Analysis Of Frank Romero's Mural 'Going To The Olympics'

In Frank Romero's mural “Going to the Olympics, 1984,” he uses vivid and bold colors to depict everyday life in Los Angeles. In this image, I can notice cars, blimps, palm trees, hearts, and two men wrestling. In a busy city like Los Angeles, it isn't uncommon for cars to be nearly bumper to bumper, which is perhaps the reason why he depicted the city in such a manner. In addition, the palm trees and cars are slanted, which can be Romero's way of showing his audience that the cars were rushing to get somewhere important. The painting also includes two men wrestling, which represents an Olympic sport that the people were commuting to witness. The stamp in the upper right-hand corner may represent a letter or postcard that someone might have …show more content…
In regards to the city, it was the right thing to do in order to protect its citizens. However, the city should not have been held accountable for Romero’s mural and decide whether it should stay or not. It is for this reason why I disagree with the city of Los Angeles. The actions Caltrans took against Frank Romero’s mural “Going to the Olympics,” were unjust and demeaning. The city should have notified Romero as the law stated.According to Los Angeles Times, the city decided to cover up the mural because it was “too expensive to repair.” In addition, the article “End is near for some LA freeway murals due to graffiti,” claims that there is no point in keeping beautiful artwork around if it’s just going to be vandalised in a couple of years. Caltrans did not have enough money to constantly be repairing murals every couple of years, which makes me question how much the city really cared for Los Angeles artwork. Nonetheless, the city did have good intentions in trying to protect its citizens from harm, but doing so not only devastated a very talented artist, but also citizens who admired the art that gave Los Angeles more