(Page 3 of 3)

Some want State House dome returned to multicolor scheme

Original colors brought to forefront of debate during restoration project

September 17, 2011|By Jonathan Pitts, The Baltimore Sun

"If there had been a secretary of the interior's Guidelines [in 1840], they'd never have changed it to white in the first place," says Fishback, who guesses that change was made to save money. Little disagrees: He believes it was part of a 19th-century trend in which public buildings were painted white as a modern reference to Classical Greek marble.

Changing the color plan at this stage would probably cost all of about $8,000, Fishback says.

Halpern, too, sent a letter to the Capital. "If ever there was a timely opportunity, this is it," he wrote in July, not long before Little and his staff met, considered the matter at length, and unanimously decided on white.

"I love the white; it stands out from a greater distance," said Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr., a member of the State House Trust, a board that has the authority to review such decisions. "To me, it's a choice between aesthetics and historical accuracy."

Sometime soon, workers will scale the scaffolding, pull out their brushes and begin applying the outer coats. Those coats will almost surely be white.

Still, a preservationist can dream.

"I understand the decision intellectually, I really do," Halpern says. "But man, this is an opportunity to tell a lively, exuberant story. To me, as someone who loves Annapolis, this seems like the goose that laid the golden egg. I wish we'd nurture that goose."

jonathan.pitts@baltsun.com

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.