.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
Acrobat, 1951, stands as one of the final manifestations of William Turnbull’s early linear sculptures before he shifted towards more solid forms. In the Autumn of 1948, Turnbull moved to Paris, seeking to escape the dominant neo-Romanticism of post-war Britain. At this time the Parisian art scene was marked by a rejection of traditional, hierarchical ideals of perfection. Instead, it welcomed new modes of expression and modernist abstraction which Turnbull found invigorating.
Inspired by a circus performer Turnbull had observed in Paris, he made several preparatory drawings before completing this final sculpture in London in 1951. Constructed in bronze, Turnbull offers a skeletal figure balancing on a wheel. By giving the viewer just enough visual information to recognise the composition, while simultaneously reducing the figure to its essential form, Turnbull offers a platform to actively participate in the work, allowing us to complete the figure and its movement through our own imagination.
The role of the viewer was fundamental to Turnbull’s philosophy. As he notes, ‘the event no longer happens in the work … but in the observer’ (A.A. Davidson, The Sculpture of William Turnbull, Much Hadham, 2005, p. 9). This is substantiated by his often one-word titles such as Aquarium, Bird, Playground and Acrobat, which offer loose association rather than specific narratives. They are designed to elicit continuous, subjective experiences rather than prescribe fixed meaning. As Turnbull explained in 1955, ‘the naming or title comes afterwards – something generalised, that will not interpret the image, so that the sculpture collects suggestions as to what it means … it becomes what people see in it’ (Ibid., p. 8).
During his time in Paris, Turnbull met and regularly visited Alberto Giacometti, whose elongated figures had recently emerged, much to the disapproval of the Surrealists in Paris. Turnbull was influenced by Giacometti’s figurative style, particularly City Square II. Acrobat echoes this work, employing a similar slender form anchored by a strong base.
While informed by Giacometti, Turnbull always pursued an independent artistic vision. Both artists engaged with the philosophical presence of Jean-Paul Satre’s existentialism and Albert Camus’s absurdism, which were prevalent in Paris at the time. However, their executions differ. Giacometti’s’ figures often convey a sense of existential emptiness. In contrast, Turnbull’s use of childlike, stick forms reflects a more playful engagement with the absurd, affirming life rather than depicting its futility.
Another element that distinguishes Turnbull from Giacometti was his sustained interest in movement and balance. Throughout his career, he explored how motion could be expressed not only literally but perceptually. In Acrobat, movement is implied rather than enacted. The tilt of the arms and the curl of the leg balanced on the wheel evoke a kinetic tension. The work is animated not by mechanics but by the viewer’s imagination. As Turnbull believed, ‘ultimate motion is ultimate rest’ (Ibid., p. 17).
By 1953, Turnbull began to move away from the linear constructions. In 1956 he explained, ‘I became dissatisfied with the possibilities of linear sculpture … Perhaps it became too schematic … too close to intellectual aesthetics’ (Ibid., p. 28). This marked a shift towards denser, more solid sculptural forms, consolidating a new phase in his practice.
Acrobat captures Turnbull’s pursuit of sculpture as a process of discovery, a search not for fixed meanings but for open-ended experience. He once explained that he ‘began to make a piece of sculpture to find out what a piece of sculpture should be like – the process is the most important part’ (Ibid., p. 18). Acrobat remains a pivotal work within his oeuvre, encapsulating the philosophical and formal concerns that define this period. It is a work that looks both to the existential dialogues of post-war Paris, and forward towards the material presence that would define his later sculpture.
Inspired by a circus performer Turnbull had observed in Paris, he made several preparatory drawings before completing this final sculpture in London in 1951. Constructed in bronze, Turnbull offers a skeletal figure balancing on a wheel. By giving the viewer just enough visual information to recognise the composition, while simultaneously reducing the figure to its essential form, Turnbull offers a platform to actively participate in the work, allowing us to complete the figure and its movement through our own imagination.
The role of the viewer was fundamental to Turnbull’s philosophy. As he notes, ‘the event no longer happens in the work … but in the observer’ (A.A. Davidson, The Sculpture of William Turnbull, Much Hadham, 2005, p. 9). This is substantiated by his often one-word titles such as Aquarium, Bird, Playground and Acrobat, which offer loose association rather than specific narratives. They are designed to elicit continuous, subjective experiences rather than prescribe fixed meaning. As Turnbull explained in 1955, ‘the naming or title comes afterwards – something generalised, that will not interpret the image, so that the sculpture collects suggestions as to what it means … it becomes what people see in it’ (Ibid., p. 8).
During his time in Paris, Turnbull met and regularly visited Alberto Giacometti, whose elongated figures had recently emerged, much to the disapproval of the Surrealists in Paris. Turnbull was influenced by Giacometti’s figurative style, particularly City Square II. Acrobat echoes this work, employing a similar slender form anchored by a strong base.
While informed by Giacometti, Turnbull always pursued an independent artistic vision. Both artists engaged with the philosophical presence of Jean-Paul Satre’s existentialism and Albert Camus’s absurdism, which were prevalent in Paris at the time. However, their executions differ. Giacometti’s’ figures often convey a sense of existential emptiness. In contrast, Turnbull’s use of childlike, stick forms reflects a more playful engagement with the absurd, affirming life rather than depicting its futility.
Another element that distinguishes Turnbull from Giacometti was his sustained interest in movement and balance. Throughout his career, he explored how motion could be expressed not only literally but perceptually. In Acrobat, movement is implied rather than enacted. The tilt of the arms and the curl of the leg balanced on the wheel evoke a kinetic tension. The work is animated not by mechanics but by the viewer’s imagination. As Turnbull believed, ‘ultimate motion is ultimate rest’ (Ibid., p. 17).
By 1953, Turnbull began to move away from the linear constructions. In 1956 he explained, ‘I became dissatisfied with the possibilities of linear sculpture … Perhaps it became too schematic … too close to intellectual aesthetics’ (Ibid., p. 28). This marked a shift towards denser, more solid sculptural forms, consolidating a new phase in his practice.
Acrobat captures Turnbull’s pursuit of sculpture as a process of discovery, a search not for fixed meanings but for open-ended experience. He once explained that he ‘began to make a piece of sculpture to find out what a piece of sculpture should be like – the process is the most important part’ (Ibid., p. 18). Acrobat remains a pivotal work within his oeuvre, encapsulating the philosophical and formal concerns that define this period. It is a work that looks both to the existential dialogues of post-war Paris, and forward towards the material presence that would define his later sculpture.