Пост 30. Вэйн Фрэнитс (Wayne Franits), Питер де Хох "Женщина готовит мальчику бутерброд". Примечания

Примечания

1. See Gerard Hoet, Catalogus ofnaamlyst van schilderyen, met derzelver pryzen, 3 vols. (The Hague, 1752-70), Vol. 2, p. 288.

2. For further details on De Hooch's life and artistic career, see Peter C. Sutton, Pieter de Hooch (Ithaca, N.Y., 1980); and Peter C. Sutton, ed., Pieter de Hooch, 1629-1684, exh. cat. (Hartford, Wadsworth Atheneum, 1998-99).

3. Arnold Houbraken, De groote schouburgh der Nederlandtsche konstschilders en schilderessen, 2^nd  ed., 3 vols. (The Hague, 1753), vol. 2, pp. 34-35.

4. The document in question is summarized in Sutton 1980 (note 2), p. 145, doc. no. 15.

5. The idea that De Hooch may have been an actual servant is articulated more fully in Wayne Franits, "The Depiction of Servants in Some Paintings by Pieter de Hooch," Zeitschrift fur Kunstgeschichte 52 (1989), pp. 559-66. See also the objections to this hypothesis in Sutton 1998-99 (note 2), pp. 85-86, n. 141; and Walter Liedtke, A View of Delft: Vermeer and His Contemporaries (Zwolle, 2000), p. 279, n. 31.

The latter's reference to Eddy de Jongh, "Review of Peter C. Sutton, Pieter de Hooch" Simiolus 11 (1980), p. 182, fails to clarify matters because the term dienaar in seventeenth-century Dutch did not refer exclusively to indentured persons. See, for example, Leonard J. Slatkes, Vermeer and His Contemporaries (New York, 1981), p. 124. Sutton 1980 (note 2), p. 9, states that there is no proof that De Hooch ever resided with De la Grange and that their relationship appears to have been short-lived.

6. See Michiel C. C. Kersten and Danielle H. A. C. Lokin, eds., Delft Masters: Vermeer's Contemporaries, exh. cat. (Delft, Stedelijk Museum Het Prinsenhof, 1996); Liedtke (note 5); and Walter Liedtke, ed., Vermeer and the Delft School, exh. cat. (New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2001).

7. For more comprehensive surveys of seventeenthcentury Dutch genre painting, see Christopher Brown, Images of a Golden Past: Dutch Genre Painting of the ijth Century (New York, 1984); Peter C. Sutton, ed., Masters of Seventeenth-Century Dutch Genre Painting, exh. cat. (Philadelphia Museum of Art, 1984); and, most recently, Wayne Franits, Dutch Seventeenth-Century Genre Painting: Its Stylistic and Thematic Evolution (London and New Haven, 2004).

8. The roots of this imagery can ultimately be traced to sixteenth-century German prints. For Codde and Duyster, see Caroline Bigler Playter, "Willem Duyster and Pieter Codde: The 'Duystere Werelt' of Dutch Genre Painting, c. 1625-1635," Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1972; and Franits (note 7), pp. 57-64.

9. For De Hooch and De Jongh, see Roland E. Fleischer, "Ludolf de Jongh and the Early Work of Pieter de Hooch," Oud Holland 92 (1978), pp. 49—67; Sutton 1980 (note 2), pp. 12-13, passim; Roland E. Fleischer, Ludolf de Jongh (1616-1679): Painter of Rotterdam (Doornspijk, 1989), pp. 71-77, passim; and Liedtke (note 5), pp. 160-62.

10.  For the doorsien in seventeenth-century Dutch art, see Martha Hollander, An Entrance for the Eyes: Space and Meaning in Seventeenth-Century Dutch Art (Berkeley, 2002).

11.  See Liedtke (note 5), pp. 145-68. 71 72

12.  Sutton 1998—99 (note 2), p. 30.

13  See Hollander (note 10), pp. 150-51.

14.  Walter Liedtke, "Delft and the Delft School: AnIntroduction/' in Liedtke (note 6), p. 15, passim, identifies these general stylistic characteristics of Delft painting.

15.  The literature on Vermeer is voluminous. Recommended among the many monographic studies of his art are Arthur K. Wheelock, Jr., Jan Vermeer (New York, 1981); Albert Blankert, John Michael Montias, and Gilles Aillaud, Vermeer (New York, 1988); Arthur K. Wheelock, Jr., Vermeer and the Art of Painting (London and New Haven, 1995); and Wayne Franits, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Vermeer (Cambridge and New York, 2001). See also Arthur K. Wheelock, Jr., et al., eds., Johannes Vermeer, exh. cat. (Washington, D.C., National Gallery of Art, 1995-96); and Liedtke (note 6).

16.  See the discussion in Sutton 1998-99 (note 2), p. 38.

17.  There are two versions of this picture; see Sutton 1998-99 (note 2), cat. no. 21. Moreover, a strikingly similar setting was employed for De Hooch's Mother and Child with Its Head in Her Lap (Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum); see Sutton 1998-99 (note 2), cat. no. 22.

18.  This was first pointed out by Ben Broos, Great Dutch Paintings from America, exh. cat. (The Hague, Mauritshuis, 1990-91), p. 304. For interior decor in the Dutch Republic, see Mariet Westermann, ed., Art and Home: Dutch Interiors in the Age of Rembrandt, exh. cat. (Newark Museum, 2001-2).

19.  This discussion of Amsterdam draws upon Deric Regin, Traders, Artists, Burghers: A Cultural History of Amsterdam in the i~yth Century (Assen, 1976); Renee Kistemaker and Roelof van Gelder, Amsterdam: The Golden Age 1275-1795, trans. Paul Foulkes (New-York, 1983); and Peter Burke, Venice and Amsterdam: A Study of Seventeenth-Century Elites, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, 1994).

20.  For musical themes in seventeenth-century Dutch art and their rich symbolism, see Edwin Buijsen and Louis Peter Grijp, eds., Music and Painting in the Golden Age, exh. cat. (The Hague, Hoogsteder & Hoogsteder, 1994).

21.  For the painting by Van Mieris, see Otto Naumann, "The Lesson (Reattributed)," in The William A. Clark Collection, exh. cat. (Washington, D.C., Corcoran Gallery of Art, 1978), pp. 68-71.

22.  For De Hooch's use of perspective and working methods, see Sutton 1998-99 (note 2), pp. 40-42.

23.  In De Hooch's Woman with a Baby in Her Lap, and a Small Child (fig. 7), a pinhole can actually be seen with the naked eye; it is located on the edge of the door, just above the mother's right shoulder. A detailed photograph of this pinhole can be found in Sutton 1998-99 (note 2), p. 41, fig. 33b. A pinhole is also visible in The Courtyard of a House in Delft (fig. 56) in the shadow of the door beside the woman in the vestibule. Similar pinholes are present in Vermeer's work; see Jorgen Wadum, "Vermeer in Perspective," in Wheelock et al. (note 15), pp. 67-69, fig. 4.

24.  The elaborate mantelpiece in The Music Party (Family Portrait) (fig. 18) also incorporates details from one found in the Town Hall; see Sutton 1998-99 (note 2), p. 142. The Town Hall itself appears in the background of De Hooch's Musical Party on a Terrace of circa 1667; see Sutton 1998-99 (note 2), p. 57, fig. 57. For the Town Hall, see Katherine Fremantle, The Baroque Town Hall of Amsterdam (Utrecht, 1959); and Jan Peeters et al., The Royal Palace of Amsterdam in Paintings of the Golden Age, exh. cat. (Amsterdam, Royal Palace, 1997).

25.  See Sutton 1998-99 (note 2), p. 54, fig. 55. See also Wheelock et al. (note 15), pp. 141-42; and Liedtke (note 6), p. 386, n. 13. Liedtke considers implausible the argument that De Hooch's painting dates slightly earlier than Vermeer's.

26.  For the disputed date of De Hooch's canvas, see Wheelock et al. (note 15), p. 180; Sutton 1998-99 (note 2), p. 178; Liedtke (note 6), p. 293, n. 221.

27.  See Sutton 1980 (note 2), p. 147, doc. nos. 40, 43.

28.  Sutton 1980 (note 2), p. 147, doc. no. 45.

29.  This translation is taken from John Michael Montias, Vermeer and His Milieu: A Web of Social History (Princeton, 1989), p. 212. Bolnes's testimony was probably exaggerated slightly in order to elicit sympathy. Marie Christine van der Sman, "The Year of Disaster: 1672," in Donald Haks and Marie Christine van der Sman, eds., Dutch Society in the Age of Vermeer (Zwolle, 1996), p. 136, quotes the journal of Vermeer's contemporary L. van der Saan: "Before the war, when trade and business was flourishing, people in Holland who did not know very well what to do with their

money, and how they could best invest it to their enjoyment, would pay something between 500 and 600 and up to 1,000 guilders for a painting... But from the year 1672 until 1694, so long as the grievous wars continued many no longer desired to buy paintings . . . Then many scarcely earned in one year what in former times they had recklessly spent in one hour."

30.  Paintings by the Amsterdam artists Pieter Codde and Willern Duyster come to mind here; for these two artists, see the literature cited in note 8 above.

31.  For a discussion of late-seventeenth-century Dutch genre painting, see Franits (note 7), pp. 217-57.

32.  See Sutton 1980 (note 2), p. 40; and Sutton 1998-99 (note 2), p. 61.

33.  The record of De Hooch's burial refers to him as having come from Amsterdam's Dolhuys (madhouse); see Sutton 1980 (note 2), p. 147, doc. no. 50.

34.  For the concept of domestic virtue in seventeenth century Dutch art, see Wayne E. Franits, Paragons of Virtue: Women and Domesticity in Seventeenth-Century Dutch Art (Cambridge and New York, 1993).

35.  Jacob Cats, Houwelyck. Dat is de gansche gelegentheyt des echten staets, 6 pts. (Middelburg, 1625).

36.  Eddy de Jongh, "Grape Symbolism in Painting of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries," Simiolus 7 (1974), p. 174. For Cats's life and illustrious literary career, see Domien ten Berge, De hooggeleerde en zoetvloeiende dichter Jacob Cats (The Hague, 1979).

37.  For more on such books, see Suzanne W. Hull, Chaste, Silent and Obedient: English Books for Women 1475-1640 (San Marino, Calif., 1982); and L. F. Groenendijk, De nadere reformatie van het gezin: De visie van Petrus Wittewrongel op de Christelijke huishouding (Dordrecht, 1984). Many of these English domestic treatises were known among the Dutch, some through translations, others

in the original.

38.  De Jongh (note 36), p. 173: "The Amsterdam publisher Ian lacobszoon Schipper, who brought Cats's collected works out no fewer than four times between 1655 and 1665, estimated in midcentury that the number of copies of Houwelyck in circulation could not be less than 50,000."

39.  For this story and related superstitions concerning pregnancy, see the article by Herman Roodenburg, "The Maternal Imagination: The Fears of Pregnant Women in Seventeenth-Century Holland," Journal of Social History 21 (1988), pp. 701-16.

40.  See, for example, the Protestant writers John Dod and Robert Cleaver, A Godly Forme of Houshold Government, 5th ed. (London, 1612), fol. R2; Petrus Wittewrongel, Oeconomia Christiana ofte Christelicke huys-houdinghe, 3rd ed., 2 vols. (Amsterdam, 1661), vol. i, p. 197; and Bernhardum Wallenkamp, Inleydinghe in Zions-schole (Utrecht, 1661), pp. 94-95. Catholics also viewed children as divine gifts; see, for example, Cornelis Hazart, Het gheluckich ende deughdelyck houwelyck (Antwerp, 1678), p. 204. For two comparatively recent studies on the history of childhood in the Netherlands, see Benjamin Roberts, Through the Keyhole: Dutch Child-Rearing Practices in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Century: Three Urban Elite Families (Hilversum, 1998); and Rudolf Dekker, Childhood, Memory and Autobiography in Holland from the Golden Age to Romanticism (New York, 2000).

41.  In some Protestant circles, especially those of the Puritans and Pietists, it was believed that Adam's original sin had imputed to all of his descendants inherently corrupt natures, which could be subdued only through discipline and intense indoctrination in religion and ethics, beginning at the earliest possible age. Thus, the parental commission to rear children properly had eternal consequences. See, for example, William Gouge, Of Domesticall Duties (London, 1622), pp. 536-47; Wittewrongel (note 40), vol. i, pp. 182-98, vol. 2, pp. 741-59; and Wallenkamp (note

40), pp. 93-138. See also Groenendijk (note 37), pp. 146-56.

42.  "Gelooft het, dat in teere sinnen / d'Op-voeding kan den aert verwinnen." This saying appears in an appendix of proverbs entitled "Kinder-op-voedinghe" (Children's Education) that appears following part i of Jacob Cats, Spiegel vanden ouden ende nieuwen tijdt, 3 pts. (The Hague, 1632). See also Dod and Cleaver (note 40), fol. S3v; and Bartholomew Batty, The Christian Man's Closet, trans. W. Lowth (London, 1581), fols. iSv-ig. 73 74

43.  For the family as a microcosm of the state, see Wittewrongel (note 40), vol. i, pp. 1-5; and Simon Oomius, Ecclesiola, dat is kleyne kercke (Amsterdam, 1661), pp. 4, 5, 266-67. See also Groenendijk (note 37), p. 105.

44.  Prevailing medical opinion held that behavioral traits were conveyed to children through breast milk; a child was believed to imbibe the personality of the woman who nursed it. Mothers were therefore strongly advised not to hire wet nurses to feed their children. Still, the practice of hiring wet nurses must have been common, given the notoriously unsanitary conditions, poor care, and frequently difficult deliveries that characterized seventeenth-century obstetrics. Most interestingly, in comparison to the practices of our own culture today, mothers who allowed their offspring to be nourished with animal milk were vigorously condemned, as medical experts believed that these children would develop the behavioral traits of the animals from whom they had received milk. See, for example, a popular book that dispensed practical medical advice by one of the most famous doctors of the day, Johan van Beverwijck, "Schat der gesontheydt," in Alle de wercken, zo in de medicyne als chirurgie van de heer Joan van Beverwyck (Amsterdam, 1656). On p. 167, Van Beverwijck relates that a child breast-fed by a dog routinely woke up at night and barked! Franits (note 34), pp. 114-19, contains a lengthy discussion of breast-feeding in Dutch art.

45.  Sutton 1998-99 (note 2), p. 120.

46.  Oomius (note 43), pp. 211-13.

47.  The depiction of brooms and other utensils for cleaning in Dutch art is also discussed by Simon Schama, The Embarrassment of Riches: An Interpretation of Dutch Culture in the Golden Age (New York, 1987), pp. 375-97, passim, who interprets them from an anthropological perspective that emphasizes cleanliness as an affirmation of such values as separateness, vigilance, and patriotism. See also Eddy de Jongh, "The Broom as Signifier: An Iconological Hunch," in de Jongh, Questions of Meaning: Theme and Motif in Dutch Seventeenth-Century Painting, ed. and trans. Michael Hoyle (Leiden, 2000), pp. 193-214.

48.  See Wayne Franits, "The Family at Grace: A Theme in Dutch Art of the Seventeenth Century," Simiolus 16 (1986), pp. 36-49; and Franits (note 34), pp. 141-57.

49.  Steven Ozment, When Fathers Ruled: Family Life in Reformation Europe (Cambridge, Mass., and London, 1983), p. 143, provides a complete translation of the inscription.

50.  Erasmus, Ziichtiger Sitten zierlichen Wandels und hofflicher Geberden derjugent (Strasbourg, 1531). Erasmus's text was published in Dutch only in 1678, but Cats and his colleagues were familiar with it through earlier editions in Latin.

51.  See Otto van Veen, Quinti Horatii Flacci emblemata, 2nd ed. (Antwerp, 1612), pp. 56-57; and Versameling van uytgeleesene sinne-beelden (Leiden, 1696), pp. 24-25, no. 12. Jan Baptist  Bedaux has made the first important contribution to our understanding of dogs as educational metaphors in Dutch seventeenth century painting, based in part on his study of the texts cited here. See "Discipline for Innocence: Metaphors for Education in Seventeenth-Century Dutch Painting," in Bedaux, The Reality of Symbols: Studies in the Iconology of Netherlandish Art 1400-1800 (The Hague and Maarssen, 1990), pp. 109-69.

52.  There are several seventeenth-century Dutch editions of Plutarch's treatise (a work that first appeared in his Moralia), for example, Plutarchus, Tractaet vande op-voedinghe der kinderen, trans. S. de Swaef (Middelburg, 1619); and R. T, Eenighe morale of zedige wercken van Plutarchus (Amsterdam, 1634).

53.  Plutarch, The Education or Bringinge Up of Children, trans. T. Eliot (London, n. d. [circa 1535]), fols. B1V-B2.

54.  Batty (note 42), fol. igv.

55.  "Gewent een winde tot den pot / Een lagt hont wort een keucken-sot," from Cats (note 42), appendix of proverbs following part i.

56.  For toys as symbols of foolishness and frivolity in Dutch paintings, see Eddy de Jongh et al., eds., Tot lering en vermaak: Betekenissen van Hollandse genrevoorstellingen uit de zeventiende eeuw, exh. cat. (Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, 1976), p. 99; and Mary Frances Durantini, The Child in Seventeenth- Century Dutch Painting (Ann Arbor, Mich., 1983), pp. 206-56.

57.  See also the painting by Dou's star student, the Leiden master Frans van Mieris the Elder (fig. 21). 58 Gouge (note 41), p. 545. See also Wittewrongel (note 40), vol. i, p. 187. The pedagogical significance of Dou's painting was first discussed by Durantini (note 56), pp. 47—49. See also Hollander (note 10), pp. 61-64.

59.  See, for example, Cats (note 35), pt. 5, p. 58; Wittewrongel (note 40), vol. i, p. 187; vol. 2, pp. 749—50; Dod and Cleaver (note 40), fol. R3v; and Plutarch (note 53), fols. BI-BIV. See also Bedaux (note 51), pp. 127-32.

60.  Related to this horticultural metaphor is that of the young sapling, which is easier to bend than an older tree with a thick trunk. The third image on the wall behind the praying children in Meyer's engraving (fig. 46) depicts this metaphor. See Cats (note 42), pt. i, pp. 1-7; Wittewrongel (note 40), vol. i, p. 187; and Bedaux (note 51), p. 122.

61.  The quoted passage is taken from a letter from Johan Huijdecoper, Jr., to his son Balthasar, dated May 25, 1685. This letter is cited and discussed by Roberts (note 40), pp. 181-82.

62.  For more on domesticity, see Roberts (note 40) and Dekker (note 40), both with many references to additional scholarly literature on this complicated subject.

63.  For example, Protestant reformers and humanists of the early sixteenth century wrote important tracts and books about domestic life, advocating specific roles and responsibilities for individual family members, particularly women. For the writings of Luther, Erasmus, and others on this topic, see Ozment (note 49), pp. 50-72, 132-54. There were also several works concerning marriage and the family published before the Reformation, for example, A. von Eyb, Ehebiichlein (Nuremberg, 1472).

64 For domestic conduct books, see Hull (note 37); and Groenendijk (note 37).

65.  Philips Angel, Lofder schilderkonst (Leiden, 1642), p. 39. Angel's short treatise is based on a speech that he gave in Leiden on October 18, St. Luke's Day — St. Luke is the patron saint of painters — in 1641. My quotation is taken from Michael Hoyle and Hessel Miedema, "Philips Angel, Praise of Painting," Simiolus 24 (1996), pp. 243-44.

66.  Neil de Marchi and Hans J. van Miegroet, "Novelty and Fashion Circuits in the Mid-Seventeenth- Century Antwerp-Paris Art Trade," Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 28 (1998), pp. 201-46.

67.  De Marchi and Van Miegroet (note 66), pp. 223-25, 235-36.

68.  De Marchi and Van Miegroet (note 66), pp. 223, 225.

69.  Though principally concerned with Dutch art collectors of the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, Marten Jan Bok, "Vraag en aanbod op de Nederlandse kunstmarkt, 1580-1700," Ph.D. diss., Rijksuniversiteit te Utrecht, 1994, pp. 53-96, nevertheless contains many valuable insights into elite collecting and patronizing tendencies that are relevant in this context. Middle-class participation in the market for the finest genre paintings, never really substantial to begin with, decreased significantly as the century progressed.

70.  For more on the economic situation in the Netherlands at this time, see Jonathan I. Israel, Dutch Primacy in World Trade 1585-1740 (Oxford, 1989), pp. 197-291; and Jonathan I. Israel, The Dutch Republic: Its Rise, Greatness, and Fall 1477-1806 (Oxford, 1995), pp. 610-19.

71.  The classic studies of this phenomenon, which scholars have termed "aristocratization," are by D. J. Roorda; see, for example, D. J. Roorda, Partij en factie: De oproeren van 1672 in de steden van Holland en Zeeland... (Groningen, 1961); and D. J. Roorda, "The Ruling Classes in Holland in the Seventeenth Century," in J. S. Bromley and E. H. Kossmann, eds., Britain and The Netherlands (Groningen, 1964), pp. 109-32. However, recent research has modified our understanding of aristocratization; see, among others, Pieter Spierenburg, Elites and Etiquette: Mentality and Social Structure in the Early Modem Northern Netherlands (Rotterdam, 1981), pp. 19-31; and L. Kooijmans, "Patriciaat en aristocratisering in Holland tijdens de zeventiende en achttiende eeuw," in J. Aalbers and M. Prak, eds., De bloem der natie; adel en patriciaat in de Noordelijke Nederlanden (Meppel and Amsterdam, 1987), pp. 100-101.

72.  Norbert Elias, The History of Manners, vol. i, The Civilizing Process, trans. Edmund Jephcott (New York, 1978); and Norbert Elias, Power and Civility, vol. 2, The Civilizing Process, trans. Edmund Jephcott (New York, 1982). Elias's seminal study first appeared in German in 1939.

73.  For the linking of these aspects of public life with civility, see Spierenburg (note 71), pp. 5-13; Elias 1978 (note 72), pp. 60-160; and Herman Roodenburg, "How to Sit, Stand, and Walk: Toward a Historical Anthropology of Dutch Paintings and Prints," in Wayne Franits, ed., Looking at Seventeenth-Century Dutch Art: Realism Reconsidered (Cambridge, 1997), pp. 175-85.

74.  For this portrait, wrongly attributed in my opinion to Cornelis de Man, see Westermann (note 18), cat. no. 82.

75.  Related to the use of napkins is the evolution of the use of utensils such as forks; see Elias 1978 (note 72), pp. 104-5, 122-29. See also the mid-seventeenth century portable knife and fork set with case illustrated and discussed in Westermann (note 18), p. 168, cat. no 28.

76.  For civility and hygiene, see Johan Goudsblom, "Civilisatie, besmettingsangst en hygiene: Beschouwingen over een aspect van het Europese civilisatieproces," Amsterdams Sociologisch Tijdschrift 4 (1977-78), pp. 271-300; and Georges Vigarello, Concepts of Cleanliness: Changing Attitudes in France since the Middle Ages, trans. J. Birrell (Cambridge, 1988).

77.  Among the many scholarly studies concerning the development of concepts of public and private are Richard Sennett, The Fall of Public Man (New York, 1977), pp. 16-19, 89-106; Nicole Castan, "The Public and the Private," in Roger Chartier, ed., Passions of the Renaissance, vol. 3, A History of Private Life, trans. Anton Goldhammer (Cambridge, Mass., 1989), pp. 403-45; Dena Goodman, "Public Sphere and Private  Life: Toward a Synthesis of Current Historiographical Approaches to the Old Regime," History and Theory 31 (1992), pp. 1-20; and Martine Segalen, "The House between Private and Public: A Socio-Historic Overview," in Anton Schuurman and Pieter Spierenburg, eds., Private Domain, Public Inquiry: Families and Life-Styles in the Netherlands and  Europe, 1550 to the Present (Hilversum, 1996), pp. 240-53. For the public versus the private in seventeenth-century Dutch literature, see Mieke B. Smits-Veldt, "Images of Private Life in Some Early-Seventeenth-Century Dutch Ego-Documents," in Arthur Wheelock, Jr., and Adele Seeff, eds., The Public and Private in Dutch Culture of the Golden Age (Newark, Del., 2000), pp. 164-77. For the arthistorical perspective on privacy, see David Smith, "Privacy, Realism, and the Novelistic in i7th-Century Dutch Painting," in Acts of the 2jth International Congress of the History of Art (1989) (Strasbourg, 1992), sec. 3, pp. 35-52; Nanette Salomon, "Early Netherlandish bordeeltjes and the Construction of Social 'Realities,'" in Wheelock and Seeff (see above), pp. 141-63, esp. 144-45; and Hollander (note 10), pp. 177-84, passim.

78.  See, for example, John Loughman and John Michael Montias, Public and Private Spaces: Works of Art in Seventeenth-Century Dutch Houses (Zwolle, 2000), pp. 22-30; and Mariet Westermann, "'Costly and Curious, Full of Pleasure and Home Contentment': Making a Home in the Dutch Republic," in Westermann (note 18), pp. 15-81.

79.  See Hollander (note 10), pp. 161-76.

80.  See Martha Hollander, "Public and Private Life in the Art of Pieter de Hooch," in Mariet Westermann et al., eds., Wooncultuur in de Nederlanden 1500-1800 (Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 51) (Zwolle, 2001), pp. 273-93. Hollander (note 10), pp. 179,199, takes a slightly different view, arguing that the omnipresence of the outside world in De Hooch's work, suggested by windows, courtyards, and so forth, literally illustrates the instability of the concepts of public and private at this time. For other important studies that examine how domestic spaces are gendered,

namely how they become identified almost exclusively with females, see Elizabeth Alice Honig, "The Space of Gender in Seventeenth-Century Dutch Painting," in Franits (note 73), pp. 149-53; Nanette Salomon, Shifting Priorities: Gender and Genre in Seventeenth-Century Dutch Painting (Stanford, 2004), pp. 84-86, passim.

81.  See, for example, Thera Wijsenbeek-Olthuis and Leo Noordegraaf, "Painting for a Living: The Economic Context of Judith Leyster's Career," in James A. Weluet al., eds., Judith Leyster: A Dutch Master and Her World, exh. cat. (Worcester Art Museum, 1993), pp. 39-54. See also Franits (note 7).

82.  For the depiction of prostitution in seventeenth century Dutch art, a topic which remains understudied, see Lotte C. van de Pol, "Beeld en werkelijkheid van de prostitutie in de zeventiende eeuw," in G. Hekma and H. Roodenburg, eds., Soete minne en helsche boosheit: Seksuele voorstellingen in Nederland 1300—1850 (Nijmegen, 1988), pp. 109-44; and Wayne Franits, "Emerging from the Shadows: Genre Painting by the Utrecht Caravaggisti and Its Contemporary Reception/' in Joneath Spicer and Lynn Federle Orr, eds., Masters of Light: Dutch Painters in Utrecht during the Golden Age, exh. cat. (Baltimore, Walters Art Gallery, 1997-98), pp. 114-20.

83.  Other artists, among them Jan Steen and Frans van Mieris the Elder, continued the tradition of representing ribald prostitution scenes. However, such imagery was depicted less frequently than it had been earlier in the seventeenth century.

84.  See Hollander (note 10), pp. 150—51.

85.  In another indication of his commercial savvy, De Hooch registered in 1664 with the Confrerie, the painters' professional organization in The Hague, no doubt motivated by potential sales prospects. The Hague, the capital of the Netherlands, was situated about ninety minutes by foot or horse-drawn barge from Delft. Although it was relatively small, The Hague ranked among the wealthiest cities in the country. It was a flourishing center for painting but by 1660 had a conspicuous lack of genre painters, a situation of which De Hooch surely was aware.

86.  Julie B. Hochstrasser, "Imag(in)ing Prosperity: Painting and Material Culture in the lyth-Century Dutch Household," in Westermann et al. (note 80), p. 224, passim, makes a similar point about the development of increasingly lavish Dutch still-lifepaintings during the second half of the seventeenth century.

87.  C. Willemijn Fock, "Semblance or Reality? The Domestic Interior in Seventeenth-Century Dutch Genre Painting," in Westermann (note 18), pp. 83-101.

88.  Fock (note 87), pp. 91, 96.

89.  Bok (note 69), p. 204, points out that wealthy buyers not only purchased pictures for decorative or investment purposes but also for reasons of status. Hochstrasser (note 86), p. 205, quotes a well-known passage from the diaries of the seventeenth-century English connoisseur John Evelyn in which he terms Dutch paintings "commodities."

90.  For the economic aspects of the art of Don and his fellow fijnschilders, see J. M. Montias, "Cost and Value in Seventeenth-Century Dutch Art," Art History 10 (1987), p. 462. See also E. J. Sluijter, "Schilders van 'cleyne, subtile ende curieuse dingen': Leidse 'fijnschilders' in contemporaine bronnen," in Leidse fijnschilders: Van Gerrit Dou tot Frans van Mieris de Jonge 1630-1760, exh. cat. (Leiden, Stedelijk Museum de Lakenhal, 1988), pp. 24-28.

91.  Peter Sutton (Sutton 1998-99 [note 2], p. 15; and Sutton 1980 [note 2], p. 54) has argued that De Hooch's clientele consisted of largely middle- and upper-middle-class patrons. However, an important source upon which Sutton based his hypothesis is probably unreliable. In an inventory of the possessions of De Hooch's former employer, Justus de la Grange, composed in 1655, the notary appraised eleven pictures by the artist at between six and twenty guilders. The fact that a painting by Dou was likewise valued at the ridiculously low amount of six guilders in this inventory should raise our suspicions about the accuracy of its compiler's assessments. According to Marten Jan Bok, "Pricing the Unpriced: How Dutch Seventeenth-Century Painters Determined the Selling Price of Their Work," in Michael North and David Ormrod, eds., Art Markets in Europe, 1400-1800 (Aldershot, 1998), p. 104, this is not an isolated instance as notaries (and auctioneers) routinely underestimated the worth of paintings, objects that they often regarded as simply secondhand goods.

92.  C. Willemijn Fock, "Werkelijkheid of schijn. Het beeld van het Hollandse interieur in de zeventiendeeeuwse genreschilderkunst," Oud Holland 112 (1998), p. 240, n. 158, quotes a fascinating archival document of 1645, which details how the Amsterdam merchant Nicolaes Spiljeurs rented an expensive Turkish carpet for several weeks so that it could be included in a portrait of himself that was currently being painted. Although Fock does not say so, surely Spiljeurs wanted to include the carpet in his portrait for the associations of status that it evoked. The Leiden genre painter Quirijn van Brekelenkam, whose subject matter relates to that of De Hooch, provides yet another example of this trickle-down effect. Although his pictures were, judging from their prices, intended for clients of more modest financial means, many still incorporate motifs reflective of elite values. For Van Brekelenkam, see Franits (note 7), pp. 130-34.

93.  Pierre Bourdieu, Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, trans. R. Nice (Cambridge, Mass., 1984).

94.  The possession of taste, like other aspects of civility, provided a means by which the elites — or those who aspired to be part of the elite —could distance themselves from the masses. Naturally, the masses were identified with popular taste, which was considered coarse because it was unlearned and sense oriented; see Michael Moriarity, Taste and Ideology in Seventeenth-Century France (Cambridge, 1988).