Guided Art Discussion: Late Rembrandt in Rijksmuseum
At Museums as Therapy, we organize events we call guided art discussions. This is a form of a group visit to an art museum or gallery that combines two activities: an independent exploration of artworks by participants and a group discussion of these artworks facilitated by guides. In March, we organized a guided art discussion in the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, where we focused on the art of late Rembrandt and his arguably the most famous work, the Nightwatch. Below, we will give a brief summary of this event.
We started by looking at several relatively early Rembrandt’s paintings. The participants were excited by extremely fine details of two monumental portraits of a married couple, Marten Soolmans, “the son of a wealthy Flemish immigrant who owned a successful sugar refinery in Amsterdam” (Rijksmuseum), and Oopjen Coppit, “the eldest of three daughters of an old, affluent Amsterdam family” (Rijksmuseum), made in 1634. However, most participants registered no strong emotions while looking at these portraits and some even called the portraits boring. More interest, instead, was triggered by the story of the sitters and their mariage, “an alliance between families, old and new money” (Rijksmuseum).
Many participants chose to look longer at the “Still Life with Peacocks” made around 1639. Some chose it because of its more vivid colors, others simply because of the contrast with the “boring” portraits. At first, the participants were frustrated by the child looking curiously and somewhat joyfully at the dead peacocks. They then discussed the interplay between the lively child, the bleeding bird (probably half dead) and the dead bird, suggesting that this contrast may have been made intentionally with the meaning of memento mori.
We also looked at “Cimon and Pero” attributed to Willem Drost and made around 1655–1657. Most participants focused on the content of this painting: “Sentenced to death by starvation, Cimon was kept alive by his daughter Pero who visited him in prison and secretly breastfed him” (Rijksmuseum). They found it uncomfortable looking at a young woman breastfeeding her father.
We continued our guided art discussion about the art of late Rembrandt in the Rijksmuseum by looking at and discussing the Nightwatch, finished in 1642. This painting is probably the most famous and most mysterious Rembrandt’s work and can be seen as a turning point in his career.
The first question many participants asked was: “What is going on in this painting?” To address it, we first shared what part of the painting each of us paid attention to, from two front figures down to a dead chicken on a girl’s belt. Then, we shared our interpretations of what was going on. For example, there was speculation that these military men are returning from a won battle and are about to celebrate the victory.
The facilitators then gave some historical context about the civic guards in the Netherlands, their group portraits (some of which, executed by other artists, could be seen in the same room), the fact that the Nightwatch has become much darker over the years than it originally was (hence its current name), the illness and death of Rembrandts beloved wife Saskia in the same 1642, etc.
Based on this context, the participants offered a few interpretations of the painting: (i) Rembrandt painted civic guards most objectively and most realistically (i.e., if we see chaos in this painting, it is because such were civic guards back in 1642); (ii) the Nightwatch is a social satire (if not a mockery, see Peter Greenaway’s “Nightwatching”) showing members of an elite “men’s club” pretending to be military men but failing to do so; (iii) Rembdandt was devastated by his wife’s illness and death, so he might have seen things much more negatively than they were. Since we believe there is no “right” or “wrong” interpretation when considering art, each of the above has the right to exist.
The last part of our guided art discussion in the Rijksmuseum was dedicated to two late Rembrandt’s paintings: “Self-portrait as the Apostle Paul”, 1661, and “Isaac and Rebecca, known as ‘The Jewish Bride’”, 1665–1669. Most participants were attracted to and moved by the self-portrait. They appreciated how the face and its emotions are depicted and how it is lit from above and behind. The participants interpreted the facial expression as tired and wise, as if Rembrandt in this portrait was saying: “Why are you disturbing me? I understood life, but have you?” The facilitators also helped participants make parallels between the life of Apostle Paul and the life of Rembrandt.
Finally, we looked at “Isaac and Rebecca, known as ‘The Jewish Bride’”, one of the latest Rembradt’s paintings. One participant noted that we seemed to be spying on this couple through a keyhole. The contrast between rich clothing and sad facial expressions was also noted. Moreover, it was observed that the characters do not look at each other, nor at us. The question was raised as to why the man holds his right hand on a woman’s breast. Here, facilitators told the story of Isaac and Rebecca: “To prevent being killed and having his wife captured by King Abimelech, Isaac concealed his love for Rebecca by pretending they were brother and sister. However, their intimacy betrayed them when they thought they were not being spied on” (Rijksmuseum). This explained certain aspects of the painting to the participants, but did not lead to further discussion. Participants shared that this painting made them feel sad, calm, and tranquil.
In summary, during this discussion, participants spent more time looking at a small number of paintings as opposed to skimming quickly over an entire museum, interpreted what they saw (e.g., when looking at the “Night Watch” and “Self-portrait as the Apostle Paul”) and delved into their feelings (e.g., with regards to “Cimon and Pero” and “Isaac and Rebecca”). Above all, the participants valued the group experience, i.e., sharing with and listening to other people.
