« Responsive Architecture | Eye Level Home | LA Times: Now on Exhibit, the Blogger's View »

The Science
July 31, 2006


Ann Creager uses microtweezers to restore Gene Davis's Two Part Blue. Photo by Michael Mansfield.

Gene Davis's Two Part Blue was given to American Art in the ‘90s as part of the late artist’s estate.  The painting came with a surprise: it seemed to have some white accretions on its surface. (Viewers can observe the restoration of this piece in person at the Lunder Conservation Center; that's where I spotted it.)

Microscopic examination revealed that the white specks were tiny areas of exposed fabric from which the paint had flaked away. The painting appeared to be abraded in places, according to Ann Creager, a conservator at the Lunder Conservation Center.

Creager says that the paint was likely scuffed when the artist rolled the canvas to store it. Restoring the painting includes using microtweezers to pluck the fibers that have separated from the support and then painting over the remaining bare threads using watercolor and gouache. Opaque paints, like oils and acrylics (and in this case, the original Magna colors used by Davis) are eschewed by conservators, who almost never make such permanent changes to a piece.

Creager has her eye on two other anomalies as well. Under the microscope she sees specks of alien paint, which she believes were likely introduced before the painting was rolled; these flecks are too small to see with the naked eye, and the conservator will remove them using the microtweezers. There's also a "shiny substance" that she can't identify without further chemical testing. (She notes that she hasn't "worked that far up the stripe yet.")

That was enough for me. I love that there's an arena within art appreciation for wonks, a branch rooted in chemistry and empiricism and microscopic examination. As conservators will tell you, there are other intangibles associated with art conservation: "We always brag to the art history majors that the conservators get to touch things and art history majors only get to see slides."


Posted by Kriston on July 31, 2006 in American Art Here


Comments

I remember hearing an anecdote, I don't know if it's true, that years ago some workers at the Met were moving a Pollock painting, and a cigarette butt that had been lodged in the paint fell off. I understand the conservators were in something of a quandry as to whether they should reattach it. Any idea what the accepted practice is for things like that?

Posted by: David | Aug 2, 2006

David, thanks for your comment. Interesting story. We're looking into getting an answer on that for you.

Posted by: Jeff | Aug 2, 2006

I've got $20 that says that's apocryphal, but I can't say definitively.

Posted by: Kriston Capps | Aug 2, 2006

K, since I can't remember where I read it, I'm going to save my $20 for Starbucks.

Posted by: David | Aug 3, 2006

I looked around for a while but didn't find anything. I'm willing to believe something like that has happened, for sure. But I doubt it's documented. (And $20 wouldn't get you very far at Starbucks anyway.)

Posted by: Kriston Capps | Aug 4, 2006

I think I read it in a newspaper somewhere, but who knows. Thanks for digging around. You were right about the $20; it's already gone.

Posted by: David | Aug 8, 2006


Post a comment

Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged. Questionable language, off-topic comments, and flames will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on Eye Level until they have been approved.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In







TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345233c469e200d834a4807253ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Science: