Big Sur Beach, No. 2, Big Sur, California

Masumi Hayashi’s 1990 panoramic photo collage Big Sur Beach, No. 2, Big Sur, California documents California’s legendary Big Sur coastline—90 miles of dramatic Pacific coast between Carmel and San Simeon where Santa Lucia Mountains plunge directly into ocean, creating spectacular clifftop vistas, hidden beaches, and wilderness landscape representing California’s most iconic coastal scenery. This 22×56-inch nearly-square panorama (unusual 1:2.5 ratio, compact for typical horizontal panoramas) captures Big Sur Beach’s rugged coastal character where natural beauty, environmental protection, and tourism converge, creating landscape emblematic of California’s coastal preservation ideals and romantic wilderness aesthetic.

Historical Context: Big Sur’s Cultural Significance

Big Sur emerged as California coastal icon through multiple cultural forces: 1930s Highway 1 completion enabling public access to previously remote wilderness, 1950s-1960s Beat Generation/counterculture associations (Henry Miller, Jack Kerouac residencies), 1960s-1970s environmental movement victories protecting coastline from development, and continuing mystique as pristine natural refuge contrasting Southern California’s urban sprawl and commercial beach development.

By 1990 when Hayashi documented Big Sur Beach, the coastline occupied contradictory position: legally protected through California Coastal Commission regulations preventing development yet facing tourism pressures from Highway 1’s scenic drive status attracting 3+ million annual visitors whose presence threatened wilderness character they sought to experience. This tension—preservation requiring access control yet economic vitality depending on tourism—defined Big Sur’s ongoing challenge balancing conservation with community sustainability.

Format: Nearly-Square Panorama

The 22×56-inch dimensions (1:2.5 ratio) created nearly-square panorama unusual in Hayashi’s overwhelmingly horizontal-format City Works series—most works extending 60-96” wide creating extreme panoramic effects. Big Sur Beach #2’s compact 56” width and relatively taller 22” height produced less dramatically horizontal composition, potentially reflecting:

Subject Constraints: Beach scenes emphasizing vertical cliffs and ocean horizon might benefit from taller format capturing cliff height versus purely horizontal seascape emphasizing coastal extent.

Compositional Variation: Paired documentation strategy (Big Sur Beach #1: 22×66”, #2: 22×56”) created format variations distinguishing related works through compositional approaches rather than merely different viewpoints.

Production Economy: Smaller format reduced film requirements, mounting costs, and framing expenses—enabling premium pricing (

The

Several factors potentially constrained distribution:

Subject Saturation: Big Sur imagery abundance—Ansel Adams, Edward Weston, contemporary landscape photographers—created oversaturated market where Hayashi’s photo collage approach competed with established Big Sur imagery canon without clear differentiation commanding premium pricing.

Generic Landscape Challenge: Unlike Watts Towers (folk art monument), Dealey Plaza (assassination site), or Palace Theater (preservation triumph), Big Sur Beach lacked specific narrative beyond general coastal beauty—preventing work from achieving curatorial distinction needed for institutional acquisition or serious collector interest.

Geographic Competition: California coastal documentation from Cleveland-based artist faced competition from California photographers with stronger regional market presence, gallery representation, and collector networks—Hayashi’s Ohio base limiting California market penetration despite subject matter’s geographic location.

Cataloging Discrepancy: City Works vs. Misc. Series

The master catalog shows Big Sur Beach #2 appearing in BOTH City Works series and Misc. series (pieceId 11024)—suggesting cataloging ambiguity where coastal landscape documentation didn’t clearly belong in “City Works” focused on urban infrastructure, civic monuments, and architectural documentation. The Misc. series classification potentially reflected uncertainty about work’s thematic fit, with eventual placement in City Works directory suggesting retroactive categorization decisions during archive organization.

Paired Documentation Strategy

Big Sur Beach #2 joined Big Sur Beach #1 (11023, 22×66”, completely distributed) in paired coastal documentation—two works creating complementary perspectives or capturing different beach locations within Big Sur’s extensive coastline. The contrasting distribution outcomes (Big Sur #1: 0% retention/100% distributed, Big Sur #2: 100% retention/0% distributed) despite similar subjects, dates, and formats created puzzling market divergence suggesting either:

Quality Variation: Big Sur #1 might have achieved superior composition, atmospheric conditions, or technical execution making it significantly more appealing to collectors versus #2’s less successful execution.

Pricing Differential: Big Sur #1 might have carried lower pricing enabling complete distribution, while #2’s documented

Exhibition Selection: Big Sur #1 might have received exhibition exposure (gallery shows, institutional displays) generating sales interest, while #2 remained in storage never achieving public visibility needed for collector discovery.

Related Works

• Big Sur Beach No. 1 (11023) - Paired work, 22×66”, 100% distribution
• Sutro Baths, San Francisco (02024) - California coastal ruins, “packets” distribution
• Dry River, Orange County, CA (02006) - California landscape, 100% distribution
• Coast Guard Station, Cleveland (02004) - Coastal infrastructure, 100% distribution
• Angel Island Immigration (02002) - California Bay Area, 100% distribution

Series Context

Big Sur Beach No. 2 represents City Works series’ engagement with California coastal landscape documentation through nearly-square panoramic format capturing Big Sur’s iconic wilderness coastline. The work’s

---

Dimensions: 22 × 56 inches (nearly-square panorama, 1:2.5 ratio - compact for series) Year: 1990 Medium: Panoramic Photo Collage Film: 3.) Inventory: 1 unframed edition retained Location: Big Sur Beach, Big Sur coastline, California Series: Misc. (11024) / filed as City Works (cataloging discrepancy) Paired Work: Big Sur Beach No. 1 (11023, 22×66”) - 100% distributed (opposite outcome!) Market Challenge: Premium pricing + subject saturation + generic landscape vs. narrative specificity Format Distinction: Nearly-square format unusual in predominantly horizontal-panorama series California Context: Iconic coastal landscape documentation, environmental protection significance Distribution Mystery: Why did Big Sur #1 achieve 100% distribution while #2 achieved 0%? Cataloging Anomaly: Appears in both City Works and Misc. series in master catalog