렘브란트 판 레인의 〈니콜라스 튈프 박사의 해부학 수업〉에 표현된 직업 의식 (The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp by Rembrandt van Rijn and the social status of the medical doctors in 17th century Holland)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국미술사교육학회
· 수록지 정보 : 미술사학 / 21권 / 155 ~ 181페이지
· 저자명 : 이한순

초록

This paper attempts to interpret the social consciousness of the medical doctors represented in The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp by Rembrandt van Rijn.
Being representative of Dutch group portraits with the anatomy lesson of surgeons, this painting has been, over the years, the object of art historical study from various angles. So we have not just the basic information such as on the identification of the sitters or on the circumstances in which the group portrait was commissioned. Discussions have also indeed been made in detail on the formal as well as on the iconographical aspects of the picture. This study, then, intends to make a contribution to the understanding of the group portrait by Rembrandt by examining it in the sociological perspective.
To begin with, Dr. Nicolaes Tulp was not a surgeon, as is generally known in the art historical literature, but a physician. These two medical professions had different social positions in the 17th century. The surgeons were occupationally active under guild regulations and thus obtained the educational training from master surgeons. The physicians, on the other hand, were academicians who acquired the doctor degree at the university so that their profession was classified as a liberal one. This difference naturally caused a disparity in social standing, though both were, not like today, relatively low.
In the group portrait with Dr. Tulp, it would seem that this consciousness of social status among medical doctors had been implicated by means of visual motifs. Dr. Tulp, for instance, appears on the right of the picture plane obviously separated from the rest seven figures on the left. He is the only one that wears a hat, the symbol of dignity. Besides these, he is depicted in distinction through light effect and elaborate treatment of details.
The vertical relationship between Dr. Tulp and the surgeons could be particularly expressed by the various attitudes of the surgeons who seem to be absorbed in Dr. Tulp’s explanation as to the anatomy of the arm. Their relation is namely a hierarchical one between teacher and students.
The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Tulp should also have been intended to deliver the social aspects which the two groups each wished to show to the world. As for Dr. Tulp, it would have meant a great deal to him to appear as praelector in anatomy of the surgeons’ guild, for he could eternalize himself in his high social status with this group portrait. He could present himself in this way not as a general practitioner but as a scholarly man with a great knowledge in anatomy and with an outstanding position in society. The surgeons, on the other hand, could have stressed their intellectual side by showing themselves focused in the theory of anatomy and not as engaged in practice involving dirty works. This all would mean that the real social position of the medical practitioners had been in fact low in the 17th century unlike their image displayed in the group portrait by Rembrandt.

영어초록

This paper attempts to interpret the social consciousness of the medical doctors represented in The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp by Rembrandt van Rijn.
Being representative of Dutch group portraits with the anatomy lesson of surgeons, this painting has been, over the years, the object of art historical study from various angles. So we have not just the basic information such as on the identification of the sitters or on the circumstances in which the group portrait was commissioned. Discussions have also indeed been made in detail on the formal as well as on the iconographical aspects of the picture. This study, then, intends to make a contribution to the understanding of the group portrait by Rembrandt by examining it in the sociological perspective.
To begin with, Dr. Nicolaes Tulp was not a surgeon, as is generally known in the art historical literature, but a physician. These two medical professions had different social positions in the 17th century. The surgeons were occupationally active under guild regulations and thus obtained the educational training from master surgeons. The physicians, on the other hand, were academicians who acquired the doctor degree at the university so that their profession was classified as a liberal one. This difference naturally caused a disparity in social standing, though both were, not like today, relatively low.
In the group portrait with Dr. Tulp, it would seem that this consciousness of social status among medical doctors had been implicated by means of visual motifs. Dr. Tulp, for instance, appears on the right of the picture plane obviously separated from the rest seven figures on the left. He is the only one that wears a hat, the symbol of dignity. Besides these, he is depicted in distinction through light effect and elaborate treatment of details.
The vertical relationship between Dr. Tulp and the surgeons could be particularly expressed by the various attitudes of the surgeons who seem to be absorbed in Dr. Tulp’s explanation as to the anatomy of the arm. Their relation is namely a hierarchical one between teacher and students.
The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Tulp should also have been intended to deliver the social aspects which the two groups each wished to show to the world. As for Dr. Tulp, it would have meant a great deal to him to appear as praelector in anatomy of the surgeons’ guild, for he could eternalize himself in his high social status with this group portrait. He could present himself in this way not as a general practitioner but as a scholarly man with a great knowledge in anatomy and with an outstanding position in society. The surgeons, on the other hand, could have stressed their intellectual side by showing themselves focused in the theory of anatomy and not as engaged in practice involving dirty works. This all would mean that the real social position of the medical practitioners had been in fact low in the 17th century unlike their image displayed in the group portrait by Rembrandt.

참고자료

· 없음