.jpg?w=1)
Flowers
Details
Andy Warhol (1928-1987)
Flowers
signed and dated 'Andy Warhol 64' and with the Andy Warhol Art Authentication Board stamp and numbered 'A100.100' (on the overlap)
silkscreen inks and synthetic polymer on canvas
14 x 14in. (35.6 x 35.6cm.)
Executed in 1964
Flowers
signed and dated 'Andy Warhol 64' and with the Andy Warhol Art Authentication Board stamp and numbered 'A100.100' (on the overlap)
silkscreen inks and synthetic polymer on canvas
14 x 14in. (35.6 x 35.6cm.)
Executed in 1964
Provenance
Galleri Burén, Stockholm.
Acquired from the above by the present owner in 1965.
Acquired from the above by the present owner in 1965.
Special notice
No VAT will be charged on the hammer price, but VAT at 17.5% will be added to the buyer's premium which is invoiced on a VAT inclusive basis
Further details
Decorative, upbeat and kitsch, Warhol's Flowers are the complete antithesis of his previous Death and Disaster Series. At the time of their first show at the Leo Castelli Gallery, New York, 1964, Flowers were considered a far happier subject than the works in his previous exhibition, which had been difficult to sell. As a consequence Castelli was inundated with orders for the flower-paintings and the whole exhibition rapidly sold out.
Executed in 1964 and based on a photograph of hibiscus blossoms by Patricia Caulfield in the June issue of Modern Photography, Warhol manipulated the images to produce a purely synthetic and manufactured vision of his world. This distinctly Warholian take on the flower-painting tradition, in which artists often tried to make their paintings imitate nature to the limits of trompe l'oeil, blows any pretence of realism away with its bizarre, jarring colours. It is a paradoxical affront to his predecessors as, being based on a photograph, it theoretically represents a realistic image of the flowers in comparison to the interpretations of other artists. The lurid orange colour of this painting was subsequently printed over the green and black background creating a strong sensation that the flowers are floating above a photographic netherworld of undergrowth. In selecting the colours of his flowers, however, Warhol deliberately chose unnatural-looking hues of synthetic colour. Often referred to as Day-Glo or cosmetic colouring, the clearly man-made colours deliberately mock the romanticism and sense of pantheist wonder usually associated with paintings of flowers by subordinating their colour and imagery to a simple mechanical process. The manufactured look of Warhol's flowers emphasizes the process by which they have come into being and their ability to be mass-produced.
Executed in 1964 and based on a photograph of hibiscus blossoms by Patricia Caulfield in the June issue of Modern Photography, Warhol manipulated the images to produce a purely synthetic and manufactured vision of his world. This distinctly Warholian take on the flower-painting tradition, in which artists often tried to make their paintings imitate nature to the limits of trompe l'oeil, blows any pretence of realism away with its bizarre, jarring colours. It is a paradoxical affront to his predecessors as, being based on a photograph, it theoretically represents a realistic image of the flowers in comparison to the interpretations of other artists. The lurid orange colour of this painting was subsequently printed over the green and black background creating a strong sensation that the flowers are floating above a photographic netherworld of undergrowth. In selecting the colours of his flowers, however, Warhol deliberately chose unnatural-looking hues of synthetic colour. Often referred to as Day-Glo or cosmetic colouring, the clearly man-made colours deliberately mock the romanticism and sense of pantheist wonder usually associated with paintings of flowers by subordinating their colour and imagery to a simple mechanical process. The manufactured look of Warhol's flowers emphasizes the process by which they have come into being and their ability to be mass-produced.