Portrait of Titus 1653

Editor: So, here we have Rembrandt’s "Portrait of Titus" from 1653, rendered in oil. The rich browns and shadowy background create such a feeling of intimacy. I’m struck by how the artist captured such youth, innocence and a slight uncertainty in his face. What can you tell me about its reception at the time? Curator: The public role of portraiture during the Dutch Golden Age was deeply connected to emerging notions of citizenship, and, of course, commerce. How do you see that intersecting in this specific painting, considering that Titus was Rembrandt's son? Editor: I guess I hadn't really considered that. He seems posed in a manner meant to suggest someone older, more established, wearing something that resembles official dress... Was this common? Almost symbolic of upward mobility? Curator: Exactly. Portraiture was about constructing identity as much as it was about likeness. This painting has a foot in two different worlds. On one hand, the portrayal mimics the formal visual language displayed by powerful Dutch citizens in portraiture meant to commemorate power. On the other, that goal is juxtaposed against the painting being a private representation of his young son. The costume may have also simply been what Rembrandt had available in his studio; it wasn’t unusual for artists to have clothing on hand. Did these circumstances make the painting subversive? Editor: That’s interesting! It's almost a negotiation between private life and this desire for public image, painted in such a familial way. I wonder what other societal tensions were reflected through artistic works? Curator: Plenty, but that’s a discussion for another time. I didn't fully appreciate the connection between private meaning and public perception in the piece. Editor: Right, food for thought. Thank you for this conversation!