Repainting murals

Keith Haring painted a mural on the side of a three story brick
building at a technical college in Melbourne Australia in 1984 using
commercial house paint. By 1990 it was quite faded and a process of
recognition of its importance and concern for its condition led to
its being treated by a conservator with appropriate experience to
consolidate it and slow the deterioration in 1994. It was supposed
to be attended to on a roughly 5 year maintenance cycle, however
this did not occur due to changes in ownership of the building.
Though it has not markedly deteriorated since its treatment some 15
years ago, there has recently been public pressure to repaint the
mural to return it more to it's original appearance and this seems
to be supported by the Haring Foundation in New York. The Haring
Foundation has apparently funded repainting of some Haring murals by
sign painters in the US East Coast region.

The local conservation community and preservation groups in
Melbourne support a traditional conservation treatment which is more
reversible and focusses on preservation of the artist's hand, but
will not appear as much like the original as repainting would. There
are legal issues as the mural has been classified by the local
heritage authority, which must issue a permit for any work to be
done.

Does anyone have specific experience with similar murals being
repainted vs. given a conservation approach? I would appreciate any
information about successes or failures in the repainting vs.
conservation treatment of murals, especially by Haring.

Thomas Dixon
Melbourne Australia


                                  ***
                  Conservation DistList Instance 24:21
                Distributed: Thursday, October 21, 2010
                       Message Id: cdl-24-21-012
                                  ***