Genuine or copy? Opinions have changed.
The commanding male portrait shown here (of 1629), previously thought to be a copy, is now
being offered for sale at the European Art Fair at Maastricht, Netherlands, as the work of
Frans Hals, one of the most remarkable Dutch portrait painters of the 17th century.
It represents the Haarlem burgomaster Pieter Jacobsz Olycan. Hals specialized in portraits
of men whose civic importance shows unmistakably in their stance and facial expression.
Although much of his work may have been lost - it wasn't until the mid-19th century that
the power and deft skill of his work was appreciatively reassessed after years of
obscurity - what remains are more paintings of men than women.
In the case of Olycan, a portrait of his wife that has been paired with it is considered
of lesser quality and is not attributed to Hals. The linking of the two paintings may have
discouraged experts from recognizing the male portrait as a Hals. But there were other
misleading features that persuaded even Seymour Slive, author of Hals's catalogue
raisonn in 1974, to call it a copy.
The picture was bought at a London auction in 1967 by art dealer Leonard Koetser of
Zurich, Switzerland. He was convinced it was by Hals. But it has taken years of research
and restoration, most recently in 2005, before a consensus was reached. Experts at the
Frans Hals Museum in Haarlem, Claus Grimm, Pieter Biesboer,and Martin Bijl, restorer and
expert on 17th-century Dutch painting, were all involved.
Mr. Koetser's son, David, also an art dealer, now has it for sale with a price tag of
$12.5 million.
Technical evidence shows that the portrait was not originally the bust it now is. it was
cut down from a three-quarter-length figure. The change was made in Hals's studio. The
suggestion of a sleeve and hand, deftly brushed in by Hals but then "finished"
by a less-skilful assistant, was added to establish its new composition. That was not the
only change. Olycan's costume was altered to reflect his new appointment as burgomaster.
He was given a fur-trimmed cloak, painted by Hals.
When Biesboer examined the painting in 2003, he agreed with Grimm, who gave his opinion at
the end of the 20th century that here was a painting of notable quality marred by several
weak passages.An ear had been incorrectly retouched.A restorer had mysteriously tousled
the hair.Such flaws were corrected by fine retouchings in the 2005 restoration.
Today the painting has the appearance of a typical Frans Hals - a fresh, direct record, a
deceptively effortless presentation of a character's powerful presence.
in https://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0315/p18s03-hfes.html
By Christopher Andreae . 3/23/2006