RAYMOND M. SPILLER and ASSOCIATES INC. 1025 Westview Street Philadelphia, Penna. 19119 Phone: (215) 849-2888 FINE ARTS APPRAISERS and Art Conservators August 24, 1987 Ms. Nina Ozlu Artists Equity Association, Inc. 1116 F Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20004 Examination and Evaluation of Recent Alterations to Dear Ms. Ozlu: The following summary is based upon the undersigned appraiser's: Long-time familiarity with the Maryland House Murals; study of photographic material supplied by Artists Equity Association and additional photographs and documentation obtained from other sources; recent on-site examination of the murals after their alteration by Studio Carli of York, Pennsylvania; and research regarding the current price range of the artist who executed the murals, and the price range of other contemporary muralists of comparable status. The murals are the original work of William A. Smith, N.A.. signed in two places and dated 1968. There are nine panels in all, depicting significant personages and events in Maryland's history. Inasmuch as the eight panels that flank the lobby (four on each side, above staircases leading to a balcony) have not been overpainted. this report is primarily concerned with the large central panel situated under the balcony and facing the building's entrance. This panel measures twelve feet and seven inches in height, forty-three feet and one inch in width, a total of slightly more than five hundred and twenty square feet. It is painted in oil on an unspliced expanse of sturdy top-quality Belgian linen canvas, glue-sized and oil-primed (see attached specimen A). The panel was installed on April 2, 1968. by the firm of J. Frank Hoffman and Sons, marouflage specialists, then located at 3239 Erdman Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland 21313. SERVING PHILADELPHIA AND THE MAIN LINE WITH A COMPLETE FINE ARTS SERVICE SINCE 1952 Ms. Nina Ozlu Page 2 August 24, 1987 The panel depicts Leonard Calvert's arrival in America in 1634, to take possession of the proprietary colony of Maryland on behalf of his older brother, Cecilius Calvert, 2nd Baron of Baltimore. It comprises twenty-one near life-size figures, three Yaocomico Indian dwellings, and the ships Ark and Dove. The setting, on the Western Shore, is the modern site of St. Marys. On first viewing of the mural after it was worked over by Studio Carli, I was shocked at the desecration and vulgarization of a painting that, in my opinion, ranks high among the notable historic i murals of the past fifty years. Thave enjoyed seeing the work many times, and have always admired the excellence of the painting, as well as the scholarship and authority the artist has brought to his historical subject matter. The consequences of Studio Carli's overpainting are immediately obvious to one familiar with the original work - an effect of extensive diminishment of quality. A precise determination of the extent and nature of the repainting, however, has demanded careful study of photographs taken before and after, as well as painstaking examination of the painting itself. To clarify my findings, I have prepared a supplement (B, attached) as a key to the color photograph of the completed original painting taken prior to installation (C, attached). Areas colored green indicate where new painting has recently been added, entirely by Studio Carli. Arches over three doors have been removed and replaced with wall, to which has been affixed canvas insets and extensions to the original composition. Areas colored yellow indicate alteration or extensive repainting of the original work. The new painting in the green areas is, without exception, ill-conceived, very poorly drawn, and amateurishly incompetent - completely out of accord with the original work. In and over arch No. 1, the anatomical configuration of the legs and feet of the two Indians is so misunderstood as to be ludicrous. The nearer of the two figures has been transformed into a dummy-like image, his feet so misplaced with respect to the center of gravity that he looks about to tip over. The added grass, the aimless brush strokes on the ground surface, and the twig-like additions near the dwelling are fussy and out of unity with the original concept. In arch No. 2, the connecting compositional resolution is weak and fatuous. The form contiguous to the door, intended to represent a fourth Indian dwelling, more closely resembles a loaf of bread. In arch No. 3, the added hand, arm, shoulder and back of the helmeted figure is drawn in a manner that causes the figure to appear deformed. The representation of his armor is preposterous. The areas colored yellow are so considerable, many of them so far removed from the sections of canvas previously occupied by the Ms. Nina Ozlu August 24, 1987 arches, that I surmise much of the repainting is an attempt to conceal extensive damage done to the original painting in the course of a bungling removal, or partial removal, of the canvas from the wall. The entire ground area, originally painted with a loosely broken texture, has been covered over with a flat solid tone, causing the figures to look cutout. Tunics on the two figures to the left of door No. 3 have been reworked with added highlights and folds, breaking the simplicity of the shapes and weakening their function in the pattern scheme. Several heads have been repainted, their modelling destroyed and their characterization lost. This is especially obvious in the head of Leonard Calvert (mid-way between No. 1 and No. 2), and the heads of the two plume-hatted figures (between No. 2 and No. 3). Calvert's gloved hands have been repainted a different tone value. The contour of the tunic on the figure adjacent to door No. 2 has been altered. Tone values have been distorted on the Indian dwellings. I most emphatically attest that what has been done by Studio Carli is, in no sense, a restoration; and the words prominently painted to the left of door No. 1, Restoration by Studio Carli York Pa 1987 (D, attached), is a blatently fraudulent assertion. It is, moreover, a slur on the reputation and the professional integrity of the artist who painted the murals. The mural is so corrupted that, in its present state, it is not valid to expose the work as that of William A. Smith, whose signature it bears. An appraisal of the central panel of the mural before recent alterations, additions and overpainting would be in the range of $ 500,000. An appraisal of the central panel in its "as is" condition, would be in the range of $70,000. Normally, there is a decrease of 15% to 20% in value of many restored works. Therefore, if the central panel is successfully restored, I would place the approximate value at between $ 400,000 and $425,000. This would, of course, be contingent on the original artist's designing and executing new painting in the green areas, or the replacement of the arches. It is the practice of ethical conservators to use only paint that can easily be removed, in case their treatment of a work of art is not successful. This is known as the "principle of reversibility". There is reason to suspect that Studio Carli disregarded, or was ignorant of, this principle, and employed an intractable acrylic paint, rather than an easily reversible Magna-type acrylic. If this is true, it might be impossible to remove the Carli overpainting without lifting the original paint layer. A qualified conservator would have to make that determination. Ms. Nina Ozlu August 24, 1987 If such is the case, the conservator will undoubtedly advise that it is only feasible to paint the panel anew, on a fresh canvas, and the original artist would have to do it. Inasmuch as research, sketches, and concept already exist, repainting the central panel would not be starting from scratch. Nor would it be a patched and mended work. It would have the integrity of the original work before desecration, and the same value. I would appraise it in the range of $500,000. The eight smaller panels are in good condition, though they should be cleaned. There are, also, a few small scratches which should be in-painted. They cohere the mural ensemble of which the large central panel is the keystone. An appraisal of these smaller panels would be in the range of $ 50,000 each. |