Lynn Chadwick, R.A.

The Artist's Estate, from whom acquired by the present owner, 2006

Los Angeles, Tasende Gallery, Lynn Chadwick, Sculptures and Drawings 1955 to 1991, 1st November - 21st December 2002, un-numbered catalogue, illustrated p.9 and front cover, with tour to Tasende Gallery, La Jolla; 
Paris, Artcurial, English Contrasts: Peintres et Sculpteurs Anglais 1950-1960, 27th September - 24th November 1984, un-numbered catalogue, illustrated p.33 (working model). 

Nico Koster & Paul Levine, Lynn Chadwick: The Sculptor and His World, SMD Informatief, Spruyt, Van Mantgem & De Does BV, Leiden, 1988, p.63 and 73 (another cast);
Dennis Farr and Eva Chadwick, Lynn Chadwick Sculptor, With A Complete Illustrated Catalogue, Lund Humphries, London, 2014, cat. no.170B, illustrated p.122 (another cast).

The sculpture is stable. There are some very slight variations in the colour of the patina, apparent towards the very upper reaches of the arms. The work may benefit from a light clean and the application of conservation grade wax. There is some light surface dirt in the pitted areas of the work and some minor rubbing to the extreme edges. On close examination it is possible to see a very small hole in the female figure's leg, which appears to be consistent with the casting process, and some small scattered areas of oxidisation. With the exception of the above the work appears to be in very good condition, with a rich surface texture. Please contact 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."

That Lynn Chadwick should be considered to be one of the most important sculptors working in Europe in the mid-1950s is clearly demonstrated by his winning the grand prize for sculpture at the Venice Biennale in 1956, at the age of just 41, beating Alberto Giacometti (amongst others) into second place. The significance of this achievement cannot be under-estimated: at the time, the grand prize was usually reserved for sculptors who were already well-established international figures, such as Henry Moore (who won it in 1948), Marino Marini (1952) or Hans Arp (1954). It was not for an artist who had only recently broken into international art circles, as Chadwick had done at Venice just four years earlier, as part of the group of young tyros that made up the New Aspects of British Sculpture exhibition that had caused quite a stir at the British pavilion. Yet Chadwick’s work – full of angst and tension, yet bold and spirited - seemed to perfectly capture the zeitgeist, both in terms of art and of wider culture. As the critic and art historian Alan Bowness wrote at the time, 'Chadwick has been one of the revelations of the Biennale. Quite apart from the distinguished and highly original quality of his imagination, it is the beauty and sensitivity of execution that impresses. He may make use of the "creative accident" but the very sureness of his control makes most modern sculpture look simply incompetent by the side of his work. This Biennale award marks the emergence of Lynn Chadwick as a figure of international artistic importance.' (Alan Bowness, 'The Venice Biennale,' Observer, 24th June 1956, quoted in Dennis Farr, Lynn Chadwick, Tate, London, 2003, p.44) 

It was in the run up to his 1956 Venice show that Chadwick created the first version of Teddy Boy and Girl, a subject he was to return to a number of times in the following years, including the present work. It is one of his most important images – perhaps, even, his signature image – and certainly one of the great works of 20^th Century British sculpture. Its sharp angular forms, full of energy and dynamic movement; the tension between the work’s surface and its structure; the expression of the human form through a etiolated, mechanised, post-Cubist gaze – everything about this work speaks of the concerns of Post-War sculpture, in Britain and abroad, a movement that sought to find a new form of expression centred on the figure that could encompass the horror of the War years, the optimism of having survived them, yet the new sense of threat that came with the shadow of the Cold War. 

Yet for all its significance, Teddy Boy and Girl also speaks very directly to a British audience, with its very British subject-matter. The Teddy Boys were this country’s first manifestation of a youth ‘sub-culture,' a working-class street style doused in teenage rebellion, at a time when the idea of ‘teenagers’ didn’t really exist in Britain. The Teds’ name derives from the long Edwardian-style jackets favoured by both boys and girls, which were then paired with drain-pipe trousers, white socks, crepe-soled suede shoes and topped off with a quiff or pompadour inspired by Bill Haley or a young Elvis Presley. This sub-culture had a dark and violent edge too. As Michael Bird writes, ‘Teddy Boys gained a reputation as dangerous outlaw-dandies, who didn’t take much provocation to flourish flick-knives and knuckledusters concealed in their tailored pockets, (Michael Bird, Lynn Chadwick, Lund Humphries, p.78). Inevitably, trouble would start over a girl: one wonders if there is an element of threat in the boy's raised arms- or are they just dancing?

For Chadwick, the subject allowed him both to provoke bourgeois sensibility – the choice of title, as Bird points out, is deliberately pop-cultural, aimed to infuriate the critics (ibid. p.78) – but also to tap into the energy of these rebellious youths. Chadwick often stated that his sculpture had to have ‘attitude’ – a term he never really explained, but which his long-standing bronze founder Rungwe Kingdon came to understand as a combination of formal qualities – stance, precision of line, crispness of texture – with the work’s sense of character  (See Rungwe Kingdon, ‘Coming From the Dark’ – Lynn Chadwick, exhibition catalogue, Gallery Pangolin, Stroud, 2003, p.11). The Teddy Boys and Girls, in their sharp jackets and elaborately sculptural hairstyles, certainly had plenty of ‘attitude’. If sculpture in the Post-War era was looking for a new spirit, why not look towards those that had only really known this Brave New World? In this reworking of the Venice piece, Chadwick takes the boy and girl's long, draped jackets and emphasised their pleats and folds, making the overall silhouette sharper and the internal tensions more evident, angular. In doing so, these pleats form what feels like an exoskeleton - the brittle carapace of the teenager seeking identity and a sense of belonging by running in a gang.