Rembrandt on the Block
Reams have been written about Rembrandt's self-portraits. All very interesting, increases appreciation, but I have noticed one point of view is missing. An artist's opinion. Let me plug that hole, because, if there are few art historian-artists, there are fewer artists who deign to express an opinion on other artists, much less an Old Master such as Rembrandt.
Rembrandt wrote nothing about his own art as far as I know. It would be beguiling to discover how he thought about the redefinition of humanism in art, to which his oeuvre is testament, or if he was aware of the epic transformation taking place on his easel. His minor subject of interest seems to have been risky investments.
This is not intended as commentary on his priorities. The facts tell us that money and finances were important to Rembrandt. As a pertinent commentary the same can't be said about all artists. Rembrandt was, first-of-all, a businessman -and a busy one at that. He probably would have found speculation about art theory idle talk, an instance of the pervading Protestant intolerance for vanity.
Despite good intentions, Rembrandt's financial circumstances seem not to have been sustainable. He died as poor as the vast majority of artists who care nothing for finance. What the surviving documents regarding his finances tell us about the disposition of his property, bankruptcy, the executor(s) of his estate, and so on, is that he took such matters seriously, both he, and those named in his portrait painting business.
It therefore takes an artist (such as yours, humbly) to broach the subject, because anyone else would be pegged for a Philistine. The fact is that finance, costs, expenses, debts, etc., influence an artist's work, influence Art. What an artist finds crass is strident publicity over blockbuster auction prices, gains which cannot possibly benefit the artist, himself. More hushed, expert opinion by art historians, i.e., appraisal, is, at the other extreme, not objective enough.
It has been pointed out by diligent art historians that there are many confirmed Rembrandt self-portraits, while very few client portraits are known to be attributed to Rembrandt. Certainly there were, and there must still exist, many client portraits by Rembrandt. His clients were satisfied. That they are unknown is irrelevant to the question, which is, why did Rembrandt paint so many self-portraits?
The insight an artist's testimony can offer is an inside look at what both he, and more taciturn artists, do in practice. Ask any artist. An artist will paint a self-portrait as proof of his art, as proof of competence (at least), of quality. The prospective buyer is invited to compare a self-portrait side-by-side with the subject—the artist himself—and judge for himself of his ability. It is paradoxical that the subject of a portrait never sees his own portrait side-by-side with himself. The comparison offered by the portrait painter gives the prospective client confidence in the client's own prospective portrait's likeness.
The artist self-portrait serves the practical purpose of a sample, a selling promotion. The prospective buyer would have arrived at Rembrandt's studio prepared to pay his price. It would, then, have been a yes-or-no proposition, but considered as a commission, a speculative venture by the commissioner. Portrait buyers have been known to change their minds, to decline to take delivery of a portrait, if dissatisfied.
It would be nice to know everyone whom Rembrandt painted, high and low, as the rising mercantile class commissioned many portraits, up to 50,000, by one estimate. Astute art collectors were known to purchase Rembrandt self-portraits on their artistic merit alone. That would have been a transaction of the simple sales type, as-is, not a commission. Although he never said as much, as we have no written reflections on his craft by him, Rembrandt must have marveled at the oddity of collectors buying his visage.
That was before art history became a self-conscious endeavor, and it is at this point that an artist's opinion becomes gratuitous. I, as any artist will, humbly defer to the higher-level erudition of the peer-reviewed art historian, or the committed connoisseur, or museum archivist, all preeminently qualified art theorists.
The insight is that Rembrandt's lifelong preoccupation with self-portraiture created a new aesthetic, one of which he, himself, did not take particular notice. His portraits sold like hot cakes. That's all Rembrandt knew. It is an aesthetic that every artist who aspires to fine technique (including Rembrandt) seeks to achieve in his own work.
One-of-a-kind works of art can be viewed at: https://www.saatchiart.com/account/artworks/1840403