Page:Hofstede de Groot catalogue raisonné, Volume 1, 1908.djvu/497

 iv PIETER DE HOOCH 473 his was one more of those frequent cases in which the influence of a talented comrade on a painter has been greater than that of the master under whom they both studied. For the themes of many of his pictures Ochtervelt owes an unmistakable debt to P. de Hooch. In such cases, however, his vistas are less complex ; he only paints views from an interior through an open house-door into the open air. His favourite subject is a conversation between a pedlar and a housewife. It is remarkable that Ochtervelt imitates only the pictures of De Hooch's middle and later periods. An imitator of weak character, whose identity was only revealed some fifteen years since, was P. Janssens E., as he signs himself PIETER-JANS- SENS ELINGA, to give what was probably his full name. He was a native of Amsterdam, and probably became acquainted with De Hooch during his residence in that city. The influence of Emanuel de Witte, as well as of De Hooch, is also noticeable in Janssens' pictures and is confirmed by tradi- tion. Janssens imitated other masters as slavishly as he imitated De Hooch for instance, KalfF in his still-life pieces. He painted again and again an interior, with windows closed at the bottom and open at the top in the back wall, flooded with such strong sunshine that the patches of reflected light on the whitewashed wall and the floor are themselves luminous enough to cast shadows on the objects in the room. Either there are no figures, or all or nearly all of them have their backs to the spectator. Still some of Janssens' pictures come so near to their model that they are admired and sold at high prices as masterpieces of De Hooch's. It is noteworthy that even to-day, in the Munich Pinakothek, Janssens' " Woman Reading " is catalogued as a De Hooch. CORNELIS DE MAN (1621-1706), again, was an artist who borrowed his ideas instead of originating them. A painter of Delft, he came by turns under the influence of the interiors by Pieter de Hooch (see the picture in the Wassermann collection, Paris), and by Vermeer (see the picture in the Porges collection, Paris), and of the church-interiors by Emanuel de Witte. He also painted single portraits and portrait-groups, as well as rustic merry-makings in the style of J. M. Molenaer if, at least, the pictures with dissimilar signatures in the museums at The Hague and at Rotterdam may be safely assigned to him. ISAAC KOEDIJK, who is often classed with the followers of Vermeer and De Hooch, really belonged to the school of Gerard Dou, as has been pointed out in a former section. On the other hand, a definite connection may have existed between ESAIAS BOURSSE (1631-1672) and P. de Hooch, although Boursse had been painting in Amsterdam for years before De Hooch settled there. The resemblance between them is only superficial and slight ; E. Boursse's talent never rose above mediocrity, and is far inferior to that of L. Boursse, a probably older man and an incomparably better painter. It is curious that L. Boursse's pictures in the Wallace collection and elsewhere should still be described by the most eminent critics in spite of the unmistakable signature as the work of Esaias.