Drawings Connoisseurship and the Problem of Multiple Originals (original) (raw)
Journal of the Historians of Netherlandish Art Volume 5: Issue 2 (2013)
AI-generated Abstract
This paper addresses the issue of multiple originals in Old Master drawings, highlighting the reluctance of scholars to accept the existence of second autograph versions. Through examples of documented commissions for second versions of drawings, it reassesses the significance of these copies as valuable records of early modern workshop practices, suggesting that they merit further scholarly attention.
Sign up for access to the world's latest research.
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Related papers
Figura: Studies on the Classical Tradition
This paper considers the replication of paintings in the seventeenth century and the underlying issues of invention and imitation behind this practice, by analyzing primary sources such as theoretical treatises, letters, contracts, and inventories. Although attention has been given to particular cases of artists who replicated their work, seventeenth-century attitudes towards replication have not been systematically studied. I begin by reviewing the development of this practice, and then present a selection of representative examples of a variety of attitudes –often conflicting–towards the problem of exact copies. A close reading of seventeenth-century texts reveals a coexistence of seemingly contradictory attitudes towards copies: on the one hand, the status of copies was elevated and the toposof the copy’s ability to deceive was reiterated numerous times; on the other, and often in a more practical sphere as reflected by letters and contracts, copies were not valued equally to originals. Interestingly, some inventories disclose a more nuanced position, closer to that of theoretical writings. Ultimately, these differences in attitude reflect an increasing awareness of the new issues introduced by the growing phenomenon of replicated paintings.
he Danish artist Martinus C.W. Rørbye, a central igure of the Golden Age of Danish painting, worked in Italy, Greece, the Middle East and the Balkans, as well as Norway and Denmark. Based on drawings made on his travels, Rørbye executed paintings on canvas. he question arises as to whether his underdrawing technique changed over time. As a favourite student of C.W. Eckersberg, Rørbye painted several copies after his master, some initially believed to be by Eckersberg himself. Would Rørbye at a more mature age carry out the same meticulous underdrawing when transferring his own composition to the canvas? Rørbye also often made repetitions of his own works, occasionally in up to four or ive identical versions. In the present study, three versions of one subject – a standing clergyman – are examined. his paper investigates the diferent approaches that Rørbye used, ranging from his early copies after his teacher to his autograph replicas of his own paintings. he aim is to demonstrate development in the artist's practice, and in so doing ofer a contribution to collectors and keepers of Rørbye's works when assessing the nature of his painting as either principal versions or replicas.
Figura: Studies on the Classical Tradition, 2018
This paper considers the replication of paintings in the seventeenth century and the underlying issues of invention and imitation behind this practice, by analyzing primary sources such as theoretical treatises, letters, contracts, and inventories. Although attention has been given to particular cases of artists who replicated their work, seventeenth-century attitudes towards replication have not been systematically studied. I begin by reviewing the development of this practice, and then present a selection of representative examples of a variety of attitudes – often conflicting – towards the problem of exact copies. A close reading of seventeenth-century texts reveals a coexistence of seemingly contradictory attitudes towards copies: on the one hand, the status of copies was elevated and the topos of the copy's ability to deceive was reiterated numerous times; on the other, and often in a more practical sphere as reflected by letters and contracts, copies were not valued equally to originals. Interestingly, some inventories disclose a more nuanced position, closer to that of theoretical writings. Ultimately, these differences in attitude reflect an increasing awareness of the new issues introduced by the growing phenomenon of replicated paintings.
News Copying Master Paintings Part 2: A Conversation with Daniel Graves
Continuing on from our conversation with Daniel Graves on the value for art students to copy old master paintings, we provide further practical information for anyone wishing to take on the enterprise. Most art museums cater to artists wishing to make frequent visits to copy in situ. Some museums are better organised than others. But Daniel insists that we ‘remind museum directors that they are the custodians of public heritage, and so have a duty to make their collections accessible to us.’
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
Related papers
Tatjana Bartsch, Marcus Becker, Horst Bredekamp, Charlotte Schreiter (Eds.): Das Originale der Kopie. Kopien als Produkte und Medien der Transformation von Antike, Transformationen der Antike Vol. 17 (Berlin 2010), pp. 27-42.