David Mottershead is a chemist by training, owner and director of Little Greene paint and wallpaper company.
When did you become interested in the “historical dimension” of paint, the way people painted their houses in the past centuries?
- When we thought about the production of decorative paint: our company was founded around 1711, and over the past three hundred years it has done a variety of things, and it all started with dyes for cotton: Manchester - where we are located - was at the beginning of the 18th century a center for the production of cotton fabrics. We had a huge historical archive - more than 20,000 shades, but we never actually turned to it.
So, more than 20 years ago we decided to produce interior paint. But how to get started on this new business? Many people produce such paints, but usually there is no scientific logic, only one or another design idea.
To be honest, you had to ask yourself questions - what colors were used in the past? when exactly? as? - and conduct a historical analysis. As part of this analysis, we asked English Heritage [a heritage conservation organization in England] to allow us to visit historic sites - the 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th centuries - to understand what colors were used in what circumstances and to compile a collection of historical colors. At first we behaved rather naively - we just wrote down where the wall was painted, but then we realized our mistake and again turned to English Heritage: we needed to find out not how the room was painted today, but what color it was three hundred years ago. Naturally, no one will allow you to spoil the wall, so we looked for an inconspicuous area in the corner, say, behind the closet - and took a paint sample from there, consisting of 15 or 20 layers of different times.
Of course, the most interesting thing is the very first layer. However, in restoration work - in which we are involved - it is not uncommon to choose a color not from the time the building was built, but from the Regency or Victorian era. And this is more difficult: to understand what time a particular layer belongs to, you need a chemical analysis. We turn to Lincoln University for this, and its researchers tell us what pigments are used in a particular paint, which allows us to date the layer, at least - to determine the earliest possible date. If you take Prussian blue, this pigment was invented in Germany around 1780. But in reality, this paint on a wall in Russia could not have appeared before 1800, because such things do not spread quickly. This is how we define, say, the colors of the Victorian period - we cut off the earlier and all later ones, with pigments of the 20th century, and we invite the restorers to choose from the remaining, for example, three options.
Of course, this is not radiocarbon analysis, but we can still determine the colors we want - although the choice is ultimately made based on aesthetic preference. These days, most owners of architectural monuments want to get the real color, and not what just looks beautiful, but sometimes the owner of the house can say: "I want the walls to be painted like in the 1960s." That is, of course, the final decision is up to the owner.
And what about the historic buildings owned by the National Trust - or publicly managed by English Heritage? Probably, these organizations have a more objective, museum approach?
- At the moment, EH considers the monument as a result of evolution, which has been going on throughout its existence. Some parts have come down to us as they were created, with original decor. And in the rooms where the last owner lived - say, who left the estate in the 1950s - the interiors of those years, and this is also a history that is worth keeping.
National Trust specialists usually want to choose the last outstanding moment in the history of a monument: it may be the 1750s, or it may be the 1930s, or the years of World War II, when a hospital or sanatorium for wounded soldiers was located in the estate.
By the way, we have a big joint project with the National Trust now: we are researching fifty architectural monuments in its possession in order to find the "primary colors" of this organization: it will be an archive of a very large number of shades, and it will take a lot of time and effort to create it. This archive will also come in handy for us to use in five or six restoration projects, which we are engaged in only this year. And, of course, in the case of each color, the process will take time - as we have to make sure that it looks right in any light - natural, artificial, LED.
How do you yourself feel about the problem of color authenticity? This often raises a lot of questions, especially in cases where it is difficult to find out how the building was originally painted. Another problem is when the historical tone seems too bright to the public: it is widely believed that in the past only restrained tones were used
- Which is not at all true.
This is a topic of change in public taste, obviously
- However, we must remember that the decision on the color of significant buildings was made by people who did not obey public taste. Those who built palaces or theaters for themselves did not seek to please the public. In the case of England, her estates, there was a competition between one noble family and another; for example, the Earl of Derby and the Duke of Westminster have built for themselves country palaces, they are seen by guests who visit there. And suddenly someone brings a new color from Venice - ultramarine - and paints the ceiling with it, decorating it with stars - not in the spirit of public taste, but to show off. Show that he has more power than others. I think that outstanding buildings are built precisely for this - to demonstrate their power.
There is another aspect to authenticity of color, a scientific one. When we analyze a historical paint sample, we can find cinnabar there - a salt of mercury, an extremely poisonous substance. We can make the same color using a different, non-toxic pigment. But restorers may require the use of cinnabar - despite its toxicity - since only such paint will be truly authentic. I don't think this is the right approach, because the architect who built the building chose the color, not the chemical. He did not seek to use exactly the poison.
But the theme of changing fashion remains - the popularity of either brighter or more neutral colors for facades and interiors
- I believe that the brightness of color until the second half of the 20th century depended on the consistency of the customer. Wealthy people used brighter colors, since until our time the price of paint was proportional to its saturation. It wasn't until the last century that chemists found a way to make bright and affordable paint. Few people understand these circumstances. Until this moment, only ultramarine and Prussian blue were bright blue. The bright green was very difficult to obtain, except for the green crown. It was the same with the bright red, which was only available to very wealthy people. And the vast majority of the population simply whitewashed the walls with lime, which made their rooms brighter, and also served as disinfection. It was also possible to achieve an ocher or beige shade, but nothing more, and these light tones entered the consciousness "at the genetic level."
However, these days young people do not want to use this light palette, but want to revolutionize the exterior and interior. However, in reality, changes occur in small steps, evolutionary - although to the majority they seem to be huge changes. Say, for five to ten years, gray was popular, and now in Europe, including Russia, dark blue and green tones are very popular. For the first time in my memory, people are choosing true colors for interiors - for architectural details, but also for solid walls and ceilings. And that's just great.
If we are talking about residential interiors, then in 90% of cases the color is the choice of a woman. This may sound like a sexist idea, but it is absolutely true. Most men agree with the choice of a wife, because women wear different colors every day, choose them, combine them - shoes, bag, sweater, pants or skirt, jacket. They are constantly aware of the color, and very often the color trends in the interior are determined by the current fashion in clothes, although, of course, they choose more neutral, restrained colors for the walls than for a blouse or belt. And a man wears a white shirt and blue trousers every day, without choosing a color, the maximum is deciding which tie to wear.
When we talk about color in architecture, it is the color not only of living space, but also of the urban landscape. This usually causes a lot of controversy - in what shade, initial or appropriate for the modern situation, to paint the building, how to regulate the color of the entire city, especially its historical center
- I did not think about this question: probably because in the UK there is a very strong opinion that nothing should be changed. In addition, most buildings have stone or brick facades that do not need painting. Of course, everything is different in Russia. For example, the Hermitage is now green, but originally it was sandy. This green is not at all pleasing to the eye, and it would be nice to return to the historical color. Several years ago we presented the Hermitage with a lot of our paint for interiors, as well as for facades - for various projects and samples. But for me, in the case of a building of such importance, historical authenticity remains the most important value. If you suddenly make the Hermitage bright pink, it will be interesting for a year, but in ten or a hundred years it will no longer be.
