Not to mince words or anything, but I hate public murals.

I find them overbearing, often oversized, a perversion of true public art and an affront to the underlying architectural design of the buildings they so grandly deface.

They are also, to me, a signal of struggling or dying communities, meant to mask underlying problems like failing infrastructure or empty storefronts.

You don't see them often in vibrant and successful communities, but rather in more downtrodden places, a symbol, to me, of towns that have turned to their last resort, a cheap injection of color or just change in places where industry and commerce have left.

Indeed, this was one of the reasons — boosting revitalization efforts — cited as the impetus for the development of a five-day mural painting festival (the idea of it makes me almost faint from nausea) in downtown Pawcatuck/Westerly.

The sign painters — maybe some of them are artists — will come from a Midwestern-based organization, The Walldogs, that will make Pawcatuck/Westerly their first defacing destination in the Northeast.

Some 200 painters are expected to come and complete 15 murals, each about 300 square feet in size.

Wendy Brown, president of the downtown business association, is the head of the local committee planning the project and attempting to raise the $150,000 needed to finance it.

Imagine the wonderful public art you could commission with that kind of money. I am thinking here of the Runaway Bunny in Westerly's Wilcox Park, the Whale Tail fountain on New London's Parade Plaza or even the new bronze of runner John J. Kelly in downtown Mystic.

Those are commissioned works of art that stand on their own. Painting the side of a building, on the other hand, obscures integral elements of that building, its shape and the materials it is made of, a part of the streetscape, a historical marker — not a canvas for the whims of a sign painter.

Murals are often colorful, playful and dramatic and meant to capture your attention. At the same time, they detract attention from the setting around them.

That makes large mural painting in downtown Pawcatuck/Westerly especially egregious, because it can only pollute the charming streetscapes and historical character of this classic small-town downtown.

Do organizers of this really think people are going to come visit Pawcatuck/Westerly just to see these big and showy murals, which are all to be painted in the theme of ye olde advertising signs?

Sorry, but simulated old advertising billboards painted on buildings is not art.

I wonder if Ocean House developer Chuck Royce knows about this and if he will continue to invest in bookstores, theaters, restaurants and art galleries in downtown Westerly once they start painting the sides of all the beautiful old buildings with fake antique advertising.

They are going to look tired and cheesy by the following weekend in September, never mind what they will look like next summer.

Alas, I suspect this is a train moving too fast to stop. They claim to have pledges of $60,000.

But I would encourage town planning officials in both Stonington and Westerly to give this some thought. Some communities around the country already are working to stop mural blight.

Los Angeles created a moratorium on new murals in 2002, until it could find a way to regulate them, which the city did in 2013, with a new mural ordinance.

Maybe since these are supposed to be replicated advertisements, real regulations pertaining to signs could be applied.

I would also warn building owners who are considering participating that some muralists lately have been aggressively claiming copyright privileges in court, where they can seek compensatory damages when a building is altered or destroyed. Permission to allow a mural on your building today could have long-lasting consequences.

Not only do I hate public murals but I love downtown Pawcatuck/Westerly, the way it is and the way that reflects the way it always has been.

Please reconsider painting over it.

This is the opinion of David Collins.

d.collins@theday.com