Week 2 California Washington Mural The Life of Washington was painted by Depression-era artist Victor Arnautoff 1. What do you think should be done with the artwork (e.g., painted over, covered, destroyed, left as is in plain view, etc.)? Why? The mural was done purposefully to depict actual history. Covering it up could be interpreted as a denial of the fact that it occurred. The truth of history might not be acceptable, or right but it happened. I believe it should have been left alone. 2. What message do you think the artwork conveys? According to Wick from the LA Times, the murals represent social history. They provide an inclusive and truthful history.... Removing them represents censorship as well as a reactionary moment in time. The artwork clearly conveys what was socially acceptable to create at the time it was created. And is a reminder of how people were treated back then. 3. Do you think the message is vague? I don't believe the message the mural is conveying is vague. According to Facione, "The first rule of fair-minded interpretation is to be sensitive to context and purpose." There is a lot to see in this mural, a lot to interpret and a lot of it seems quite purposeful. 4. Does the historic value of the artwork require that it be saved regardless of message? The freedom an artist has to expression is limited to the work's right to exist. If the work is covered up because the right to show it is gone, then the value is also gone as is the artists right to express himself. This mural has been captured digitally and most likely will forever be discussed and able to be viewed online. It is not gone forever.