.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
Painted around 1640, this refined still life combines all the elements for which Balthasar van der Ast is renowned. Set against a light background, typical of his mature paintings, a variety of fruit spreads from a tipped basket and insects, perhaps responsible for the decaying cherry in the foreground, dot the composition. To the right, a porcelain vase, girdled with exotic seashells, holds a bouquet of irises, tulips, roses, and other flowers.
Van der Ast’s composition, though cohesive, places the flowers and shells in relative isolation allowing the viewer to consider the individuality of each specimen—the gloss and sheen of the petals, the ribbed cell structure of the leaves and the iridescence of light ricocheting off the cragged shells. This anatomical precision would have resonated with contemporary audiences as both seashells and tulips from the Americas were highly sought after in seventeenth-century Holland and large sums were paid and speculated for the most exquisite and rare examples. The poet Roemer Visscher (1547-1620) satirized ‘tulipomania’ and schelpenzotten (shell-fools) in his famous 1614 book of emblems Sinnepoppen, with the epigram: ‘It is odd how a fool will spend his money’ (L.J. Bol, The Bosschaert Dynasty, Leigh-on-Sea, 1960, p. 39). These speculators named particularly coveted shell variants with eccentric old Dutch appellations, such as 'Green Cheese', 'Very Large Strange Doughnut', and 'Extra Fine Complete Louse Comb' (ibid.). Consequently, shells in still-lifes have traditionally been interpreted as symbols of vanity and the impermanence of earthly beauty and possessions. One of the most common similitudes of Dutch seventeenth-century painting was the comparison of the brief life of flowers with the brief life of man. Van der Ast builds upon this trope by incorporating subtler symbols of transience: a rotting piece of fruit, a caterpillar which will metamorphose into one of the butterflies floating above, an imperfect stone ledge with dents and chips, and a dragonfly which will inevitably molt and leave behind a cast of its former self.
Balthasar van der Ast, a native of Middelburg, trained in the studio of his brother-in-law Ambrosius Bosschaert the Elder, whom he followed to Bergen-op-Zoom, to Utrecht, and ultimately to Delft where he enrolled in the painter’s guild and remained until his death in 1657. Van der Ast was highly esteemed in the seventeenth-century and his work could be found in some of Europe's most distinguished collections including the prince of Orange, Frederik Hendrik, and his wife Amalia von Solms. Notably, two paintings by his hand were cited in their 1632 collection inventory as ‘a basket with fruit and a basket with flowers’ (now in the National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., inv. nos. 1992.51.2 & 1992.51.1).
Van der Ast’s composition, though cohesive, places the flowers and shells in relative isolation allowing the viewer to consider the individuality of each specimen—the gloss and sheen of the petals, the ribbed cell structure of the leaves and the iridescence of light ricocheting off the cragged shells. This anatomical precision would have resonated with contemporary audiences as both seashells and tulips from the Americas were highly sought after in seventeenth-century Holland and large sums were paid and speculated for the most exquisite and rare examples. The poet Roemer Visscher (1547-1620) satirized ‘tulipomania’ and schelpenzotten (shell-fools) in his famous 1614 book of emblems Sinnepoppen, with the epigram: ‘It is odd how a fool will spend his money’ (L.J. Bol, The Bosschaert Dynasty, Leigh-on-Sea, 1960, p. 39). These speculators named particularly coveted shell variants with eccentric old Dutch appellations, such as 'Green Cheese', 'Very Large Strange Doughnut', and 'Extra Fine Complete Louse Comb' (ibid.). Consequently, shells in still-lifes have traditionally been interpreted as symbols of vanity and the impermanence of earthly beauty and possessions. One of the most common similitudes of Dutch seventeenth-century painting was the comparison of the brief life of flowers with the brief life of man. Van der Ast builds upon this trope by incorporating subtler symbols of transience: a rotting piece of fruit, a caterpillar which will metamorphose into one of the butterflies floating above, an imperfect stone ledge with dents and chips, and a dragonfly which will inevitably molt and leave behind a cast of its former self.
Balthasar van der Ast, a native of Middelburg, trained in the studio of his brother-in-law Ambrosius Bosschaert the Elder, whom he followed to Bergen-op-Zoom, to Utrecht, and ultimately to Delft where he enrolled in the painter’s guild and remained until his death in 1657. Van der Ast was highly esteemed in the seventeenth-century and his work could be found in some of Europe's most distinguished collections including the prince of Orange, Frederik Hendrik, and his wife Amalia von Solms. Notably, two paintings by his hand were cited in their 1632 collection inventory as ‘a basket with fruit and a basket with flowers’ (now in the National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., inv. nos. 1992.51.2 & 1992.51.1).