Boomgroep 1628 - 1652

Editor: Here we have Jan Both’s "Boomgroep", created sometime between 1628 and 1652. It’s a drawing, using ink, and it really captures a serene, almost ethereal landscape. What strikes me is how detailed and intricate the trees are. What can you tell me about this work? Curator: Let's think about the materials first. Both is using ink on paper, readily available, relatively inexpensive. Consider the socio-economic implications. Landscape art gains popularity as the Dutch middle class gains purchasing power. They’re not commissioning religious iconography like before; they want scenes reflecting their surroundings and idealizing nature as a commodity. What’s being bought and sold, then and now, shapes artistic production, right down to the ink on the page. Editor: So, the rise of landscape art is tied to a change in the social structure and economics? Curator: Exactly! Look closely at how the drawing itself functions as a product. Is this a study for a painting, a finished piece for sale, or something else entirely? How would the way it was intended to be used affect the artist’s labor and materials? Was it a quick sketch, a meticulous study of a local beauty spot, or perhaps idealized as a luxury product for someone who had never walked in that woods? Editor: That’s a fascinating point. It reframes how I look at even seemingly simple drawings. I hadn't really considered how commercial Dutch society had become at this time, even nature was a saleable product. Curator: Precisely. Think about the value and social positioning the Dutch placed on trade, resources, land and materials, versus art as luxury item: those are crucial for understanding why an artist chose ink and paper to depict… trees. I find that consideration of the materials challenges traditional narratives around what art represents or symbolizes. Editor: I see it now. Thank you for this.