December 2011 – Page 2 – my daily art display

A Winter Scene with a Man Killing a Pig by David Teniers the Younger

A Winter Scene with a Man Killing a Pig by David Teniers II (c.1650)

I think there is an adage, or maybe it was just advice I was once given, that says you should be happy with what you have or maybe it was that you should just want what you have. There is certainly an element of truth in that as I can always remember a disastrous policy my former company brought out in making it known to all the employees what each person earned by publishing the grades of each employee and having a separate list of salary against each grade. Up to that point nobody knew what each other earned and most people had, until then, been reasonably happy with their remuneration but once they found out what their colleagues earned there were unmerciful screams around the building.

So what has all this got to do with art? The reason I bring this up is that as I told you the other day I went to see the Group of Seven and Tom Thomson exhibition at the Dulwich Picture Gallery in London and a large number of them focused on winter in Canada. The winter scenes were well executed and very lifelike. However the problem came when I decided to have a look around the rest of the Gallery and its permanent collection and came across a winter landscape by David Teniers the Younger and really, in my mind, it was in a different class to those of the Canadian artists. I was completely amazed by the works of the Canadian artists until my eyes focused on Teniers’ work. Of course, by now you know I love Dutch and Flemish art and therefore I am slightly biased with my comparison but I thought I would let you compare the two styles and see what you think.

David Teniers the Younger was born in Antwerp in 1610. His father was David Teniers the Elder, also an artist, as were his son David Teniers III and grandson, David Teniers IV. His artistic connections don’t end there as his wife, Anna, was the daughter of Jan (Velvet) Brueghel the Elder and granddaughter of the Master himself, Pieter Bruegel the Elder. His initial art training came from his father whose artistic talent would soon be eclipsed by his son, who would become the most famous, most revered and most prolific of the Teniers’ family of artists. Adriaen Brouwer, who at the time was well known and well loved for his everyday scenes, greatly influenced Teniers during his early career as did Rubens who was his wife-to-be’s guardian. At the age of twenty-two he was registered in the Antwerp Guild of St Luke and would later become deacon of that painter’s association.

In 1637 he married Anna Brueghel. The major part of Anna’s dowry was made up of pictures and drawings completed by her grandfather, Pieter Bruegel the Elder, and her father, Jan Brueghel. Teniers spent much time studying these beautifully crafted works of art and they proved to be significant in the development of Teniers’s genre painting. In the year of his marriage to Anna Breughel, Teniers painted his first genre work entitled Peasant Wedding, which hangs in the Hermitage Museum in St Petersburg. It was the period between 1640 and 1650 that art historians believe Teniers produced his finest works. His expertise at depicting village scenes with large crowds of people, often in an open landscape was breathtaking. There was often an element of humour in his paintings and warmth in the way his characters were depicted on his canvases. In many of his works one could recognise the influence of the Bruegel family.

In 1651, David Teniers and his family moved to Brussels and besides carrying on his own art business he took up the post of court painter and the director of the art gallery of the Spanish governor-general, Archduke Leopold-Wilhelm. If you look back to My Daily Art Display of January 18^th you will see a painting Teniers completed entitled Archduke Leopold William in his Gallery at Brussels, which precisely documented some of the famous works from the Archduke’s collection. Whilst looking after this vast collection Teniers made many small-scale individual copies of paintings in the Duke’s collection by foreign artists, especially the paintings of the Italian Masters. Of these, two hundred and forty-four were engraved in 1660 under the title Theatrum Pictorium.

On the death of the Archduke Leopold-Wilhelm his successor, Don Jon of Austria continued to employ Teniers as court painter and in 1663 Teniers founded the Royal Academy of Fine Arts Antwerp which still exists and is one of the oldest of its kind in Europe. David Teniers the Younger was a highly productive artist and when he died in 1690, he left more than two thousand works. Most of the major galleries of the world exhibit a number of his works. He was an extremely good businessman and was highly liked by the aristocracy. Teniers knew the type of art the people liked and was very astute when it came to following the latest fashions and whims of his clients. His art work covered numerous subjects from portraits and religious scenes to genre pictures and still-life paintings. Teniers died at the age of seventy-nine in Brussels, five years after the death of his eldest son, David Teniers III.

The featured work for My Daily Art Display today is a painting David Teniers the Younger completed around 1650 and is entitled A Winter Scene with a Man Killing a Pig. The painting is amazing. It just glows in front of your eyes. An art historian and contemporary of Teniers summed up the beauty of this painting when he wrote:

“…For the richness of his golden and silvery light, for the delicacy of his vivid colours there is only one word, and that word is ‘magical…”

Before us we see a winter landscape and in some ways reminiscent of Teniers’ wife’s grandfather, Pieter Brueghel’s work, Hunters in the Snow another winter landscape painting completed almost a hundred years earlier. As well as being a landscape painting it is also a genre picture which does not offer us an idealized landscape, but instead provides us with a window for us to see real people getting on with their daily lives in a real setting. Snow lies deep on the ground and by the looks of the dark clouds there is more snow to come. Look how the artist depicts the rays of weak sunlight forcing their way through the clouds to light up the frosty winter scene.

Work on the farms almost came to a halt at wintertime giving time to the peasants to take the break from working the fields and well-earned time to sleigh and skate. To the left of the painting we see some houses. In front of the nearest house, a pig is about to be slaughtered. Although we may cringe at the depiction of the killing it should be remembered that in Teniers time this would be a common practice. It marked a time of celebration and we see emerging from the end house, a woman carrying a baby and an old man, dressed in black, leading out a young child so they could witness the scene. The butcher kneels on the animal while a woman holds out a pan to collect the blood. Every part of the carcass will be used. The children would be given the pig’s bladder so that they could blow it up and use it as a ball. The skin, once the hair had been singed off it, would be used as a kind of leather, maybe for shoes. The flesh from the large animal would provide meat for their meals all the way to Lent, at which time, the staple food would switch to fish until the end of the “fast” and the arrival of Easter.

So now you have seen an early twentieth century Canadian winter scene and a mid-seventeenth Dutch winter scene and I will let you choose which you prefer

Spring Ice by Tom Thomson

The exhibition I visited back in November at the Dulwich Picture Gallery was entitled The Group of Seven and Tom Thomson. The reason for the Group not including Thomson himself was, although he was closely connected to and had greatly influenced the seven members of the Group, he died before they had formed this artistic association in 1920.

Tom Thomson, who was born into a large western Ontario farm family in Claremont, Ontario, was the son of John and Margaret Thomson. It is interesting to note that unlike many early stories of artist’s lives, Thomson never showed an early interest in art. In his youth, he was far more interested in music and literature. At the age of twenty-two, he worked as an apprentice in an iron foundry owned by a friend of his father. It is possible that Thomson took advantage of his father’s connection with the owner and failed to fulfil his part of the apprenticeship as within a year he had been sacked because of his lack of time management. Thomson then decided that the excitement of military life was for him and applied to fight in the Second Boer war but was rejected on medical grounds. Later he would be turned down again by the Canadian military when he tried to enlist and fight in the First World War.

In 1901, aged twenty-four, he was admitted into a business college at Chatham but stayed there for less than a year, at which time he went to Seattle where his brother George had a business school. It was in this American city that he worked as a photoengraver and designed commercial brochures and spent a lot of his free time sketching and fishing.

Thomson returned to Canada in 1905 and two years later joined Grip Limited, a leading Toronto artistic design company. It was whilst working there that he met some of the future members of the Group of Seven. Apart from Lawren Harris, who came from a wealthy background and enjoyed an independent income, all the artists, who formed the Group of Seven, supported themselves at one time or another as commercial artists or graphic designers producing lettering and layout as well as illustrations for magazine and books. Thomson and his newly found friends, who all loved to sketch and paint, would often go off together at the weekends on sketching trips.

One of Thomson’s favourite destinations on his painting trips was Algonquin Park, a forestry reserve north of Toronto, which stretches between Georgina Bay on the west and the Ottawa River to the east. It is a vast stretch of pristine wilderness and an ideal location for landscape artists. Thompson first journeyed there on a sketching expedition in 1912 returning home clutching numerous sketches of the areas he visited. These sketching trips up north were a bit of a logistical nightmare as the artists had, as well as carrying food, shelter and cooking utensils, had also to carry their painting and sketching materials and this culminated in an almost impossible burden. The weather conditions for en plein air painting or sketching was not conducive for the artists due to the cold and wet and this necessitated them having to try and paint or sketch with speed in changing light.

My Daily Art Display featured painting today is one of Tom Thomson’s early works which he completed in 1916 and which is entitled Spring Ice. The 1915 study for this painting, in the form of a small oil on cardboard sketch, as well as the finished oil on canvas painting are normally housed at the National Gallery of Canada in Ottawa. One should remember that many artists looked upon their preparatory sketches as works in their own right and not just as a preparation for the finished article. Thomson made some subtle changes to his finished painting in comparison to his contemporary sketch. Although the positioning of the land, trees and lake remain the same, the colours on the final canvas are noticeably different. In the finished work Thomson has used much brighter pastel colours and by doing so has cleverly brought to us a hint of spring. Also, whereas the sketch had a square shape, the oil on canvas work was wider and horizontal in shape. This added width allows us to get a better view of the blue waters of the lake. One can imagine the difficulty Thomson endured to capture the scene. Probably squatting down on the thawing earth, balancing his sketch box on his knee so as to obtain a low-level view of the lake. Can you imagine how cold it must have been and how cold his fingers must have been in the chilling air? It was those same frosty conditions which bit unmercifully at his limbs that prevented the ice flows from melting as they moved slowly in the water. We can see that there is a long time to go before the warmth of summer arrives to add warmth to the ground and tease the vegetation from the earth. We are still in spring and the trees have yet to open up their buds to the elements.

Artists like those of the Group of Seven had to endure great hardships in the cause of producing a realistic representation of nature. They had to paint quickly to capture the scene with its many moods as the light from the sun or moon changed. The mood for this painting is one of serenity and tranquillity and one can understand why artists like Thomson put up with the harsh conditions so as to record the beauty of nature.

Thomson’s life ended suddenly and in mysterious circumstances. It was the summer of 1917 and he had been out alone in a canoe on Canoe Lake in Algonquin Park when he disappeared. His empty canoe was spotted later that day. Thomson was an expert fisherman, canoeist and hiker, and when his body was found eight days later in the lake it seemed incongruous that he could have died accidentally. To this day the circumstances of his death have remained shrouded in mystery. The official cause of death was given as “accidental drowning”. The investigation claimed there was a fishing line wrapped around his legs and he had suffered a blow to his head before he died. As with all deaths in unusual and suspicious circumstances, the conspiracy theorists have had a field day, putting forward numerous scenarios, which ultimately led to the artist’s death. Murdered by a neighbour, killed in a drunken brawl over money he owed his assailant, and killed by the father of a girl whom he had got pregnant were just a few of the many suggested circumstances that led to the artist’s demise. Maybe closer to the truth was the belief that it was a simple accident or that he had committed suicide during one of his many bouts of depression. We will probably never know the truth but the one thing we do know with great certainty is that on that lake in July 1917, Canada lost one its great artists, aged just forty.

The Corner Store by Lawren Harris

A few weeks ago I visited family in London and as usual I just had time to take in one art gallery as recompense for a crowded, although fast, rail journey. The problem I faced was which gallery to visit. I suppose logically I should go for the Leonardo exhibition on at the National Gallery which is receiving such rave reviews. However as I thought it would be too crowded I postponed that delight until next January. In the end I plumped for the Dulwich Gallery which lies south of the Thames and went to see a Canadian art exhibition entitled Painting Canada, Tom Thomson and the Group of Seven. Over the next few weeks I will give you a taste of some of the works by Thomson himself and some of the other artists who were part of The Group of Seven.

The Group of Seven, also sometimes known as the Alonquin School, were a group of Canadian landscape painters from 1920-1933. The seven members of the group were Franklin Carmichael, Lawren Harris, Alexander Young (A.Y.) Jackson, Franz Johnston, Arthur Lismer, James Edward Hervey (J.E.H.) MacDonald and Frederick Varley. Tom Thomson who was part of the movement died in 1917 before the official formation and naming of the Group of Seven but has always been considered one of the group’s founders. This group of artists was to become noted for its works, which were inspired by the landscape of their country and in some ways are looked upon as being part of the first Canadian national art movement.

Many of the movement, namely Thomson, Varley, Lismer, MacDonald, Johnston and Carmichael had met when they all worked at Grip Limited, which was the name of the Toronto design firm and which was home to many of Canada’s foremost designers and painters during the first half of the 20th century. Later the final two members of the group, Jackson and Harris would join the firm. The Group was financially sound due, in the main, to the financial support from one of its members, Lawren Harris, whose parents owned the Massey Harris farm machinery company which would be later known as Massey Ferguson.

My choice for the first featured artist of the Group of Seven is Lawren Harris. Lawren was born in Brantford, Ontario in 1885. He was the first born of two sons. Lawren had a radically different background from that of the other artists of the Group of Seven. As I said earlier, Lawren came from a wealthy conservative family of industrialists as the Harris family was co-owners of the Massey-Harris agricultural equipment conglomerate. Harris had the luxury every aspiring artist could only dream of and he was able to pursue a career in the arts without ever having to worry about holding down a regular job.

He was privately educated and received his initial education at the Central Technical School and later the independent St Andrew’s College at Rosedale. At the age of nineteen he went to Berlin to study where he remained for three years. There he studied philosophy and became interested in theosophy, which in its modern presentation, is a spiritual philosophy which has developed since the late 19th century.

He returned to Canada in 1908 and once again settled in Toronto and became a founder member of the Arts and Letters Club, which was a club whose sole purpose was to be a rendezvous where people of diverse interests might meet for mutual fellowship and artistic creativity.

One may have thought that Harris, with his wealthy background, would concentrate on the wealthy aspects of life in Toronto for the subjects of his art but in fact his first subject after returning from Berlin was a series of six paintings of houses in what was known as the Ward, an area where much of the Toronto immigrants lived. My featured painting in My Daily Art Display today is one Harris completed in 1920, entitled The Corner Store and is housed at the Art Gallery of Ontario and is in complete contrast to his later paintings which I will feature in a forthcoming blog along with the rest of his life story. The painting is not of one of the beautiful mansions of his home area of Rosedale but of a simple building which housed the local grocery store. Lawren Harris appreciated the simplicity of its structure which contrasted with the complicated and erratic patterns of the shadows cast by the trees on the shop’s frontage. I love the way the bright winter sunlight illuminates the shop’s façade. I love the colours of the pale green wooden window shutters which contrast beautifully with the terracotta- red trim of the window surrounds. Look at the tranquil and cloudless blue sky above the building. This is a beautiful portrayal of a winter’s scene.

In a few months time a number of us will be overwhelmed by snow and curse winter so maybe snow is a beautiful thing if it is reserved for postcards, Christmas cards and paintings like this one.

Unemployed by Ben Shahn

My featured artist today was quite unknown to me. I came across him and his paintings when I was flicking through an art book looking for information regarding another painter. One painting stood out from the rest and I have made it My Daily Art Display featured painting of today. There was something very haunting about the picture with its great sense of realism and I had to find out more about the work and the artist, Ben Shahn.

Ben Shahn was at the forefront of the American Social Realist art movement of the 1930s, a grouping, which included the likes of artists of the Ashcan School, many of whom I have featured in earlier blogs. Social Realism is a term used to describe visual and other realistic art works which record the everyday conditions of the working classes and mainly feature the life of the poor and deprived and how they had to live. The works are a pictorial criticism of the social environment that brought about these conditions. Social Realism has its roots back in the mid-19th century and the Realist movement in French art. Twentieth century Social Realism refers back to the works of the French artist such as Courbet and his painting Burial at Ornans or Millet’s great work The Gleaners. Social Reailsm art became an important art movement in America during their Great Depression of the 1930’s.

The art of the Social Realist painters often depicted cityscapes homing in on the decaying state of mining villages or broken-down shacks alongside railroad tracks. Their art is about poverty and the hardships endured by the ordinary but poor people. Often the works would focus on the indignity suffered by the poor and how they would work hard for little recompense. The depiction of this inequality of course implied a criticism of the capitalist society and capitalism itself. The Social Realist painters of America did not want their works to focus on the beauty of their country as portrayed by the likes of the Hudson River School painters. For them, to get their message across to the public, their works needed to depict the industrial suburbs with its grime and unpleasantness or the run-down farming communities with their broken-down buildings. Occasionally these artists would depict the rich in their paintings but they were only included for satirical reasons.

Ben Shahn was born in Kovno, Lithuania in 1898 and was the eldest of five children of an Orthodox Jewish family. His father, Joshua, was a woodcarver and cabinet maker. In 1902, probably because of his revolutionary activities, his father was exiled to Siberia. His mother, Gittel Lieberman, and her children moved to Vilkomir, which is now the Lithuanian town of Ukmerge. Four years later, in 1906, Shahn’s mother and three of her offsprings emigrated to America and settled in Brooklyn with Joshua who had already fled there from Siberia. Ben Shahn original artistic training was as a lithographer and then as a graphic artist.

At the age of twenty-one Shahn went to New York University and studied biology. Two years later he transferred to City College of New York to study art and then moved on to the New York National Academy of Design which is now known as The National Academy Museum and School of Fine Arts.

In 1924 Shahn married Tillie Goldstein and the two set off on a long journey of discovery taking in North Africa and the traditional artist pilgrimage of the capital cities of Europe taking in the works of the great European modern artists of the time such as Matisse, Picasso and Klee. He had not been won over by their art or the European Modernist art scene and soon felt less influenced by their work and preferred to follow the style of the Realists painters especially those who showed a concern for the plight of the downtrodden. Shahn was inspired by the likes of the photographer Walker Evans, the Mexican communist painter Diego Rivera and the French Realist painters. It was with Rivera that Shahn worked on the public mural at the Rockefeller Centre, which was to cause such controversy and had to be hidden from public view and eventually destroyed.

As a political activist Shahn became interested in newspaper photography. Photography was to act as his source material for some of his paintings and satires. During the 1930’s he was engaged in street photography himself, recording the lives of the working-class and immigrant populations and the hardship of the unemployed. Over the years Shahn, with his trusted 35mm Leica camera, built up a large collection of photographs which poignantly recorded the horror of unemployment and poverty during the Depression years.

My Daily Art Display featured painting is simply entitled Unemployment and was completed by Shahn in 1934. Shahn exhibited many paintings and photographs which highlighted the plight of the unemployed and homeless especially during the time of the Great Depression. Before us stand five men, all purported to be out of work. They look down on their luck. Their black eyes stare out at us. They stand upright trying to muster a certain amount of dignity despite the hopelessness of their situation. In some of their faces we see a look of desperation and fear of what their future may hold. The man in the right foreground has his arms folded across his chest. His look is more defiant almost questioning the viewer about what they intend to do about his plight. One man has a makeshift patch on his eye which makes him look even more vulnerable. I suppose Shahn and other Realist painters believed that through the moving nature of the subjects of their works it would help remind everybody of the horrors of life we could face and counsel us to avoid similar pitfalls in the future. Sadly, as in the case of war with its tragedies and horrors, we rarely learn by our mistakes and seem to always repeat our mistakes. There seems to be little we can do but shake our heads sympathetically as we view these Social Realist paintings and can only hope that we ourselves are never touched by similar tragedies.

Four Figures at a Table by le Nain Brothers

Le_Nain_brothers-Four_Figures_at_Table — Four Figures at a Table by the le Nain Brothers (c.1643)

If I was an artist, which sadly I am not, I would always be sure to sign my name somewhere on my canvas after I had completed the work. It would be a matter of pride. It would be a matter of recognition even if it had not been the greatest work I had ever painted. Today I am going to look at a painting which does not have an individual signature upon it. It is not that it hasn’t been signed. It is just that the signature is a kind of joint one, one signifying collaboration and it makes me wonder why that has been done. Is it that the painting is a collaboration of three artists who each painted part of the work? Was a decision made by the three painters that none of them should take more praise and recognition than the other two? It is very strange. My trio of painters are three brothers. They are the Le Nain brothers. Louis who was born in 1593, Antoine was born in 1599, although some art historians put his and Antoine’s birth date as “circa 1600”and the youngest, Mathieu, was born in 1607 and between them they created many amazing genre and religious scenes as well as portraits. Only 15 dated works survive, all executed between 1641 and 1648 and simply signed “Le Nain” but without a Christian name.

Their mother was Jeanne Prévost and their father was Isaac Le Nain who held the important position of Sergent Royal au Grenier à Sel in Laon. The family were moderately prosperous and around 1615 had purchased a farm and some vineyards. Historical records show that the le Nain brothers received their first artistic education from an “artiste étranger” which could mean that their tutor was from out of town or it could mean that he was a foreigner. Unfortunately any of their early work, which had been kept in Laon like the fate of a lot art, would have been destroyed in the lead up to and during the French Revolution.

Sometime around 1629 the le Nain brothers moved to Saint Germain-des-Prés, a suburb of Paris and set up a studio, which because of its location, was outside the control and regulations of the Paris Guild. Their business soon became very successful and they received many commissions, especially for their portraiture. Surviving records show that in 1629, Antoine was admitted as master in the Corporation of Painters in Saint Germain and there is mention of a large commission he received from the Bureau de la Ville de Paris. It is also recorded that Mathieu received many religious painting commissions and that in 1633, he was appointed painter to the city of Paris. However the records mention little about the third brother, Louis.

All three brothers attended the initial meeting of the Académie Royale de Peinture et de Sculpture held in Paris on March 1^st 1648 and were admitted to the Society as founder members. Sadly, two months later, both Antoine and Louis were dead. They died within two days of each other in May 1648, probably of some highly contagious disease. They are buried at the Saint Sulpice church in Paris, recently made famous for the church at the centre of the Da Vinci Code film.

There is another unusual fact about the brothers, or to be more precise, the surviving brother Mathieu. Within ten years of the death of his two siblings, Mathieu’s financial situation had vastly improved and his social standing in the community had also risen. Mathieu’s social pretensions also increased and soon he was referring to himself as Lord of La Jumelle, which was the name of his parents’ small family farm back in Laon. More was to follow as four years later Louis XIV awarded him the collar of the Order of St Michel, a form of knighthood. This honour was only usually bestowed on those of noble birth and not an unprivileged painter like Mathieu le Nain. So why did the king bestow this award on him? There is no definite answer to this although he had spent a lot of time as a military engineer which may have contributed to his “award for services in the armies of the King”. However what is more strange is that a year later the king took back the award but Mathieu refused to stop wearing the regalia and in 1666 he was imprisoned for the offence of sporting the symbols of office when he wasn’t entitled to. Historians have put forward the view that Mathieu had friends in “high places” which resulted in his initial award but he also had an equal number of enemies in the same high places and they persuaded the king to strip Mathieu of his honour.

Mathieu le Nain died in 1667 and was laid to rest with his brothers at the church of Saint Sulpice, Paris.

It has been difficult, if not impossible, to attribute certain works of art to certain brothers and the closest they have come is the belief that the small paintings on copper had been done by Antoine and the larger more austere peasant scenes have been done by Louis. However it is agreed that this is not a foolproof method of deciding which brother did which painting. It is also strange to note that because Mathieu lived on almost thirty years after his siblings died in 1648, any paintings with the le Nain signature after that date, could be attributed to him. However there has never been a painting signed “le Nain” later than 1647.

My Daily Art Display featured painting today is entitled Four Figures at a Table and was completed around 1643. This small (44cms x 33cms) oil on canvas work is housed in the National Gallery in London. The strong light emanates from the left of the scene and draws our attention to the darkness of the background in contrast to the pure white of the cloth and the cap worn by the mother. There is a feeling of serenity and composure about the setting. There is a sombre dignity to this painting of a peasant family at the meal table. Their clothes are of brownish-grey shades, which is in stark contrast to the white of the tablecloth. I have featured many Dutch and Flemish paintings depicting peasants and in most cases there is a certain amount of squalor and drunken revelry associated with the scene. Here it is quite different. Here before us the le Nain brothers have given us a scene of tranquil dignity. There is no sign of mockery with regards the characters depicted and there is no moralising symbolism. This is simply a painting which exudes the quiet composure of the less well off. Some art historians would have us believe that this is a portrayal of the Three Ages. The old woman, hand on table, with her careworn face and look of resignation in contrast to the young woman, maybe her daughter, who is seated to the left, clay jug in hand, with her fresh-looking face looking out at us questioningly and in the background the tiny girl staring out at us with wide-eyed fervour.

Strangely, when this painting was subjected to X-radiography in 1978 it was discovered that there was a bust-length portrait of a bearded man in a ruff wearing clothes which date back to the 1620’s, painted underneath the current work. The X-radiograph exposed the man’s face and details of his costume with exceptional clearness. The underlying portrait, seen when the canvas was turned through 90 degrees, was thickly painted in colours containing a high proportion of lead white. This colouration of the under-painting, in contrast to that of the final painting with its relatively thinly painted in colours containing little or no lead white, meant that it showed up strongly in the X-radiograph. Why the original work was painted over by the brothers is not known and will never be known but where there once was a fashionable and wealthy citizen looking out at us, he has been replaced by four, less wealthy people sat at their meal table.

The subject of their painting, peasants, was an unusual subject for French painters at the time, most of whom were fixated with mythological allegories, and the “heroic deeds” of the king. The paintings of peasant life by the three brothers have a realism unique in 17th-century French art. However poverty and how to treat the poor was intensely debated especially by the Catholic movement in Paris. It was much later, during the years preceding the French Revolution, that paintings of simple country life became popular. So which of the le Nain brothers painted this work? Or is this painting yet another collaboration by the three brothers? We will probably never know the answer to that question but we do know that it was well received by the French Academy in 1648.