The Ubiquitous Paper
It's been a while since I've written. There are a lot of reasons for that, but one of them is because most of my spare mental energy was focused on finishing the final paper for my art history class. Now, many of you might think art history is boring, but I am here to tell you it is not. I've learned a lot about life and culture and present day society from looking at 400 year old paintings. Don't worry, I won't go into the crazy details of art (unless you want me to, in which case, you asked for it;) Instead I thought I'd share the paper that my brother has deemed "ubiquitous" since I've worked it into almost every conversation for weeks. Bringing it into this program did some funny things to the formatting, but it reads the same :)
The "Art" of Firefighting
Fire in the Old Town Hall (1690, Fig. 1)[1] rose from the ashes of Amsterdam’s Old City Hall, but it did not rise to fame or fortune; it was never considered a great work in and of itself, and it did not increase the number of commissions the artist received. Instead, it bolstered the career of its maker, artist and inventor, Jan van der Heyden. Fire in the Old Town Hall was an advertisement designed to sell the inventor’s latest inventions: an improved fire pump and the firehose.[2] The print was published on the opening pages of van der Heyden’s Firehose Book in 1690, the first firefighting manual ever printed (Fig. 2). Part one of the Firehose Book chronologically documents 81 major fires that impacted Amsterdam between 1651 and 1690.[3] Van der Heyden's descriptions include reports of the casualties and financial losses that resulted from the fires accompanied by 19 prints and diagrams comparing fires fought without the firehose to those fought exclusively with the new technology. Part two explains how to use the firehose and outlines van der Heyden’s detailed firefighting plan that assigns each citizen a specific task to fulfill in the event of a fire.[4] The Firehose Book was a crucial part of van der Heyden’s advertising effort, but it was Fire in the Old Town Hall that made the most compelling argument for why the citizens of Amsterdam needed to invest in van der Heyden’s firehose and implement his firefighting plan.
On the surface, Fire in the Old Town Hall simply compares two firefighting methods by contrasting visuals of the old firefighting method on the left side and van der Heyden’s firehose and pump on the right. The left side shows the burning city hall surrounded by crowds of people who, in frantic disarray, attempt to save the building from imminent collapse (Fig. 3). The right side depicts a small, organized group of citizens pumping water through a hose to the top of a nearby building, dousing the flames from a safe but effective distance (Fig. 4). However, van der Heyden’s print conveys a much deeper and more compelling message. Van der Heyden masterfully juxtaposes the fire that destroyed the city hall with the war that nearly destroyed his nation.[5] By comparing the aftermath of urban fires with the aftermath of war, he illustrates that the citizens of Amsterdam must change their firefighting methods or fires will be as destructive, chaotic, and harmful as war.[6]
If a strong city hall is synonymous with local and national independence, then a city hall engulfed in flames symbolizes the destruction of Dutch ideals.[13] Consequently, Fire in the Old Town Hall could remind viewers of the traumatic and devastating fire forty years earlier while simultaneously evoking emotions about the war that heralded the worst year in the history of the Dutch Republic—1672—known to the Dutch as the Rampjaar or “Year of Disaster.”[14] During that tragic year, Dutch independence was threatened, widespread havoc and ruin were unleashed, and life and livelihood were lost.
The Year of Disaster was a time of utter chaos for the Dutch. War erupted on three fronts when England, France, and the German Bishops of Münster and Cologne allied against the Republic.[15] War was not a novelty to the Dutch. Political relations were often strained between European countries, and war, much like fire, was an accepted hazard of Dutch life.[16] The Dutch had already survived an 80-year war for independence from Spain and two Anglo-Dutch wars with England by 1672, but this war was different. The attack heralded a third Anglo-Dutch war, but France’s involvement introduced a heightened threat.[17] As tensions mounted, the Dutch Republic succumbed to chaos and divided against itself. Citizens formed two political parties and accused each other of corruption and political intrigue.[18] Accusations became threats, which rapidly spiraled into riots against government officials.[19] Wholly disorganized, the Republic failed to provide adequate defense against the invading French army, which nearly captured the Dutch capital.[20] The Dutch almost certainly would have lost if not for their last line of defense: the waterline. The waterline was a system of canals, dykes, and sluices that could be opened to flood the lower lying regions of land between the Dutch and their enemies, making that land nearly impossible to traverse.[21] The subsequent flooding slowed the French army just enough for the Dutch to regroup, regain their land, and maintain their independence.[22]
Fire in the Old Town Hall illustrates the danger of relying on old, outdated systems. It subtly compares the inadequacies of the Dutch waterline to the old firefighting method, contrasting those failings with the success of the highly efficient firehose.[23] As the French marched on Amsterdam in the late summer of 1672, the Dutch employed the waterline, a defense system with a proven record of success.[24] However, that year the waterline nearly failed. A dry summer left little water in the canals and the land flooded slowly.[25] In some areas, the waterline was dangerously narrow and could have been crossed easily by the advancing army.[26] Ultimately, the waterline was successful, but the close call instilled great fear for the citizens of Amsterdam. Had the French breached the waterline, the Dutch Republic would have fallen.
The inadequacies of the old firefighting method represented in Fire in the Old Town Hall bear a striking similarity to the nearly failed waterline, showing that rampant fires are as dangerous for a city as war is for the Republic. In the print, a raging fire attacks the symbol of city strength while an army of citizens works frantically to contain the flames, desperately trying to prevent the fire from destroying their homes. Above their heads, flames billow wildly, filling the night sky with smoke. The fire is barely contained and threatens to spread to neighboring buildings and overtake the city (Fig. 5). Unfortunately, these firefighters are battling the fire the old-fashioned way—dousing the flames one bucket of water at a time.[27] This method is extremely slow, requires firefighters to be in close proximity to the flame, and is hampered severely if the water source is too far away.[28] It is not only unsafe but also highly inefficient since firefighters cannot reach critical regions of the fire. The “bucket brigade” is like the weakened waterline, in danger of failure at any moment. If the inefficient bucket bulwark had been breached, the citizens of Amsterdam would have had no way of preventing their city from burning to the ground.
Van der Heyden masterfully contrasts the futility and danger of the old firefighting method with the efficiency, safety, and security of his new firehose.[29] He shows the hose running from the canal in the lower right corner to the top of a nearby building where it sprays a powerful stream of water directly into the flames (Fig. 6). Keep in mind that van der Heyden’s inclusion of his firehose is not historically accurate because the firehose was not invented until 1672, twenty years after the fire in the Old City Hall (and notably, during the Year of Disaster). Van der Heyden admits a historical deviation by including the firehose, but states that he used it to enhance the contrast between the old method and the new.[30] The nearly unlimited range and mobility of the firehose stands in stark contrast to the bucket method. Water could be pumped with enough force to cover great distances, and since it could be pumped continually the fire had less ability to breach the defense.[31] Previously, firefighters had to manually run water from the canal close to the flames, but those operating van der Heyden’s firehose could fight the flames from relative safety.[32] The firehose also allowed firefighters to strategically direct water to areas of potential spread.[33] This greatly reduced the risk of the fire devastating the city.
The firehose was a better way of fighting fires but van der Heyden needed citizens to support the new firefighting method. Fire in the Old Town Hall communicates a powerful message about the importance of unity and order, both in war and firefighting. The year of disaster got its name from the war and from bloody riots that swept the country. Political leaders were brutally executed, city buildings were defaced, and property was destroyed.[34] The internal mayhem overshadowed the war and leaders focused their efforts on restoring local order rather than fighting national enemies.[35] In many ways, domestic chaos was more dangerous than international war because it slowed the military response, allowing the French to conquer more of the Republic than they would have otherwise.
Van der Heyden’s print conveys a powerful warning about the dangers of disunity. On the ground in front of City Hall writhes a confusing mass of people, horses, and equipment. Citizens are carrying buckets of water to the fire, climbing the walls of the building, wrangling ladders into position, or simply watching the building burn.[36] It’s obvious there are no designated leaders and no delegated tasks. Loyal citizens simply rush to the scene, choosing their own roles, but often getting in the way of others.[37] Ragtag lines of water carriers form only after valuable time has been lost.[38]
In comparison, the new method is a model for unity and coordination. The firehose is operated by a few organized volunteers who carry ladders, move hoses, and pump water with purpose.[39] As outlined in van der Heyden’s firefighting plan, certain responsibilities are delegated to each citizen beforehand so each knows their specific role. Regional firefighting commanders oversee the process and ensure that the fire is fought strategically and safely. Some citizens move ladders, others pump water, and others hold back crowds and maintain order so firefighters can work uninhibited.[40] This plan works if every citizen agrees to fulfill their designated task, drastically reducing response time and battling fires in an efficient, orderly way.
Fire in the Old Town Hall effectively compares the true costs of fire and illustrates what citizens could lose if they did not support van der Heyden’s system.[41] The Dutch Republic survived the year of disaster, but it was deeply affected by the war; by 1678, the Republic was on the brink of financial collapse.[42] Wars are costly, and the republic drained its financial reserve to fund the military effort. Worse, the war disrupted trade routes and factories that were the foundation of the Dutch economy.[43] As the recession progressed, citizens lost jobs and families were forced to move to new cities and countries or adjust their lifestyle to survive the ruined economy.[44] The year of disaster began an economic collapse that changed the Dutch Republic from a respected world power to a bankrupt nation whose glory days were long since passed.[45]
Fire in the Old Town Hall correlates the financial depression caused by war to the economic morass caused by fire. City Hall is on the brink of collapse. The building’s internal structure is beyond repair, a shell of its former glory. It took years to build the city hall, but just a day to destroy it. In the 17th century, urban fires were a major threat to cities, not because of the number of casualties (which were relatively few), but because of the financial and economic damage they caused.[46] Fires frequently destroyed homes and businesses, forcing those devastated by them to adjust to new social classes. This left the city physically destroyed and financially devastated. Further, when cities did not have the resources necessary to rebuild after a fire, officials petitioned neighboring cities for financial assistance, which was in most cases, granted.[47] Thus, urban fires had a far-reaching impact on the wealth and prosperity of the whole nation.
Amsterdam faced impending destruction twice in just twenty years and unless something changed, urban fires would continue to cause devastation similar to war. Van der Heyden’s firehose could not prevent fire, destruction, or financial loss, but fighting fires more effectively could reduce a fire’s physical and economic impact.[48] Fire in the Old Town Hall reminded citizens of recent fears, but it also offered a solution. The firehose could protect cities, calm chaos, and save lives if viewers agreed to financially support the firehose and physically support the firefighting plan.[49]
Acquiring support was more difficult than van der Heyden originally anticipated, despite his system’s superiority.[50] After Van der Heyden presented his invention to the city council in 1672, he was appointed to lead the city’s firefighting service and he quickly created a firefighting organization known as the Fire Brigade.[51] Although the city council granted him authority to outfit the city with pumps and hoses, they could not immediately fund the service or guarantee the support and cooperation of citizens.[52] Van der Heyden did what he could, calling upon community leaders to raise funds and lead firefighting efforts, but citizen support took time to develop, and until then, the firefighting plan could not operate at peak efficiency.[53]
The Firehose Book and its dramatic illustrations played a crucial role in helping van der Heyden accomplish his vision. Fire in the Old Town Hall persuaded Dutch citizens to increase taxes to fund the Fire Brigade and encouraged residents to support the firefighting plan. As a result, fire damage was reduced, order was restored, and the economy stabilized.[54] Unsurprisingly, the firehose’s success spread. Van der Heyden’s book and prints inspired visiting dignitaries to implement similar practices in their own countries.[55] By the early 1700’s, most European countries were utilizing van der Heyden’s firehose ideas and designs.[56]
As the fame and production of the firehose and pump increased, the need for advertisement decreased. The firehose was sold and distributed by virtue of its own merits and no longer needed the print to promote its efficiency and necessity. At the time of his death in 1712, Jan van der Heyden was a famous, wealthy inventor; his art was largely forgotten.[57] Over the years, Fire in the Old Town Hall became just another print in the Firehose Book. Today, van der Heyden’s name is generally unknown and his art is rather obscure, but his work lives on in the techniques and tools used in modern day firefighting. Although technological improvements and societal changes have altered some aspects of modern firefighting, firefighters still use elements of the strategies and drills van der Heyden outlined in his book, including his standard 50-foot firehose length.[58]
[1] Van der Heyden, Jan, The Old Town Hall on Fire, Amsterdam, 7 July 1652, 1690, plate etching, 440 mm., London, Royal Academy of Arts. *Alternate titles: Fire in the Old Town Hall and The Burning of the Old Town Hall.
[2] Helga Wagner, “Jan van der Heyden als Zeichner. Die Aeichnungen fur das Buch uber die ‘Slang-Brandspuiten’,” Jahrbuch der Berliner Museen 12 (1970): 118, doi:10.2307/4125669.
[3] Michelle V. Packer, “Rising from the Ashes: Fire Prevention as Social Transformation,” Dutch Crossing: Journal of Low Countries Studies 39, no. 2 (July 2015): 162, https://doi.org/10.1179/0309656415Z.00000000076.
[4] Packer, 175.
[5] Packer, 162.
[6] Packer, 162.
[7] Packer, 163.
[8] Lettie S. Multhauf, “The Light of Lamp-Lanterns: Street Lighting in 17th-Century Amsterdam,” Technology and Culture 26, no. 2 (April 1985): 240, http://www.jstor.com/stable/3104342.
[9] Multhauf, 240.
[10] Multhauf, 240.
[11] Packer, 161-64.
[12] Packer, 161-64.
[13] Packer, 161-64.
[14] Packer, 162.
[15] Helmer J. Helmers and Geert H. Janssen, “Introduction: Understanding the Dutch Golden Age,” in The Cambridge Companion to The Dutch Golden Age, ed. Helmer J. Helmers and Geert H. Janssen (Cambridge: University of Cambridge, 2018), 8.
[16] Judith Pollmann, “The Cult and Memory of War and Violence,” in The Cambridge Companion to The Dutch Golden Age, ed. Helmer J. Helmers and Geert H. Janssen (Cambridge: University of Cambridge, 2018), 87.
[17] Pollmann, 104.
[18] Michel Reinders, “Burghers, Orangists and ‘Good Government’: Popular Political Opposition during the ‘Year of Disaster’ 1672 in Dutch Pamphlets,” Seventeenth Century 23, no. 2 (2008): 315, doi:10.1080/0268117X.2008.10555616.
[19] Reinders, 315.
[20] Maarten Prak, The Dutch Republic in the Seventeenth Century (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 51.
[21] Prak, 52.
[22] J. Leslie Price, “Water and Land,” in The Cambridge Companion to The Dutch Golden Age, ed. Helmer J. Helmers and Geert H. Janssen (Cambridge: University of Cambridge, 2018), 44.
[23] Wagner, 117.
[24] Price, 44.
[25] Prak, 52.
[26] Price, 45.
[27] Annie Eriksen, “A Brief History of Fire Hose,” Rawhide Fire Hose LLC, n.d., https://rawhidefirehose.com/blog/brief-history-fire-hose/.
[28] Peter C. Sutton, Jan van der Heyden: 1637-1712 (Connecticut: Yale University Press, 2006), 78.
[29] Wagner, 117.
[30] Packer, 161.
[31] Jonathan Israel, “A Golden Age: Innovation in Dutch Cities, 1648-1720,” History Today 45, no. 3 (1995): 16, https://go-gale-com.ezproxy.uvu.edu/ps/i.do?p=ITOF&u=utahvalley&id=GALE%7CA16637329&v=2.1&it=r&sid=ITOF&asid=a63fda73.
[32] Israel, 16.
[33] Eriksen.
[34] Prak, 54.
[35] Reinders, 316.
[36] Packer, 173. & Wagner, 113.
[37] Sutton, 76.
[38] Sutton, 76.
[39] Wagner, 117.
[40] Packer, 175.
[41] Packer, 164.
[42] Helmers and Janssen, 8.
[43] Packer, 162.
[44] Packer, 162
[45] Prak, 60.
[46] Marie L. Allemeyer, “Profane Hazard or Divine Judgement? Coping with Urban Fire in the 17th Century,” Historical Social Research 32, no. 3 (2007): 146, https://www-jstor-org.ezproxy.uvu.edu/stable/20762227.
[47] Allemeyer, 151-52.
[48] Packer, 180.
[49] Packer, 162.
[50] Packer, 177.
[51] Israel, 16. & Wagner, 118.
[52] Israel, 16.
[53] Israel, 16.
[54] Packer, 177.
[55] Israel, 16.
[56] Israel, 16.
[57] Amy Walsh, “Ravishing Prospects: the subtleties of Jan van der Heyden’s topographical paintings are elucidated in an exhibition that opened last month at the Rijksmuseum,” Apollo 165, no. 541 (2007): 112, http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.uvu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsbro&AN=edsbro.A160712020&site=eds-live.
[58] Eriksen. & Packer, 177.
Comments
Post a Comment