De kok

De kok

<strong id="docs-internal-guid-eb27d475-7fff-94e8-9eaa-7c87d15ad1e5" style="font-weight:normal;"><span style="font-size:10pt;text-decoration:none;font-family:'Helvetica Neue';font-variant:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap;font-weight:400;color:#000000;font-style:normal;background-color:transparent;">Though this painting certainly belongs to the tradition of&nbsp; kitchen scene's of Pieter Aertsen and Joachim Beuckelaer, there are some important differences. First, Bloemaert did not paint a religious scene in the background, and second, he did not paint raw meat. The moralizing or erotic nature of kitchen scene's has often been pointed out. Despite the lack of a religious element, the cook, as a corpulent &lsquo;life-giver&rsquo;, might still provide a deeper, more vulgar meaning to the painting. However, it is quite unlikely that a genre painting such as this one would belong to such a moralizing tradition. <span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial, sans-serif;">A cook stands in front of a wooden counter, holding a spit with a roast chicken. On the left, we can see part of the fireplace, while on the right two unplucked birds hang from the ceiling. According to a cookbook published in 1683, chicken was the tastiest of all poultry. When roasted it was &lsquo;extremely tender and easy to digest, whether with rice or otherwise&rsquo;.</span></span></strong>

Though this painting certainly belongs to the tradition of  kitchen scene's of Pieter Aertsen and Joachim Beuckelaer, there are some important differences. First, Bloemaert did not paint a religious scene in the background, and second, he did not paint raw meat. The moralizing or erotic nature of kitchen scene's has often been pointed out. Despite the lack of a religious element, the cook, as a corpulent ‘life-giver’, might still provide a deeper, more vulgar meaning to the painting. However, it is quite unlikely that a genre painting such as this one would belong to such a moralizing tradition. A cook stands in front of a wooden counter, holding a spit with a roast chicken. On the left, we can see part of the fireplace, while on the right two unplucked birds hang from the ceiling. According to a cookbook published in 1683, chicken was the tastiest of all poultry. When roasted it was ‘extremely tender and easy to digest, whether with rice or otherwise’.

This object is now not on display in the museum

Title

De kok

Artist

Hendrick Bloemaert (Utrecht 1601 ca. - 1672 Utrecht)

Dating

1634

Material and technique

olieverf op doek

Object number

5461

Object type

schilderij

Acquisition

schenking 1926

Dimensions

hoogte 114.8 cm

breedte 90 cm

hoogte (met lijst) 137.2 cm

breedte (met lijst) 112 cm

Inscriptions and markings

  • signatuur en datering l.b. (met verf): [resten van een signatuur].1634.

More of the same motif

genre, kok

Documentation

  • Abraham Bloemaert and his sons, Marcel G. Roethlisberger, Marten Jan Bok, (Doornspijk, 1993), dl. I, cat. nr. H54; dl. II, afb. H57

  • Caravaggio und die Niederländer, Arthur von Schneider, (Marburg an der Lahn, 1933), p. 57, 131

  • Catalogus van schilderijen der Utrechtsche School, (Utrecht, 1941), cat. nr. 20

Exhibitions

  • De gezonde stad , Centraal Museum, Utrecht, 2022

  • De kunst van het lachen - Humor in de Gouden Eeuw, Frans Hals Museum, Haarlem, 2017 - 2018

  • Utrechters dromen van Rome, Centraal Museum, Utrecht, 2008 - 2012

Persistent url

To refer to this object please use the following persistent URL:

https://hdl.handle.net/21.12130/collect.65CF881B-F6A6-4081-B037-AA74C90AA185

Questions?

Do you have a remark or extra information on this object? Please let us know!