OPINION: USC must safeguard its architectural treasures


By
 in

Artifacts originally from the Freeman House (above) in USC’s possession were stolen years ago, a Los Angeles Times report said. (Photo from Wikimedia Commons)

At the beginning of this month, USC came under fire for an unusual theft incident that occurred nearly a decade ago. The Los Angeles Times published an article detailing the 2012 theft of two lamps and a chair designed by world-renowned architects Frank Lloyd Wright and Rudolph Schindler; the items were taken from a USC storage facility. Samuel and Harriet Freeman displayed these artifacts in their house, also designed by Wright, and when they died, the Freemans donated the artifacts and house to the University. However, USC has since neglected these properties with no regard for their historical significance — a shortcoming that USC must address as an academic institution.

Since the story broke, the University has made no moves to recover any of the stolen items. USC should have taken steps to not only find these artifacts, but also ensure that the artifacts were restored and put on display to the public. Beyond these fixes, USC must renovate the run-down Freeman house and make it accessible to both the public and USC students who wish to visit this architectural treasure for its architectural and historical importance.

Following the 1994 Northridge earthquake, which severely damaged the Freeman House, the University placed most of the furniture and other pieces from the house in a storage facility. It would seem that many of these pieces would be of interest to the public, as they were designed by two prominent architects. USC architecture and design students could also learn from these artifacts. But instead these pieces were locked away in a storage unit.

While the University made an effort to preserve the artifacts from the house, it wasted that effort by closing the house to the public and keeping its renovations under wraps. USC could reopen the house as a museum with free admission or even charge a fee to support upkeep of the house and its furniture. Even though the University says it is making steps to ensure that the Freeman House will have a “promising future,” it remains astonishing that officials have not made such an effort years ago.

The theft is demonstrative of the University’s mismanagement of historical artifacts. Even the officials in charge of the facility can’t seem to get their story straight: One associate architectural professor said that there was only one key to the room where the lamps and chair were kept, while the University said it was “unlikely” that there was only one key. The theft went unreported for seven years, exemplifying USC’s failure to be accountable for its own property. The University has promised that the house and its remaining pieces will be preserved, but it should also take direct responsibility to restore the space and make better use of it. This way, the general public could experience the famous house the way its architects intended, and they could use the revenue from this venture into preserving other architectural artifacts of value and the house itself.

One example USC should look at is how Stanford University currently manages the Hanna House, also designed by Wright, and offers tours to the public. In the late 1900s, the house also sustained earthquake damage.

However, Stanford took steps to restore the house to its former glory, and it has been open to the public since 1999. USC should follow Stanford’s steps and ensure that this architectural treasure has a future.

The University must take these steps to ensure the future of the Freeman House and work hard to restore and preserve the other architectural artifacts in its possession. Artifacts of historical significance cannot be appreciated if they are in a storage unit, or stolen.