Lynn Chadwick, R.A.

David Findlay Snr, New York, from whom acquired by the present owner in the 1960s

Dennis Farr and Eva Chadwick, Lynn Chadwick, Sculptor, Lund Humphries, Aldershot, 2006, illustrated cat. no.46, p.66.

The following condition report has been prepared by Pangolin Editions: Condition Report on restoration of Lynn Chadwick Mobile 1950 Opus No. 46 A delicate soldered and tied construction of steel wires, slate & metal shapes, lead and nylon fishing line - problems of the sculptures age were perished nylon, cracked slate and cracked or loose solder, some corrosion to steel rods and frame, broken protective paint coating. Restoration consisted of replacing all nylon with new or equivalent size and re-tying with some knots, re-soldering of loose cracked solder, repair to lead counterweight in frame to re-balance sculpture, making slate/epoxy paste to repair cracked slate form and re-touching flaked and cracked paint – sculpture was re-hung, balanced and re-packed in perfect condition. Restoration done according to methods developed with Lynn Chadwick by Pangolin Editions. Please telephone the department on 0207 293 6424 if you have any questions about the present work.
"In response to your inquiry, we are pleased to provide you with a general report of the condition of the property described above. Since we are not professional conservators or restorers, we urge you to consult with a restorer or conservator of your choice who will be better able to provide a detailed, professional report. Prospective buyers should inspect each lot to satisfy themselves as to condition and must understand that any statement made by Sotheby's is merely a subjective, qualified opinion. Prospective buyers should also refer to any Important Notices regarding this sale, which are printed in the Sale Catalogue.
NOTWITHSTANDING THIS REPORT OR ANY DISCUSSIONS CONCERNING A LOT, ALL LOTS ARE OFFERED AND SOLD AS IS" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF BUSINESS PRINTED IN THE SALE CATALOGUE."

'The mobiles conjure up the forms of moths, spiders, dragonflies and grasshoppers that tread the air with astonishing beauty and as gracefully as dancers. A touch or a faint breeze sets them in motion, and a cine-film would be the most faithful means of reproducing their elusive activity.' (Mary Sorrell discussing Chadwick's mobiles, The Studio, September 1952, pp.76-9)

Chadwick's first foray into sculpture involved constructions in motion and Mobile 1950 stands as an exceptional early example. He began constructing these pieces in the late 1940s as a design feature for trade exhibition stands when he was working as a draughtsman in a number of London architectural firms. It was from a fellow architect that Chadwick received his inspiration: 'When I was working in an architect's office somebody was making things which he actually called mobiles, and I got the idea from there' (quoted in Paul Levine, Chadwick: The Sculptor and his World, 1988, p.57).

On initial impression the mobiles resemble those of Alexander Calder, however the differences are subtle but significant. As Herbert Read pointed out: 'Calder's mobiles, for all their mechanical ingenuity, are essentially tellurian. By their movement they create a special form, but it is a form seen in relation to the earth's surface. Chadwick's mobiles, by contrast, are aerial. Their movements are not related to trees and plants, but rather to birds and insects. In this they resemble flying-machines, and the closest parallel to them in the history of art are the drawings made by Leonard for the mechanism of the wing of a flying-machine' (quoted in Paul Levine, op. cit., p.57). Indeed, the anthropomorphic elements of Chadwick's mobiles, as also observed by Sorrell above, were crucial to Chadwick's concerns. Adverse to total abstraction as he was, the patterns of movement of his mobiles were consciously suggestive of organic forms, and a theme made explicit in his seminal The Fisheater (1951, Tate Gallery, London).

The 'living' element of the mobiles is enhanced in the independent movement of the individual parts, only held in check by their point of balance. It is in their movement too that the space is indicated, as Chadwick observed, '[they] are not spatial things themselves' (quoted in Paul Levine, op. cit., p.57). The combination of both the mobile's animate forms and delicate existence in space is what makes them so mesmerising, and aptly surmised by Sorrell; '... a gallery filled with [Chadwick's] mobiles in quick or gentle motion is a strange land, and the spontaneity of their improvisations in airy fantasy casts a spell over the room' (see The Studio, September 1952, pp. 76-79).

In 1950, Chadwick launched his career by exhibiting fourteen of these mobile constructions at his first one-man exhibition at Gimpel Fils, London and few pieces displaying the quality and intricacy of the present work remain. They are the medium through which he learnt to understand sculpture and this unique example captures both the architectural and sculptural aspects which define this formative period for Chadwick before he ventured on to more monumental pieces.