Susanne Meyer-Abich, A Catalogue Raisonné of the Works of Vilhelm Hammershøi in “Vilhelm Hammershøi: Das Malerische Werk", 1995, no. 121.

Litteratur: Poul Vad, “Hammershøi - Værk og liv”, 1988, mentioned and ill. p. 117.

Provenance: Sotheby's London, March 20 1985, no. 201. Kunsthallen auction 440, 1994 no. 58, ill. p. 57, where purchased by the present owner.

The present painting is a preparatory study for Vilhelm Hammershøi’s major masterpiece “Artemis” from 1893–94, which was acquired by the National Gallery of Denmark at the artist’s estate auction in 1916 (Inv. No. KMS3358).

Like “Job”, “Artemis” is one of Hammershøi’s most enigmatic works. And, as with “Job” and many of his other paintings, it caused a stir when first exhibited at Den Frie Udstilling (the Free Exhibition) in 1894. While some viewers were provoked by its ambiguity, others were deeply moved by its mysterious and complex beauty.

The art historian Emil Hannover (1864–1923) captured this striking duality in his review in Politiken on 4 May 1894 (in Danish):

“It is exceedingly difficult to explain why this painting, which seems to have been dreamt into being as pure beauty, exerts such a captivating emotional effect, even though the eye can only partly accept its form as truly beautiful…”

“Artemis” marks the first time the artist worked on such a monumental scale — the painting measures 193 × 251.5 cm — and the first time he depicted multiple figures at life size.

“…as if in one tremendous leap, he moved from the seated figure and the 'Egyptian pose' to the large, upright and walking figure; and for the first time, he painted a free composition from imagination, symbolic in character.” (Vad, p. 117).

With “Artemis”, Hammershøi makes a decisive leap from the seated figure — known, for example, from the painting “Job” from 1887 — to standing figures in a grand and complex composition at the beginning of the 1890s.

One could say that with his work “A Greek Relief, Louvre” from 1891 (Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek), Hammershøi was preparing the ground for “Artemis”. According to Vad, the same can be said of a sketch depicting a three-part figure composition, painted on the reverse of a landscape — probably in the early 1890s:

“The three figures in the central panel, which possess a quite different sculptural authority than the strange beings in the “Artemis” painting, appear as paraphrases of Greek sculpture from the Classical period… They evoke memories of works by Polykleitos or from the Temple of Zeus at Olympia. As for the two light and graceful female figures on the wings, they possess a kind of uninhibited, erotic radiance (among other things, their hair hangs loose and unbound), which one searches for in vain in “Artemis” — and indeed in Hammershøi’s work as a whole.” (Vad, p. 117).

It is in this context that Standing Woman should be understood. Vad mentions the work as one of two small studies previously regarded as direct preparatory studies for “Artemis”, but which are more likely related to the aforementioned tripartite sketch. In other words, it is not a direct study for “Artemis”, but rather an important step in the process that ultimately led to the masterpiece.

The woman is depicted with her right arm raised and standing in a frontal, upright pose that evokes associations with classical sculpture. The slender body, the loose, hanging hair, and the angular nudity create a subdued erotic presence, while still maintaining a sense of classical detachment. As in “Artemis”, Hammershøi was likely not working from a model, but instead formed the figure freely from his imagination.

Standing Woman demonstrates how Hammershøi experimented with composition and form as part of the process leading up to “Artemis”, and as such, it is a key work in understanding how his artistic development during this important, exploratory period in the late 1880s and early 1890s.