| The seventeenth century's most esteemed still-life painter, de Heem is still valued not only for the quality of his technique but also for the breadth of his inventions. He is also notable for the unusual connection he formed with Flanders. He was one of the few Dutch artists of the time to live primarily in Antwerp, and his style reflects both Flemish and Dutch traditions. De Heem contributed to the development of the opulent still lifes that gradually superseded the simpler, more restrained compositions favored until the 1640s. Born in Utrecht, De Heem was first the pupil of his father, David de Heem (1570-1632), and then of Balthasar van der Ast. Jan moved to Leiden upon gaining his independence, a move that has been dated to 1625 (although recent scholarship says 1626). There he married Aletta van Weede from Utrecht in 1626. Their second child, Cornelis, became a painter. Jan remained in Leiden until at least 1631. His move to Antwerp is generally dated to 1635. In 1636 he was mentioned as a member of the Antwerp St. Luke's Guild, and he was granted citizenship in Antwerp in 1637. His first wife died in 1643 and he remarried Anna Ruckers from Antwerp in 1644. Their son, Jan II, also became a painter. De Heem remained in Antwerp but evidently traveled back to Holland on occasion. Antwerp was, however, his chief residence until about 1658, when he left to work elsewhere. Sometime in 1669 he returned to his native Utrecht and was registered in its guild from 1669 to 1672. The French invasion of Holland in 1672 prompted de Heem's return to Antwerp, where he remained until his death in 1683/4. During his Leiden years, de Heem's activity is traced with some difficulty. Yet scholars have identified several kinds of still lifes, including monochrome vanitas still lifes and related subjects then popular in that city. A number of examples depict books, some with easily identifiable subjects and authors, strewn casually across a tabletop and painted in restrained palettes of grays and browns. Also known from these years are some breakfast pieces (often with grapes or other fruit) inspired by Pieter Claesz and stable pieces with kitchen utensils. Before he left for Antwerp, de Heem had already made considerable progress in developing his still-life subject matter. His Still Life with Red Lobster and Nautilus Cup (dated 1634, Stuttgart, Staatsgalerie) is a precocious and stunning departure from the monochrome type made popular by Claesz. Here a sense of dramatic lighting, striking color, and palpable atmosphere enlivens the picture. Why de Heem was attracted to Antwerp has interested writers and scholars for centuries. Sandrart claimed de Heem sought out the great variety of exotic fruits available in Antwerp, and certainly such fruits are visible in the canvases he executed there. Antwerp's role as a leading center for still-life painting must have also motivated de Heem, who clearly sought out the works of Daniel Seghers, Frans Snyders, and Adriaen van Utrecht. De Heem sometimes collaborated with Seghers as well as with David Teniers. Ironically, de Heem brought to Antwerp a style that had its origins there. Jan Bosschaert, for example, who influenced de Heem and worked in Utrecht, had learned from such Antwerp painters as Jan (Velvet) Breughel. In Antwerp, de Heem adopted freer, more lavish compositions and a much brighter palette (though he retained his native Dutch interest in rendering each object individually). His flower pieces endow each individual blossom with a particular, almost unnatural vivacity, which gives these humble products of nature a nearly heroic aspect. While maintaining their integrity, he artfully fuses his flowers to the whole composition, which simply bursts with energy. Set against dark backgrounds, de Heem's flower pieces in particular are dazzling displays of virtuoso draftsmanship and lighting. During his Antwerp years, de Heem expanded the pronk still life as well. It became more lavish, complex, as well as grand in both content and size. Numerous banquet pieces with fruit, sea animals (clams, oysters, lobsters), insects, birds, precious objects, musical instruments, globes, elaborate tablecloths of velvet, damask, and any number of glass, porcelain, and metal objects are dated to his Antwerp years. Many examples show the objects displayed against a landscape vista. A Still Life (signed and dated 1640, Paris, Louvre) demonstrates the rapid evolution of his ideas about the staging of a sumptuous, superabundant display-a type of still life that had a considerable impact throughout Europe. De Heem expanded the pronk still life to its most epic proportions in Pronk Still Life with Shells, Lute, Fruit, Lobster, Flowers, set before a landscape. Dated 1642 (sold by Christie's, New York, 1988), the picture is regarded as de Heem's magnum opus and shows both the potential and the limitations of the subject. Enlarged to such grand proportions, the picture has lost some of the integrity and beauty that his smaller examples express so well, yet it is an astonishing display of both technical and artistic skill. Despite or because of their opulence, de Heem's still lifes (like those of many other painters) make direct or indirect references to the vanity and brevity of life, just as earlier, starker vanitas still lifes had done. Besides his lavish pronk still lifes and flower pieces, de Heem also produced more modestly proportioned cabinet-sized works and many pieces in between. He evidently knew how to please his clientele and wished to accommodate many tastes and purses. Admired for his ability to render diverse textures and surfaces, de Heem was especially esteemed for his depiction of gold and silver. When de Heem returned to Utrecht he had an immediate impact there, influencing particularly the young Abraham Mignon. De Heem occasionally collaborated with other painters including Nicolaes Veerndael and Jan Lievens. Houbraken tells us that de Heem painted until he was seventy with undiminished skill, affirming, in fact, that his last pictures had the best brushwork. De Heem's impact on the history of European still-life painting cannot be underestimated. No painter working on similar subject matter could afford to ignore him; in particular, the pronk still life, as well as the flower piece, owe their further development to the many artists he inspired. Besides Mignon, his pupils include Cornelis de Heem, Pieter de Ring, A. Cossemans, Maria van Oosterwyck, and Jacob Rotius. Other artists, including E. van Kessel, Cornelis Kick, J. Mortel, and J. van Son imitated him, the task of sorting master from imitators continues. |
