I think Mary's points are well taken.  The romance of patina / distaste for
corrosion, shifting point of view will always be debatable.  For outdoor
bronzes the question is often whether the corrosion/patina is intended but,
even if artists stated that they liked their casts to weather, there is no
clear indication that a current deteriorated/aged appearance has anything to
do with what was intended.  Aging is often in the context of accepted
maintenance practices, like growth patterns in gardens.  Newly planted trees
do not look like the designer's vision for the future but neither do cracked
and neglected pavings hidden under choking overgrowth.  Aging intentions
generally presume a continued level of care, whatever that can be defined
as.  Bronzes were frequently washed, rubbed and oiled by foundries after
installation historically.  Gorham foundry has a brochure for their plaques
from the turn of the century (in color!) which shows patinas and gives
procedures for follow-up maintenance.  Windows are intended to be washed on
buildings, why not facades?

As Mary said, the fact that we are accustomed to neglect does not imply that
there is a virtue inherent in it.  Of course, without that neglect a certain
undeniable character of aged buildings would disappear.  It's hard to
imagine "Rosemary's Baby" set in the Dakota apartments of today, or 1874,
(is that the right date Mr.. NY Hist?)

By the way, that movie has the scariest scene I can remember, Mia Farrow and
(what's his name?) move into an all original intact apartment in the Dakota
and paint the wood work and walls white and put up flower print wall paper!
Terrifying!  It was worse than Godzilla demolishing the Brooklyn Bridge.

Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: Mary Dierickx <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
<[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 8:50 PM
Subject: Re: Mr. Clean or Controlled Failure


>About the patina of age and cleaning buildings ---
>
>I don't see what's so bad about keeping buildings clean -- think of it in
>terms of your car, your suit, your face, your sheets.  I have been known to
>ruin clothes in the wash so I shouldn't be allowed to clean buildings, but
>many people are pretty good about cleaning stuff.
>
>I have seen many examples of overcleaning and destruction from
sandblasting,
>from harsh chemicals, and from too much water pressure.  Just because some
>people are bad cleaners is no reason to stop cleaning altogether.
>
>While it is in Japanese decorative arts tradition to value the patina of
age
>on an object,  they keep their sidewalks very clean and coat their wood
walls
>regularly.
>Pre 1950s building owners and designers in the US, I believe, expected that
>buildings would be kept clean.  (After about the 1950s deferred maintenance
>and no maintenance came into fashion.)  Now some designers worked with
>weathering, like York & Sawyer at the Federal Reserve in NYC. The
Renaissance
>Revival style facade has a deliberately variegated appearance due to the
>choice of stones that weather differently.  That is a little unusual.  Most
>architects, I think,  expected that buildings would not be streaked with
>grime or caked with black pollutants.
>
>
>Signed,
>
>Ms. Clean