Cathedral of Learning bricks mistakenly cleaned |

Cathedral of Learning bricks mistakenly cleaned

The Cathedral of Learning’s dirt nearly had its finest moment.

After clinging to the 42-story University of Pittsburgh building for 70 years, the black soot almost received its own plaque to recognize evidence of the city’s industrial past.

“Somebody has to honor those people who made the city,” said E. Maxine Bruhns, director of the cathedral’s Nationality Rooms, who came up with the idea. “These grimy stones were a perfect tribute.”

University officials agreed to keep a few blocks dirty near the Fifth Avenue entrance when they spent $4.8 million this summer to wash the Indiana limestone exterior, fix mortar joints and replace rusty fasteners. The Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation planned a marker.

“The new generation of students attending Pitt have no idea this city was the workshop to the world,” said Louise Sturgess, the foundation’s executive director. “The dirt visually lets people know what the air was like, and the air was filled with the gritty soot from all of the industry.”

Bruhns hand-picked the blocks for their markings and high-profile location. Workers built a cover so the area wouldn’t be cleaned, and the school newspaper reported in June that a crew member was assigned to protect it.

But after most of the building had been cleaned and the cover removed, another worker noticed the blemish. Without asking, he washed away the grime — so the blocks look as fresh and bright as the rest.

Overall, the cleaning project turned out better than anyone expected, said Park Rankin, the university architect. It was just an oversight that Bruhns’ blocks were washed, he said.

Still, the damage has been done — or undone.

Standing near the spot Wednesday, Paul Sawyer, 24, a junior from Whitehall, said he forgot all about the formerly dirty facade when he returned to campus this month.

“I didn’t even notice,” he said.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.