A friend and I went up to Cleveland today to an exhibit called "Rembrandt in America", the largest single collection of paintings either by Rembrandt, or attributed to him, or by followers of him, or his circle, ever assembled. We opted to use the audio tour that is available and I was astonished at how much I learned listening to the lectures on some of the paintings. We both found that we learned how to ascertain which paintings were actually by Rembrandt and which ones weren't, and which ones were problematic in their attribution to Rembrandt. One thing that amazed me was how some paintings had been altered by cleanings, retouchings and conservators over time, including the one on the left, which is one of the more problematic paintings in the entire exhibition because it was donated to the museum in not very great condition and suffered at the hands of poor conservators over the years. There is an extensive mini-exhibit of the problems associated with this painting and the various ways in which it has been damaged and retouched over the years. One of the scientific examinations of it appears to show the woman's mouth slightly open and her teeth showing, as opposed to the way we see it here. No mention is made of that in the exhibit but my friend and I swore we could see a change in the mouth of the subject, possibly done by the hand of a bad conservator or something. It left us both wondering what it was we were looking at and whether we were correct in assuming that the painting had been changed over time, throwing its original painter in doubt. I also found myself wondering later why Rembrandt, of all the Dutch Masters, had such a following that so many imitated his work to where paintings began being attributed to him that were not his at all, but by people in his circle, or his followers, or his students. What about the other Dutch Masters?
During the Gilded Age, collecting Rembrandts became a mark of prestige and robber barons snapped up paintings that they assumed were by the great master himself. Turns out not all of them were authentic Rembrandts and many were by his followers, his circle and his students. Some were authentic Rembrandts but not all of them. I don't know what it was about this particular painter that attracted such a desire to own his work, as opposed to anyone else, but apparently this painter's works were hot on the art market and became a highly desired commodity. Perhaps acquiring a Rembrandt became an outward sign of affluence. I am beginning to think that I need to learn more art history than I learned in college. One remarkable exhibit we went to that was kind of associated with the main one of his paintings was an exhibit of Rembrandts prints, which were fascinating. I knew he did prints but I was astonished by the variety of them and the ways he varied them by taking the same print and then changing them to emphasize different things in the print. The collection that was on display was from the collection of J. Pierpont Morgan, another one of the industrial barons of the early 20th century who had the money to acquire great works of art. I just wish I understood why Rembrandt in particular was so special to the industrial barons of 100 years ago and why there was such a mad race to acquire his work as opposed to, say, Vermeer or some other contemporary of Rembrandt. There must have been something about this particular artist that aroused such a passion for collecting his work. It was just so fascinating to become better acquainted with him as an artist than I previously had been and to share that with someone who loves art as much as I do. All in all a very good, albeit very exhausting, day was had, and I am glad for it. I don't get up to the Cleveland Museum of Art nearly enough even though I have a membership there, and we in NE Ohio are very blessed to have a world class art museum in our own backyard. Thanks to the industrial barons of nearly a century ago, Cleveland is blessed with cultural treasures that rival those found in far larger cities, and all of Northeast Ohio benefits from the 1% of the Gilded Age. Too bad today's 1% are not as civically minded as that class was a hundred or so years ago.
No comments:
Post a Comment