by Tom Gurney
Tom Gurney BSc (Hons) is an art history expert with over 20 years experience
Page created on March 2, 2018 / Page updated on October 6, 2026
Email: tomgurney1@gmail.com / Phone: +44 7429 011000
Introduction
A basket of flowers fills the round copper plate of Frida Kahlo's The Flower Basket. Two broad yellow blooms rise above a dense gathering of red, pink, white and blue flowers, while a small bird appears near the upper edge. Painted in 1941, the work has a documented path from a changed commission for Mexico's National Palace to a sale to the actress Paulette Goddard. [1] [2]
Its colour and abundance invite a celebratory reading, yet the arrangement is not entirely orderly: a regular floral border encloses stems and blossoms that turn in different directions. The work also has a more complicated history than the familiar story of a private gift. Letters described in the 2019 sale catalogue, together with a signed export declaration, let us follow both its public commission and its later purchase, while leaving some questions about payment open. [2] [3] [4]
At a Glance
- Work: The Flower Basket, also referred to as Canasta con flores. [1] [5]
- Date and medium: Signed and dated 1941; oil on copper, as catalogued by Christie's. [1]
- Size: Circular copper plate 64.1 cm in diameter; 80 cm across with its frame. [1]
- First setting: Associated with a still-life commission for the dining room of Mexico's National Palace. [2]
- Recorded buyer: Paulette Goddard, whose December 1941 export declaration records a $300 purchase of a Still Life later identified with this work. [1] [4] [5]
Contents
- Introduction
- Looking at The Flower Basket
- From Historical Portraits to Copper Still Lifes
- Paulette Goddard and the Export Document
- Abundance and Fragility
- Related Reading
Looking at The Flower Basket
The painting's circular shape makes the flower display feel concentrated, though the basket itself occupies only a modest space near the bottom. Blooms and leaves rise well beyond its rim. A large yellow-rayed flower near the top and another to the left give the crowded centre points of orientation, while smaller red, pink, white, blue and purple accents fill the intervals. [1]
A more measured ring of little flowers, foliage and green forms follows the outer edge. This border holds the eye around the plate before returning it to the basket, where stems and heads are packed less evenly. The blue area behind the upper flowers makes their colours unusually vivid; it need not be identified as an outdoor sky or a specific garden. [1]
Above the highest yellow flower is a small bird. Luis-Martín Lozano, writing for Christie's 2019 catalogue, identifies it as a hummingbird and also notes a butterfly and a bee among the flowers. He names roses, daisies, sunflowers, dahlias and orchids in the arrangement, supplying a more specific botanical vocabulary than the image alone can confidently establish. [2]
The basket's woven structure, the round plate and the enclosing floral ring give the picture a strong sense of design. Against that framework, the central bouquet looks more changeable: petals and stalks have different scales and directions. Kahlo makes an ordinary still-life subject visually active without needing to turn every flower or insect into a fixed personal symbol. [1] [2]
Watch: Frida Kahlo
Five perspectives to view here alongside the article.
Frida Kahlo’s The Two Fridas: Great Art Explained
A focused visual introduction to the painting and its context.
The Flower Basket in Kahlo’s career
The Two Fridas
1939Timeline source: Museo Frida Kahlo chronology [6].
From Historical Portraits to Copper Still Lifes
The work emerged from a National Palace dining-room commission whose brief changed. Lozano reconstructs an initial plan for five portraits of distinguished women from Mexican history, later replaced by circular copper still lifes. This history helps explain why the flower painting has a decorative round format and why it belongs to a group rather than to an isolated domestic scene. [2]
Among the proposed subjects were Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz, Josefa Ortiz de Domínguez and Leona Vicario. Lozano's account of a letter to Gómez shows that the change was not communicated cleanly: Kahlo understood one adviser to be pressing for still lifes while the president might still want portraits. The uncertainty mattered to a painter facing a September deadline for several round pictures. [2]
Lozano draws on published correspondence involving Kahlo, her doctor Leo Eloesser and Marte R. Gómez. His account describes two pictures delivered on 13 September 1941 and Kahlo's later request for payment for the work she had completed. The two delivered paintings were returned to her, while Christie's exhibition history also lists a 1941 presentation at the Palacio Nacional. [1] [2]
Those details do not tell us exactly where The Flower Basket hung, how long it remained on view or whether its present frame was made for the dining room. Nor does the accessible correspondence settle whether the government ultimately paid Kahlo. Art historian Teresa Eckmann, in a separate essay for the same catalogue, points to later testimony suggesting it may have done so; the safest conclusion is that payment became a point of dispute, not that non-payment is established beyond doubt. [2] [3]
The commission matters because it places this luxuriant image within official patronage as well as Kahlo's private practice. A flower painting might appear intimate when seen alone, but the round support and its documented group context belong to a public interior. Lozano says Kahlo still hoped in late October to make the originally proposed historical portraits for another part of the palace, although the plan was not realised. [2]
That unfulfilled proposal is a reminder that the final painting was one outcome of a shifting project, not the simple execution of a stable brief. Lozano associates another still life from the group with the composer Carlos Chávez; it is a separate painting, and its later whereabouts and title should not be transferred to The Flower Basket. The Goddard sale gave this particular copper plate a new route beyond the dining-room scheme. [2]
Paulette Goddard and the Export Document
Christie's provenance lists Goddard as acquiring the painting directly from Kahlo. A signed declaration dated 19 December 1941 records Goddard's purchase of a Mexican Still Life for $300 and its transport by air through Brownsville. The original form is photographed in a later French auction catalogue, which describes a roughly 65 cm oil painting and identifies the transaction with The Flower Basket. [1] [4] [5]
The document uses the generic title Still Life rather than the specific title by which the work is now known. That difference should remain visible: the identification is made by later cataloguers from the buyer, date, format, size and object history, not by a title written on the form itself. Its rounded 65 cm description is consistent with Christie's more precise 64.1 cm diameter for the copper plate. [1] [4] [5]
This record cuts against a story that Goddard received the painting as a free gift or an apology. Whatever warmth may have existed between buyer and artist, the surviving transaction is described as a purchase. Eckmann also cites a later-published Kahlo letter indicating that by December she had spent money received from “Paulette”; the exact original letter was not consulted here, but the account reinforces her reading of Goddard as a patron rather than a recipient of a present. [3] [4]
The purchase does not, in turn, explain every visual detail as a coded message about Kahlo, Goddard or Diego Rivera. A later claim that the hummingbird, butterfly and bee each stand for one of those people lacks a traceable artist statement. The creatures belong first to the observed arrangement; a proposed symbolic key would need firmer evidence than their presence alone. [2] [3]
The later provenance moves through a 1980 Sotheby's sale and several collections and dealers before the Alsdorf collection acquired the picture in 2007. Christie's also lists appearances at the Grey Art Gallery in 1983 and Tate Modern in 2005. Because the work was offered again in 2019, that historical chain should not be mistaken for a statement of its present owner or current display. [1]
Abundance and Fragility
Lozano emphasises the vivid, festive character of the flowers and the small living creatures within them. Eckmann reads the contrast between the regular outer wreath and the cut blossoms at the centre differently, finding an awareness that flowers wilt and life is transient. The two readings need not cancel each other: the work can present abundance while the uneven bouquet also prompts a thought about change. [2] [3]
Eckmann places the picture beside other traditions of Mexican still life, including the decorated trays Kahlo owned and the nineteenth-century work of José Agustín Arrieta, Mercedes Zamora and Hermenegildo Bustos. She also notes a difference from the calla lilies prominently associated with Rivera. These are critical comparisons, not claims that Kahlo directly copied a particular tray or painter. [3]
Eckmann's mortality interpretation is a way of looking, not a documented declaration of Kahlo's intention. We can see the orderly border, crowded basket and different directions of stems; we cannot prove from those features alone exactly what the painter wished each element to mean. Likewise, a bright palette tells us about the painting's visual effect, not necessarily Kahlo's mood while she made it. [1] [3]
The Flower Basket is therefore more than a decorative exception to Kahlo's self-portraits. It is a carefully organised still life with an official origin, a documented sale and a later exhibition history. Its strong design and the surviving paper trail make it possible to consider the work on its own terms, while keeping its most appealing anecdotes separate from what the records support. [1] [2] [4]
Related Reading
Kahlo's still lifes looks at her wider treatment of flowers, fruit and objects. Tray with Poppies is a distinct earlier flower painting with its own history.
Discussion
Use the cited evidence and your own close looking to explain your view. The prompts below are starting points, not fixed interpretations.
Reader Insights
How does the ordered floral border change the way you see the crowded bouquet?
What can the 1941 export form establish about Goddard's purchase, and why does its generic title matter?
Where do Lozano's festive reading and Eckmann's mortality reading overlap or diverge?
Join the Conversation
Which reading best fits the evidence, and where does uncertainty remain?
References
- Christie's, The Flower Basket, Latin American Art sale, New York, 20 November 2019, lot 22, object details, provenance and exhibition history. View source text.
- Luis-Martín Lozano, signed essay accompanying Christie's 2019 lot 22, paragraphs on the flowers, National Palace commission, correspondence and Goddard sale. The original letters were not independently examined for this article. View source text.
- Teresa Eckmann, signed essay accompanying Christie's 2019 lot 22, paragraphs on the Goddard narrative, disputed payment and contrasting floral arrangement. View source text.
- Heritage Auctions, two Frida Kahlo signed export declarations, lot 34309, description of the 19 December 1941 $300 purchase and Goddard's air transport. The declaration's own title is Still Life. View source text.
- Aguttes, Aristophil: Britannica Americana, 18 November 2019, lot 104, printed p. 139 (PDF p. 141), photograph and description of the 1941 export declaration with the later catalogue identification of The Flower Basket. View source text.
- Museo Frida Kahlo, Frida interactive chronology, selected work dates used for the comparison timeline. The current work's date follows its cited object record. View source text.
