketel. A painter without a brush..pdf

Documents

Transcript of Cornelis Ketel. A painter without a brush..pdf