De Schilderijen

In augustus 1888 begon Vincent van Gogh een serie werken te schilderen die hem, zoals Dr. Jan Hulsker opmerkt "misschien meer dan welk van zijn schilderijen dan ook over de hele wereld beroemd hebben gemaakt. Het zijn vaak de enige werken waar hij mee wordt geïdentificeerd.”¹ We hebben het hier uiteraard over de serie zonnebloemen.

De zonnebloemen stonden Van Gogh voor ogen als een serie en hij werkte er hard aan in afwachting van de komst van zijn vriend Paul Gauguin naar Arles. In een brief aan Emile Bernard van 18 augustus 1888 schreef Vincent : "Ik denk om mijn atelier te decoreren met een half dozijn schilderijen "zonnebloemen", een decoratie waarin het ruwe of gebroken chroom geel naar voren zal springen op verschillende achtergronden--blauw, van bleek- en lichtgroen tot koningsblauw . . ." (B15).

Vincent was oorspronkelijk van plan een dozijn werken op te hangen in het Gele Huis, dat hij en Gauguin als atelier zouden gebruiken: "In de hoop in een eigen atelier met Gauguin te gaan samenwonen zou ik voor het atelier een wandversiering willen maken. Niets dan grote zonnebloemen…Enfin, als ik dat plan uitvoer, zullen er een dozijn panelen zijn. Het geheel zal dus een symfonie in blauw en geel worden. Ik werk er alle ochtenden aan van zonsopgang af, want de bloemen verwelken snel en het gaat erom het geheel in één ruk te maken." (526). Helaas mocht Vincent’s race tegen de klok niet baten en op 18 augustus had hij slechts vier schilderijen van zonnebloemen voltooid, inclusief het werk dat hierboven staat afgebeeld.

De brieven aan zijn broer Theo en aan anderen zijn voor ons ongetwijfeld de belangrijkste bron die de ontwikkeling en totstandkoming van Van Gogh’s werken kunnen laten zien. Op de voor hem zo eigen en gedetailleerde manier en met grote nauwkeurigheid beschrijft Van Gogh het ontstaan van de eerste drie werken van zijn serie: "Ik heb drie doeken op stapel: 1e. drie grote bloemen in een groene vaas, lichte achtergrond (doek van 15) [A]; 2e. drie bloemen, een bloem die zaad gevormd heeft en ontbladerd is en een knop op koningsblauwe achtergrond (doek van 25); 3e. twaalf bloemen en knoppen in een gele vaas (doek van 30) [B]. Het laatste is dus licht op licht en zal, hoop ik, het beste worden. [C]" (526). Enkele dagen later schrijft Vincent in Brief 527: "Ik ben nu bezig met een vierde schilderij van zonnebloemen. Dit vierde is een boeket van veertien bloemen en heeft een gele achtergrond, net zoals een stilleven met kweeën en citroenen dat ik indertijd heb gemaakt. [D]”

De vier hierboven genoemde werken staan gemerkt van “A” tot “D” en komen overeen met de werken hieronder in de tabel:

F 459 "Tournesols" Sunflowers on royal blue background (6 blooms).

Oil / wood, probably canvas first, later mounted on wood and increased to 98 x 69 cm.

F 459 shows a grass-green vase with three sunflowers on an azure background on a table of light violet, arranged like F 453, now however enriched with further blooms, that are draped in the foreground around the foot of the vase: this painting is definitely the second one described in letter 526 "sunflowers" with "3 flowers one flower gone to seed and leafless & one bud on a royal blue background size 25 canvas." (Compare with F 453).

Admittedly there is always a reservation to this identification, Van Gogh's statement "size 25 canvas" is in contradiction to the recorded data for F 459. De la Faille didn't see any possible way to solve this contradiction. Hulsker was inclined to believe that the size statement was an error of Van Gogh's. Roskill (in agreement with A. Tellegen, formerly RKD) reached the same conclusion, that F 459 is identical to the second version in letter 526, but was no longer in the condition described there: He suspected an addition at the picture's top edge, meaning he thought that a retouch had been done when it was later mounted on wood; however Roskill abstained from elaborating on his description of his observations and on a overall evaluation of the results.

The recorded measurements for F 459 are without parallel in Van Gogh's Oeuvre and are very strange – there is no such size in the French standard formats, which Van Gogh had almost exclusively used since 1886; it is close to a "size 30 canvas" or a "size 40" in "paysage" format (92:65 as opposed to 100:73). If F 459 (98:69) was this size, however, Van Gogh only rarely used it, and in Arles he only used the smaller "Paysage"-format, (the "size 25 canvas"), otherwise without exception (!)for larger pictures he used the "size 30 canvas" in the Figure size.

Admittedly the recorded measurements would become more plausible if wood actually had been used as the bearer material. However, this would stand completely in contradiction to Van Gogh's statements in letter 526 – and would prove unique, although Van Gogh seems to have occasionally painted on wood in his early career: De la Faille lists barely 20 works in a smaller format on this bearer material, admittedly these statements are to be treated with caution: possibly they are on cardboard, which Van Gogh definitely did use, and concerning any montages on wood; the last and only works on wood from Van Gogh's French period were done in Paris (F 335 & F 336, both painted on oval teabox covers).

In order to bring Van Gogh's remark with letter 526 in agreement, Roskill's supposition consequently appears justified. F 459 was mounted on wood later by the artist himself in a unique case, (this certainly has occasionally happened to Van Gogh's works, usually only posthumously however, for "conservation" reasons), and the revision postulated by Roskill points in this direction. Roskill assumed that this would have brought about more significant extensive changes in the original conception.

However, under the circumstance, six sunflowers are depicted on F 459, but only five are spoken of in letter 526. One of the unmentioned "boutons" in the foreground, i.e. either the middle or the right bud) is assumed to have been inserted into the composition later.

Overwork marks on F 459 – still visible as a retouch even on photographs, on the basis of the characteristic refraction of the pure color values of deep blue and yellow to half tones with wet on wet corrections - show in particular (a) at the tops of the petals on the right upward reaching sunflower and (b) in the area of the three draped blooms on the table. In both these areas there is a bulge or break in the color layers, visible on photographs as a dark shadow line – both horizontal, approximately parallel to the edges: (a) the upper shadow line runs across the entire picture width, cutting through the petals of the right upper sunflower. Roskill has interpreted this strip above the bulge line as an additional piece. (b) the lower bulge is only halfway between the left and middle sunflower in the foreground, and becomes overlapped by the lower petal points of this left bloom. If this indicates the original picture edge, this line would trim the sunflowers only in a minor way in the two corners, namely in the petals; therefore this sub edge caused only minor changes to the composition and therefore was done to – in view of the retouch in this area – accommodate the additional foreground motifs that Letter 526 did not mention.

The distance between the two colour bulges, in other words between the upper and lower edges of the original composition, presumably measured 81-83 cm, which would correspond to the "size 25 canvas" measurement in the above format (81:65 cm).

However, this theory is to be taken only as an assumption, since (a) it is not known whether the recorded dimensions were the true edge measurements of F459, which must be assumed for this conclusion and (b) none of the available reproductions of the picture shows the actual edges, therefore each illustration could have an unknown amount trimmed from the left, right, lower and probably the upper edges.

If one puts the recorded dimensions of 98:69 cm uncorrected into relationship with those of the available reproductions (assuming the dimensions of the reproduction are correct), they result in distance values between 83,5 and 85,5 cm. If one takes the trimmings at the edges into account as well as the deviations from traditional data and reproductions from the relationship, then the values would be between 81,5 and 84 cm. Since the distance between the bulges is inversely proportional to the size of the conjectural edge trimmings (the larger the distance between the bulges is assumed to be, then – mathematically – the less the reproductions are allowed to be trimmed), the photographs should not be trimmed to a greater distance than approximately 84 cm: the distance therefore must be smaller. For the ideal distance (81 cm) edge trimmings of the original calculate to approximately 2-5 cm. This should approximate the actual circumstances.

With this situation, we accept Van Gogh's words in letter 526 and will have to agree that originally F 459 was conceived as a composition with five sunflowers on a "size 25 canvas", before the canvas was enlarged and the sixth bud was inserted into the composition ( for which the canvas was added to on the stretcher, although perhaps it was not enough to attain the desired enlargement of the format, so that it became necessary to mount it on wood at the same time?)

This revision must have been done , as there are indications of light wet on wet retouching, before the oils were dry on the canvas, therefore soon after the announcement of the picture (letter 526), maybe in context of the "Aureole" (letter 527): the version with royal blue background F 459, introduced in letter 526 in which it was conceived, was therefore already finished and changed to its final setting by the end of the week of 19th to 26th August 1888.

From the beginning assigned to the Décoration of the yellow house, these are "suns on royal-blue background" and cited shortly afterwards expressly as "one of the decorations" (letter 527): F 459 proves to be the reference point indeed for the two "size 30 canvas" F 454 and F 456. The enlargement of the format was done with the intent of adjusting the picture so that they were both "size 30 canvases", a plausible purpose.

Nevertheless, in a later mention of "sunflowers" (letter 534f) F 459 is no longer included. This should show that Van Gogh in the end gave up on the second sunflower picture, which had caused him some effort, to use for his Décoration.

(Translation courtesy of Bob Harrison.)