A painting by Willem van Aelst. Photo by Google Art Project. Wikimedia Commons

Top 10 Intriguing Facts about Willem van Aelst


 

Willem van Aelst grew up in Delft, where his father was a notary public. He studied under his uncle, Delft still-life painter Evert van Aelst (1602-1657). On November 9, 1643, Willem joined the town’s Saint Luke’s Guild. Little is known about his personal life, but he did reside in France between 1645/1646 and 1651, and then in Italy until 1656.

Van Aelst worked for the Medici family in Florence, specifically the brothers Cardinal Gian Carlo and Cardinal Leopoldo de’ Medici. Van Aelst painted at least eleven works for them, as well as pieces for collectors in Bologna and Rome. The Grand Duke of Tuscany, Ferdinand II de’ Medici, allegedly awarded Van Aelst a gold medal and gold chain for his service.

1. Van Aelst specialized in still-life painting

One of Willem van Aelst’s paintings. Photo by Sailko. Wikimedia

Painting fruit and flower still lives, fish and forest floor still lives, and most importantly hunting scenes with dead game and hunting gear. 
 
Van Aelst appears to have been especially influential in the development of this last type of picture, which became very popular after the mid-century, and his paintings were highly praised and sold for high prices. 

2. In 1672, Van Aelst was asked to evaluate a collection of Italian paintings

In 1672, Van Aelst was one of seven Dutch painters, including Otto van Schrieck (1619/1620-1678), who were asked to evaluate a collection of Italian paintings sold by Amsterdam art dealer Gerrit Uylenburgh to the great elector of Brandenburg.

They deemed the paintings to be worthless. Rachel Ruysch (1664-1750), a flower painter, was a Van Aelst student, and he influenced a number of other artists, including William Gowe Ferguson (English, 1632/1633 – c. 1690), Elias van den Broeck (c. 1650-1708), and Simon Verelst (1644–1721).

3. He moved to Florence in 1649 to work as a court painter for Ferdinando II de’ Medici, Grand Duke of Tuscany

A portrait of Ferdinando II de’ Medici. Photo by Justus Sustermans. Wikimedia Commons

Guillielmo d’Olanda was his name in Italy. At the time, the grand duke also employed two Dutchmen, Matthias Withoos and Otto Marseus van Schrieck, the latter also a still-life painter who most likely influenced Van Aelst’s style. Ferdinando II publicly presented Van Aelst with a gold chain and medal as proof of his approval and recognition of his abilities.

4. His paintings fetched more than 100 guilders

A painting by Willem van Aelst. Photo by Jan Pieter Brueghel. Wikimedia Commons

One of Willem’s flower still lives was estimated at 250 guilders in 1666, and another painting fetched 400 guilders in a 1687 auction. Willem was taxed in 1674 based on his wealth of 4000 guilders. The known mean prices for his paintings were 131 guilders (between 1650 and 1679), and 110 guilders (after 1680).

5. It has been speculated that Van Aelst visited Rome and joined the Bentvueghels

Bentvueghels is a group of mostly Dutch and Flemish artists based in Rome. This conjecture is based, not very convincingly, on his practice of signing his works with his name followed by: alias (and a drawn stick figure)’ during the years 1657/58. Some have interpreted this as a reference to a Bent name (the nickname that a member of the Bentvueghels would adopt) – De Vogelverschrikker (Dutch for’scarecrow) – but there is no documentation to support this.

6. He is the subject of “Elegance and Refinement: The Still-Life Paintings of Willem van Aelst,”

The Still-Life Paintings of Willem van Aelst. Photo by Dr. Alexey Yakovlev. Wikimedia Commons

The exhibition includes 27 oil paintings selected from the artist’s known canon of approximately 150 works. It is an appropriate tribute to the talented painter who rose to the challenge of matching the sumptuousness and brilliance of the luxury objects he painted. Granted, it wasn’t all glitz and glam; roughly half of the works on display are of game, such as trophies of rabbits, roosters, and rams that are almost too realistically depicted as they stare back at you, dead in the eyes.

The other half of the exhibition is devoted to his floral and fruit paintings. Both exhibit his use of vibrant color, nuanced lighting, and fine attention to detail, such as blood on a chicken’s beak in Hunt Still Life with a Velvet Bag on a Marble Ledge, a missing button on a hunting jacket in Still Life with Birds and Hunting Equipment, or a fly on a dead rooster in Still Life with Birds.

7. His most impressive works, on the other hand, are on a smaller scale

“Hunt Still Life with a Velvet Bag on a Marble Ledge” (circa 1665) is a nearly microscopic study of textures: the feathers of a gray partridge hanging upside down with splayed wings like a fallen angel; the soft, blue velvet fabric of a hunter’s sack with its bright silver buckles and catches. It all seems to spill forth into the viewer’s space in startling trompe-l’oeil style, heaped on a forward edge of a smooth stone slab.

8. The term pronk, which appears in many van Aelst titles, referred to the types of objects he painted

A painting by Willem van Aelst. Photo by Jan Pieter Brueghel. Wikimedia Commons

They were expensive items that only the wealthy could afford. This includes cut flowers, fresh fruit, and dead game animals, as recreational hunting was previously restricted to the aristocracy. Paintings like van Aelst’s were also pronks: pronks depicting pronks.

“Still Life with Fish, Bread, and a Nautilus Cup” (1678) highlights the richness of a red satin tablecloth and a silver statuette of Orpheus serving as the base for a large nautilus shell with humble foodstuff, including a rather gross cut-up herring on a silver plate. Van Aelst, who worked for an upscale market, was no populist.

9. Van Aelst’s paintings were frequently criticized for their bipolarity by critics

While they were obviously extraordinary works of art, the viewer perceives the things they depict as uncannily present, as if hallucinated. Arthur K. Wheelock Jr., the show’s organizer and the National Gallery’s curator of northern Baroque painting, quotes one critic who says van Aelst “knew how to imitate life so naturally, that the work of his brush seemed to be no painting but life itself” in his catalog essay.

10. Van Aelst’s paintings may appear fusty to modern viewers

A painting by Willem van Aelst. Photo by Google Art Project. Wikimedia Commons

They may appear to belong to an obsolete moral universe when viewed as examples of the vanitas genre, with soon-to-wilt flowers warning of the fleetingness of life. In several works, a golden pocket watch appears to confirm notions of time passing, extinguishing life as it goes.