JOHN PARISH WHITE (1855-1917) THE PYGHTLE WORKS: A SET OF SEVEN OAK ARTS AND CRAFTS CHAIRS with elongated arched high backs and tapered splats, drop-in part-rush seats, supported by 'X'-frame' stretchers, terminating on carved square tapered legs, 125cm high x 62cm wide x 55.5cm deep (7)Note: The Pyghtle Works was established in 1896 by John Paris White in Bedford, Bedfordshire. It was aptly described in an advert in 'The Studio' (1900) as 'a manufacturer of wood chimney pieces... garden furniture, every description of high-class joinery...'. Indeed they manufactured furniture to the esteemed designs of Mackay Hugh Baillie Scott, C.F.A Voysey, C.H.B Quennell and George Jack amongst others; as well as manufacturing general stock and making special commissions to order.They notably exhibited at the Arts & Crafts Exhibition Society, in 1900 and 1903.
We found 2009 price guide item(s) matching your search
There are 2009 lots that match your search criteria. Subscribe now to get instant access to the full price guide service.
Click here to subscribe- List
- Grid
-
2009 item(s)/page
A large Georgian-style dolls house on stand - late 20th century, the house with eight windows and three dormers in the tiled roof, the front with a fold-down front with shallow front garden and central path leading to steps up to a portico porch and black painted six panel front door, the two-part hinged front opening to reveal two rooms and a central hallway/landing with staircase to each of the three floors, with wood veneered floorboards and a tiled floor to the hall, each room with a fireplace, wallpaper, pictures and light fittings, the roof hinged to reveal two servants' rooms to the attic, the basement with three further kitchen / cellar rooms, with six bisque head doll's house dolls and a small amount of furniture and accessories, the right side of the house with a lean-to glasshouse with an arched entrance to a carriage / car port beneath, the main house LWH 93 x 43 x 124cm, overall size including the beechwood stand 122 x 70 x 168cm, requires some restoration and the electrics untested.
AFTER THE ANTIQUE- A WHITE BISCUIT PORCELAIN MODEL OF THE BORGHESE CENTAUR BY GIOVANNI VOLPATO (1735-1803), LATE 18TH CENTURY Impressed stamp to one side of plinth G. Volpato Roma 28cm high, base 18cm wide There are two Roman forms of these large centaur sculptures. The first are the 'Furietti' pair in Laconian grey black marble which were discovered during excavations at Hadrian's Villa in Rome during the 1720s. That pair were purchased by Cardinal Furietti, whose descendants sold the centaurs to Pope Clement XIII after which they were added to the Capitoline Museum collection. This form, with the young Eros figure riding on the back of the older of the two centaurs, was excavated in Rome in the 17th century and entered into the Borghese collection. Together with 694 other statues it was acquired from Camillo Filippo Ludovico Borghese by Napoleon in 1807 and is now held in the Louvre Museum. Working in white biscuit, Volpato mimics the white marble of the original and a pair of centaurs by Volpato are held in the Museum of Arts and Crafts Hamburg (1878.564.a). For a comparable pair of centaurs by Volpato please see Christie's New York, Important European Furniture, Works of Art, Ceramics, 21 May 2003 lot 99 (sold for $15,535 inc. buyer's premium). Condition Report: With engrained surface dirt throughout- resulting in browner patches- and odd fluorescence under UV. Cupid right foot and right wing repaired, lacking fingers to centaur's hand and section of rein/strap formerly over hand Please see additional images for visual references to condition which form part of this condition report. All lots are available for inspection and Condition Reports are available on request. However, all lots are of an age and type which means that they may not be in perfect condition and should be viewed by prospective bidders; please refer to Condition 6 of the Conditions of Business for Buyers. This is particularly true for garden related items. All lots are offered for sale "as viewed" and subject to the applicable Conditions of Business for Buyer's condition, which are set out in the sale catalogue and are available on request. Potential buyers should note that condition reports are matters of opinion only, they are non-exhaustive and based solely on what can be seen to the naked eye unless otherwise specified by the cataloguer. We must advise you that we are not professional restorers or conservators and we do not provide any guarantee or warranty as to a lot's condition. Accordingly, it is recommended that prospective buyers inspect lots or have their advisors do so and satisfy themselves as to condition and accuracy of description. If you have physically viewed an item for which you request a report, the condition report cannot be a reason for cancelling a sale. Buyers are reminded that liability for loss and damage transfers to the buyer from the fall of the hammer. Whilst the majority of lots will remain in their location until collected, we can accept no responsibility for any damage which may occur, even in the event of Dreweatts staff assisting carriers during collection. Condition Report Disclaimer
A SET OF INDIAN WHITE MARBLE SEAT FURNITURE UDAIPUR, LATE 20TH CENTURY Comprising: Pair of armchairs, 105cm high, 74cm wide, 56cm deep; a settee, 105cm high, 156cm wide, 56cm deep and a low table Condition Report: With weathering - colour variance from exposure- wear, marks, knocks and scratches as per age, handling, use, and cleaning These have been dismantled for purposes of removal and transport. As is common with this form, they do not have dowelled joints but rather need to be mortared. There is old mortar and glue visible to all joints which will require removal before assembly. Some weathering cracks, one foot with damage, one underframe bar requires repair. currently set on pallets- total weight difficult to calculate but we would suggest 300-350KG- if you are intending to purchase and require a more accurate weight estimate- please contact your carrier to visit and inspect in person. Please see additional images for visual references to condition which form part of this condition report. All lots are available for inspection and Condition Reports are available on request. However, all lots are of an age and type which means that they may not be in perfect condition and should be viewed by prospective bidders; please refer to Condition 6 of the Conditions of Business for Buyers. This is particularly true for garden related items. All lots are offered for sale "as viewed" and subject to the applicable Conditions of Business for Buyer's condition, which are set out in the sale catalogue and are available on request. Condition Report Disclaimer
A REGENCY PAPIER MACHE AND GILT-JAPANNED TRAY IN THE MANNER OF HENRY CLAY, EARLY 19TH CENTURY Decorated with landscapes, pagodas and sail boats on an associated simulated bamboo stand 43cm high, 62cm wide, 47cm deep Henry Clay was renowned for his japanning and papier mache business which he conducted out of Birmingham and then London's fashionable Covent Garden from 1772 until his death in 1812. In 1772, he received a patent for a special process of pasting sheets of paper together and stove hardening them to produce a durable substance suitable for furniture wares. This process was distinct from that for making true mache, which used a mixture of pulped paper, glue and chalk and originated in Persia, coming to England via France in the seventeenth century. He decorated his products in the Etruscan (Classical) or Chinese taste. The patent expired in 1802 at which time rival factories began production and continued to use the Clay name throughout the nineteenth century. The 1851 Great Exhibition catalogue noted that the Clay method was superior to the traditional method of papier mache production (G. Beard and C. Gilbert, eds., Dictionary of English Furniture Makers, 1660-1840, 1986, pp. 176-177; E. Joy, English Furniture, 1800-1851, 1977, pp. 271-272).
Amended Condition Report, Beautiful Garden by Bramblecrest, a set of grey faux whicker work garden furniture to comprise, four armchairs, 89cm high, a circular table with glass top, 70cm high x 115cm diameter, and umbrella, 231cm high (6)Condition Report: The umbrella works but has faded areas as you would expect. The glass top has masking tape marks from which would need to be removed, from being transported. Some minor cracks rust to base of pole. Overall ready to use. The umbrella has a large rip to the fabric.
A RARE FRENCH BONE SPINNING JENNY AUTOMATA DIEPPE OR MERU, EARLY 19TH CENTURY Of carved, pierced and part polychrome decorated form, with two straw work platforms, upper level with standing female figure holding distaff behind a spinning wheel, a central, seated lady with distaff, with a pair dancing couple to one side, fiddler and two further female figures to the other side, lower level with pierced central wheel and two supporting cog wheels driving figures on the upper level, two huntsmen to the sides with long guns and dogs, the whole now set in a velvet based, ebonised base clock dome with glass dome the jenny 19cm high, the case 28cm high, 21.5cm wide Provenance: Works of Art from the collection of the late Roger Warner Esq, offered by his family Often catalogued and referred to as "Prisoner of war" models, these rare automata were more likely to have been made by skilled craftsmen working in and around Méru in the Oise district between Paris and the sea. For related examples see Bonham's London, Marine Sale, 8th October 2014, Lot 28 (£15,000 incl. BP) and Skinners Boston, American Furniture & Decorative Arts, 4th March 2012, Lot 413 ($16,590 incl. BP). Condition Report: With wear, marks, knocks and scratches as per age, handling, use, and cleaning. The whole with typical old and more recent glue repairs- chair backs, small details & reattaching figures to bases etc. Currently not fitted with all requisite threads so when main front handle is turned the figures do not operate. Several internal pillars currently detached which will mean that even if threaded correctly- figures above will not move. Other figures very stiff Losses to straw work and shrinkage faults and some old losses to bone detailing and possible action levers/spurs The whole will benefit from remedial sensitive restoration to bring back to working condition. Please see additional images for visual references to condition which form part of this condition report. All lots are available for inspection and Condition Reports are available on request. However, all lots are of an age and type which means that they may not be in perfect condition and should be viewed by prospective bidders; please refer to Condition 6 of the Conditions of Business for Buyers. This is particularly true for garden related items. All lots are offered for sale "as viewed" and subject to the applicable Conditions of Business for Buyer's condition, which are set out in the sale catalogue and are available on request. Potential buyers should note that condition reports are matters of opinion only, they are non-exhaustive and based solely on what can be seen to the naked eye unless otherwise specified by the cataloguer. We must advise you that we are not professional restorers or conservators and we do not provide any guarantee or warranty as to a lot's condition. Accordingly, it is recommended that prospective buyers inspect lots or have their advisors do so and satisfy themselves as to condition and accuracy of description. If you have physically viewed an item for which you request a report, the condition report cannot be a reason for cancelling a sale. Buyers are reminded that liability for loss and damage transfers to the buyer from the fall of the hammer. Whilst the majority of lots will remain in their location until collected, we can accept no responsibility for any damage which may occur, even in the event of Dreweatts staff assisting carriers during collection.Condition Report Disclaimer
A collection of six bronze doorstops, late 19th/early 20th century, comprising:a silvered-metal example of a stylised dolphin, with foundry initials 'CGF' to the back for Classic Garden Furniture of Shropshire,27cm wide7cm deep41cm high,a set of four, similar, smaller, andanother in the shape of a fox surrounded by foliage (6)Provenance: The collection of Charles Edwards and Julia Boston, Tile Barn, Northamptonshire.Condition ReportThe silvered example worn and patchy. All with visible wear however ready for use See additional images for details.
A suite of grey rattan garden furniture by Kettler Consisting of a bench; two armchairs; and a low table.The bench 129cm wide x 79cm high. The chairs 69cm wide x 85cm high. The table 94cm wide x 48cm deep x 48cm high.Qty: 4The table lacking the glass inset top. In generally good condition commensurate with age and use.
A suite of garden furniture Comprising a metal-framed table with a glass top and six folding armchairs.The table approximately 180cm wide 94cm deep x 74cm highQty: 7In generally good condition, weathering commensurate with age and use, some scuffs, dents and scratches to the top. Seemingly structurally sound.
A suite of grey rattan garden furniture Made by Burford. To comprise of an oval glass-topped table with a Lazy Suzan; eight armchairs, two with reclining backs; and a green parasol with a stone base.The table 220cm wide x 114cm deep x 77cm high. Each chair 61cm wide x 94cm high.Qty: 10Some damage to the rattan throughout, with some evidence of mice damage, notable on the top of one. Further damage to the legs. Notable dirt throughout commensurate with outdoor use. One of the reclining chairs has a stiff catch and does not fully function as intended - however, it does recline.
WM. GARDEN, ABERDEEN A .360 No.5 (.380 L/R) SINGLE-SHOT ROOK & RABBIT RIFLE, serial no. 44956, circa 1900, with 25 1/2in. octagonal blued barrel, machine engraved top-flat, dove-tailed fore-sight, standing notch rear-sight with additional folding leaf, the adjacent top-flats signed 'WM. GARDEN' on the left and '122 1/2 UNION ST. ABERDEEN' on the right, calibre designation near breech, automatic ejector, plain side-lever opening action with central rebounding hammer, walnut butt-stock with capped and chequered pistol-grip, iron furniture, chequered walnut snap-on splinter fore-end, strong traces of finish remaining Sold as an exempt item under Section 58 (2) of the 1968 Firearms Act, to be held as a curiosity or ornament
A 20TH CENTURY TEAK AFTER HEALS OF LONDON STOWAWAY STYLE GARDEN TABLE AND CHAIRS tables square slatted top with rounded corners on cruciform base with lower tier, 71cm high x 84cm wide x 84cm deep and four corner chairs with bowed backs over slatted seats on square supports joined by crossed stretchers, 71cm high x 65cm wide x 53cm deep (5) Condition Report:Suite is in a fair condition relative to age and use as garden furniture with heavy weathering throughout with some notable splits and top of chair backs and minor looseness to joints
BRIAN WILLSHER (BRITISH 1930-2010) THE STORM 9/9, embossed with signature, title and number to base, verdigris bronze 64cm high, 40.5cm wide, 28cm deep (25.25in high,16in wide, 11in deep) including integral base Brian Willsher was born in the deprived south London borough of Catford in 1930 and lived in the city all his life. His was a definitively ‘non-art’ background, one that would today make him an ‘outsider artist’ and very liked fêted by an art world in search of authentic voices. He had no formal training as a sculptor – instead he studied engineering at Woolwich Polytechnic for three years from 1946 and then began a career of odd-jobbing, working as telephone engineer, farm worker and dental technician, all the while funnelling his various salaries into his passion for motorcycle racing.In the early 1950s Willsher suffered a major bike accident. During his recovery he began playing around with plaster, before moving onto wood around 1956. Initially he tried his hand at making a living carving salad bowls, to little success, although this did lead to a shop owner asking him to make lamp bases instead. They proved far more popular and were sold at Harrods, Heal’s and Liberty’s. From here, Willsher began to generate purely sculptural forms, defined by their intricacy and layering, in a Modernist vocabulary reminiscent of Barbara Hepworth and Henry Moore. After a one-man show at Dunn’s furniture store in Bromley in 1965 and another at Heal’s in 1966, Willsher’s career as a sculptor took off. He was given another exhibition at Heal’s in 1967 (where he sold everything for the deliberately low price of £10 each, subverting the ‘fine art’ context). He showed in Melbourne, Australia, had three works commissioned for Dartington Hall and six for Devon Guild of Craftsmen. He also showed in the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition for five years in a row.However, just as his career was taking off, Willsher became more famous for a controversy not of his making. In 1968, Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) decided his work did not count as ‘fine art’ and so was immediately subject to the 40% manufacturing tax on ‘household decorations’ – in a grim parallel of the 1926 episode when US Customs officials denied Constantin Brancusi’s Bird in Space entry into the country, arguing it was just a piece of metal rather than a sculpture. Willsher was probably not helped by his own diffidence to pricing his work as ‘art’. And part of the Revenue’s argument may have been based on his technique - he didn’t hide the fact he used a bandsaw rather than a chisel. Indeed, he had featured in a British Pathé newsreel, which showed him at work in his suburban garden studio sawing blocks of wood, his hands just centimetres from the bandsaw blade. ‘These are no handmade shapes created with highfalutin motivations’, intones the voice-over, ‘Some purist sculptors may turn up their noses at Willsher’s efforts.’A number of artists sprang to Willsher’s defence, most notably Moore, who perhaps saw many of his own sculptural concerns within Willsher’s abstract sculptures, with their holes punched through the middle. Moore was quoted in The Guardian saying, ‘Here's pure sculpture, indeed! More than that, memorable sculpture!’ and in turn it was The Guardian and The Observer who turned the impasse into a national campaign, posing questions such as ‘When is a sculpture not a sculpture?’ Eventually, HMRC backed down and Willsher was vindicated, although the furore put him off exhibiting, just at the point when his star was in the ascendant. This may go some way to explain why his work is less well-known today than it should be – even if he has enjoyed something of a small renaissance in the last decade or so, as dedicated collectors such as Hugo Burge would seek his work out, either online or at the few galleries who showed him. This reappraisal of Willsher reached its apotheosis in October 2021, with an exhibition at Margaret Howell’s Wigmore Street atelier – a non-traditional ‘art’ space of which the artist would no doubt have approved.Willsher is known almost exclusively for his finely turned, smoothly finished carvings in exotic woods and so we are delighted to be able to also present some of his lesser-seen bronzes from Hugo Burge’s collection, as together they represent the breadth of Willsher’s sculptural vision.
BRIAN WILLSHER (BRITISH 1930-2010) MILLENIA 9/9, embossed with signature, title and number to base, verdigris bronze 29cm high, 25.5cm wide,15cm deep (11.5in high, 10in wide, 6in deep) including integral base Brian Willsher was born in the deprived south London borough of Catford in 1930 and lived in the city all his life. His was a definitively ‘non-art’ background, one that would today make him an ‘outsider artist’ and very liked fêted by an art world in search of authentic voices. He had no formal training as a sculptor – instead he studied engineering at Woolwich Polytechnic for three years from 1946 and then began a career of odd-jobbing, working as telephone engineer, farm worker and dental technician, all the while funnelling his various salaries into his passion for motorcycle racing.In the early 1950s Willsher suffered a major bike accident. During his recovery he began playing around with plaster, before moving onto wood around 1956. Initially he tried his hand at making a living carving salad bowls, to little success, although this did lead to a shop owner asking him to make lamp bases instead. They proved far more popular and were sold at Harrods, Heal’s and Liberty’s. From here, Willsher began to generate purely sculptural forms, defined by their intricacy and layering, in a Modernist vocabulary reminiscent of Barbara Hepworth and Henry Moore. After a one-man show at Dunn’s furniture store in Bromley in 1965 and another at Heal’s in 1966, Willsher’s career as a sculptor took off. He was given another exhibition at Heal’s in 1967 (where he sold everything for the deliberately low price of £10 each, subverting the ‘fine art’ context). He showed in Melbourne, Australia, had three works commissioned for Dartington Hall and six for Devon Guild of Craftsmen. He also showed in the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition for five years in a row.However, just as his career was taking off, Willsher became more famous for a controversy not of his making. In 1968, Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) decided his work did not count as ‘fine art’ and so was immediately subject to the 40% manufacturing tax on ‘household decorations’ – in a grim parallel of the 1926 episode when US Customs officials denied Constantin Brancusi’s Bird in Space entry into the country, arguing it was just a piece of metal rather than a sculpture. Willsher was probably not helped by his own diffidence to pricing his work as ‘art’. And part of the Revenue’s argument may have been based on his technique - he didn’t hide the fact he used a bandsaw rather than a chisel. Indeed, he had featured in a British Pathé newsreel, which showed him at work in his suburban garden studio sawing blocks of wood, his hands just centimetres from the bandsaw blade. ‘These are no handmade shapes created with highfalutin motivations’, intones the voice-over, ‘Some purist sculptors may turn up their noses at Willsher’s efforts.’A number of artists sprang to Willsher’s defence, most notably Moore, who perhaps saw many of his own sculptural concerns within Willsher’s abstract sculptures, with their holes punched through the middle. Moore was quoted in The Guardian saying, ‘Here's pure sculpture, indeed! More than that, memorable sculpture!’ and in turn it was The Guardian and The Observer who turned the impasse into a national campaign, posing questions such as ‘When is a sculpture not a sculpture?’ Eventually, HMRC backed down and Willsher was vindicated, although the furore put him off exhibiting, just at the point when his star was in the ascendant. This may go some way to explain why his work is less well-known today than it should be – even if he has enjoyed something of a small renaissance in the last decade or so, as dedicated collectors such as Hugo Burge would seek his work out, either online or at the few galleries who showed him. This reappraisal of Willsher reached its apotheosis in October 2021, with an exhibition at Margaret Howell’s Wigmore Street atelier – a non-traditional ‘art’ space of which the artist would no doubt have approved.Willsher is known almost exclusively for his finely turned, smoothly finished carvings in exotic woods and so we are delighted to be able to also present some of his lesser-seen bronzes from Hugo Burge’s collection, as together they represent the breadth of Willsher’s sculptural vision.
BRIAN WILLSHER (BRITISH 1930-2010) BRAZ MARK signed and inscribed with title by hand on the underside of the base, carved wood 80cm high, 54cm wide, 18cm deep (31 ½in high, 21 ¼in wide, 7in deep) including integral wooden base Brian Willsher was born in the deprived south London borough of Catford in 1930 and lived in the city all his life. His was a definitively ‘non-art’ background, one that would today make him an ‘outsider artist’ and very liked fêted by an art world in search of authentic voices. He had no formal training as a sculptor – instead he studied engineering at Woolwich Polytechnic for three years from 1946 and then began a career of odd-jobbing, working as telephone engineer, farm worker and dental technician, all the while funnelling his various salaries into his passion for motorcycle racing.In the early 1950s Willsher suffered a major bike accident. During his recovery he began playing around with plaster, before moving onto wood around 1956. Initially he tried his hand at making a living carving salad bowls, to little success, although this did lead to a shop owner asking him to make lamp bases instead. They proved far more popular and were sold at Harrods, Heal’s and Liberty’s. From here, Willsher began to generate purely sculptural forms, defined by their intricacy and layering, in a Modernist vocabulary reminiscent of Barbara Hepworth and Henry Moore. After a one-man show at Dunn’s furniture store in Bromley in 1965 and another at Heal’s in 1966, Willsher’s career as a sculptor took off. He was given another exhibition at Heal’s in 1967 (where he sold everything for the deliberately low price of £10 each, subverting the ‘fine art’ context). He showed in Melbourne, Australia, had three works commissioned for Dartington Hall and six for Devon Guild of Craftsmen. He also showed in the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition for five years in a row.However, just as his career was taking off, Willsher became more famous for a controversy not of his making. In 1968, Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) decided his work did not count as ‘fine art’ and so was immediately subject to the 40% manufacturing tax on ‘household decorations’ – in a grim parallel of the 1926 episode when US Customs officials denied Constantin Brancusi’s Bird in Space entry into the country, arguing it was just a piece of metal rather than a sculpture. Willsher was probably not helped by his own diffidence to pricing his work as ‘art’. And part of the Revenue’s argument may have been based on his technique - he didn’t hide the fact he used a bandsaw rather than a chisel. Indeed, he had featured in a British Pathé newsreel, which showed him at work in his suburban garden studio sawing blocks of wood, his hands just centimetres from the bandsaw blade. ‘These are no handmade shapes created with highfalutin motivations’, intones the voice-over, ‘Some purist sculptors may turn up their noses at Willsher’s efforts.’A number of artists sprang to Willsher’s defence, most notably Moore, who perhaps saw many of his own sculptural concerns within Willsher’s abstract sculptures, with their holes punched through the middle. Moore was quoted in The Guardian saying, ‘Here's pure sculpture, indeed! More than that, memorable sculpture!’ and in turn it was The Guardian and The Observer who turned the impasse into a national campaign, posing questions such as ‘When is a sculpture not a sculpture?’ Eventually, HMRC backed down and Willsher was vindicated, although the furore put him off exhibiting, just at the point when his star was in the ascendant. This may go some way to explain why his work is less well-known today than it should be – even if he has enjoyed something of a small renaissance in the last decade or so, as dedicated collectors such as Hugo Burge would seek his work out, either online or at the few galleries who showed him. This reappraisal of Willsher reached its apotheosis in October 2021, with an exhibition at Margaret Howell’s Wigmore Street atelier – a non-traditional ‘art’ space of which the artist would no doubt have approved.Willsher is known almost exclusively for his finely turned, smoothly finished carvings in exotic woods and so we are delighted to be able to also present some of his lesser-seen bronzes from Hugo Burge’s collection, as together they represent the breadth of Willsher’s sculptural vision.
BRIAN WILLSHER (BRITISH 1930-2010) CONSTRUCTION XVIII 9/9, embossed with signature, title and number to base, verdigris bronze 21cm high, 35.5cm wide, 18cm deep (8 ¼in high, 4in wide, 7in deep) including integral base Brian Willsher was born in the deprived south London borough of Catford in 1930 and lived in the city all his life. His was a definitively ‘non-art’ background, one that would today make him an ‘outsider artist’ and very liked fêted by an art world in search of authentic voices. He had no formal training as a sculptor – instead he studied engineering at Woolwich Polytechnic for three years from 1946 and then began a career of odd-jobbing, working as telephone engineer, farm worker and dental technician, all the while funnelling his various salaries into his passion for motorcycle racing.In the early 1950s Willsher suffered a major bike accident. During his recovery he began playing around with plaster, before moving onto wood around 1956. Initially he tried his hand at making a living carving salad bowls, to little success, although this did lead to a shop owner asking him to make lamp bases instead. They proved far more popular and were sold at Harrods, Heal’s and Liberty’s. From here, Willsher began to generate purely sculptural forms, defined by their intricacy and layering, in a Modernist vocabulary reminiscent of Barbara Hepworth and Henry Moore. After a one-man show at Dunn’s furniture store in Bromley in 1965 and another at Heal’s in 1966, Willsher’s career as a sculptor took off. He was given another exhibition at Heal’s in 1967 (where he sold everything for the deliberately low price of £10 each, subverting the ‘fine art’ context). He showed in Melbourne, Australia, had three works commissioned for Dartington Hall and six for Devon Guild of Craftsmen. He also showed in the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition for five years in a row.However, just as his career was taking off, Willsher became more famous for a controversy not of his making. In 1968, Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) decided his work did not count as ‘fine art’ and so was immediately subject to the 40% manufacturing tax on ‘household decorations’ – in a grim parallel of the 1926 episode when US Customs officials denied Constantin Brancusi’s Bird in Space entry into the country, arguing it was just a piece of metal rather than a sculpture. Willsher was probably not helped by his own diffidence to pricing his work as ‘art’. And part of the Revenue’s argument may have been based on his technique - he didn’t hide the fact he used a bandsaw rather than a chisel. Indeed, he had featured in a British Pathé newsreel, which showed him at work in his suburban garden studio sawing blocks of wood, his hands just centimetres from the bandsaw blade. ‘These are no handmade shapes created with highfalutin motivations’, intones the voice-over, ‘Some purist sculptors may turn up their noses at Willsher’s efforts.’A number of artists sprang to Willsher’s defence, most notably Moore, who perhaps saw many of his own sculptural concerns within Willsher’s abstract sculptures, with their holes punched through the middle. Moore was quoted in The Guardian saying, ‘Here's pure sculpture, indeed! More than that, memorable sculpture!’ and in turn it was The Guardian and The Observer who turned the impasse into a national campaign, posing questions such as ‘When is a sculpture not a sculpture?’ Eventually, HMRC backed down and Willsher was vindicated, although the furore put him off exhibiting, just at the point when his star was in the ascendant. This may go some way to explain why his work is less well-known today than it should be – even if he has enjoyed something of a small renaissance in the last decade or so, as dedicated collectors such as Hugo Burge would seek his work out, either online or at the few galleries who showed him. This reappraisal of Willsher reached its apotheosis in October 2021, with an exhibition at Margaret Howell’s Wigmore Street atelier – a non-traditional ‘art’ space of which the artist would no doubt have approved.Willsher is known almost exclusively for his finely turned, smoothly finished carvings in exotic woods and so we are delighted to be able to also present some of his lesser-seen bronzes from Hugo Burge’s collection, as together they represent the breadth of Willsher’s sculptural vision.
SIR EDWIN LUTYENS (BRITISH 1869-1944) SIDE TABLE, 1902 oak, with brass fittings, made by William Skull & Son Ltd., High Wycombe 81cm high, 124cm wide, 48.5cm deep (32in high, 48 ¾in wide, 19 ¼in deep) Edward Hudson, Deanery Garden, BerkshireWith John Ashton Beer Sir Edwin Lutyens is renowned for his architectural achievements, including Castle Drogo, Little Thakeham, and Campion Hall, as well as his role in designing war memorials for the Imperial War Graves Commission and planning New Delhi. Yet his influence extended to furniture design, where he applied the same meticulous attention to detail and craftsmanship that defined his architectural work.Growing up in the Surrey countryside, Lutyens developed a keen interest in architecture from a young age, spending his childhood sketching buildings and honing his drawing skills. Although illness kept him from public school, his early immersion in construction influenced his later career. By the age of twenty, he had established his own practice in London, combining his architectural knowledge with an intuitive understanding of proportions and spatial relationships that would later shape his furniture designs.Lutyens’ furniture is noted for its eclecticism, drawing inspiration from historical styles but always adapting them in his own distinctive way. While he drew from historical references, he never replicated designs verbatim; instead, he adapted and subtly altered proportions and details to suit his own vision. For example, Lutyens had a particular aversion to "dead proportions," often opting for slight adjustments to standard measurements—either slightly more or less than a half or quarter proportion.The side table offered here was conceived as part of the interior scheme for Deanery Garden in Sonning, Berkshire, a ‘quintessential’ Lutyens property built 1899-1901. The illustrated scale plans of the furniture include annotations naming Edward Hudson, editor of Country Life and Lutyens’ good friend, for whom he designed Deanery Garden. Also mentioned is ‘Skull’, referencing the furniture workshop Walter Skull and Sons Ltd in High Wycombe, commissioned to complete the piece. The design for the set of ladderback chairs after Lutyens offered here is also featured on this sheet.The table’s frieze and drop handles echo 17th and 18th century furniture, influenced by Lutyens' “furniture hunting” with Edward Hudson at Lindisfarne Castle. The bulbous legs, reminiscent of 16th-century refectory tables, are executed with a lighter touch, while the delicately arched stretchers at the base blend 17th-century elements with the Arts & Crafts style, seen also in the work of Sir Robert Lorimer. These adaptations showcase Lutyens’ skill in merging historical references with his modern sensibility and his ability to work closely with craftsmen like Skull allowed him to create furniture that was both aesthetically refined and technically sophisticated.
ANGRAVE'S, THURMASTON, LEICESTER SET OF 'TERRACE' GARDEN FURNITURE, CIRCA 1930 bamboo and cane, with later upholstered cushions, to include; four armchairs, each bears maker's label, 108cm high, 56cm wide, 46cm deep (48 ½in high, 22in wide, 18 ¼in deep) and a circular centre table, 70cm high, 76cm diameter (26 ½in high, 30in diameter)
BRIAN WILLSHER (BRITISH 1930-2010) WISHBONE signed and dated ‘2001’ by hand to underside, carved wood 25cm high, 11.5cm wide, 7cm deep (9 ¾in high, 4 ¼in wide, 2 ¾in deep) Brian Willsher was born in the deprived south London borough of Catford in 1930 and lived in the city all his life. His was a definitively ‘non-art’ background, one that would today make him an ‘outsider artist’ and very liked fêted by an art world in search of authentic voices. He had no formal training as a sculptor – instead he studied engineering at Woolwich Polytechnic for three years from 1946 and then began a career of odd-jobbing, working as telephone engineer, farm worker and dental technician, all the while funnelling his various salaries into his passion for motorcycle racing.In the early 1950s Willsher suffered a major bike accident. During his recovery he began playing around with plaster, before moving onto wood around 1956. Initially he tried his hand at making a living carving salad bowls, to little success, although this did lead to a shop owner asking him to make lamp bases instead. They proved far more popular and were sold at Harrods, Heal’s and Liberty’s. From here, Willsher began to generate purely sculptural forms, defined by their intricacy and layering, in a Modernist vocabulary reminiscent of Barbara Hepworth and Henry Moore. After a one-man show at Dunn’s furniture store in Bromley in 1965 and another at Heal’s in 1966, Willsher’s career as a sculptor took off. He was given another exhibition at Heal’s in 1967 (where he sold everything for the deliberately low price of £10 each, subverting the ‘fine art’ context). He showed in Melbourne, Australia, had three works commissioned for Dartington Hall and six for Devon Guild of Craftsmen. He also showed in the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition for five years in a row.However, just as his career was taking off, Willsher became more famous for a controversy not of his making. In 1968, Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) decided his work did not count as ‘fine art’ and so was immediately subject to the 40% manufacturing tax on ‘household decorations’ – in a grim parallel of the 1926 episode when US Customs officials denied Constantin Brancusi’s Bird in Space entry into the country, arguing it was just a piece of metal rather than a sculpture. Willsher was probably not helped by his own diffidence to pricing his work as ‘art’. And part of the Revenue’s argument may have been based on his technique - he didn’t hide the fact he used a bandsaw rather than a chisel. Indeed, he had featured in a British Pathé newsreel, which showed him at work in his suburban garden studio sawing blocks of wood, his hands just centimetres from the bandsaw blade. ‘These are no handmade shapes created with highfalutin motivations’, intones the voice-over, ‘Some purist sculptors may turn up their noses at Willsher’s efforts.’A number of artists sprang to Willsher’s defence, most notably Moore, who perhaps saw many of his own sculptural concerns within Willsher’s abstract sculptures, with their holes punched through the middle. Moore was quoted in The Guardian saying, ‘Here's pure sculpture, indeed! More than that, memorable sculpture!’ and in turn it was The Guardian and The Observer who turned the impasse into a national campaign, posing questions such as ‘When is a sculpture not a sculpture?’ Eventually, HMRC backed down and Willsher was vindicated, although the furore put him off exhibiting, just at the point when his star was in the ascendant. This may go some way to explain why his work is less well-known today than it should be – even if he has enjoyed something of a small renaissance in the last decade or so, as dedicated collectors such as Hugo Burge would seek his work out, either online or at the few galleries who showed him. This reappraisal of Willsher reached its apotheosis in October 2021, with an exhibition at Margaret Howell’s Wigmore Street atelier – a non-traditional ‘art’ space of which the artist would no doubt have approved.Willsher is known almost exclusively for his finely turned, smoothly finished carvings in exotic woods and so we are delighted to be able to also present some of his lesser-seen bronzes from Hugo Burge’s collection, as together they represent the breadth of Willsher’s sculptural vision.
BRIAN WILLSHER (BRITISH 1930-2010) SORROW 9/9, embossed with signature, title and number to base, verdigris bronze 68cm high, 33cm wide, 26cm deep (26 ¾in high, 13in wide, 10 ¼in deep) including integral base Brian Willsher was born in the deprived south London borough of Catford in 1930 and lived in the city all his life. His was a definitively ‘non-art’ background, one that would today make him an ‘outsider artist’ and very liked fêted by an art world in search of authentic voices. He had no formal training as a sculptor – instead he studied engineering at Woolwich Polytechnic for three years from 1946 and then began a career of odd-jobbing, working as telephone engineer, farm worker and dental technician, all the while funnelling his various salaries into his passion for motorcycle racing.In the early 1950s Willsher suffered a major bike accident. During his recovery he began playing around with plaster, before moving onto wood around 1956. Initially he tried his hand at making a living carving salad bowls, to little success, although this did lead to a shop owner asking him to make lamp bases instead. They proved far more popular and were sold at Harrods, Heal’s and Liberty’s. From here, Willsher began to generate purely sculptural forms, defined by their intricacy and layering, in a Modernist vocabulary reminiscent of Barbara Hepworth and Henry Moore. After a one-man show at Dunn’s furniture store in Bromley in 1965 and another at Heal’s in 1966, Willsher’s career as a sculptor took off. He was given another exhibition at Heal’s in 1967 (where he sold everything for the deliberately low price of £10 each, subverting the ‘fine art’ context). He showed in Melbourne, Australia, had three works commissioned for Dartington Hall and six for Devon Guild of Craftsmen. He also showed in the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition for five years in a row.However, just as his career was taking off, Willsher became more famous for a controversy not of his making. In 1968, Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) decided his work did not count as ‘fine art’ and so was immediately subject to the 40% manufacturing tax on ‘household decorations’ – in a grim parallel of the 1926 episode when US Customs officials denied Constantin Brancusi’s Bird in Space entry into the country, arguing it was just a piece of metal rather than a sculpture. Willsher was probably not helped by his own diffidence to pricing his work as ‘art’. And part of the Revenue’s argument may have been based on his technique - he didn’t hide the fact he used a bandsaw rather than a chisel. Indeed, he had featured in a British Pathé newsreel, which showed him at work in his suburban garden studio sawing blocks of wood, his hands just centimetres from the bandsaw blade. ‘These are no handmade shapes created with highfalutin motivations’, intones the voice-over, ‘Some purist sculptors may turn up their noses at Willsher’s efforts.’A number of artists sprang to Willsher’s defence, most notably Moore, who perhaps saw many of his own sculptural concerns within Willsher’s abstract sculptures, with their holes punched through the middle. Moore was quoted in The Guardian saying, ‘Here's pure sculpture, indeed! More than that, memorable sculpture!’ and in turn it was The Guardian and The Observer who turned the impasse into a national campaign, posing questions such as ‘When is a sculpture not a sculpture?’ Eventually, HMRC backed down and Willsher was vindicated, although the furore put him off exhibiting, just at the point when his star was in the ascendant. This may go some way to explain why his work is less well-known today than it should be – even if he has enjoyed something of a small renaissance in the last decade or so, as dedicated collectors such as Hugo Burge would seek his work out, either online or at the few galleries who showed him. This reappraisal of Willsher reached its apotheosis in October 2021, with an exhibition at Margaret Howell’s Wigmore Street atelier – a non-traditional ‘art’ space of which the artist would no doubt have approved.Willsher is known almost exclusively for his finely turned, smoothly finished carvings in exotic woods and so we are delighted to be able to also present some of his lesser-seen bronzes from Hugo Burge’s collection, as together they represent the breadth of Willsher’s sculptural vision.
* Purse. An Edwardian purse, Continental, hand-stitched black velvet and satin fabric, silver pierced frame with Continental hallmark, engraved with figures and foliate garlands, inside of frame engraved 'Ottoline Morrell 10 Gower Street', lined with yellow silk, white metal chain with ring, 15 x 11.5 cm (6 x 4.5 ins), containing a manuscript note in the hand of Igor Vinogradoff 'My Juiie is a darling,/A lovely little cat./She thinks that I'm not loving,/But she is wrong in that', 8 x 10 cm (3.25 x 4 ins), together with:A Regency hand-painted reticule, small green silk bag or purse, with cream ribbon stitched vertically to centre of each side, hand-painted with blue dots between pink tulips and green and yellow leaves, one lower corner with tiny white metal acorn suspended from a ring, that to other corner lacking, top of each side gathered onto a thin white metal bar with finial at each end (one side with stitching becoming loose), white metal chain attached to middle of each bar, 13 x 18 cm (5.25 x 9 ins), plus:A late 19th century chatelaine purse, hand-stitched brocade bag (frayed and threadbare in places), silver frame with Dutch hallmark, embossed to one side, and with decorative embossed hook with two similar panels below attaching to large ring on frame (held together with ribbon where a few small connecting rings lacking), cream silk lining partly replaced with black satin, overall size 40 x 17 cm (15.75 x 6.75 ins), plus 20 other bags and purses, including a large beaded bag, probably Italian, early 20th century, both sides with a pair of dolphins amongst scrolling floral stems, lined with red and gold brocade, engraved yellow metal frame, beaded tassel trim to lower edge (slightly deficient to one corner), lacking chain, 32.5 x 23 cm (12.75 x 9 ins)QTY: (22)NOTE:Provenance: Lady Ottoline Morrell (1873-1938); thence by descent.Igor Vinogradoff was the second husband of Julian, Ottoline and Philip's daughter, and Juiie was Julian's Garsington nickname.Lady Ottoline Morrell, and her husband, Philip, lived at 10 Gower Street, Bloomsbury, London, from 1927, after straitened circumstances forced them to sell the Oxfordshire Manor of Garsington. Ottoline had both a generous and an acquisitive nature, and the combination of years of hosting friends at Garsington, and buying beautiful furniture and objects with which to fill the house, meant that it was necessary to relocate to a more modest setting. The Morrells frequented the Continent and purchased seemingly without restraint whilst travelling abroad, as well as when closer to home. On one of their trips to an antique shop in Fulham, in 1920, they purchased 14 statues and busts with pedestals for the garden at a cost of £517, or about 20% of their total annual income.
A matched set of cast and painted aluminium garden furniture to include a circular openwork bistro table with scrolled knees on splayed tripod supports together with a pair of chairs each having an arched back with a large central acanthus leaf splat in a pierced surround over a circular openwork seat raised on moulded cabriole supports. H.63 W.69cm (table) H.84.5cm (chairs)
BRITAINS - a collection of items from Britains and Floral Garden series including swinging benches, bird houses, fences, hoses, other garden furniture and tools together with crazing paving, lawns, shrubs and plants, walled beds, a variety of flower-bed bases and green house and shed parts. The items are loose and unboxed. The items generally appear to be in good, but playworn / displayed, condition. The items have not been checked for completeness. (This does not constitute a guarantee.) [GM - 2]
BRITAINS - a collection of boxed and unboxed items from Britains Trees and Floral Garden series. The boxed items include Greenhouse #2592, apple tree #1801, brick edging #2560, gladioli #2544, climbing roses #2546, crazy paving #2569 (x2), silver birch #1806, oak tree #1822, lawns #2568 (in sealed packets x2) etc. Together with a selection of empty boxes (some with spares noted) and some loose items including various types and colours of branches, multiple greenhouse and shed parts, garden furniture, loose lawns etc. The boxed items generally appear to be in very good or better condition - some with sprues noted. The boxes range from poor to about excellent. The loose / spare items generally appear to be in good, but playworn / displayed, condition with some storage wear. The items have not been checked for completeness. (This does not constitute a guarantee.) [GM]
A DAVID SUTHERLAND REEDED TEAK GARDEN FURNITURE SUITE DESIGNED BY JOHN HUTTON MODERN with cushions, including two reeded lounge chairs stamped 'SUTHERLAND', two reeded ottomans and a low table The chairs measure 90cm high with cushion, 80cm wide, 95cm deep (seat height 40cm) The stools measure 35.5cm high with cushion, 82cm wide, 22cm deep The table measure 30.5cm high, 121.5cm wide 63.5cm deep Provenance: Property of a Lady, Eaton Square, London Condition Report: PLEASE NOTE: ALL LOTS ARE LOCATED AT SACKVILLE WEST STORAGE IN ANDOVER (SP10 3SA) AND ARE NOT AVAILABLE TO VIEW.Marks, knocks, scratches, abrasions commensurate with age and use Overall weathered appearance, and have visibly been outside for some time, would benefit from a clean Some losses to panelling, notably to the foot of one stool Surface marks and deposits to the removable cushion covers which would benefit from a clean Some loose slats Both chairs stamped 'SUTHERLAND' to undersideADDITIONAL IMAGES: Please 'Ask a Question' to request additional images for this lot. Condition Report Disclaimer
Konvolut Blumen-Zubehör für Blumenläden und Puppenstuben. L 2 - 14 cm. Verschiedene Pflanzen und Blumentöpfe, meist mit Textilblumen. Dazu Rankgitter, Gartenmöbel und 4 Püppchen. Altersspuren und Defekte. Aufrufzeit 27. | Feb. 2025 | voraussichtlich 10:49 Uhr (CET)Convolute of flower accessories for flower stores and doll's houses. L 2 - 14 cm. Various plants and flower pots, mostly with textile flowers. Including trellis, garden furniture and 4 dolls. Signs of age and defects. Call time 27 | Feb. 2025 | probably 10:49 am (CET)*This is an automatically generated translation from German by deepl.com and only to be seen as an aid - not a legally binding declaration of lot properties. Please note that we can only guarantee for the correctness of description and condition as provided by the German description.
Loading...-
2009 item(s)/page