1r:1
My dear Theo,
You will have received my letters,1 I’m answering yours, received this afternoon. In accordance with your request, I immediately sent Tersteeg 10 guilders, lent to me this week by His Hon. I wrote to you about C.M.’s order, this is what happened. C.M. appeared to have spoken to Tersteeg before he came to see me, at any rate began talking about things like ‘earning your bread’. My answer suddenly came to me, quickly and, I believe, correctly. Here’s what I said: earn my bread, what do you mean by that? – to earn one’s bread or to deserve one’s bread — not to deserve one’s bread, that is to say, to be unworthy of one’s bread, that’s what’s a crime, every honest man being worthy of his crust — but as for not earning it at all, while at the same time deserving it, oh, that! is a misfortune and A great misfortune. So, if you’re saying to me here and now: you’re unworthy of your bread, I understand that you’re insulting me, but if you’re making the moderately fair comment to me that I don’t always earn it because sometimes I’m short of it, so be it, but what’s the use of making that comment to me? It’s scarcely useful to me if it ends there.2 I recently tried, I continued, to explain this to Tersteeg, but either he’s hard of hearing in that ear or my explanation was a little confused because of the pain his words caused me.  1v:2
C.M. then kept quiet about earning one’s bread.
The storm threatened again because I happened to mention the name Degroux in connection with expression. C.M. suddenly asked, But surely you know there was something untoward about Degroux’s private life?3
You understand that there C.M. touched a tender spot and ventured on to thin ice. I really can’t let that be said about good père Degroux. So I replied, it has always seemed to me that when an artist shows his work to people he has the right to keep to himself the inner struggle of his own private life (which is directly and inextricably connected with the singular difficulties involved in producing a work of art) – unless he unburdens himself to a very intimate friend. It is, I say, indelicate for a critic to dig up something blameworthy from the private life of someone whose work is above criticism. Degroux is a master like Millet, like Gavarni.
C.M. had certainly not viewed Gavarni, at least, as a master.
(To anyone but C.M. I could have expressed myself more succinctly by saying: an artist’s work and his private life are like a woman in childbed and her child. You may look at her child, but you may not lift up her chemise to see if there are any bloodstains on it, that would be indelicate on the occasion of a maternity visit.)  1v:3
I was already beginning to fear that C.M. would hold it against me – but fortunately things took a turn for the better. As a diversion I got out my portfolio with smaller studies and sketches. At first he said nothing – until we came to a little drawing that I’d sketched once with Breitner, parading around at midnight – namely Paddemoes (that Jewish quarter near the Nieuwe Kerk), seen from Turfmarkt. I’d set to work on it again the next morning with the pen.4
Jules Bakhuyzen had also looked at the thing and recognized the spot immediately.
Could you make more of those townscapes for me? said C.M. Certainly, because I amuse myself with them sometimes when I’ve worked myself to the bone with the model – here’s Vleersteeg5 – the Geest district6 – Vischmarkt.7 Make 12 of those for me. Certainly, I said, but that means we’re doing a bit of business, so let’s talk straightaway about the price. My price for a drawing of that size, whether with pencil or pen, I’ve fixed for myself at a rijksdaalder8 – does that seem unreasonable to you?
No – he simply says – if they turn out well I’ll ask for another 12 of Amsterdam, provided you let me fix the price, then you’ll earn a bit more.
Well, it seems to me that that’s not a bad way to end a visit I had rather dreaded. Because I actually made an agreement with you, Theo, simply to tell you things like this in my own way, as it flows from my pen, I’m describing these little scenes to you just as they happen. Especially because in this way, even though you’re absent, you get a glimpse of my studio anyway.
I’m longing for you to come, because then I can talk to you more seriously about things concerning home, for instance.  1r:4
C.M.’s order is a bright spot! I’ll try to do those drawings carefully and put some spirit into them. And in any case you’ll see them, and I believe, old chap, that there’s more of such business. Buyers for 5-franc drawings can be found. With a bit of practice, I’ll make one every day and voilà, if they sell well, a crust of bread and a guilder a day for the model. The lovely season with long days is approaching, I’ll make the ‘soup ticket’, i.e. the bread and model drawing, either in the morning or the evening, and during the day I’ll study seriously from the model. C.M. is one buyer I found myself. Who knows whether you won’t succeed in turning up a second, and perhaps Tersteeg, when he’s recovered from his reproachful fury, a third, and then things can move along.
Tomorrow morning I’ll go and look for a subject for one of those for C.M.
I was at Pulchri this evening – Tableaux vivants and a kind of farce by Tony Offermans.9 I skipped the farce, because I can’t stand caricatures or the fug of an assembly hall, but I wanted to see the tableaux vivants, especially because one of them was done after an etching I gave Mauve as a present, Nicolaas Maes, the stable at Bethlehem.10 (The other was Rembrandt, Isaac blessing Jacob,11 with a superb Rebecca who watches to see if her ruse will succeed.) The Nicolaas Maes was very good in chiaroscuro and even colour – but in my opinion not worth tuppence as far as expression goes. The expression was definitely wrong. I saw it once in real life, not the birth of the baby Jesus, mind you, but the birth of a calf. And I still know exactly what its expression was like. There was a girl there, at night in that stable – in the Borinage – a brown peasant face with a white night-cap among other things, she had tears in her eyes of compassion for the poor cow when the animal went into labour and was having great difficulty. It was pure, holy, wonderfully beautiful like a Correggio, like a Millet, like an Israëls. Oh Theo – why don’t you let it all go hang and become a painter? Old chap – you could do it if you wanted to. I sometimes suspect you of keeping a great landscapist hidden inside you. It seems to me you’d be extremely good at drawing birch trunks and sketching the furrows of a field or stubble field, and painting snow and sky &c. Just between you and me. I shake your hand.

Ever yours,
Vincent

Here’s a list of Dutch paintings intended for the Salon.12
Israëls, an old man13 (if he weren’t a fisherman he’d be Tom Carlyle – the author of the French Revolution and Oliver Cromwell14 – for he definitely has that distinctive head of Carlyle), an old man sits in a hut by the fireplace in which a small piece of peat barely glows in the twilight. For it’s a dark hut the old man sits in, an old hut with a small window with a little white curtain. His dog, who’s grown old with him, sits beside him – those two old creatures look at each other, they look each other in the eye, the dog and the old man. And meanwhile the man takes his tobacco box out of his trousers pocket and he fills his pipe like that in the twilight. Nothing else – the twilight, the quiet, the loneliness of those two old creatures, man and dog, the familiarity of those two, that old man thinking – what’s he thinking about? – I don’t know – I can’t say – but it must be a deep, a long thought, something, though I don’t know what, surfacing from long ago, perhaps that’s what gives that expression to his face – a melancholy, satisfied, submissive expression, something that recalls that famous verse by Longfellow that always ends, But the thoughts of youth are long long thoughts.15 I’d like to see that painting by Israëls as a pendant to Millet’s Death and the woodcutter.16 I definitely know of no other painting than this Israëls that can stand up to Millet’s Death and the woodcutter, that one can see at the same time, on the other hand I know of no other painting that could stand up to this Israëls than Millet’s Death and the woodcutter, no other painting that one can see at the same time as this Israëls. Moreover, I feel in my mind an irresistible desire to bring together that painting by Israëls and that other by Millet and make them complement each other. It seems to me that what this Israëls lacks is having Millet’s Death and the woodcutter hanging close by, one at one end and the other at the other end of a long, narrow room, with no other painting in that gallery but those two and them alone.  2v:6
It’s a fabulous Israëls, I couldn’t really see anything else, it made such a deep impression on me. And yet, there was another Israëls, a small one with 5 or 6 figures, I think, a labourer’s family at table.17
There’s a Mauve, the large painting of the pink being dragged onto the dunes, it’s a masterpiece.
I’ve never heard a good sermon about resignation nor been able to imagine one, except for this painting by Mauve and the work of Millet. It is indeed resignation, but the true kind, not that of the clergymen. Those nags, those poor, sorry-looking nags, black, white, brown, they stand there, patiently submissive, willing, resigned, still. They’ll soon have to drag the heavy boat the last bit of the way, the job’s almost done. They stand still for a moment, they pant, they’re covered in sweat, but they don’t murmur, they don’t protest – they don’t complain – about anything. They’re long past that, years ago already. They’re resigned to living and working a while longer, but if they have to go to the knacker’s yard tomorrow, so be it, they’re ready for it. I find such a wonderfully elevated, practical, wordless philosophy in this painting, it seems to be saying,

to know how to suffer without complaining, that’s the only practical thing, that’s the great skill, the lesson to learn, the solution to life’s problem.18

It seems to me that this painting by Mauve would be one of those rare paintings which Millet would stand in front of for a long time, mumbling to himself, he has a good heart, that painter.19
There were other paintings – I must say I scarcely looked at them, I had enough with the above-mentioned.  2v:7
Listen Theo, wouldn’t you like to ponder whether there’s not a great landscapist in you? We should both of us quite simply become painters, we’d be able to make a living at it. For the figure one must be more of a draught ox or work-horse, more a man of hard labour. There’s a long long thought for you – old boy.  2r:8
Theo, remain something better than HGT. When I first got to know him, HGT was better than now, he’d been a bigwig only a short time and was newly married.20 Now he’s been caught, he’s trapped. He’ll grow more and more to have secret regrets about many, many things and will be forced to conceal them. The thing is, Theo, my brother, not to let your hands be tied by anyone, especially not with a gilt chain. I have to say that the chain tying Tersteeg is very beautiful to look at, but anyone who thinks about it doesn’t envy his position. Be that as it may, artist is healthier – pecuniary difficulties are the greatest worry, I repeat, you, and you as a landscape painter, would surmount them sooner than I, though I, too, shall pull through some day. But, if you push off immediately, you’ll overtake me, because the figure is complicated, takes longer. You’ll understand that I speak in all seriousness.

211

Br. 1990: 210 | CL: 181
From: Vincent van Gogh
To: Theo van Gogh
Date: The Hague, Saturday, 11 March 1882
more...

 
 
 
close
1. These were letters 208 and 209.
2. The fact that Van Gogh said this in French could mean that there was a model present; on a previous occasion Van Gogh had spoken to Tersteeg in English for the same reason (see letter 210).
3. A year after Degroux’s death Emile Leclerq described the artist as a solitary man who had turned his back on the world, a person with a ‘terrible melancholy’, a ‘condemned man’, ‘sad and profound’, who identified strongly with the deprived people he portrayed and whose depictions of hardship and abuse were distasteful to some people: ‘It was only dark emotions and feelings of quiet desperation that he rendered well; his inner self was visible everywhere. The cheerful note was present in his work only in the form of a misanthropic humour ... He was mercilessly tormented by a disease that was to overwhelm him, and a resigned melancholy was the essence of his character and his talent’. (Il n’a jamais bien rendu que les sensations sombres et les mouvements placidement désespérés: son moi se reflétait partout. La note gaie n’existe dans son oeuvre qu’à l’état d’humour misanthropique ... Inexorablement tenaillé par un mal qui devait le vaincre, une mélancolie résignée faisait le fond de son caractère et de son talent). See Emile Leclerq, Charles De Groux. Brussels 1871, espec. pp. 21 (quotation), 22, 28. Regarding Van Gogh’s discussion with Uncle Cor, see also letters 228 and 236.
a. Read: ‘nam’ (took, took out).
4. Street scene, ‘Paddemoes’ (F 918 / JH 111 [2359]).
[2359]
5. The drawing of Vleersteeg is not known.
6. Bakery in Noordstraat, ‘Geest’ (F 914 / JH 112 [2360]).
[2360]
7. The drawing of Vismarkt is not known.
8. A rijksdaalder is 2.50 guilders.
9. This took place on ‘Saturday, 11 March at half past seven in the evening (Hofje van Nieuwkoop)’, according to the announcement in Het Vaderland of 9 March 1882. The Dutch painter, musician, improviser and speaker Anton (Tony) Lodewijk George Offermans produced the farce presented that evening at the Hague artists’ society Pulchri. According to Gram, this was ‘a kind of revue, in which current events were criticized in the most entertaining way’, displaying ‘extraordinary humour and wit’. See Gram 1881, pp. 1-2; Van Gelder 1947, pp. 41-44, 53-54; and Van Kalmthout 1998, pp. 336-342.
[1686]
11. The makers of this tableau vivant could have based their idea on the drawing Isaac blessing Jacob (London, Lady Melchett), but the theme was more likely taken from a work by one of Rembrandt’s pupils. The subject was especially popular among artists in the circle of Rembrandt; indeed, some of their paintings were long thought to be by his hand. This is true, for instance, of Isaac, Jacob and Rebecca by Govert Flinck, after which Johannes Pieter de Frey made an engraving, calling it ‘after Rembrandt’. Van Gogh knew prints by De Frey after Rembrandt (see letter 54). See The drawings of Rembrandt. Complete edition in six volumes by Otto Benesch. Ed. Eva Benesch. New York 1973, pp. 43, 250, cat. no. 892; and Hidde Hoekstra, Rembrandt en de bijbel. Verhalen uit het Oude en Nieuwe Testament, door Rembrandt in schilderijen, etsen en tekeningen in beeld gebracht. Utrecht n.d., pp. 41-42.
12. Van Gogh saw the works of art mentioned below in Goupil’s ‘gallery of paintings’ in The Hague (cf. letter 212, l. 56).
13. Jozef Israëls, An old man – Fisher (Old friends) (Philadelphia Museum of Art, William L. Elkins Collection). Ill 192 [192]. See exhib. cat. Paris 1882, p. 120, cat. no. 1388 under the title Dialogue silencieux (Silent dialogue); exhib. cat. Groningen 1999, pp. 201-203, cat. no. 36.
[192]
14. Thomas Carlyle wrote The French Revolution (1837), a dramatized account, and supplied the 1845 edition of Oliver Cromwell’s letters and speeches with highly personal commentary. Cf. letter 132 and the illustrated edition: Carlyle 1846. It is uncertain whether Van Gogh already knew Carlyle’s portrait from The Graphic, which he mentions a year later, but it definitely bears some resemblance to the head of the man in Israëls’s painting (see letter 325, n. 33).
15. Taken from Longfellow’s poem ‘My lost youth’, in which the line quoted recurs at the end of every verse. See letter 126, n. 19.
16. Jean-François Millet’s Death and the woodcutter, 1859 (Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek). Ill. 283 [283]. It is possible that Van Gogh knew Pierre Edmond Alexandre Hédouin’s print La mort et le bûcheron after this work, which had appeared in the Gazette des Beaux-Arts 1859, p. 364. See exhib. cat. Paris 1998, pp. 106-114, cat. nos. 49-52.
[283]
17. It was previously assumed that Van Gogh is referring here to Jozef Israëls’s Peasant family at table, 1882 (Amsterdam, Van Gogh Museum) Ill. 188 [188]. This canvas measures 71 x 105 cm, however, and he speaks of ‘a small [one]’, so perhaps he is referring to one of the two variations of it, namely the version with six figures which was formerly in the Alexander Young Collection, 53.5 x 85 cm (present whereabouts unknown) or a smaller variation on panel, 48 x 69 cm (Sotheby’s London, 17 November 1985, no. 224). See exhib. cat. Amsterdam 1993, pp. 78-80, cat. no. 3 and Van Gogh Museum Journal 1995. Amsterdam and Zwolle 1995, p. 189. Cf. in this context the composition in the photogravure Peasants at table, published by Goupil (Amsterdam, Van Gogh Museum). Ill. 193 [193]. This print was made after the painting The frugal meal (Glasgow, Art Gallery and Museum, Kelvingrove); see also letter 257, n. 18. Silent dialogue was, incidentally, the only work by Israëls at the Salon.
[188] [193] [485]
b. Read: ‘straks’ (soon).
18. The source of this quotation has not been traced. Van Gogh cites it again in letters 750 and 784; cf. also letter 826.
19. This is not a literal quotation from Sensier, but its meaning fits in with Millet’s ‘programme’ as a painter.
20. This refers to the period in which Van Gogh worked as a clerk in The Hague, from August 1869 to May 1873. In 1867 Tersteeg became the manager of Goupil’s Hague branch, at which time he and his wife, Maria Magdalena Alida Pronk, went there to live.
c. Read: ‘is hij er in gelopen’ (he’s been caught).
d. Literally ‘regretfulness of heart’; probably to be understood as ‘remorse’.
e. Meaning: ‘meteen’ (immediately).