preview

Muller's Summary And Review: A Review

Decent Essays

Throughout the reading, Muller discusses the connection between the artist and the sociable scholars who collect artworks in the 1630s and 1640s. She states that the paintings created by Gerrit Dou and Adriaen van Gaesbeeck depict the young artist in his study as a learned and cultivated scholar that favors civil conversations. Also, she argues that their works reveal artists’ desire to elevate their professional status and to engage in sociable exchange with elites at that time. The article is organized in chronological order, from the early 1630s to the mid 1630s, and then to the 1640s. Furthermore, Muller starts the article with Dou’s artworks then discusses his pupil van Gaesbeeck’s.
Muller uses solid sources to convincingly argue that Dou’s painting in the early 1630s shows the artist well-mannered and favors educated company. She first compares Dou’s Artist in his Studio made during 1630-1632 with Rembrandt van Rijn’s Artist in his Studio made in 1629. She points out that Dou’s work, different from Rembrandt’s, shows the painter attired in a long …show more content…

First, she compares Dou’s Boy Playing a Flute in a Study made in 1636 with his earlier painting Artist in his Studio. She states that both of the artworks present the artist as a scholar preferring learned company, but the work created in the mid 1630s emphasizes the youthfulness of the artist. By this means, Dou’s work claims that the young gets involved in civil conversations, while the old favors solitude. Further, Muller uses earlier paintings showing students as depressed and boisterous to make contrast with Dou’s delineation of the young artist, expressing the decorum and erudition of the artist. The fusion of the visual comparison with Dou’s earlier work and the negative examples of earlier depiction of students allow Muller to persuasively support her

Get Access