
Destroyed by Rockefellers, Mural Trespassed on Political Vision (2014) - tintinnabula
https://www.npr.org/2014/03/09/287745199/destroyed-by-rockefellers-mural-trespassed-on-political-vision
======
rob74
> _[...] a fresco — paint on wet plaster instead of on canvas. That meant the
> work couldn 't be moved_

That's not really true - detaching frescos from walls is a technique practiced
since Roman times
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detachment_of_wall_paintings](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detachment_of_wall_paintings)).
However it's probably expensive and labour-intensive, and in this case I
imagine nobody wanted to pay for it...

~~~
pmiller2
Relevant again, for the second time in 2 hours:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23279742](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23279742)

~~~
nabla9
Rockefeller and other billionaires are class of people who collect cultural
artifacts and value give them absurdly high valuations without making money
out of them. They signal their peers that money does not matter to them using
art.

99% of what gives art it's value is that it's collectible and can't be owned
by others. Today you can take a good photo of the painting, or replicate
statue so well that you need expert to find out it's not the original. Being a
good replication will not decrease aesthetic value of art, it just decreases
the collectible value and social prestige from owning it (masses can't own
originals).

Valuing 'original' is capitalistic invention.

~~~
kweinber
That’s not fair. Much of what gives art its value is its usefulness in money
laundering..... arbitrarily high-priced items with no inherent value are
staples for legitimizing cash transfers.

~~~
nabla9
That's part of value but not what big money billionaires do.

They actually spend money to fund institutions that eat hundreds of millions
and what they get is galas and places to mingle. Really really rich are not
laundering money. They are burning it to show they are cultured elite and not
just rich.

------
meebob
The more interesting thing is that this happened more than once! The Ford
family helped fund Rivera to create the 'Detroit Industry Murals', which
happily, unlike the Rockefeller mural, survives to the present day.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit_Industry_Murals](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit_Industry_Murals)

------
justin66
As always, you don't really want to go entirely by the headline. The mural did
a _bit_ more than trespass on a political vision:

 _Then, the World Telegram newspaper ran the headline: "Rivera Paints Scenes
of Communist Activity and John D. Jr. Foots the Bill." Pliego says Rivera then
decided to add a portrait of communist revolutionary Vladimir Lenin to the
mural.

"He sent his assistants to find a picture of Lenin because, he said, 'If you
want communism, I will paint communism,' " Pliego says.

On top of that, according to David Rockefeller Sr., Rivera added a panel that
the family felt was an unflattering portrait of his father.

"The picture of Lenin was on the right-hand side, and on the left, a picture
of [my] father drinking martinis with a harlot and various other things that
were unflattering to the family and clearly inappropriate to have as the
center of Rockefeller Center," he said._

------
bogomipz
This article has a couple of pictures of Diego at Rock Center working on "Man
at the Crossroads":

[https://www.6sqft.com/diego-riveras-psychedelic-mural-in-
roc...](https://www.6sqft.com/diego-riveras-psychedelic-mural-in-rockefeller-
center-was-destroyed-in-1934-before-it-was-finished/)

------
AlgorithmicTime
I dunno, Rockefeller commissioned the man to paint a mural, and the guy
deliberately included themes offensive to sense and to the Rockefeller
personally. Seems reasonable to remove it.

