Mask and Crustaceans (vive le Carème)

This still life is arranged on a wooden board supported on two square wooden boxes. It shows a large fish head, a knife with an ivory handle, a glass filled almost to the brim with white wine, a dark reddish-brown wine bottle, a herring lying on a white napkin, a blue water jug, a large red lobster in front of a white porcelain pot with blue decoration, and a large crab lying on its back. There is a small black mask dangling beneath the lobster. On the left is a figure with a white Pierrot face and a chef’s hat on his head, dressed in blue and red.

Belgian fishermen fished crustaceans from the North Sea in limited quantities. For many centuries, they were only eaten in coastal areas and were not yet considered delicacies. Above the still life on the table, we can just about make out the remains of an inscription that descends diagonally. Technical research has revealed that Ensor wrote the words Vive Carême (Long live lent) here, but appears to have had second thoughts and paint it out. Apart from the wine, this still life could be interpreted as a sort of parody on the meagre meal that Christians consume during the annual pre-Easter fast. This forty-day-long fast is often preceded by Carnival celebrations. Perhaps Ensor, who was undoubtedly an atheist, toyed with the idea of conceiving his painting as a humorous, and mildly grotesque representation of an important religious custom: after celebrating Carnival, Pierrot is confronted with the culinary expectations of the next forty days.

Masks from Carnival folklore first appear in Ensor’s work in the Temptation of Saint Anthony and the Ordeal of Saint Anthony, respectively a drawing and a painting, both of which date from 1887.

Over the course of 60 years, Ensor painted more than 230 still lifes, amounting to a third of his painted oeuvre. With the exception of a short break around 1885/88, he painted at least one still life a year. He considered the still life the most important genre and the touchstone of the true colourist.

Ensor first introduced masks as characters in his 1889 still life entitled Attributes of the Fine Arts (the painting is a reworking of a still life of circa 1883). He used similar masks looming into the pictorial space from the side and rear in his large 1896 still life, Masks and Vases. He also displayed masks alongside other objects in Attributes of the Fine Arts of 1883 and 1889. A masked character of the type that appears in this still life, looming over an arrangement of objects on a table, is not something that occurs very often in Ensor’s oeuvre. However, the blue water jug pops up several times in Ensor’s still lifes of the 1890s.

During various periods in his career, Ensor revealed a marked preference for using small, pre-prepared panels for his paintings and drawings. In 1886, he painted the Descent from the Cross in grisaille on a 60 cm x 47 cm panel. This was one of six images in his Visions series, Christ’s Haloes or the Sensitivities of Light: (6) the Peaceful and Serene. Ensor may have become acquainted with the qualities of pre-prepared panels as supports when seeking out the right materials for this pastiche of a late Medieval religious scene. He used panels of increasingly smaller size during the decade that followed.

Ensor undoubtedly chose the various motifs – the fish head, herring, lobster and crab – for their whimsical forms. He limited the illusion of volume and space by depicting his objects head-on at eye level, which serves to emphasise their quirky shapes. Black contours accentuate this further. His other paintings and drawings on small pre-prepared panels of the same period were dominated by ornamental arabesques. Technical research revealed that he overpainted a small green pot behind the crab. He must have done this to optimise the composition. It is unclear how he worked up the area between the two wooden boxes supporting the table top.

Mask and Crustaceans is painted on a hardwood panel approximately 6 mm thick. This panel, probably native oak, has a ring-porous structure with a horizontal grain. It has slight signs of damage, including a small hole at top right, possibly caused by incorrect handling. On the back, there is a layer of varnish, several labels and inscriptions and the remains of the brown paper that was used to secure the panel in its frame.

The white ground layer is predominantly lead-based with a small amount of calcium and its application is even and thin. There are minor signs of damage to the corners caused by friction from the frame. There is a detailed underdrawing in a dry medium (i.e. pencil, charcoal, etc.), visible on the infrared image. This can only be seen by the naked eye to the right the wine bottle. The underdrawing was followed carefully during painting. At some point there was a vase behind the crab on the right, but it was subsequently overpainted. There are two words – vive carême’ – in the background; they mean long live Lent. They are only just visible to the naked eye.
It is worth noting the absence of an underdrawing beneath the black mask under the table. This mask was added over a localised varnish layer and is now badly cracked.

The painting technique consists of a layer of opaque oil paint over a white ground layer with the paint covering the ground and underdrawing almost entirely. The objects on the table are mostly painted with short, streaky brushstrokes. The background is painted with diagonal brushstrokes, typical of Ensor's later still lifes. The objects are painted with a small, soft-bristled brush while the background is painted with a thicker, hard-bristled brush. The contours are traced in black paint which gives the objects clear outlines.

PXFR indicated the use lead white, vermilion, earth pigments and cobalt blue, although some pigments, including the black and purple paint, could not be identified.
The signature Ensor 91 appears at lower right a few centimetres above the lower edge and partly disappears on the infrared image. Ensor probably traced over the first two letters in a different pigment.
The most noticeable damage is to the blue paint layers. This includes craters in the paint layer, probably caused by metal soaps. This damage may well have occurred early in the history of the work.

There are two layers of varnish: one, a recent synthetic layer, and the other, a locally applied layer beneath the table which is probably a natural varnish like dammar.

The work was painted on a hardwood panel, probably native oak, with a ring-porous structure. The panel is approximately 6 mm thick. The grain is horizontal and is clearly visible on the x-ray. The panel is bevelled at the rear.

A small hole can be seen on the front of the support at top right. It is difficult to date this damage as this area is always hidden by the frame in photos. It was probably caused by incorrect handling. There is also damage to the lower left of the panel but with little material loss.
An insulation layer has been applied to the back of the panel; this is probably a varnish.

There are next to no traces of restoration to be seen. At the back of the panel, the remains of some brown paper around the edges testify to how the panel was secured in its frame. This was usual practice at the museum in the past.

There are the remains of nine labels from earlier exhibitions. There are also visible inscriptions, including the names of the museum, the work and the artist in black ink. The ink is located beneath the varnish layer and is badly smudged in some areas. There is also a white chalk inscription beneath the labels which therefore cannot be read.
Lastly, there is a stamp at lower right which is completely illegible.

The ground layer is white and uniform and its application is thin and even. Only a few local details are visible, namely in the crab and lobster. The pXRF measurements indicate that this ground layer is predominantly lead-based with a small amount of calcium. Calcium was often used as a filler in paint.

There is damage to the edges of the ground layer caused by friction from the frame. In particular, parts of the lower and left-side edges are missing. There is a large scratch and dent in the ground layer at the level of the signature which the artist overpainted; this is clearly visible on the raking light image. This demonstrates that the artist was not unduly concerned with having a perfectly smooth ground layer as the base of his painting.

Ensor made a very fine and detailed underdrawing for this picture in a dry medium, probably pencil, chalk or charcoal. This is clearly visible on the infrared image. He followed this underdrawing closely during painting with the exception of the vase to the rear right of the crab; although he painted this, he subsequently overpainted it.

The only area of the painting without an underdrawing is the area beneath the black mask under the table. This black mask cannot have been part of the composition sketch, and was only added after the background under the table had been painted and a varnish layer applied over it. Therefore, the mask was added over the varnish layer and has a lot of craquelure, presumably because the underlying varnish layer was not fully dry when the mask was painted.

In contrast to the underdrawings of The Skeleton Painter (1896, inv. 3112, KMSKA) and Man of Sorrows (1891, inv. 3320, KMSKA) this underdrawing is barely visible to the naked eye. Only to the right of the wine bottle can it be seen by the naked eye. The contours of the wine bottle were added with a rather unsteady hand, in several squiggly lines. The infrared image also shows Ensor’s multiple attempts to create the correct shape for the blue jug to the right of the wine bottle. Both the jug’s handle and spout have been altered several times.

When composing his underdrawing, Ensor continued the line of the table edge in full, extending it beneath the tablecloth. This shows that Ensor left no gaps in his preparatory drawing.

Ensor overpainted a striking detail in the background of the painting. The words vive carême, which mean ‘long live Lent’ appear there, probably in the underdrawing, or else in the paint layer. This is a playful nod to the abundance of provisions on table in the still life.

The work was painted in opaque oil paint over an even white ground layer. The paint covers the ground and underdrawing almost entirely; both are visible in a few small areas only.
The paintstrokes are short and streaky, in particular in the objects on the table, and in some areas the paint is heavily cross-hatched. Ensor painted the background with longer, diagonal brushstrokes which run from top left to bottom right; these are clearly visible in the raking light image and on the x-ray. Similar diagonal, streaky backgrounds can be found in several works from Ensor’s later period, including Still Life with Chinoiseries (1906, KMSKA, inv. 1959) and Flowers and Vegetables (1896, KMSKA, inv. 1858).

The paint was applied in somewhat pasty strokes and was probably not mixed on the painter’s palette but on the painting itself. The paint was applied wet on wet with various accent colours. The objects in this still life were painted with quite a fine, soft-bristled brush, while a thicker, stiff-bristled brush was used for the background. The contours of the objects were traced over at the end with black paint and a fine brush, giving them a hard, clear outline. In some places, the black paint applied was very liquid; elsewhere it was quite dry.

The area under the table is an exception in terms of technique. Here, the artist removed some of the wet paint with his fingers and possibly a rag.

At lower right, a few centimetres higher than the lower edge of the work: Ensor 91
Painted in red/brown paint with a little black paint in the first two letters.
The artist traced over part of this signature in a pigment that behaves differently under infrared and UV light to the rest. The entire signature can be seen under UV light, while only the first two letters are visible on the infrared image.

The pigments were analysed by Geert van der Snickt on the basis of nine pXRF measurements. The information below is drawn from his analysis.¹ The pXRF measurements indicate that this ground layer is predominantly lead-based with a small amount of calcium. Calcium was often used as paint filler and is often found in the ground of Ensor’s paintings. It was not possible to identify the black paint although calcium and small amounts of cobalt, iron and chromium were detected within in. PXRF does not give a clear indication of which paint layer the different signals come from. In all likelihood, a calcium-based ivory or bone black was used for the black of the mask in the lower part of the painting, while the signals from the other elements come from the paint layer below it.

Both iron, indicating an earth pigment, and mercury, indicating the use of vermilion, were detected in the red paint. Cobalt blue was detected in the blue paint and iron in the brown paint. This again suggests an earth pigment.

There are craters in several areas of the paint layer. These are presumed to result from the formation of metal soaps in the paint layer or ground layer. Paint is made from pigments, additives and binder. These materials sometimes interact with each other to form new compounds.² Metal soaps are produced by the reaction between a fatty acid from an oil binder and a metallic pigment. This reaction causes crater-like cavities filled with white, opaque or transparent material. These are called protrusions and are metal soap aggregates.³ Protrusions sometimes break through the paint layer; subsequent friction during cleaning can either flatten them or cause them to fall out of the paint layer. This causes paint loss and the creation of craters in the paint layer.

This phenomenon is most pronounced in the crab’s leg, but is present to a lesser extent elsewhere. The layers affected appear always to contain blue pigment. PXRF detected lead and calcium in these areas, possibly originating from the ground layer, and cobalt originating from the cobalt blue paint layer.

This damage appears to be already present on an image from 1922 (Le Roy, James Ensor). This damage is clearly visible in the crab’s leg and in the blue jug on images from 1951 from the KIK image bank. Therefore, we are confident that this phenomenon is old damage that manifested itself early in the history of the work.

In any event, it predates the application of the varnish layer covering the lacunae. Under the microscope, only one spot could be found where there was a lacuna not covered by the varnish. This indicates that the paint loss from this protrusion occurred after the varnish had been applied.

This painting has two different varnish layers. The more recent one covers the entire surface of the painting with the exception of the edges where the paint layer is protected by the frame. This is a layer of synthetic varnish and it is heavily cracked. It is definitely not original.

Additionally, there is a localised application of varnish under the table. This layer is unevenly applied with wrinkles from uneven drying and some pitting. It has a strong green fluorescence under UV light, which suggests it is a layer of natural varnish (dammar).
This layer is heavily soiled with incrustations of dust and grime. This layer was most likely applied by the artist himself, seeing that the mask was painted over it. There is a lot of craquelure in this mask, probably because it was painted over a layer that was not fully dry.

The more recent varnish layer also shows signs of discolouration when compared to the unvarnished edges of the painting.

Kunsthandel Breckpot; Alphonse Aerts Collection, Antwerp; donated to the museum by Marie-Louise and Henriëtte Aerts, 1924.

1983 conservation treatment by Jan Bender. KMSKA Archive, RES 0815/1958: Masks and Crustaceans is listed alongside several other paintings on an invoice. The treatment carried out to the paintings included: dusting - stabilisation - waxing with pure beeswax and, where necessary, applying new layers of varnish required for preservation.
1/9/1999 Ineke Labarque - internal treatment proposal reframing with felt in rebate and balsa wood as filling in rebate; securing with metal plates; installing a new hanging system and barcode; dusting panel front and back; watercolour retouche on damaged edges of painting; watercolour retouche on frame; consolidation of frame; painting in good condition, good adhesion of paint layer-preparation-support
5/05/2000 condition report: surface grime removed. General condition: good.
12/11/2003 condition report. General condition: good.
1/09/2003 condition report. General condition: good.

1892, Brussels, Palais des Beaux-Arts, Les XX. Brussels. Ninth annual exhibition, no. 7;
1921, Antwerp, Kunst van Heden. Exhibition 1921, no. 81;
1951, Antwerp, Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten Antwerpen, James Ensor. Retrospective, no. 95, image no. 80;
1955, Neremberg, Fränkische Galerie am Marientor, 50 Jahre Belgische Kunst. 1890-1940, no. 29;
1956, Antwerp, Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten Antwerpen, Henri De Braekeleer en zijn werk, no. 83;
1959, Krefeld, Museum Haus Lange, James Ensor (no catalogue);
1960, Charleroi, Palais des Beaux-Arts, Cercle Royal Artistique et Littéraire de Charleroi, XXXIVe Salon. Trente ans de peinture belge. 1890-1920, no. 12;
1961, Otterlo, Rijksmuseum Kröller-Müller, Ensor. 1860/1949, no. 48;
1961, Rotterdam, Museum Boymans Van Beuningen, Ensor. 1860/1949, no. 48;
1963, Basel, Kunsthalle, James Ensor, no. 62, image no. 62;
1963, Münster, Landesmuseum Münster, James Ensor, no. 62, image no. 62;
1969, Kaiserslautern, Pfalzgalerie, no. 51;
1972, Stuttgart, Württembergischer Kunstverein, Ensor. Ein Maler aus dem späten 19.Jahrhundert, no. 40, image p. 120;
1972, Kamakura, The Museum of Modern Art, James Ensor Exhibition, no. 20, image;
1972, Nagoya, Aichi Prefectural Museum of Art, James Ensor Exhibition, no. 20, image;
1972, Fukuoka, Prefectoral Museum of Art, James Ensor Exhibition, no. 20, image;
1972/ 1973, Kyoto, The National Museum of Modern Art, James Ensor Exhibition, no. 20, image;
1974, Bosque de Chapultepec, Museo de Arte Moderno, Instituto Nacional de Bellas Artes y Literatura, Tres Maestros de la imaginación. Ensor. Magritte. Delvaux. El Surrealismo en Belgica y su antecedente, no. 7, image;
1983/ 1984, Kobe, The Modern Museum of Art, James Ensor, no. 50, image p. 72;
1984, Kamakura, The Museum of Modern Art, James Ensor, no. 50, image p. 72;
1984, Saitama, The Museum of Modern Art, James Ensor, no. 50, image p. 72;
1984, Sendai, Miyagi Museum of Art, James Ensor, no. 50, image p. 72;
2000, Antwerp, Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten Antwerpen, Mo(u)vements. Kunstenaarsbewegingen in België van 1880 tot 2000;
2003, Saint Petersburg, Russian Ethnographic Museum, James Ensor (1860-1949). Antwerp presents a Painter, no. 17, image;
2004/ 2005, Salamanca, Caja Duero, James Ensor. De noche cartografiaba mis sueños. Obras en las colecciones del Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten de Amberes (KMSKA) y del Museum voor Schone Kunsten de Ostende (MSKO), no. 129, image p. 172;
2005, Seville, Caja San Fernando, James Ensor. De noche cartografiaba mis sueños. Obras en las colecciones del Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten de Amberes (KMSKA) y del Museum voor Schone Kunsten de Ostende (MSKO), no. 129, image p. 172;
2005, Tokyo, Tokyo Metropolitan Teien Art Museum, James Ensor: Japonisme to Modernism, no. 63, image p. 98;
2005, Tsu City, Mie Prefectural Art Museum, James Ensor: Japonisme to Modernism, no. 64, image p. 98;
2005, Fukushima, Fukushima Prefectural Museum of Art, James Ensor: Japonisme to Modernism, no. 64, image p. 98;
2005, Kitakyushu, Kitakyushu Municipal Museum of Art, James Ensor: Japonisme to Modernism, no. 64, image p. 98;
2005, Takamatsu, Takamatsu City Museum of Art, James Ensor: Japonisme to Modernism, no. 64, image p. 98;
2010, Mexico, Xochimilco, Museo Dolores Olmedo Patinõ, James Ensor, image p. 59;
2010/ 2011, Brussels, ING Culture center, Ensor unmasked, no. 225, image p. 203;
2011, The Hague, Gemeentemuseum, James Ensor. Universum van een fantast, image p. 127;
2012, Aichi, Toyota Municipal Museum of Art, James Ensor in Context. Ensor and the History of European Art from the Collection of the Royal Museum of Fine Arts Antwerp, no. 116, image p. 139;
2012, Ehime, The Museum of Art, James Ensor in Context. Ensor and the History of European Art from the Collection of the Royal Museum of Fine Arts Antwerp, no. 116, image p. 139;
2012, Tokyo, Seiji Togo Memorial Sompo Japan Museum of Art, James Ensor in Context. Ensor and the History of European Art from the Collection of the Royal Museum of Fine Arts Antwerp, no. 116, image p. 139;
2012/ 2013, Iwate, Iwate Museum of Art, James Ensor in Context. Ensor and the History of European Art from the Collection of the Royal Museum of Fine Arts Antwerp, no. 116, image p. 139;
2013, Okayama, The Okayama Prefectural Museum of Art, James Ensor in Context. Ensor and the History of European Art from the Collection of the Royal Museum of Fine Arts Antwerp, no. 116, image p. 139;
2013/ 2014, Ordrupgaard, James Ensor Fra Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten Antwerpen og schweiziske samlinger, no. 111, image;
2014, Basel, Kunstmuseum, The surprised masks: James Ensor from the Royal Museum of Fine Arts Antwerp and Swiss collections, no. 111, image;
2014, Los Angeles, The J. Paul Getty Museum, The Getty Center, The Scandalous Art of James Ensor (no catalogue);
2014/ 2015, Chicago, The Art Institute of Chicago, Temptation: The Demons of James Ensor (no catalogue);
2018/ 2020, Oostend, Mu.ZEE, Dreams of mother-of-pearl. The ENSOR collection of the KMSKA in Ostend, image p. 39;
2021, Mannheim, Kunsthalle, James Ensor, no. 67, image p. 136;
2021/ 2022, Munich, Kunsthalle München, Fantastically real. Belgian modern art from Ensor to Magritte, no. 50, image p. 112;
2023/2024, Oostend, Mu.ZEE, Rose, rose, rose à mes yeux. James Ensor and still life in Belgium, no. 42, image p. 91;