Throughout the history of still lifes in Europe, food has been used as a subject in paintings to evoke feelings of sensuousness, luxury, and abundance. Still life paintings, as a tradition, came to prominence in the Netherlands in the 1600s and displayed the opulence that was brought through trade, industry, and the possession of sprawling estates. The tradition spread to other countries in Europe, each using still lifes to display its own cultural values and luxuries. Still life paintings were more commonly sold on markets, as they were not often the kind of art that was commissioned, making them more accessible to the middle class. It's possible that the feelings of abundance and luxury that one gets from looking at displays of food were appealing to middle class buyers. Much of the luxury of these still lifes comes from cultural symbolism and the physical array of food. There was an interest in the objects that were used when sharing a meal, the act of which focuses on the senses instead of challenging intellect. A group of still life paintings whose main subject is food can-- because of cultural context, symbolism, and a focus on the senses-- evoke feelings of luxury, abundance, and sensuousness.
Luis Meléndez, The Afternoon Meal (Le Merienda), 1772, oil on canvas, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1982.60.39
Meléndez, who is considered one of the greatest still life painters of the seventeenth century, was painting still lifes at a time when the practice had greatly declined in popularity, particularly in Spain, the country of his birth. Having an outdoor setting for a still life was uncommon, even for him, but the lush landscape lends itself well to the delectable array of food that has been laid out for a picnic. The melon in the center of the painting is cut open, inviting the viewer to partake in the meal and engage the senses.
Jan Davidsz, Still Life with a Glass and Oysters, 1640, oil on wood, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 71.78
Davidsz uses a different tactic here to evoke sensuousness in the viewer. Compared to most of the other still lifes in this collection, the assemblage of food and objects is small but includes an important piece of symbolism: oysters. In the Netherlands, oysters were understood to be an aphrodisiac, something to stimulate sexual desire. This painting doesn't need an abundance of food. There is enough symbolic sensuality packed into the cluster of oysters. Instead of sensuousness being directly in front of us, it becomes something to expect later on.
Jacob van Hulsdonck, Still Life with Meat, Fish, Vegetables, and Fruit, 1615-20, oil on panel, The Cleveland Museum of Art, Cleveland
Still Life with Meat, Fish, Vegetables, and Fruit brings luxury with it through cultural context. Many Dutch still life paintings included objects that would have been brought to the Netherlands through international trade. Here there are two plates and a bowl made of beautiful Chinese porcelain. International trade brought with it the hope of national prosperity and abundance. In the seventeenth century a table full of food, especially food that's been left over, would represent a world without hunger, which would be a luxury indeed.
Abraham van Beyeren, Still Life with Lobster and Fruit, early 1650s, oil on wood, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1971.254
Again we see the use of Chinese porcelain to represent international trade, but we also have metal and glass vessels and goblets to reflect luscious fruit and a lobster. A modern viewer will likely associate the lobster with luxury and an abundance of wealth. Abraham van Beyeren shifts away from vanitas, a type of still life that is meant to remind the viewer of the certainty of death, and portrays subject matter that will encourage the viewer to embrace earthly pleasures.
Pieter Claesz, Still Life with a Turkey Pie, 1627, oil on panel, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam
Claesz includes symbols that have been repeated throughout the collection. There is a plate of oysters, a food believed to stimulate sexual desires, and there is evidence of trade with Asia, as seen in the savory pie, which would have included ingredients like cinnamon, mace, cloves, and ginger. Having wild game, such as turkey, would likely suggest the ownership of land large enough for hunting. The ownership of land is not the only thing that proposes wealth: notice the porcelain bowl and the nautilus shell. To have such rare objects would certainly have been a luxury at the time this painting was made.
Floris van Schooten, Breakfast, 1615-20, oil on panel, The Kröller-Müller Museum, Otterlo
Floris van Schooten often did paintings of breakfast foods and the ability to create abundance such as this was a reminder of trade with Asia, symbolized by the porcelain plate. Still lifes with food reminded viewers during that time-- a time when Holland was wealthy and powerful-- of the richness of earthly pleasures. Food like these were subject to decay and so their transience gave them an extra sense of luxury. Even the monochrome color palette allows the viewer to appreciate the abundance of the meal.
David Ligare, Still Life with Grape Juice and Sandwiches (Xenia), 1994, oil on canvas, de Young Museum, San Francisco
When surrounded by the other still life paintings in this collection, Still Life with Grape Juice and Sandwiches (Xenia) by David Ligare, though simple in subject matter, suddenly becomes and exquisite meal. Ligare used to serve grape juice and sandwiches at a homeless shelter in his hometown of Salinas, California. Taking this context into consideration, this painting evokes a sense of hospitality and the idea that one does not need an abundance of food to experience the luxury of sharing a meal with others.
No comments:
Post a Comment