Rachel Ruysch

Flowers in a Glass Vase with a Tulip, 1716, Oil on canvas, 46.5 x 36 cm, Private Collection; L1208, On Loan to The National Gallery, London. © Private Collection.

Wealth and Transience

Commentary by Jonathan Anderson

Cite Share

If Rachel Ruysch’s Flowers fosters reflection on the marvellous ontological gratuity of these fleeting creatures—the gift that is their very being—it also elicits reflection on the social and economic backgrounds implicit in the gathering and staging of this bouquet. The variety of blooms in this vase attests to the extensive economic structures supporting their cultivation and commercialization. In Ruysch’s context, such a grouping of flowers connoted not only intense earthly pleasures but also immensely concentrated wealth and opulence.

Ruysch’s bouquet is crowned with a Semper Augustus tulip, one of the most expensive and highly coveted flowers in Dutch society. Indeed, during the ‘tulipmania’ of the 1630s a single bulb regularly sold for many times an average household’s annual income. The delicate red and white striping is produced from ‘broken’ bulbs, infected with an unpredictable virus that breaks the flower’s natural colour into spectacular patterns but weakens the bulb and hinders propagation—thus compounding demand for it. These tulips bloom for only about one week in springtime, making the play between luxury and fleetingness potent and riddled with questions of value.

Such imagery pulls ‘in the two spiritual directions at the heart of the Dutch predicament: between enjoying and celebrating an unprecedented wealth, while also questioning its true worth’ (Martin 2006: 563). The same cross-pressure pushes through the pages of Ecclesiastes, beginning in the prologue (1:8) and growing throughout (esp. 5:8–6:12).

Flowers also extends these questions of value to image-making itself. Ruysch rigorously observed each individual blossom, yet the overall pictorial ‘bouquet’ is highly fabricated, combining plant species that could never all have been in bloom (and certainly could not have been painted in such detail) at the same time. Ruysch seems temporally to ‘freeze’ each of them, preserving their lavishness from decay. But (in a self-reflexive move) she also builds vanitas into the logic of the image itself: everything pictured here, as well as the patron and the picturer herself, are now utterly gone, leaving only the image.

 

References

Martin, Wayne M. 2006. ‘Bubbles and Skull: The Phenomenology of Self-Consciousness in Dutch Still-Life Painting’, in A Companion to Phenomenology and Existentialism, Blackwell Companions to Philosophy, ed. by Hubert L. Dreyfus and Mark A. Wrathall (Chichester: John Wiley & Sons), pp. 559–84

See full exhibition for Ecclesiastes 1:1–12

Ecclesiastes 1:1–12

Revised Standard Version

1 The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem.

2Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher,

vanity of vanities! All is vanity.

3What does man gain by all the toil

at which he toils under the sun?

4A generation goes, and a generation comes,

but the earth remains for ever.

5The sun rises and the sun goes down,

and hastens to the place where it rises.

6The wind blows to the south,

and goes round to the north;

round and round goes the wind,

and on its circuits the wind returns.

7All streams run to the sea,

but the sea is not full;

to the place where the streams flow,

there they flow again.

8All things are full of weariness;

a man cannot utter it;

the eye is not satisfied with seeing,

nor the ear filled with hearing.

9What has been is what will be,

and what has been done is what will be done;

and there is nothing new under the sun.

10Is there a thing of which it is said,

“See, this is new”?

It has been already,

in the ages before us.

11There is no remembrance of former things,

nor will there be any remembrance

of later things yet to happen

among those who come after.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

12 I the Preacher have been king over Israel in Jerusalem.