Purchased by Frank More of Edinburgh, probably in the 1930s, and thence by descent to the present owners

Original canvas. Some occasional and minor areas of craquelure in the thicker areas of impasto, only visible on close inspection. The paint surface is slightly dirty and the work may benefit from a light clean. Otherwise the work appears to be in good original condition. UV light inspection reveals no evidence of any retouching or restoration. Held in a gilt plaster frame and under glass.
"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."

In her essay Exploring the Poetics of Form: The Post-War Paintings of S.J. Peploe, Elizabeth Cumming describes the evolution within Peploe’s work through the artist’s early use of acid yellows, emerald greens and burnt orange, noting that such bravura would give way within a decade to a ‘quieter, more empirical way of working’ (E. Cumming, S.J. Peploe, 2012, p.67). Still Life with Roses exemplifies the mature work of Peploe; a largely blue-purple muted tonal range is charged only by the red, orange and yellow highlights of the blooms. Altogether it is an essay in dynamism of both composite form and colour. By the late 1920s Peploe had seceded from the more experimental Colourism of painters such as Henri Matisse and André Derain, whose influence is evident in many of his earlier, more saturated works. What was retained, however, was the importance of subtle colour combinations within his still life compositions, the perfection of which Peploe strove towards throughout the decade.

It would be easy to allow the ease with which Peploe’s oils appear to have been painted to disguise the meticulous nature of his working method. In his biography of the artist, Stanley Cursiter noted that ‘when Peploe selected his flowers or fruit from a painter's point of view he presented a new problem to the Edinburgh florists. They did not always understand when he rejected a lemon, for its form, or a pear for its colour, and he remained unmoved by the protestations of ripeness or flavour’ (S. Cursiter, Peploe, 1947, p.55). Once the composition had been formed, the paint application was no less considered. Quadrilateral brush strokes are recognisable across Peploe’s works, but they evolved away from the harsh angles found in Still Life painted in 1912 and Flowers and Fruit [Japanese Background] of 1915. Retained in a more subtle form in Still Life with Roses, the square brushstrokes contrast elegantly with the curved forms inherent in the🃏 compositi♑on, including the semi-circular table and rounded white vase.

Despite its many distinctions, Peploe’s late work still owes a great debt to French modernism. The ‘auld alliance’, frequently referred to in analysis of the Colourist works, remained strong during this period with Peploe making his last journey to Cassis as late as 1930 before declining health prevented travel outside of Scotland. Although tonally it is distinct from the work of Matisse and Derain, in the bold outlines and impasto passages of Still Life with Roses the enduring influence of Cézanne’s work shows through. Peploe had held a life-long fascination with the still life’s of Cézanne; as such the present work may be seen to be the marriage of French modernism with Peploe’s new-found maturity. As examination of Still Life with Roses suggests, each still life can be seen to represent a unique moment in the artist’s developing style. In the words of one critic present at Peploe’s memorial exhibition held at The Scottish Gallery in 1935: ‘Here is no mere subjective formula imposed upon different subject-matter, making all more or less akin, but a sensitive reaction to the varying qualities and suggestiveness in each of the subjects under scrutiny’ (G. Peploe, S.J. Peploe, 2012, p.180).