Att_06_140P8623Q0033_Drawings_and_Photos.pdf

tbloch Text Box

SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

AQUATIC PARK BATHHOUSE

THIRD FLOOR MURAL CONSERVATION AND MAINTENANCE

DOCUMENT

Drawings and Photographs

Typewritten Text This page intentionally blank

TH

IR

D

FL

O O

R M

U

RA

LS

P

LA

N

LO

CA

TI

O

N O

F M

U

RA

LS

tbloch Polygonal Line tbloch Line tbloch

LOCATION OF CONDENSATION STAINING

SA

M

PL

E

PH

O

TO

S

W es t W al l M ur al

Ea st

W al l / D oo r M ur al s

Co lu m n

M ur al s

Ex am pl es o f M ur al C on di tio n

Fl ak in g pa in t w ith m iss in g pi ec e.

Cr ac k as se ss m en t sh ou ld d et er m in e if cr ac k is a ne w pr ob le m th at n ee ds re pa ir or a n ol d co nd iti on th at is st ab le a nd n ot in n ee d of re pa ir.

SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

Conservation and Treatment Report - Third Floor Murals by Richard Ayer, 1939, The Bathhouse Building by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation (2017)

Conservation Treatment Report, Murals by Richard Ayer, 1939 The Bathhouse Third Floor, San Francisco Maritime National Historic Park April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA

Table of Contents Background:

Introduction to the third floor:

First Explorations for Conservation Treatment: ARG, RW, AR

Technical Study:

Condition:

Common Conditions of Columns #1, 2 & 4:

Condition of Decorative Painted Doors: East

Condition of Wood Trims, Engaged Corner Columns, and Clock Wall:

Condition of Tugboat Panels:

Condition of East Doorframe:

Condition of End Cap Walls at top of Stairs:

Condition of GRAND MURAL:

Condition of Center Section between Staircases:

Condition of Grand Mural ‐ West End:

Condition of West Mural, Ship Rigging:

Treatment, July 2015 ‐ April 2017 Columns, Tugboats, End Caps:

Compensation of losses, Inpainting, and Varnishing:

Varnishing and Waxing:

Removal of overpaints from Grand Mural and Column 3:

Column 3, Overpaint Removal:

Grand Mural Wall, Overpaint Removal: see Alteration section also

Repaintings:

Unanswered Questions:

Conclusion:

Appendix

Colorimeter Data

Mural Dimensions

Map of 3rd Floor

April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA P a g e | 1

P.O. Box 150384 San Rafael, CA 94915 RosenDarte@aol.com 415.883.8050

CONSERVATION TREATMENT REPORT

THIRD FLOOR MURALS BY RICHARD AYER, 1939, THE BATHHOUSE BUILDING

SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NATIONAL HISTORIC PARK

900 BEACH STREET, SAN FRANCISCO

Prepared for the National Park Service, April 2017

Background:

The Maritime Museum Building at Aquatic Park in San Francisco, also called the Bathhouse, was built in 1939 as a joint effort of the City of San Francisco and the Works Progress Administration (WPA) between 1935‐1939. Federal funds were available through the WPA program to put builders, artists of all media, and tradesmen back to work improving the nation's infrastructure.

The purpose of the Bathhouse was to provide public recreation spaces as a larger scheme to improve surrounding Black Point Cove. The bathhouse building would provide changing facilities, showers, light dining, and resting areas with beautiful views of San Francisco's water's edge. The new Aquatic Park facilities also included adjacent bleachers, piers, and towers for announcing swimming and boating events, and exhibitions within the cove.

The Bathhouse Building, also sometimes referred to as the "Casino", was built in a style often called "Streamline Moderne" by a father and son team of architects, William Mooser, Jr. and William Mooser III. The building resembles a floating ship with rounded ends, a rectangular middle section, and with a stepped profile that can be compared to various levels of decking with a pilot house on top. The third floor is actually the second level above the main lobby and most‐used entrance on Beach Street, but it is considered the third level from beach access on its north side

Hilaire Hiler, known for his mural decorations in France and published work in color theory, was the lead artist and coordinator of the artistic embellishment of the building; the artist responsible for the creation of murals on third floor was Richard Ayer. Ayer absorbed Hiler's color theories on the job, and had a background in painting, printmaking, and sculpture at the California School of Fine Arts in San Francisco. Hiler enlisted other artists and assistants for the

April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA P a g e | 2

Bathhouse, some of whom were Sargent Johnson, Benjamino Buffano, Ann Sonia Medalie, Charles Nunemaker, Shirley Stachen, and Ann Rice O'Hanlon, as well as other anonymous artisans in terrazzo, stone, plaster, metal and tile. The Bathhouse is a superb example of architecture between the World Wars, but it is also a rare WPA achievement in San Francisco, arguably because the emphasis on color and marine themes was not bound by historical narratives, or social realism with underlying political or didactic intentions. The mural work is still fresh, innovative, abstract, somewhat surrealistic, and well incorporated into the architecture.

Introduction to the third floor:

At the time of this writing, no preliminary sketches or written documents have been found relating to the inspiration or fabrication of the artwork on third floor. The specific means of coordination between Ayer and Hiler is largely unknown. An interview with Ayer by Mary McChesney in 1964 for The Archives of American Art records Ayer's memory of the work, and his informal study with Hiler. This writer also toured the room in the 1980s with Shirley Stachen Triest who was an assistant to Ayer. At that time much of the room had been obscured, but she found one column face (column 4 north) with chain links she had painted under Ayer's direction.

The third floor was planned as a restaurant; Ayer called it the Banquet Hall. The murals and floor design are largely abstracted from natural forms, or from sources connected to sailing, ships, navigational instruments, and architectural plans. The arrangements are not literal, but are semi literal, fantastical, abstracted. Sources of inspiration may have derived from cubism, surrealism, or familiarity with artists such as Joan Miro or Paul Klee. The murals, especially the vignettes on the columns, are studies in design, using minimal combinations of color, shape, texture, weight and balance to compose pleasing and inventive compositions.

The execution of these third floor murals is oil paint on smooth plaster, with bas relief created by engaged pieces of wood, rope, and string. Some dimension is also created by textured plaster in some areas. The colors are muted, in shades and tints of gray, terra cotta, green and blue, and relate directly to bands within Hiler's color wheel in the Prismatarium. Hiler's concentric bands of color in the Prismatarium contain primary colors he termed "color standards" then created bands mixing the "standards" with black, then white, and then with both black and white. Ayer's colors mimic these color choices. The floor is terrazzo, with colored stones and colored grout, in a similar color palette. Most designs use a fluid line, with some addition of recognizable forms such as a compass and ship's wheel. All of the murals have black marble wainscot below them, which wraps around the room, including the lower portions of the four columns.

The Art Deco inspired hardware, including door pulls, sconces, clock, and chandeliers are related to marine forms. Multi‐layered wood trims around doors and murals are deliberately color coordinated with the murals and floor. As with many works of art, the more one engages

April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA P a g e | 3 with these designs, the richer they becomes in meaning, interpretation and sophistication. For a restaurant wherein patrons spend some time sitting and relaxing, the designs give opportunity for more than passing consideration. Further, the simplified palette blends seamlessly with the outside landscape on the north, and cityscape on the south. The colors of the mountains, sea, fog, clouds, sand, and surrounding brick structures do much to bring the outside inside, and vice versa. The merging of interior and exterior spaces was a growing sensibility in architectural and interior design in the first quarter of the twentieth century, a concept much in growth in 1939, albeit taken much for granted today.

The original layout of the room is largely intact, with the exception of changes to the ante‐room on the east end of the room, which now includes an elevator. The main body of the room has two staircases at east and west ends connecting to the main lobby. At the top of each stairway one faces a short wall cut with a doorway, leading into spaces occupied by restrooms in 1939.

One is now a storeroom on the east, the other is exhibition space called the "radio" room on the west. These short walls run north‐south and attach to a long wall running east‐west. This long wall, called the Grand Mural, is the south wall of the room. It is cut by two stairways leading up to a fourth floor. Between the stairways there is a short wall with a door leading into a closet.

A full wall of windows and glass doors comprises the north side of the room, with a spectacular bay view. The activity on the bay appears to have been considered greatly by Ayer, adding context to the designs.

Running parallel to the long window wall are four supporting columns, about a third of the distance into the room from the north side. Each column has four faces, each positioned directly north, east, south or west.

At the east end of the room are three doorways and a panel of the same size, creating two pairs of door‐sized panels. All these are decorative. Above them are two horizontal murals of abstracted tugboats and rope. The tugboats are stylistically a departure from Ayer's designs on the walls and columns, and may be the work of Ann Rice O'Hanlon or Shirley Stachen.

The west exterior wall has a mural of abstracted ship rigging. It is located between a set of double glass doors leading to a roof deck, and windows above the stairs.

Administration History:

Though details are scanty, some opposition to the management of the building as a casino appear to be responsible for a walk‐out of artists near the time of completion of the building.

Some design details in the Lobby and in the Prismatarium appear to be unfinished, as is the large mosaic tile mural on the exterior wall of the veranda. The same appears true of certain parts of the third floor murals, as will be mentioned in the treatment section.

April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA P a g e | 4

The operation of the building during 1939 until December 1941 is sparsely documented.

Apparently, use of the room as a restaurant or banquet hall was short lived. By the early start of World War II until afterward (1941‐1948) the building was occupied by the US Army. Since then any changes or restorations to the artwork were largely undocumented, although the refurbishing of the room in 1976 for the U.S. Bicentennial is known through several construction photographs.

Over the years, management and maintenance of the building was overseen by several entities.

The City of San Francisco, The Maritime Museum Association, and the National Park Service most recently, all played a part in managing the building. Historically, funding for repairs was scarce, and maintenance was necessarily deferred. Problems with the heating system, leakage from windows, and from tile decks were ongoing. Leasing arrangements and functional use of spaces was largely at the discretion of management. Now, under federal control, requisite conservation and restoration are being addressed. Over the last several decades, major repairs have been undertaken; roof decks received new membranes and tile, failing windows have been replaced, offices refurbished, bleachers and ramps re‐poured, and climate control systems are being updated.

The murals are a primary feature of this landmark building, and require equally comprehensive documentation, conservation treatment, maintenance, and future protection. To date, the Senior Center (Blue Room), the Prismatarium, the Main Lobby, and parts of the exterior entrance have received conservation treatment. Maintenance procedures are being instated, safety and code requirements enforced, and a great effort has been made to preserve the historic fabric of the building so that the nuances of the art and architecture can function together as they did when initially conceived.

Alterations to Third Floor, 1976:

In 1976, prior to the National Park Service administration, a major alteration was made to the third floor to expand exhibition space for artifact display. This campaign was intended to rejuvenate the space to honor the Bicentennial of the nation's founding, but it was also intended to obscure the outdated and damaged murals.

A change was made to the south‐most doorframe on the east wall; the elevator lobby area was used as a private library, and the original decoratively painted door was removed to storage.

Framing was added to install a shorter door, and the tugboat panel above was covered over with a thin piece of plywood. The decorative panel over the stairs was primed with white paint and then a plywood panel was attached overall with contact adhesive. Signage was installed onto these plywood panels at some point in time, with bolts screwed directly through the unseen artwork.

A much larger alteration followed. Two walls perpendicular to the Grand Mural wall were built, anchored onto, and wrapped around, Columns #1 and #2 (numbered from the east), and to the end cap wall at the top of the east stairs, creating a three sided gallery. The newly expanded exhibition wall space was entered between Columns #1 and #2.

April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA P a g e | 5

Much of the east‐end of the Grand Mural was stripped of its protruding bas relief wood elements; column #2 was variously stripped of some three dimensional protrusions. Changes of dimension in the Grand Mural surface, made by Ayer's creation of different levels of plaster and wood, were filled with wall board and mudding to smooth out the surface as much as possible, prior to it being painted white. Within the newly fashioned gallery, artifacts and signage for changing exhibits were attached with screws and bolts directly through the Grand Mural walls and through Columns #1 and #2.

The west‐end of the Grand Mural wall was less severely stripped of applied ornament, but small protruding pieces of wood ("rivets" in the mural design) were removed. The greatest damage was done by applying oil‐based primer to the entire length of the Grand Mural, followed by a thick layer of white latex paint. Column #3 was likewise painted over in its entirety (all four sides above the wainscot.) A second layer of latex was added to the east end of the Grand Mural in the 1980s.

A map of the room appears in the Appendix – Page 27

Many original colors of doors and wood moldings of third floor were also painted over at various times, thus negating some of the color relationships to the walls and to the floor. The clock wall and the four walls bearing sconces in northeast and southeast, and northwest and southwest were repainted around 2010 to improve the cleanliness of the space as a rental for social events. The ceiling has also been repainted.

The original designs and colors of the murals were lost to memory as staff retirement, changes of authority, and lack of photographic documentation accompanied the murals into the twenty first century.

Past restorations:

Richard Ayer mentions in his interview in 1964 that artist Herman Volz may have repaired parts of the mural that were damaged during its use as a dance and social hall. Indeed there are some plaster repairs (e.g. bottom edge of Column #2 north, and Column #3 north, and End Cap Wall East). Most retouchings were done with oil paints and can be distinguished from the original by their more matte quality. Small losses of plaster and some inadvertent dents and scratches are also visible below the original paint, indicating that some small damages have existed since initial fabrication.

First Explorations for Conservation Treatment: ARG, RW, AR Architectural Resources Group, San Francisco, undertook a study of the third floor murals in 2010, in an effort to reveal the color palette and outline of the designs of the Grand Mural, April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA P a g e | 6 west end. The method used was dry scraping with scalpel blades, a technique also used in the Blue Room (Senior Center), and for collecting cross sections of the ceiling paint in the lobby. A nearly accurate facsimile of the design of the Grand Mural was reproduced digitally by ARG, but the scraping method was not suggested for use broadly to uncover the design, due to the tenacious bond of overpaint and primer, and the unevenness of paint removal produced by the scalpels.

Subsequently, Anne Rosenthal and consultant (chemist/conservator/educator) Richard Wolbers of the University of Delaware conservation training program, worked several days with solvent gels to assess the possibilities of removing overpaints by chemical means. Only a small portion of the Grand Mural was uncovered during these tests due to the long exposure times needed, but preliminary results were hopeful. Chemical treatment seemed to predict better results than mechanical means. Some colors were more stable than others, however, and some variation in results would be likely using chemicals. A very damaged original might be found beneath the overpaints, or unintentional damage might result from the use of chemicals despite best efforts to avoid it.

Substantial reconstruction might be necessary after overpaints were removed. Total reconstruction of missing elements would undoubtedly be required for those parts of the mural known to be destroyed. No one was certain of the condition of the mural when it was primed in 1976, due to lack of documentation. The highest priority of the NPS was to rediscover the overall design since this was lost under the repainting and past demolition. The second priority was to preserve as much original as possible, and to restore what remained to a viable artistic presentation as the artist conceived it to be.

The options for treatment were presented to NPS staff, and accepted as a way to proceed.

Since the mural was largely envisioned by the artist as juxtapositions of large color fields and shapes, and not primarily for brushworking in the artist's (or his assistant's) own hand, the intention of saving as much original paint (and specific color) as possible was the goal.

Considering the extent of damage, repainting (or blending or glazing) with matching color would be acceptable if needed to create an acceptable image. The goal was to present an old, but well cared‐for appearance as close to the original as possible (including anomalies and characteristic signs of the artist’s work), not to achieve a newly painted, pristine appearance.

Changes of texture, light reflection and color within the color fields might require more inpainting than typically warranted, but this would be tempered by accepting an appearance of age and original workmanship. Achieving the best result required skillful handling of chemicals or scrapers, cautious optimism, and continued rapport between staff and conservator, with working results reviewed often by project directors.

Technical Study:

Prior to the on‐site testing, samples of the plaster, paint film and overpaints were sent to Richard Wolbers for analysis. The plaster is traditionally layered over triangular metal lath, April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA P a g e | 7 coated with a protein‐based sizing (animal glue), then primed with an oil‐containing white film, followed by several layers of commercial oil paints (see appendix). Over the design layers there is an obscuring oil primer (1976), then one/two layers of off‐white latex paint.

Due to the presence of a glue size below the original paints, any solvents used for cleaning or removing overpaints must restrict the addition of water. Water penetration through layers is extremely fast, and can be responsible for weakening the glue bond to the original paints. Gel solvents, on the other hand, require only very small percentages of water in their formulation.

Gels retain active agents close to the surface, rather than allowing them to penetrate deeply.

For this reason, gels rather than solvent solutions were recommended for the operations of cleaning and overpaint removal.

Condition:

Deteriorations of Columns:

The four columns are numbered 1‐4, starting from east to west, and are further tagged in photographs with north, east, south and west faces.

Common Conditions of Columns #1, 2 & 4:

All the exposed surfaces are greatly soiled, with black soot at the top, approximately 30" from the top edge, falling off gradually to the lower portion. This soot is presumed due to the heating system, which was fueled by diesel for many years. Other kinds of adhered soil, more grayish or brownish were found on the lower areas. This may be attributed to cigarette smoke and/or hand soil. The lower surfaces are more or less generally mottled, perhaps by hand rubbing, or even past light cleaning. Marked fading is also noted in some colors, especially those facing the windows. All the paint films appear to exist in multiple layers, as if primed by a version of the final color; underlayers are typically lighter in color than the top layers. Where there has been rubbing of the surface, a bit of the lighter color shows through. This is most notable in Column #1 east and west; Column #2, north; and Column #4, north east and west.

Column 1:

north: has sizeable losses at bottom center, where an anchor was exhibited below it.

Indentations and bolt holes were made to rest the heavy item slightly into the wall to prevent it from falling forward.

east: has multiple indentations and small losses from mechanical blows to the surface.

The main disfiguration is a large liquid splash across its face, possibly due to a carbonated drink. A small bar was known to exist for some time near the compass on the floor adjacent to the column. Further, a rectangular shaped area at bottom center is darker in color, since it was protected from light for many years with a plaque describing an artifact placed in front of it.

April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA P a g e | 8 south: has multiple soiled areas with remnants of pressure sensitive tape attached to the surface. Small losses appear at top left.

west: damaged by multiple scratches causing horizontal and vertical losses.

Column 2:

north: very soiled with areas of cracking and cupping of finish plaster/paint. Multiple scratches and small losses are scattered as well as larger loss at top left. Notable loss of five rivets in design at top. Repaired loss and overpaint at bottom left.

east: huge loss of plaster in vertical band from left to middle section, about 2/3 of its length. Losses at top right and along right edge, losses horizontally through center, loss at lower right. Multiple pieces of original plaster/paint were found within the hollow of the column, giving invaluable clues to the original design. No photos were available at the time of repair, so the NPS architect, and others, agreed upon a close facsimile design made through computer manipulation of the available shards. The color, depth and circumference of the circle was determined from an original small fragment.

south: Almost the entire face of this column was destroyed, with the exception of some of the uppermost plaster. The outline of the remaining plaster suggested the outline of a tail of a fish. Later historical footage of a Berkeley class reunion in 1939 in this space determined that several sharks made of wood in the NPS storage facility belonged on this column. These were repaired and their locations determined. Other parts of the design on this column are not known with certainty, though they are suggested on a film negative.

west: A large loss is found at center, immediately adjacent to the wood.

Column 3:

This column is completely overpainted with oil based primer and latex paint. Small scattered losses can be seen beneath the paint on all sides.

north: numerous losses noticed below overpaints along with cracking; numerous areas sounded for attachment indicated areas of cleavage.

east: several losses visible along edges (beneath overpaint) south: this column was tested along the bottom third for the efficacy of removing overpaint by means of the strappo technique using pressure sensitive tapes and tapping. This was only partially successful, and the technique was abandoned due to inconsistency and resulting small losses.

west: This face was relatively intact, except for losses of paint and priming over areas of original drilled holes to fasten the wood bas relief.

Column 4:

north: traction cracking, vertical cracking and overpaints were found at bottom and through the center. Fingerprints and marks from handling are noted mostly along bottom and right edge. Active flaking is marked below painted rivets, but is scattered elsewhere.

April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA P a g e | 9 east: some rubbing of the surface is visible in lower portion. Blanching of the paint film and blended overpaints exist mostly on the wood bas relief, especially in areas of attachment (filled screw holes) of the engaged wood piece. A sizeable loss exists at upper left.

south: The painted wood relief appears blanched and is darkened by cracks. Small losses appear along top edge.

west: Etched name of Dan at bottom left, as well as retouched areas in oil to scrapes and scratches. Mottled lower portion due to handling. A horizontal band of flaking paint at the top of the column appears due to pressure sensitive tape removal, probably used to mask the column when the ceiling, or soffit, was painted. Active flaking is present throughout much of this face, especially in the upper register.

Condition of Decorative Painted Doors: East

Two painted doors exist at the east wall, opening into the elevator lobby. These are heavily coated (unevenly) with a discolored resinous film similar to the oil/alkyd film found in the lobby and on the Prismatarium ceiling. Cleaning tests to remove the film indicate uneven sensitivity of the original paint film, so the prospect of removing this film was abandoned. Some surface soil and handmarking is visible, as well as small scattered losses and foreign debris. Near the floor, the surface is blanched and marked with gray/black soot. A kick plate exists on the right‐ most door, under which the surface is greatly blanched. There are impact dents and small scattered losses.

Condition of Wood Trims, Engaged Corner Columns, and Clock Wall:

Around the painted doors and tugboat panels, some of the trim consists of intact original films, and some is overpainted. Entry ways are greatly scuffed, splintered, and most repainted. Small impact damages mark all the woodwork. Reveals of paint stratigraphy were made on all wood trims, doors, ceiling, and on the engaged solid‐color columns in the corners of the room bearing sconces, and on the Clock Wall. Slight variations in color were found on all these surfaces; each area seems to have been painted a different color originally, and many have been repainted in non‐original colors. An exception is the extant original dark blue‐gray surrounding the decorative east doors. In most cases, trims were repainted to the closest match to original paint, with commercially available Benjamin Moore latex paints. These are documented and will be available for future repainting when necessary. Latex paints do not resemble oil paints in depth of color, but they are the practical choice to use in areas likely to require continued touch‐ups.

April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA P a g e | 10

Condition of Tugboat Panels:

The tugboat over‐door panels are executed on thin plywood. Careful measuring determined that the southeast panel was likely to exist below a second layer of thin plywood, painted white. Uncovering this original artwork was a surprise to NPS staff, who had not known it to exist. The greatest alteration of this original panel was caused by screw or bolt holes drilled sometime after installation of its cover (after 1976). Both tug panels were soiled, and the north‐most one is marked with black rubbery soot, probably shoe marking from a painter.

Small losses are scattered.

Condition of East Doorframe:

The doorframe of the southeast entry to the elevator lobby (adjacent to the stairs) had been framed‐out and lowered to accommodate a shorter door. The original door was located in storage, but will not be re‐installed due to the restricted opening (and code violation) it would create. Standing water was found below the metal plate on the floor, where the old door pivots on a pin of sorts.

Condition of End Cap Walls at top of Stairs:

East End Cap Wall:

This wall is marked with large losses of plaster at upper left, and by sizeable losses near the signature area of Richard Ayer, to the right of the electrical panel. Smaller losses occur around the door frame, upper right near soffit, and around the electrical panel. There are many losses of engaged wood "rivets" around the electrical panel, and wood trim pieces at far right, where the wall was anchored during the remodel of the room in 1976. Surfaces are greatly soiled.

The topmost edge of the large gray square over the door is uncharacteristically wavy and does not match the color of the curved plaster at the top of the door. Red color is visible beneath small losses, indicating repaint, and a photograph of a different design was found by the architect. Numerous dents, scratches and embedded grime characterize the area around the electrical panel. The metal panel door is not original and is marked by handling, permanent markers, pressure sensitive tape residues, and a paper sticker.

The closet door and wood trim were repainted in the past. A very large amount of impact damage is noted on the door.

West End Cap Wall:

This wall is characterized by patches of actively flaking paint near the south windows, across the top, and scattered throughout the left side. Numerous overpaints are scattered to compensate

April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA P a g e | 11 old flake losses. The panel is greatly soiled/marked, many "rivets" are missing; there are losses of plaster at center left, and also where the wall was drilled to install signage over the gray riveted area (at lower left).

The original closet door was removed and the trim repainted. Finished plywood was used to trim‐out this "radio room" as an exhibition space.

Condition of GRAND MURAL:

East End:

The greatest damage in the room exists on the east section of the Grand Mural.

During the 1976 remodel, supporting studs for a new gallery wall was anchored to the east end cap wall. The new drywall stood perpendicular to the Grand Mural wall, and wrapped around, (and was anchored to) Column #1. From the west face of Column #1, the wall returned to the Grand Mural Wall, creating a "dead space" the width of the column, inside the new wall.

Within the dead space, most of the original Grand Mural wall with engaged wood elements remained.

This Grand Mural wall was greatly variable in thickness, following the contours of the artist's design. There were engaged pieces of plywood forming portholes, ribs of a skeletal "ship hull", and raised plaster "waves", which stood out in different levels from one another. There was an oddly‐shaped wood panel as part of the design, a wood "davit", and a textured patch of plaster to the west where the east Mural Wall section ends at a stairway. As explained previously, workmen made efforts to level the surface of this wall by removing some of the wood pieces, and by filling the low spaces on the wall with drywall (drilled into the original surface) and with plaster, laid directly onto the painted mural. The wall was primed and painted white in 1976, then painted again with latex in the early 1980s. Intermittent leaking at the top of the wall was repaired several times, and some of the fabric‐covered soffit suffered detachment and tearing during the efforts to re‐adhere the fabric over time.

A second perpendicular dry wall was created and anchored to the Grand Mural at the east edge of the east stairway to fourth floor, and to Column #2.

Condition of Center Section between Staircases:

This portion of the Grand Mural was primed and painted white without removing any of the three dimensional parts attached to the mural. The closed Dutch door and frame had been damaged and gouged, and was repainted. A sizeable dent in the plaster is located to the top left of this door.

April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA P a g e | 12

Condition of Grand Mural ‐ West End:

The west end of the Grand Mural was devoid of rivets, as determined by some preliminary testing. No other three dimensional parts were missing. This wall was also oil‐primed and covered with white latex paint in 1976. The fabric covering the soffit above the wall was delaminated in some areas, indicating past water leakage. This section of the mural became the subject of dry removal techniques by the architectural conservators at Architectural Resourses Group, and Rosenthal/Wolbers testing with solvent gels, prior to the 2016‐2017 conservation treatment.

Condition of West Mural, Ship Rigging:

The western exposure of the building is subject to strong winds, driving rain, as well as the strongest exterior sun exposure. The west mural wall panel sustained damage in the form of cracking, lifting and loss of plaster. The black marble wainscot below the panel is equally damaged by water penetration, efflorescence and spalling, confirming the long history of weather‐borne damage to this particular location. Signs of former repairs exist in the form of blanching of the lower section of the mural as well as active flaking (perhaps due to aqueous cleaning) and repainting of the upper section. This remaining original gray paint is very friable, and is lead‐containing, closely resembling the gray‐scale walls of the Prismatarium. Each return side of the panel (perpendicular to the wood and string face side of the mural) has been patched several times. The surface of all is very soiled.

Treatment, July 2015 ‐ April 2017

All treatments were done in accordance with standards of the American Institute of Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.

Digital photographs were taken of all surfaces prior to treatment, marked with the letter designation "A". During Treatment photographs ("B") were mostly taken as overall situational images in which location is easily recognized, Before Inpainting is designation "C", and After Treatment is designation "D". Each part of the treatment is grouped together in separate photo folders and with this report on SD card. Representative color prints are also included.

Columns, Tugboats, End Caps:

Consolidation:

Due to the active flaking of various paints, the essential first step before cleaning was to reattach lifted paint back into contact with the surface. Acryloid B72 was first used on Column #4, but this required use of xylene to remove excess. Instead, an 8‐10% solution of Avalure

April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA P a g e | 13

AC315 (Lubrizol) in ethanol was used, and this was very successful. The resin was flowed around cracks and under flakes, then left for 24 hours to dry. Paint flakes were relaxed with a stream of hot air or a tacking iron, and with light hand pressure returned to plane. All excess residues of resin were cleaned off easily with ethanol.

Cleaning:

The original painted surfaces remaining in the room were exposed directly to changes in climate, sunlight, and visitor interaction throughout the multiple uses of the building since 1939; these surfaces were greatly altered and aged by soiled hands, airborne particulates including automobile exhaust and tobacco smoke, and hydrocarbon products used in the (formerly) unfiltered heating system of the building. The grime layer was thereby an amalgamation of different substances.

The first order of cleaning was to dust the surface with a non‐static brush, then to lightly dry clean with Wishab dry‐cleaning sponges, followed by a second dusting. Trial cleaning tests were then made with numerous solvents, both aqueous and organic. Gel emulsion mixtures with limited water content were found to be most useful, causing dissimilar components within the grime to become soluble and more easily lifted.

The most effective formulation was an emulsion gel. Pemulen (Lubrizol co.) a polyacrylic acid was combined with water and triethanolamine (a base) to a pH of 7‐8. This gel was used to clean all the exposed original surfaces of the murals including those of the columns, tugboats, and end cap walls. As with most cleaning processes, the variables of length of exposure, type of friction used, pH of solution and clearing ability played a great role in its effectiveness. This gel was useful as a surface active agent, holding a minimal amount of moisture, reducing the chances of paint disintegration, and flaking of the design. The cleaning process also needed to be followed by clearing with mineral spirits to remove the gel and its residues.

The gel was applied with a sponge brush, quickly agitated and then removed efficiently with a flat trowel‐like sponge with short, soft bristles. The surface was then rinsed with mineral spirits, and dried with soft paper towels. The cleaning process was not without its difficulties, however. Lower portions of the walls were more sensitive to all solvents, perhaps due to the more damaging history of handling and light exposure. Any repeat applications of gels or solvents caused increased sensitivity and risk of color bleeding. Timing and gentle handling were key. Overall, cleaning produced very dramatic results; colors were enhanced and the relationships of the colors to one another could be more easily recognized.

Retouchings in oil paint were not possible to remove safely. Efforts were made to minimize them, but in most instances they were left in place and corrected later with inpainting.

April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA P a g e | 14

Compensation of losses, Inpainting, and Varnishing:

Filling: Large losses in plaster were repaired by Greg Conway, a professional from Ruane Company, who made the excellent repairs to the second floor lobby. Smaller losses were filled by the conservator or her assistant Michael Wolf with Modostuc or Crawford's filler (both calcium carbonate and polyvinylacetate). Occasionally, microcrystalline wax (Bareco Victory white) was used and textured in small areas.

Inpainting: Inpainting was carried out in multiple media. Latex commercial paints (Benjamin Moore, eggshell finish) were used in large fills on the columns or areas requiring thin blending.

Higher gloss was required for some of the wood trims. Golden matte liquid acrylics or Liquitex acrylic emulsion tube paints were also used singly or in combination. Gamblin restoration colors (in Laropal A81 aldehyde resin medium) were used most frequently in areas requiring small discrete applications of color. Blending or layering with these paints, especially in large areas, was not easily possible due to disturbing them with the solvents they require. Fast evaporation was also a problem in large areas. Berol Prismacolor colored pencils (using only the most light stable colors) was helpful in applying thin layers in dry wax binder to achieve very slight alterations of color without use of solvents; these were sometimes layered with Gamblin colors.

The latex, acrylic and wax inpainting materials are reversible from the original paints due to differences in solubility. Most of the original paints are stable to some degree of exposure to xylene, acetone, mineral spirits, and alcohols, with the exceptions of the dark colors listed. The Avalure priming is also intended to help protect the original colors in the event these inpainting materials need to be removed. Oil paints were not used, as they have solubility similar to the original paints, and they are known to darken (and thereby not match) over time.

Varnishing and Waxing:

The columns were varnished after cleaning with a brush application of Gamblin varnish (negalrez 1094). This was done to saturate color and to help unify the several original color layers, especially in areas where hand rubbing had produced some visibility of underlayers. The glossiness of the varnish was minimized as possible by repeated brushing until dry, and also by a small admixture of cosmoloid 80H wax, as recommended by the supplier. The tugboats were also treated in this way. Results confirmed the notion that a shiny varnish was not optimal, as repairs on the columns were too visible in unavoidable specular light.

To produce best results for these paintings, and for viewers to be able to see them without undue distractions from the many areas of repair, the surface sheen needed to be adjusted to produce as uniform a finish as possible. An overall, but even, surface sheen would help unify color, texture and light reflection, all the elements challenging to successful repairs on color field paintings. In consultation with NPS staff, the decision to slightly matte the surface with a general spray application to an eggshell finish was preferred over a glossy finish, even if this is a

April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA P a g e | 15 slight departure from the original sheen. Repaired areas would then be less noticeable even if they could be identified, and fewer areas would require repainting or glazing to produce acceptable results. Only if needed would matching paints be used to blend off damaged to undamaged areas. A general varnish would also serve to protect the paint film, both from future accumulations of airborne soot and possible handling by visitors. The Golden MSA spray finish varnish (8 parts satin stock varnish: 16 parts VMP naptha: 1 part gloss stock varnish: 2 parts xylene) contains an ultraviolet filtering agent to help arrest further fading. This is optimum protection for both original surfaces and conservation materials used for inpainting.

In addition to the UV light protection offered by the varnish, ultraviolet filters were replaced on the windows and glass doors, and new operational filtering screens were installed over the windows to help control ambient light.

The tugboats, all columns and end cap walls were treated in this way; only the columns and tugboats received the coatings of regalrez varnish. The tugboats do not have any spray MSA varnish, with the exception of the repaired areas on the southeast panel.

Most wood elements of the columns were coated with Rennaissance Wax (microcrystalline) and lightly buffed to produce a satin sheen. These areas were treated more like polychrome wood sculpture, since their movement might be more amenable to a wax finish.

Removal of overpaints from Grand Mural and Column 3:

Gel solvents were tested with Richard Wolbers to address the latex and oil‐based layers covering Column 3 and the Grand Mural.

A solution of xanthum gum and benzyl alcohol 20%, was shaken together to produce a gel, and then applied to the surface of the murals covered with latex paint. After a short exposure, this softened the latex (one layer on Column #3, one layer on west Grand Mural, and two layers on the east Grand Mural) and it could be diminished. A second and sometimes third application was necessary along with further scraping or brushing with stencil brushes could remove the remaining latex, leaving the oil primer completely exposed.

The second gel was a formulation of carbopol powder, ethomeen C‐12, and 1‐methyl‐2‐ pyrrolidinone. This is a gel formulated to remove oil films, so its use has to be carefully controlled so as not to damage the original oil paints below. There is a short window of opportunity to successfully remove the oil primer from the paints composing the design of the murals. Some colors such as deep reds, dark blue, brown or black are so sensitive to chemical action that they cannot be completely preserved intact despite a great deal of practice.

April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA P a g e | 16

Column 3, Overpaint Removal:

This column was especially problematic. The designs on north and south were inordinately sensitive, as were the dark colors of the west. Alternative means of removing the overpaints were tried, such as with strappo techniques of various kinds, as well as with a very wide variety of chisels and blades, and alternative paint strippers. Partial success with each method was achieved, but there was no single reliable way to proceed. Each method was used and compared as progress slowly advanced. In the case of south and north walls of Column #3, a great amount of spalling of the plaster was also a problem. Tapping produced some advance warning of plaster collapse, and this could be managed in part by consolidating with hypodermic injections of Avalure AC 315 resin (Lubrizol) in 10% concentration, then confirming adhesion with heat and pressure over silicone release paper.

The south face of column 3 was so badly damaged that a decision was made to repaint it completely. All parts of the original design had been revealed, however, and there were intact areas to use as color guides. Original colors were documented with a colorimeter, and the readings are contained in the appendix. An intervention layer of avalure resin (8‐10%) was applied to the original remaining surfaces. Fills were added, and Benjamin Moore paints were applied with as close a match as possible; other smaller areas of the design were custom matched by the conservator with Liquitex emulsion paints.

The north face of column 3 was also spalling. More of the original color could be retained, however, and a decision was made to fill and inpaint the losses. The bottom edge of the north was found to be very damaged, cracked and filled already, so the repair was left in place. Other vertical cracks are prominent. This design required many fills and a considerable amount of inpainting, including repaint of several inches horizontally at the bottom edge.

The red ship vent on the west face of Column #3 also required repainting due to excessive sensitivity to solvents. The other forms are original with some amount of inpainting.

Reconstructing Column 2: see also "Alteration" section above.

The south face of Column #2, and the east face of Column #2 are not entirely accurate as of the end of this project. No photographic evidence at close range was available to reconstruct these sides of the column. The east face could be fairly well reconstructed using the designs of original shards and a partially obscured color slide taken in the 1970s. A recently found photograph suggests some differences in the light blue paint and charcoal‐colored board making up the base of the "direction finder" instrument. If additional photographs become available, it is suggested that changes be made.

The south face of Column #2 was recreated in part. One photograph from the University of California, Berkeley, shows that the two wood "sharks" (from NPS storage) belong to this column. Additional proof was found in several frames of a 1939 amateur movie in the UCB

April 2017 by Anne Rosenthal Fine Art Conservation, Box 150384, San Rafael, CA P a g e | 17 archive, taken by students of the 1919 class having a 20 year reunion dinner on third floor.

Behind several people, the sharks can be seen on the wall. Digital capture of these frames and photo suggest other painted and wood additions to this south face, but they are not clear enough to reproduce. In time perhaps another document will be located to reconstruct the original design in all its detail.

Grand Mural Wall, Overpaint Removal: see Alteration section also.

The entire Grand Mural was treated in much the same way as the columns, tugboats and end cap walls. One of the differences involves the amount of damage done in 1976 by flattening the wall surface of south east. The drywall and plaster added to this wall caused excessive damage in the form of holes drilled into the wood reliefs and plaster support. There were losses of design caused by scraping motions to remove wood "rivets". Applications of wet plaster caused delamination of the paints and finish plaster on the blue "waves". The removal and disposal of wood "ribs", "davit', "porthole", "rivets" and wood trims, necessitated further effort to reconstruct them in detail. Each part needing replacement required hand shaping as the originals did. Understanding the original design was, in this area, a matter of excavation layer by layer to find any evidence of the intact original surface. A discovery of approximately four dozen missing rivets was made, and the original outlines of large pieces of wood were corrected from the computerized model. Much of the process of discovery involved removing extraneous hardware and chipping off applied mud.

A number of different chisels and scrapers were found to be helpful to remove overpaints as well as drywall. Use of chisels/scrapers was continued onto the middle section and west end of the Grand Mural.