CHRISTOPHER WOOD | Ballet Rehearsal

Redfern Gallery, London
Private Collection, London
Mercury Gallery, London
Anthony Hepworth Fine Art, Bath, where acquired by the present owner, 5th June 2000

London, New Burlington Galleries, Christopher Wood: Exhibition of Complete Works, 3rd March - 2nd April 1938, cat. no.125;
London, Mercury Gallery, Christopher Wood: Paintings, Watercolours, Drawings, 29th June - 23rd July 1977, cat. no.1. 

Eric Newton, Christopher Wood 1901-1930, Redfern Gallery, London, 1938, cat. no.138.

The canvas is original. The canvas undulates slightly towards the corners. There is some very light frame abrasion to the extreme upper left and lower right corners. There is reticulation to the white pigment at the upper edge. There are a small number of further areas of reticulation to the extreme lower left corner and to the lower centre. There is some very light craquelure to the arms of the figures to the right, with further instances elsewhere. There is a 1cm. scratch just to the right of centre, a very light diagonal scratch in the upper right of the white central pigment and a further light diagonal scratch below the left figure's arm. There are two small flecks of loss to the central figure's head. There are also a small number of further very light scuffs elsewhere. There is evidence of studio matter and detritus throughout. Subject to the above the work appears to be in good overall condition. Inspection under ultra violet light reveals no obvious signs of fluorescence or retouching. The work is held within a simple wooden frame with a painted wooden slip. Please telephone the department on +44 (0) 207 293 6424 if you have any questions regarding 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."

We are grateful to Robert Upstone for his kind assistance with cataloguing the present work. Dr Upstone is preparing the forthcoming catalogue raisonné of the Artist’s paintings and would like to hear from owners of Wood’s works, so that they can be included in this comprehensive catalogue. Please write to the Christopher Wood Catalogue, c/o Modern & Post-War British Art, Sotheby’s, 34-35 New Bond Street, London, W1A 2AA or email modbrit@sothebys.com. Ballet Rehearsal relates to a large group of drawings that Wood made in 1926 for Serge Diaghilev’s production of Romeo & Juliet for the Ballet Russes in Paris, for which Wood’s close friend, Constant Lambert, was doing the music. As Richard Ingleby writes: 'Diaghilev had decided that the ballet should not be Romeo and Juliet itself, but a ballet of a rehearsal for a performance of the ballet' (Richard Ingleby, Christopher Wood: An English Painter, Allison & Busby, London, 1995, p.122). Ballet Rehearsal was produced during the flurry of excitement Wood felt for the idea. As he wrote to his mother,  'All the scenes are set to represent the rehearsal room of the Russian Ballet, which is a huge empty room with white walls and behind the scenes of a theatre with nothing but ropes and bits of scenery to go on'. Yet, despite this enthusiasm, he was turned down for the project (eventually passed on to Max Ernst and Joan Miró), something that Wood claims met with Picasso’s disapproval, who, on visiting Wood’s studio proclaimed (or so the artist tells his mother in a letter) that he could not understand why Diaghilev had refused Wood’s designs for the production, which ‘simply could not have been better or more beautiful’.