Sunflower I
Sunflower I
Signed Print
David Hockney
Price data unavailable
AAGR (5 years) This estimate blends recent public auction records with our own private sale data and network demand.
There aren't enough data points on this work for a comprehensive result. Please speak to a specialist by making an enquiry.
Medium: Intaglio
Edition size: 80
Year: 1995
Size: H 69cm x W 57cm
Signed: Yes
Format: Signed Print
TradingFloor
Track this artwork in realtime
Watch artwork, manage valuations, track your portfolio and return against your collection
Track auction value trend
Auction Results
| Auction Date | Auction House | Artwork | Hammer Price | Return to Seller | Buyer Paid |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| January 2021 | Phillips London - United Kingdom | Sunflower I - Signed Print | |||
| February 2020 | Wilson55 - United Kingdom | Sunflower I - Signed Print | |||
| May 2017 | Freeman's - United States | Sunflower I - Signed Print | |||
| September 2015 | Sotheby's Online - United Kingdom | Sunflower I - Signed Print | |||
| March 2015 | Sotheby's Online - United Kingdom | Sunflower I - Signed Print | |||
| July 2014 | Christie's New York - United States | Sunflower I - Signed Print | |||
| July 2014 | Bonhams New Bond Street - United Kingdom | Sunflower I - Signed Print |
Meaning & Analysis
An obvious homage to van Gogh, Sunflower I is a striking intaglio still life. Here the sunflowers of the title stand tall in their pot or vase, against a background filled with marks from the etching plate. The leaves are a mass of black ink, dominating the composition, and bring a certain weight to the more ephemeral blooms. The work could just as easily be a copy of the Dutch master’s work or a study from life, however the pot is a different shape to van Gogh’s. It is likely that Hockney was inspired by the famous series of paintings and created his own similar composition. Whereas elsewhere there are veiled quotations from Morandi or Matisse still lifes, Hogarth prints, and various works of literature, here we see perhaps Hockney's most overt acknowledgment of the debt he owes to those who came before him. The artist clearly had a close relationship to van Gogh’s work and even compared his move to LA from London in 1964 to ‘van Gogh going to Arles’.
