Remember the old days, when the Salt Lake Tabernacle was ringed with heroic murals depicting scenes of the Church’s past?
.
.
You don’t?
That’s because it never quite came to be, despite these realistic “photographs” of how those murals looked in place.
.
.
Mormon artist J. Leo Fairbanks, of the notable artistic family that included John B. Fairbanks and Avard Fairbanks, was teaching at the Oregon State Agricultural College, Department of Art and Architecture, in 1936, but was looking for a way to return to his Utah roots, or at least to produce work centered on his Mormon heritage. While considering his options, he devised a plan to use the largest, most prominent “canvas” in Mormondom: the dome of the Salt Lake Tabernacle.
His proposal, according to a brochure he prepared and distributed:
It is suggested that mural paintings depicting sacred historic events alternate with relief sculpture panels representing outstanding characters of the respective eras. These decorations will encircle the lower part of the dome which is admirably adapted to a decorative scheme that harmonizes with the architectural features, with the color treatment, and with the service of the building.
These permanent decorations would accomplish on a grand scale the visual interpretation of the Gospel that the Church decorative symbolism did on a small scale at the recent World Fairs. They would be unique, as there is no semblance to any other decorations extant. They offer an opportunity of visualizing our idealism, and of glorifying the accomplishments of our people. They would add a splendid contribution of our grateful generation to the rich heritage left by our ancestors.
By means of reflectors, concealed in the hand-railing around the home, the selective control of the electric lights can be made to illuminate any one or all of them. During the service the decorations can be darkened if desired. The problem of protecting the panels from grime and other deleterious effects is a very simple one.
These decorations are proposed as a Church memorial and as a lasting tribute to the centennial of the arrival of the Utah Pioneers and could be ready for unveiling July 24, 1947.
While Fairbanks’ proposal was not accepted – for which I am thankful, actually – his vision was accomplished only a few years later, after a fashion. It seems undeniable that Avard’s general plan was the inspiration behind the murals that ring the dome of the chapel in Cody, Wyoming: while Fairbanks proposed bas relief sculptures to separate the panels of his mural, Cody’s use of painted human figures to serve the same purpose is too much of a coincidence for me to believe that it was an independent idea.
I would have loved those murals up there. Better yet, the whole ceiling covered with murals for our own Sistine Chapel.
I agree with Loyd. I like artwork anywhere.
The ceiling of the Assembly Hall DID used to be painted that way — a loss, I think, when they were faded and painted over.
Murals were all the rage in the 1930s. The Mexican government, for instance, commissioned Diego Rivera and several others (Siquireros, Orozco) to paint the history of Mexico as massive murals in schools, universities, and government buildings.
In the U.S., the WPA issued a similar commission in the early 1930s, and murals went up on the walls of post offices, libraries, and courthouses around the country.
And, of course, in Mormonism, you have Minerva Teichert painting her murals during the same period. The Church didn’t show much more interest in Teichert’s murals than it did Fairbanks’. (FWIW, the Church wasn’t really interested in Friberg’s BoM paintings either.) The early temples have murals, but because of the setting, they’re not widely photographed or well known.
In any case, considering the scarcity of Mormon art during this period, it may have been very influential in depicting how Mormons visualized their past.
On one hand this would have been an incredible project . . . on the other, it would have distracted from the purpose of the building – that of paying attention to the speaker.
Somehow the College of Cardinals manage to elect a pope despite the distractions of Michelangelo’s art above them on the ceiling! I suspect that the people (bishops and stake presidents, mostly, who attended conference in the tabernacle, could have managed to pay attention (or not) about as well as they did without the art.
The church leaders have always been fond of the work of living non-Mormon artists.
LDS artists don’t seem to get much respect until after they’ve died.