Christian Wilhelm Ernst Dietricy (aka Christian Wilhelm Ernst Dietrich) (1712–74)
“Landscape in the manner of Ruisdael”, 1745
Etching on laid paper
Size: (sheet) 17.8 x 23.4 cm; (plate) 10.5 x 16.7 cm; (image borderline) 10.1 x 16.5 cm
Signed and dated in the plate at upper left
State i (of at least ii as the BM holds a state ii impression)
Linck 1846 259.159.I (JF Linck 1846, “Monographie der von C. W. E. Dietrich radierten, geschabten und in Holz geschnittenen malerischen Vorstellungen”, Berlin)
The British Museum offers the following description of this print:
Landscape with figures on a path to right; houses amongst trees and a church spire to left; first state. 1745 Etching” (http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=1471592&partId=1&people=127014&peoA=127014-2-60&page=3)
Condition: a faultless exceptionally rare, first state impression with generous margins (varying from 3 to 4 cm) in near pristine condition. There is a remnant of mounting tape and pencil notations about the impression (verso).
I am selling this exceptionally rare landscape etching executed in the style of Jacob van Ruisdael (1629–82) for the total cost of AU$246 (currently US$185.44/EUR173.97/GBP152.57 at the time of posting this listing) including postage and handling to anywhere in the world.
If you are interested in purchasing this delicately rendered and skilfully balanced landscape composition that is full of light and air, please contact me (firstname.lastname@example.org) and I will send you a PayPal invoice to make the payment easy.
This print has been sold
Very few landscape etchings of the 18th century are as delicately executed as this remarkably beautiful study. Although it is executed in the style of one of the greatest of all landscape artists—the legendary Ruisdael—the print should be viewed as much more than a pastiche. Certainly the image displays key attributes of Ruisdael’s drawing style (e.g. his use of tightly curved small strokes; his seemingly random, but very meaningfully placed, stipples; his leaning to juxtapose densely worked areas with broad untouched areas), but Dietericy has added a dimension to the portrayed scene that is more about his own vision than that of Ruisdael: a different way of portraying distance.
Arguably, Ruisdael’s approach to representing spatial depth tends to be about framing glimpses of distance through landscape features such as trees—the notion of a translucent landscape. By contrast, Dietericy’s approach is all about concrete solids arranged with precision to provide visual “stepping-stones” into the distance.
In short, Dietericy may have appropriated many of Ruisdael’s stylistic traits but these idiosyncrasies have been subverted to his own very personal way of looking.
Post a Comment
Please let me know your thoughts, advice about inaccuracies (including typos) and additional information that you would like to add to any post.