In “The Space of Gender in Seventeenth-Century Dutch Painting,” Elizabeth Honig discuses the role women play as, subjects, buyers, and even the artists. Unlike most cultures at this time, art made by women, even amateurs, could be appreciated depending on the woman’s schooling and social status. Women were in charge of the domestic homes, which allowed them to be part of viewing artwork that was shown. Honig states that the production, showing, and content of the works reveal how paintings mixed with the Dutch domestic life style in a way that was different from the rest of Europe.
Although amateur artwork is usually disregarded and seen as worthless, Honig proposes that this is not the case when it comes to seventeenth-century Dutch art. She …show more content…
This is why the European gaze is usually considered to be male, but in Dutch art, this is not the case. The Reformed church did not support public art so the majority of paintings were bought for a private viewing. In Dutch culture, taking care of the home was the woman’s job and this included buying art. Because of this they were often the viewer and the buyer of the work so artist started to appeal to the woman’s ideals, and gaze. Even though Dutch painting was probably primarily seen through a feminine gaze, Honig believes that art historians deny this possibility and continue to look at these works through a male …show more content…
Honig described the women of this time as having more of a say than their Italian counterparts. Dutch women were able to paint works to sell, and even sell them themselves at the marketplace. Many works show them bargaining in this extension of the home. Dutch painting at this time was made by women for women to buy. Since the church didn’t promote many public works, art was bought for the privacy of the home. This allowed women to be acknowledged by the artists and even become part of the gaze that was originally thought to only be male. Honig makes the reader question that when viewing a Dutch seventeenth-century painting, was the beholder meant to be female or
Although amateur artwork is usually disregarded and seen as worthless, Honig proposes that this is not the case when it comes to seventeenth-century Dutch art. She …show more content…
This is why the European gaze is usually considered to be male, but in Dutch art, this is not the case. The Reformed church did not support public art so the majority of paintings were bought for a private viewing. In Dutch culture, taking care of the home was the woman’s job and this included buying art. Because of this they were often the viewer and the buyer of the work so artist started to appeal to the woman’s ideals, and gaze. Even though Dutch painting was probably primarily seen through a feminine gaze, Honig believes that art historians deny this possibility and continue to look at these works through a male …show more content…
Honig described the women of this time as having more of a say than their Italian counterparts. Dutch women were able to paint works to sell, and even sell them themselves at the marketplace. Many works show them bargaining in this extension of the home. Dutch painting at this time was made by women for women to buy. Since the church didn’t promote many public works, art was bought for the privacy of the home. This allowed women to be acknowledged by the artists and even become part of the gaze that was originally thought to only be male. Honig makes the reader question that when viewing a Dutch seventeenth-century painting, was the beholder meant to be female or