Every time I open a humanities book to read about the old masters and their canvases, I am unruffled as I see it as a way to rediscover the achievements of the past. But more than that, an encounter with them is larger than an experience; it resembles a love affair, filled with beautiful surprises. It’s less about determining whether a painting is genuine or assessing its expression and more about the overall impression it leaves on you. The process of finding and discovering this expression is far more complicated than it looks: the preoccupation with some of the great painters like Rembrandt and Frans Hals forces us, again and again, to consider what paintings can achieve and what they can offer to us. Sometimes, these offerings are values of life, a psychological emphasis, but other times they are inspirational or a catalyst to reality. More importantly, they set a standard to reflect upon the ideas of the past and present. One of the intriguing portraits, which challenged the viewers repeatedly for conflicting responses is Malle Babbe by Frans Hals. Today, in this article, I will discuss how close this work is to us and what qualities it possesses, along with its entire history.
Among many paintings of the earlier centuries that have literally aged, Frans Hals’ paintings give a freshness to the subjects with a different kind of luminosity of their colors. All his paintings have a careful handling of colors, but at most, they have a psychological aspect alongside the qualities of humanism. The material and spiritual freshness of the artist’s oeuvre shows him as an independent and keen observer of the human condition, making his paintings one of a kind.
Malle Babbe: An Introduction.
The painting came into light when Thore-Burger first published its account in 1869, and the mature Courbet paid homage to Hals in the same year at Munich’s International Exposition. Since then, the painting Malle Babbe has been universally recognized as the finest example of Hals’ power of characterization, his mastery of expressing spontaneous movement and emotion with a fury of his suggestive brushwork.
When we look at the painting, we see a woman’s unfamiliar face with an owl standing nearby, but that’s not it. We see madness in the behavior with spontaneity in the emotions of the subject with a great depth of symbolism. The identification of this subject is based on a seventeenth or possibly eighteenth-century inscription on a piece of the painting’s old stretcher, which reads,
‘Malle Babbe van Haerlem… Fr[a]ns Hals.’
Thore-Burger published a facsimile of this inscription, but in the 1867 sale catalog, he erroneously wrote ‘Hille Bobbe’ instead of Malle Babbe, which left the incorrect title in the older literature.
It was Irene van Thiel-Stroman who wrote a catalog much later that not only gave the chronology of Hals’ life that is correlated with pertinent cultural and political events of his epoch but also corrected the name to Malle Babbe. She analyzed several documents and corrected the errors that were made in the earlier transcriptions.
Did You Know?
Frans Hals was rediscovered by the painters of the period between Gustave Courbet and Lovis Corinth. They did this by imitating his works and colors. Eugene Fromentin, an artist, in fact, wrote the first account of Frans Hals.
About the Subject.
The probable name Malle Babbe was certainly not an invention, as a real person was living by this name. In 1653, Haarlem’s Leper-House authorities stated that they contributed 65 guilders toward Malle Babbe’s support when she was confined to the city’s house of correction. Although this is the only thing known about her, she was most commonly called the ‘Witch of Haarlem.’ So when you see the wild and animal-like movement with a demonic laugh in this canvas, it is not because the subject consumed alcohol but because it was controlled by more potent and mysterious forces that can challenge any man’s faith and his rational powers. The only other artist who conjured this savage side of human nature was Francesco Goya.
Did You Know?
Frans Hals is famous for handling pigments and rhythmic brushstrokes that are wedded to form accentuating psychologically accurate portraits.
A Closer Look.
Malle Babbe exemplifies the remarkable skill the artist had maintained in capturing fleeting expressions. It also illustrates the extent to which he had embraced the use of black-on-flesh tones. Hals abandoned the use of positive colors here, and there is a use of grayish, dusky, and black shadows. Frans Hals sets the ruthless reality of Malle Babbe through saber-like black slashes on the background at the side of her head. It is significant to note that he uses medium size brushwork here.
The flesh of the subject has black shadows, and it looks old and bloodless – as if there is no need for forgiveness. There is tension and breathless concentration on the face of the subject as if Frans took a look that resembles jugglery. One of the noteworthy aspects of this painting is that Hals rarely painted an animal, but he composed a dog in the 1627 Doelen picture, a woodpecker in the tree at the back of the portrait of himself and his wife; and an owl, hardly a bird in the Malle Babbe. Hence, the symbolism of this owl can not be left behind. I am going to tell you about it in later sections of the article.
Pro Fact
Frans Hals captures an impression in this painting by increasing the values of subdued, clayey-gray color, carefully juxtaposed. He masterfully employed a semi-dry painting technique, skillfully crafting striking contrasts with richly layered brushstrokes that dance across the canvas in graceful motifs.
The Painting Technique of Malle Babbe.
At first, Hals made an awkward gesture and cut two horizontal lines through the freshly painted collar of the subject with his palette edge or possibly two brushstrokes. Now, look closer to the bright edges of the collar which Hals contrasted with the semi-opaque dark brown area of the jacket. There is a relaxed brushwork here and use of impasto but the impasto is done hurriedly. The brilliance of this section is how the artist achieved precise gradation of lightness here. Then, Hals used his gliding brush to create varied values of color. This coloring and gradation are so accurate that they show the depth in the costumes and facial features of Malle Babbe. The most important point is that he did this by using strikingly angular accents. This technique was first mentioned in Arnold Houbraken’s De Groote Schouburgh. Hence, Hals first used grey and darker colors over the canvas and then strikingly applied contrasting colors.
Did You Know?
Hals marked some scratches in this painting so that these colorful areas can be fast-dried. These scratches even go deep till the dark brown ground color. Then the artist patched this depth with the brightest reflections and darker shades.
Next, a crucial step that the artist used in this painting was achieving tonal delicacies. It was done by movement of the brush instead of intermixing the colors. During the application of paint, the movement of the brush is highlighted by the brush edge and the tracks left between individual bristles. At the same time, the paint at the edge of the brush, where pressure is applied more firmly, adheres to the surface or blends with adjacent layers of paint. This dual effect cannot be achieved with either liquid paint or hard paste; it requires a 50:50 mixture of water and fat-soluble binders. This technique helps in preserving the colors for a long time.
Symbolism and Frans Hals.
One of the questions that arises after looking at the picture is whether the painting really has the popular moralizing and allegorical tradition of Hals’ time, or is it just a study of a fleeting moment in the life of the shrieking old clone. Does it really have any additional significance?
One simple explanation can be the symbolism of the pet owl in this composition. Though an owl was most commonly attributed as a symbol of wisdom, it does personify several ideas. In medieval times, in the texts of Renaissance, and Baroque, owl symbolism was used frequently. Here, by owl, Hals depicts the power of evil over man as the owl prefers darkness over light. It is the most appropriate symbol of the demonic force that appears to possess the ‘Witch of Haarlem.’ The owl sitting over the shoulder of Malle Babbe is associated with the powers of darkness, as this idea was expounded in medieval encyclopedias and bestiaries. Furthermore, an owl is also known to personify foolishness, stupidity, and ignobility, as per a voluminous treatise of 1556, Hieroglyphic. This similar use of owl over the shoulder has been used in Rembrandt’s Flute-Player. Lastly, the owl also represents drunkenness, as there’s a proverb that says drunk as an owl. So, the painting might show a resemblance to a medieval context.
The Artwork Interchange, Drama, and Tease.
When Courbet painted his version of Malle Babbe, he framed this version at the Munich International Exposition to pay homage to the artist. He boldly scratched into the wet paint of his replica in the year 1645 and interconnected the artist’s monogram to the right of Malle Babbe’s arm. This led to confusion of the original painting composed by Hals for some time. However, as Thore Burger described the painting, he cited that there was no inscription in the original painting that dismissed Courbet’s invention later. In 1869, Lutzow, who knew both the copied- original and Courbet’s work, stated that Courbet’s version misses the painting’s light tone and severely dampens the glimmers of its colors, further making the facial expression less lively. This disappointing quality of Courbet’s copy suggests the story that the French realist managed to substitute his copy for the original when it was exhibited in Munich in 1869, and for some reason, its trick of fooling the public was successful. It was only later that it was determined that the original copy was different.
This trickery was perhaps a teasing allusion and a homage to Courbet’s friend Thore Burger by Gustave Courbet.
Other Versions of Malle Babbe.
There are several other portraits of Malle Babbe. One of them is at the Metropolitan Museum, which comes closest to the standard set by the Berlin picture, but when it was seen next to the latter, it betrayed another hand. The painting was different from the original version as there was less spontaneity in this. There was a sharp turn of Malle Babbe’s head that created a strong counter-movement to the emphatic diagonal thrust of the design that changed the direction of the energetic brushwork on her collar, cap, sleeve, and apron. Then, the tenseness in the Metropolitan version of the painting has slackened considerably. The separate strokes do not effectively convey the dominant rhythm established by the figure’s movement, and we lack the decisive accents that provide a convincing roundness to the forms, even when they are suggested with just a single touch of light or dark paint.
The next version of the painting is from Louis Berhard Coclers, who etched the Metropolitan version. There is a couplet on his version that reads,
‘Babel of Harlem
To you, your own is a falcon. O Babel! I am glad of it.
Play with an illusion. You are not alone.”
(Babel van Harlem
uw uil schijne u een valk, o Babel! ‘k ben te vreen
Speel met een valsche pop, gij zijt het nit alleen.)
Another version of this painting is at Lille, which was the most accepted version of Malle Babbe. Only a technical analysis concluded that it employs pigments that were not present at Frans Hals’ time. The picture is in a New York’s private collection. Besides, the painting is neither a portrait of some famous model nor belongs to Hals.
The next piece is “Malle Babbe and a Smoker,” found in Dresden. This artwork thoughtfully blends elements from New York’s “Malle Babbe” with the well-loved portrayal of a smoker at the Louvre, which many appreciate for its connection to Adriaen Brouwer or Joos van Craesbeeck. Moreover, it includes a fish still-life that evokes the beautifully intricate works of Abraham van Beyeren, inviting viewers to reflect on the rich storytelling and artistry behind each element.
Another version shows Malle Babbe as a fishwife, giving her a slovenly and merry-drinking companion. The artist who painted it based part of his work on the Berlin picture. He probably took Drinker from a picture by Pieter van Roestraten, who was Hals apprentice for five years, or by Petrus Staverenus, a genre painter active in Haarlem around 1635.
Lastly, a recent effort to rival the peerless original artwork of Frans Hals was made by the Dutch forger Han van Meegeren, who was best known for his Vermeer fakes. His Malle Babbe was signed falsely on the right with Hals’ connected monogram. However, it was seized in his studio in 1945 and was deposited in the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, in 1947. Though he made a nearly perfect copy of the original work, there was not a single trace of psychological penetration that was normally found in Hals’ works.
Quick Question.
What do you think Malle Babbe is about?
Final Words.
When I looked at the painting for the first time, I saw a few demonic faces over the background in the dark black shadows. They have eyes, and they look over the viewer. I believe these black shadows are indications of demonic possessions on Malle Babbe, the subject of the painting. With the extraordinary symbolism of the owl, this darkness is only enlarged. Certainly, the artist saw the dark side of mankind and through the portraiture of this character, he portrayed it excellently.
Resources.
- Frans Hals: The Complete Work by Claus Grimm.
- Frans Hals by Seymour Slive.
- Featured Image: Malle Babbe by Frans Hals; Frans Hals, Public Domain, via Wikimedia Commons.
Related Reads.
