Art Damage Control

Popular Mural Painted Over In LA - Without apparent warning, an iconic mural by artist Kent Twitchell depicting fellow artist Ed Ruscha was painted over Friday in Los Angeles. "It's always been such a popular piece in the art world and in Los Angeles. I had no idea it was in danger in any way. To not be notified, to have it be a fait accompli…. It will take a while for the shock to wear off. It was sort of my 'Mona Lisa'; I worked on it for nine years."

Works of public art are protected by law, including the federal Visual Artists Rights Act. Zakheim said creators of murals typically must be given 90 days to respond before a work can be destroyed.

"We could have protected the piece, we could have protected the paint, we could have hibernated it," Zakheim said, referring to a technique by which a mural is treated with paint that can be removed later. "There are a whole bunch of options besides destroying it."

It was not the first time one of Twitchell's murals had been endangered. His 1974 "Our Woman of the Freeway," visible from the northbound lanes of the 101 Freeway, was painted out by a billboard company in 1986 and vandalized during restoration in 2000. The first incident led to a lawsuit, which the artist won.

Zakheim said the Ruscha piece was equally important. "The mural is published in about 100 art books and periodicals," he said. "It's probably his most known mural. Career-wise, it's like a kick in the gut." Los Angeles Times 06/03/06

Well, artist Kent Twitchell intends to sue, but as an artist, even winning would feel like an empty accomplishment. Recently, around twenty of my paintings were returned after three months of floating around the country between a museum in North Dakota and a gallery in Boston. Much to my dismay, a handful of the works were damaged. Now as a former gallery director, I realize that mistakes occur and many of the infractions to the works were minor – yet, they seemed to be issues that could have been easily avoided with a bit of common sense. One painting had the show label listing title and dimensions actually still on the piece (it should never have been there to begin with – it should have been on the wall!) and to make matters worse my name was listed as “Robert North” on the label. I was able to remove the label, luckily, without having to touch-up too much of the paint. Another piece was not even covered in bubble wrap, just stacked in the crate between a few other works, which led to some unwanted creasing that needed to be flattened back out (I am a meticulous packer – a stringent follower of museum standards since my 1999/2000 fellowship stint at the Smithsonian). Fortunately, every aspect of my scrolls from the rice paper mountings to the ink/paint is handmade by yours truly – so I can take any level of damage and return the painting to original creation condition. It’s not the act of repairing that is aggravating; to some degree it even gives me a bit of an adrenaline rush to continue the “process” on a painting I once thought complete. My annoyance comes from the fact that someone didn’t respect the work enough to take care of it, properly. Why should I give a damn about showing the work if they don’t give a damn to hang and repack it properly? That, my friends, is the true source of my recent weeks’ funk. - DN