The Bare Brick Mistake Will Not Die!
Like a vampire that won’t stay dead, the bizarre urge to strip plaster off brick walls walks the land once again. The yearning for “exposed brick” was a renovation fad in the 1960s and ’70s, but I thought the silliness that begot this folly had been laid to rest.
After several years of living with dust from their exposed brick walls, this couple will realize they made The Bare Brick Mistake. Their regret will come even faster if their neighbors strip the plaster off the other side of this row house wall, and they unwittingly share the sounds of each other’s Saturday night parties. Photo: Michelle V. Agins for the New York Times
As early as 1973, in the pages of Old-House Journal, I had outlined both the aesthetic and practical reasons for leaving plaster on brick walls. And, for a while, the craze seemed to have subsided. But just as the full moon causes Dracula to rise once again from his coffin, so The Bare Brick Mistake has returned to cast its spell over a new generation of renovators.
My colleague Paul Kitzke called my attention to the latest egregious example. This article in the New York Times tells the story of David and Liz and their renovation of an abandoned wreck of a townhouse in Brooklyn. The couple seems sensitive to the history of the house and treasures what little remains of its original architectural details. But – in a triumph of fad over common sense – they chipped the plaster off their brick walls.
The reporter from the Times described the result in glowing terms: ”The brick hidden behind plaster walls was exposed, as was the brick beneath the stucco on the facade.” The writer makes it sound like some sinister fellow deliberately hid a beautiful brick wall behind a coat of plaster as a deliberate act of aesthetic sabotage. Nothing could be further from the truth: Plaster was originally applied to those brick walls for very sound, practical reasons.
1. Old townhouse party walls are made of soft, porous brick sloppily laid up because the masons knew the walls would be covered with plaster.
2. Once stripped, the exposed brick both collects dust and sheds its own mortar and brick particles.
3. If the bare brick is covered with a sealer to retard exfoliation, the sealer imparts a plastic-looking sheen that detracts from the desired natural, rustic appearance of the brick.
4. The plaster acts as an extra layer of insulation and protection in case of a fire in the row house next door.
5. Worst of all, the lack of plaster greatly increases sound transmission from the adjacent building. If your neighbor also exposes the brick on his or her side of the party wall, you can conduct a conversation through the bricks.
Keeping the original plaster on the walls of this restored Brooklyn brownstone not only provides a lot of additional soundproofing and fireproofing, but also offers much greater flexibility for interior finishes and decoration. Photo: Trevor Tondro for The New York Times
David and Liz may also discover that the stucco on the building’s exterior had been applied to prevent water infiltration through the outside brick caused by wind-driven rain.
The passion for exposed brick had largely vanished by the end of the 1990s as the various problems posed by bare brick became apparent, and many realized the whole fad was a mistake. However, these manias run in cycles, and it looks like the lust for exposed brick has risen from the dead once again. Thus, a whole new flock of renovators is doomed to discovering bare brick’s many nuisances all over again. When that happens, perhaps The Bare Brick Mistake can be interred forever — with a stake through its heart!
As a masonry contractor I have worked on hundreds of bare brick restoration projects. and you are missing the point as to why people exposed the old brick, and remove the stucco. There is little to no charm in looking at a stucco wall. Where as old brick walls do have charm and beauty. Some of the most beautiful bare brick walls are layed rustic, and can be sealed with a flat sealer that will not leave them with a plastic look or shine. As you said it yourself people keep doing it, and always will brick is beautiful. a Seattle Masonry Contractor
I had a bad experience with bare bricks in the lower level of an old building in Chicago which had been rehabbed. I had a conversation with someone in a room with bare brick walls. No sooner had I gone in, than I started coughing. It didn’t stop. We had to have the conversation in another room. I figured the bricks were giving off some fine powder or something which got into my lungs, which logically caused me to cough to expel the dust. I want to use some salvaged bare brick inside some rooms in a house my late mother designed, but I’d better make sure the brick is very clean.
Folks – as with all old house projects, the devil is in the details.
1. First, I would not remove stucco from an outside wall unless you’re prepared to both re-point and only then if you have excellent interior insulation. That stucco is excellent additional insulation.
2. But what about interior brick walls? Yes – plaster was applied to interior brick walls for sound reasons in the 19th century. And – in SOME cases – you ought not to remove that plaster. These cases include: (a) if the brick underneath was – in fact – messily installed (as noted in the original blog, this was fairly common since the masons would have been told that the brick would be covered with plaster); (b) if the wall was an exterior wall, the plaster served both as an insulator and a seal against water leakage; and (c) to prevent brick and mortar dust and chips from permeating the room.
3. However, that certainly does not mean that exposing brick in interiors is a bad idea. First of all, de gustibus non disputandem est (Yiddish or Gaelic or something ancient – OK, Latin – that means: “There’s no accounting for taste,” or – in more modern vernacular – “Hey – it’s your house – if you can’t do what you want there, where can you?!”).
4. Second, the key is to prepare and then do it properly. By the way – the removing of very old plaster is an intense, time-consuming and very messy process – best done if you’re renovating the whole floor or building. But that’s for another blog. And – before proceeding with any plaster removal, you should test a small section in an easily repairable area to get a sense of the condition of the brick underneath. If it turns out to be one of those sloppily done masonry efforts – take a pass; it’s not worth it.
5. So, the next question presented is the location of the wall. If it’s an interior wall that is common with the exterior, you could have an insulation problem. It depends on how thick the wall is. If it’s only one or two bricks deep, I’d take a pass. But three or more bricks would be OK if the brick is well-pointed. Updating the pointing would be a worthy investment. If you do remove the plaster on this wall location, you absolutely should seal the brick (see #7 below)
6. If it’s an interior wall abutting a building next door, you have far less of an insulation problem. So what about that “traveling noise” issue? Well, that too depends on the thickness of the wall, the use of the room, and what your abutting neighbor has done. If the wall is three or more bricks deep, and your neighbor hasn’t done the same thing, you’re OK. But – if you’re going to use the room for a video room, don’t take off the plaster. First, the acoustics will stink, and second, the base sounds will travel through the brick.
7. So – if you’ve gone through all these steps and all is a go, you can proceed. Once you’ve completed the plaster removal, contrary to the first blog above – and as another blogger noted – there are wonderful brick sealants in flat or matte finishes that have no appearance at all (e.g., Moxie 1300, Safecoat AcriGlaze Matte, Coronado Final Finish Sealer – Green, etc.)). These not only eliminate any dust or masonry coming into the room, they also are excellent moisture seals. They will even add a little insulation affect by eliminating any air that might pass into the room through the brick, and they strengthen the pointing and protect the brick. They’re cheap and easy to apply.
We removed ancient plaster from an abutting wall last year in a loft in NYC’s East Village. It converted an ugly contemporary renovation to a warm period piece entirely consistent with the loft looks of lower Manhattan. The plaster – over 100 years old – was harder than concrete and a bitch to remove – but the brick wall underneath was in pristine condition – the builders in 1899 had apparently decided that, even though it wouldn’t be seen, it would be perfect. We didn’t even have to point it anywhere. The room is a beauty.
So – it’s all in the prep, the assessment and the details
Good luck all.