Get Brooklynian.com by Email! 
Grab the Feed (RSS)
http://rfkessler.com/2010Mirador.pdf
Also - Why the view should be a landmark
and why the Lincoln statue should be moved
to an appropriate location.
http://rfkessler.com/40yearsago.pdf
Don't let the turkeys get you down.
Brooklynian » Forum » Park Slope »
-
-
Forty years ago, two years after the assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert Kennedy, a simple lamppost was built on the median of the principle roadway leading
into Prospect Park.
Are you suggesting that the lamp post erection is somehow related to the assassinations? If so, what would lead you to believe that? If not, why mention them together?This lamppost is the Brooklyn Mirador
Says who? That's a name that you made up.The Tower of the Empire State Building is perfectly framed within and precisely bisects the Arch.
Nope, not quite.This view reflects our dedication to the proposition that all men are created equal and documents the relentless challenges to our resolve.
What? Where did you get this from?This historic view should be protected and promoted
It hasn't been designated as historic. In fact, by your own accounts, experts (which you are NOT) say it's coincidence and nothing more.
The Mirador, the Arch, Bailey Fountain, the JFK Memorial and the Tower are aligned along the axis of Grand Army Plaza. Why?
Alignment along an axis is pretty typical.Planners Calvert Vaux and Frederick Law Olmsted, and Brooklyn Parks Commissioner James Stranahan, devoted Lincoln men, aimed the axis of the Plaza at that mansion,
You have no evidence to support that, but there is evidence that the axis simply points to the magnetic north pole at the time of construction. Are you insinuating that the location of Grand Army Plaza was selected with both direct north AND the mansion in mind? It wasn't.Blah, blah, blah, lots of historical trivia that has nothing to do with anything
Enough said.In 1931, the Empire State Building replaced the Waldorf-Astoria, exposing the original alignment planned by Vaux and Olmsted
Again, where's your evidence? Oh yeah - you don't have any.This view and its history have remained unknown and
undocumented for 40 year
It doesn't have any history other than one mans rampant session of connect the dots that aren't related....not that there's anything wrong with that. -
Whyfi-
Isn't it amazing how people can convince themselves of almost anything?When I read this post, I can't help but think of those folks who have convinced themselves that the bible says the world is going to end later this week.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
Someone please PM me when this develops a shred or even a mere glimpse of a coherent thought.
Thanks
-
Don't hold your breath DR
(\__/)
(=’.'=)
(”)_(”) -
One or two steps at a time. OK?
Do you believe that Vaux and Olmsted, in 1869, had no motive in positioning the Lincoln statue as they did?
Do you believe that they had no idea it was facing a particular location, the home a leader of the most influential group who opposed Lincoln and the Civil War, and would rather amend the Constitution to protect slavery to maintain business as usual?
Is this a coherent staring point?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d2/Arch_and_EmpireSB_-_Grand_Army_Plaza_Brooklyn.jpg
Don't let the turkeys get you down. -
So, is this related to the G.A.P. is a giant ladyparts theory?
http://standard-deviant.blogspot.com/2006/11/grand-army-plaza-is-giant-vagina.html
-
richard said:
One or two steps at a time. OK?Sure, lemme just adjust my aluminium hat... OK!
richard said:Do you believe that Vaux and Olmsted, in 1869, had no motive in positioning the Lincoln statue as they did?
Of course I think that they had motive in placing where they did - aesthetics. Tell me, if you had a site shaped like an ellipse, would you place it on an axis of the ellipse? Without a doubt, and on the long axis, as well.
richard said:Do you believe that they had no idea it was facing a particular location, the home a leader of the most influential group who opposed Lincoln and the Civil War, and would rather amend the Constitution to protect slavery to maintain business as usual?
I think that they were dead certain that it was facing a specific direction - magnetic north. As to whether or not I believe that they knew that it pointed over the river and through the woods (literally!) at a house not visible - no, I don't believe that they did.
You obviously believe that they did know, this brings up two questions -
1) Does this suspicion of yours somehow constitute evidence?
2) Do you think that the magnetic north orientation is mere coincidence?richard said:Is this a coherent staring point?
No, but I expect nothing less of you, Richard.
...not that there's anything wrong with that. -
There were six or seven Brooklyn neighborhoods competing for the site of the park which would rival Manhattan's Central Park, to raise local propery values and draw wealthy residents.
This was prior to Lincoln's election, the Civil War, and the construction of the mansion. Any proof I have in the letters between Vaux and Olmsted showing they aimed to influence Stranahan in the selection Propect Park (because it gave them this platform to create the ellipse whose axis pointed north at ???) would only confuse you more. You already are unable to beleive the physical, concrete, stone, photographic proof before your eyes.
The alignment within the Plaza along its axis (the Arch, fountain, the Lincoln statue and the JFK Bust which replaced it) is obviously aesthetic, but is also designed to be confluent with outside elements.
I think two brothers have been and are still waging battle over the future of the New World. One believes in equality of men (right makes might) and the other on enslavement of the masses (might makes right). And this battle, this back and forth, is good. No society has ever advanced so far.
You say there are a bunch of dots with no connection. I see them perfectly aligned and connected with a purpose. For more than 40 years, I have connected dots aestheticly.
I've not make any money or recognition from this effort, but I keep doing it. And I will keep pushing for your realization that this alignment exists, and for a purpose.
I am so sorry if this persistance provokes you guys.
Don't let the turkeys get you down. -
sandcastler said:
So, is this related to the G.A.P. is a giant ladyparts theory?http://standard-deviant.blogspot.com/2006/11/grand-army-plaza-is-giant-vagina.html
Wait. We could be sitting around talking about how GAP is shaped like vagina and how great that is, but we are instead talking about some made-up, revisionist nonsense?
What the hell?!
I vote we talk about vaginas.
Although I don't have one, I could write about them happily for hours.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
Stop with your vagenda, WN
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
Boygabriel said:
Stop with your vagenda, WNexcuse me?
My vagenda?
Boygabriel-
If you were to take the time to review the thread, you will find that Sandcastler is the one who is the one who has given this thread the potential for intelligent dialogue.Given Richard's apparent obsession with all things Lincoln, and his insistence that GAP is aligned with the four of the seven Taco Bell's in Indianapolis which of course, it is), I was not expecting him to partake.
But Whyfi has no excuse. Despite being informed that GAP resembles one of the body parts subject to the most intense debate and fascination THROUGHOUT HISTORY, Whyfi continues to try to convince Richard that he is making stuff up, and has convinced himself of theories that no else believes or cares about.
Whyfi-
Of course you are free to spend your time as you choose, but may I respectfully ask "Why do you feel this conversation with Richard is a good use of your time?", especially in light of the information Sandcastler has brought to bear?Whyfi and Everyone else-
If we are going to have a thread that talks about the historic significance of GAP, let's not settle for discussing how it may be aligned with the Empire State building that has only been around since the 1920s, and silly, made-up theories about the intentions of the designers.Instead, let's take a cue from Sandcastler and the good folks over at Standard Deviant: Let's discuss how it may resemble a vagina.
Because this is a thread on history, let's also discuss the historic significance vaginas have played.
Here, I'll give you a framework that isn't something I made up in order to convince you of some bizarre agenda:
1. Vaginas have been around since the literally the beginning of animal life...
2. Ever since we stopped being simple organisms that reproduced by dividing into pieces, our very survival on earth has depended upon them!
If we are going to talk about GAP, we risk being called misogynist if we do not talk about its obvious influence by (and reverence of) vaginas.
Just to make everyone happy, I say we put the Lincoln statue where the clitoris would be and call it a day.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
I was just kidding man.
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
Boygabriel said:
I was just kidding man.I know man.
But take this friendly advice: I've learned the hard way to not kid about vaginas.
Some of the graduates of places like Smith College or Oberlin will take it the wrong way and kick your ass.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
richard said:Any proof I have in the letters between Vaux and Olmsted ... would only confuse you more.
Not if they mention the orientation of the plaza - bring, big boy. As it sits, Olmsted was in CA when Vaux had already completed preliminary sketches for PP including the placement and orientation of the plaza. Olmsted didn't join the project until AFTER this.
richard said:You already are unable to beleive the physical, concrete, stone, photographic proof before your eyes.
What proof? That there's a vague alignment doesn't mean that it was intentional. Proof would be diagrams showing the orientation at the distant (and not visible) manor. Proof would be written word stating the intent. You have no proof, you have blind faith.
...not that there's anything wrong with that. -
Whyfi-
You don't seem to be taking my advice today, but I can't resist giving you what may be helpful information:I believe that professionals in the field of psychiatry have found that when treating persons with fixed delusions or "blind faith", verbal interventions are often most effective when coupled with psychotropic drugs.
Now of course, I do not know if such a course of treatment would work in this instance.
Nor am I absolutely certain that such treatment would be indicated or reimbursable as per his health insurance.
Nor can I get you said drugs.
Nor can I figure out a way in which you would legally trick Richard into consuming them.
But I am CERTAIN, that your prior efforts to convince this poster that his theories are not based on any factual or logical basis, have been complete and utter failures despite your noble efforts.
....and I do strongly suspect that our patriarchal asses are at risk of physical harm from some of the graduates of Smith and Oberlin if we don't give begin to give them their due.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
In addition to the evidence provided by Standard Deviant, I submit the following:
-At the time of Grand Army Plaza's construction, the vast majority of women in New York City wore pantyhose.
-As you may be aware, pantyhose flattens women's pubic hair, thus creating what is historically know as "Flat bush".
I submit that Flatbush Ave was named after this phenomena, and that by following Flatbush Ave one can successfully arrive at New York's tribute to the vagina: Grand Army Plaza. (please see above link by Sandcastler)
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
If I may continue:
While the designers of Grand Army Plaza may have cleverly disguised their true intentions under rhetoric and events of the "civil war", I am among those very few people who know the real story ....and no one can tell me that I am wrong.
a. Even in historical times, Grand Army Plaza was abbreviated as GAP.
b. Although considered to be crude, in the 1800s, men consistently referred to vaginas as being a "gap" that they wished to get to.
Hence, they built an avenue that noted the common conditions of the day (as discussed above, women's bushes were often flat) in order to get to the gap.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
WN, while I'm sure that the rest of your "facts" are true, I very much doubt that any women wore pantyhose at the time of Grand Army Plaza's construction. According to Wikipedia, pantyhose did not appear until the 1960's.
Would you like to comment on the simultaneity of the appearance of pantyhose, the availability of the birth control pill, the burning of bras, and the sexual revolution, all in the 1960's?
-
Booklaw-
You will not dissuade me from my theories with your "facts"!Nothing in life is coincidence! Everything has a reason!
Although pantyhose may not have existed, how about halters? yes, I meant to type halters.
Halter (not pantyhose) are the explanation for why they all had flat bushes.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
booklaw said:
Would you like to comment on the simultaneity of the appearance of pantyhose, the availability of the birth control pill, the burning of bras, and the sexual revolution, all in the 1960's?
No, but I believe the Catholic church just claimed that is why their priests molested so many children. "Blame Woodstock"
I read their latest theory in in a NYT this week. http://www.care2.com/causes/politics/blog/bishops-report-on-priest-sexual-abuse-scandal-puts-the-blame-on-woodstock/
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
excuse me, booklaw. no one ever burned bras. http://www.snopes.com/history/american/burnbra.asp
carry on.
Bumping ancient threads with bot-like bullshit -
I stand corrected: the "trashing of bras" (I remember the photo!).
-
I'm just glad we all agree that if one follows the flat bush long enough, one reaches the gap.
What do you folks think about my idea to move Lincoln to where the clitoris should be?
Although he might want to be somewhere else, I believe I am correct when I assert that most women believe that men have gotten to be where they want to be for far too long.
This is a thread that is trying to give women their due. It is time for Lincoln to do his part.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
By your reasoning, shouldn't there be a tall obelisk somewhere in GAP?
-
As I understand it, obelisks want to be in a gap, but are often denied permission by the owner of the gap.
...but there are many other plausible explanations for its absence:
-It could be stuck in flat bush traffic.
-It could be lost.
-It could not want to go to this particular gap.
....you'd have to ask the obelisk's owner to get the real answer. I try not to go around just making stuff up.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
booklaw said:
By your reasoning, shouldn't there be a tall obelisk somewhere in GAP?no.
Bumping ancient threads with bot-like bullshit -
Sweet Tea, I had intended that question for WhyNot... no offense intended!
-
Booklaw-
There is always potential for confusion and misunderstandings when someone suggests that an obelisk should be in someone's gap.This particular gap is owned by all of Brooklyn, so determining what (if anything) should go in it is very difficult.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
It might be a bit fortunate that all of the vagina talk has made richard run off - I've done a little digging and I may have to eat crow.
...not that there's anything wrong with that. -
Whyfi-
It would not be the first time that vagina talk has had a negative impact. What did you learn?....does it have any impact on my life?
Should I devote every post I make to it?
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
This is the most awesome thread in the history of this site.
-
WhyFi said: I may have to eat crow.
Is that what it's called these days?
-
WhyFi, what have you learned?
-
I also want to know what Whyfi has learned.
But feel the need to let readers know that it was the girdle, not the halter, that was responsible for flat bush.
It is important to keep this conversation factually based.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
Dance Rehearsal said:
Someone please PM me when this develops a shred or even a mere glimpse of a coherent thought.Thanks
Done
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
DanielJ said:
This is the most awesome thread in the history of this site.agree
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
Whyfi - I would like to hear what you found.
Your words have been more thoughtful and
constructive than most here.
You should notice some of your points
have lead to changes in the downloadable
file that initiated this thread.Don't let the turkeys get you down. -
We all await word from Whyfi.
Meanwhile, I have received a cease and desist letter from Taco Bell.
They apparently feel it is bad for business to have their tacos mentioned as being aligned with the arch in gap.
They are tired of sophmoric fish taco, vagina jokes as well. ....even though I would never stoop to that level.
Maybe booklaw is right; we should just sot around and talk about our own obelisks. Anything beats revisionism.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
Ah, richard's back! Here I thought you'd gone to ground. No, I don't have anything that supports your theory, quite the opposite. How about we take a look at a relevant timeline?
Jan 9th, 1865 - "In the meantime you may be interested in the Brooklyn affair, though nothing may come of it. Stranahan induced me to go over the other day & examine the site"
- a letter from Calvert Vaux (NY) to Fredrick Law Olmsted (CA). Excerpt from The Papers of Frederick Law Olmsted, Volume 5. This is the first time that Vaux mentions (to Olmsted) the project that would turn in to Prospect Park.
*** Note the wording, "Stranahan induced me..." this doesn't sound at all like someone that's chomping at the bit to undertake the project. ***
- the sketch that accompanied the letter (for bearings, north is roughly at the 7:30 position) -
*** Note that there is no precursor to GAP in this drawing and, although Manhattan (New York Island) is represented in the smaller sketch in the upper left, the only only thing remotely linking Manhattan and the park is the line representing Flatbush Ave). ***Feb 5th, 1865 - Calvert Vaux plan for Prospect Park is submitted to the city of Brooklyn. It shows his proposed boundary changes. (North is, as indicated by the arrow, precisely at the 3:00 position)
*** Note the plaza - the size, shape, orientation is identical to what is in place today. Note the date. ***
This map resides with the Brookly Historical Society Map Collection - http://brooklynhistory.org/blog/2010/06/04/prospect-park-maps/Mar 12th, 1865 - "I have recently recieved your letters of 9th & 10th January, and the map of Brooklyn Park as designed by General Viele. My heart really bounds (if you don't mind the poetry) to your suggestion that we might work together about it. I can't tell you & you can't conceive how I would like to expect it. But I don't think it's likely. My health is weak."
...
"Your plans are excellent, of course"
- a letter from Fredrick Law Olmsted (CA) to Calvert Vaux (NY). Excerpt from The Papers of Frederick Law Olmsted, Volume 5.***Note - Olmsted, like Vaux, doesn't express a great amount of optimism about the project. Also note that the "excellent," comment is in reference to the Jan 9th sketch by Vaux that did not include a GAP precursor.***
April 14, 1865 - President Lincoln is assassinated.
So, what we can take from this -
1) Despite your love of Olmsted's quote "all of its parts... shall be confluent," he had no input on the size, shape, location or orientation of the plaza. There is no conspiracy between Vaux and Olmsted.
2) The size, shape, location and orientation of the plaza was determined before the assassination of Lincoln. At this point, Astor may be a polital rival of the President, but he's not a politcal rival of a slain President. Did Vaux, and Vaux alone, have such a dislike for Astor, at this point in time, as to aim the plaza at his unseen house, more than 5 miles distant?
2.5) It's also worth noting that there is one significant difference between the initial plaza design (Feb, 1865) and the finalized design: a berm (hill/mound with trees) was added at the north end of the ellipse. If they were really trying to establish a "visual corrridor," why would they create a berm, that rises higher than the interior of the plaza, smack in the middle of said "corridor"?So, will you go away now?
...not that there's anything wrong with that. -
*slowly stands up while clapping*
-
Perhaps Richard could join with those who believed judgement day would happen today. His theories are debunked.
Richard-
I believe you should continue to revise your theories in light of the facts Whyfi has brought to bear.Xlizelx, I believe that Richard has been forced to eat gap, not crow.
....many people enjoy it. ....even in historical times.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
I sometimes get the sneaking suspicion that a clever high school slacker duped me in to researching a paper for him/her. I guess that that's easier for me to believe than an adult that's as delusional as portrayed over the past year.
...not that there's anything wrong with that. -
From your research, you know that after returning from Germany in 1827 at age 35, Astor purchased the plot where he and his older brother’s mansion would be built more than 30 years later. In 1850, both Olmsted and landscape architect Andrew Jackson Downing traveled to England. Downing returned with Englishman Vaux and they designed the grounds of the Capitol and Smithsonian. No alignments there, right?
The view from the Prospect Park roadway in 1930, looking through the Arch, of the Tower under construction (40 years before the Mirador), exposed the previously invisible alignment of the axis of the Brooklyn ellipse and a point on that plot in Manhattan.
In 1859-60, while Olmsted was in England again, Stranahan consulted Vaux on his selection of the site of Brooklyn’s Park among several competing locations. Stranahan was leaning towards a site in Ridgewood. Who influenced his selection of Prospect Park? And this was before Lincoln’s election (much less his assassination), the Civil War or the mansion at 350 Fifth Avenue. The man-made structures which enable the awareness of the alignment may appear to be random. The Arch, the Lincoln statue and JFK bust, each fountain, the evolution of mansion to the Tower, the Mirador, and even Payne’s monument may only serve as convenient markers.
But I still want the Lincoln statue facing the site of the mansion, as planned by Vaux and Olmsted. I’m sure you guys could care less. And if the view of the Tower is eclipsed by Building Six of Atlantic Yards, you guys would be all over me when I say “If that building wasn’t in the way, you would see the Empire State Building bisecting the Arch.”
In the 1865 map you chose not to show, by engineer Benjn D Frost, it is obvious that the ellipse would have existed even if the Vaux plan was not accepted and Flatbush Avenue ran through the center of the planned park and at angle through the ellipse) No Plaza, but maybe a fountain and statue, and no Arch.
You truncated Olmsted’s March 12, 1865 quote. “Your plans are excellent, you go at once to the essential starting points, and I hope the commissioners are wise enough to comprehend it.”
In Volume V, page 66, what does Vaux mean by the work on Brooklyn Park being “of vital importance to the progress of the republic?” After all, he is just an architect.
Do you know the name and history of the money man behind the Empire State Building?
The view documents the New World’s history of the ongoing competition between the ostentatious abuse of wealth, power and greed and the subtle cultivation of a unique society that respects man’s differences, as all are created equal.
Don't let the turkeys get you down. -
I hope that some future man made structure will enable your awareness of your delusion. It runs deeps. Seriously, I'm not fucking around - go get help.
(Do I really need to debate quotes, as though everybody were speaking in code, throughout all volumes of The Papers of Frederick Law Olmsted? Let me ask you - how many times, in ALL of the correspondence, to and from F.L.O, was the Astor name mentioned? 3 times, maybe 4, but all in passing. I repeat, over a period of DECADES, 3 or 4 times. Yeah, the Astors were certainly high on his list of priorities. That was sarcasm, just in case your delusion clouded my intent.)
...not that there's anything wrong with that. -
You can imagine how unhappy I am not to find Astor's name among those Olmsted denounced and wanted hung during the Draft Riots. Barlow, Bennet, Brooks and Belmont. Seymour, Woods, Andrews, and Clancey. But no Astor. Rats.
Don't let the turkeys get you down. -
Richard-
If I were you, I would imagine this entire thread has been nothing but disappointment to you, but I agree with you on one point: I wish the Astors were around GAP more. They are very generous with their money, and I would like some of it.But let's stay on topic.
Even though Whyfi took the time to try dissuade you from your version of history, you continued to exhibit blind faith.
Even now (after it has been proven that your theories have no basis in fact what-so-ever), you continue to desperately search for a way in which you can get people to believe your theories.
I am sorry, but the vast majority of people here require facts before following a theory. Despite being confronted with the facts, you have refused to yield.
Like the guy who predicted the world would end on Saturday, you are free to continue to believe your version of the events. I am sure you (or someone else) will again desperately try to create a new version of history, and see who follows you.
Perhaps Ratner will build a building that coincidentally aligns with the arch. Then you (or someone 100 years from now) can argue that the view should be protected.
However, it is my sincere hope that you (and anyone you may convince to listen to you), not waste their lives on this cause. There are better things to do than live in an imagined past.
For example, one could waste time talking about the new restaurant that is going to open. Or a lost cat.
...these things are real.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
richard said:
You can imagine how unhappy I am not to find Astor's name among those Olmsted denounced and wanted hung during the Draft Riots. Barlow, Bennet, Brooks and Belmont. Seymour, Woods, Andrews, and Clancey. But no Astor. Rats.What monuments did he point at their houses?
...not that there's anything wrong with that. -
Brooke Astor deserves a monument.
She sounds like she was really great person.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
This does have me curious, though, ricky - since your belief mirrors (to me) that of devoutly religious people, what would it actually take to convince you that it's all a coincidence? I think that most people see the logic in my explanation through documented facts (others, feel free to chime in if you think that I've left something unexplained), but where does it fall short with you? What would it take, you know, short of resurrecting Vaux, Olmmsted and Stranahan?
...not that there's anything wrong with that.
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.