'If Michelangelo can afford a wash and brush up, we're going to do the same for Rembrandt.'
               
               
	 
	While the conservation scientists concentrate on David, the museum cleaners decide Rembrandt deserves
	 equally a spit-and-polish.
	 
	The cleaning of Michelangelo David in the Galleria dell’Accademia, Florence was the subject of great
	international interest. It is now the fashion that the conservation of high-profile art is carried by white-coated
	experts, behind a protective screen, in full view of spectators. Blinding by science ensures that the public,
	the art community and academia are reluctant to questions the conservation methods used and the final
	appearance of the work of art.
	 
	The history of fine-arts conservation, in particular, paintings, has been controversial. In the first half of the
	20th century ‘picture cleaning’ as it was then known, used techniques that had remained largely unaltered
	from the eighteenth century. Removing an old blackened varnish from the surface of the painting involved
	 
	materials such as Spirits of Salt (Hydrochloric acid in a water solution) to black soap applied with a stiff
	brush. In order to remove the most obstreperous varnish, it was a practice, up until at least the 1930s, to
	flood the picture surface with alcohol and set it alight. This, apparently, weakened the varnish layer to allow
	its removal: what one might call a masterpiece flambé.
	 
	In the watercolour, the technician dedicated to the conservation of Rembrandt’s Andromeda is, obviously, a
	believer in these more traditional cleaning methods. The original painting, in the Hague Mauritshuis, a work
	of about 1629 (and which is little more than 34 x 25 cm.) takes up the greater part of the foreground wall in
	the present painting.