Woodstock 40th Anniversary at Prospect Park

i hate the idea. the brooklyn hype is already way to much. we do not need something like this. i don't like central park because its so crowded, i perfer having the space there is in prospect park. i think having a woodstock in prospect park be followed by more similar events and end up with prospect park always being too crowded. isn't woodstock suppose to be a concert in the country anyway?

i think if enough of the monies would be guaranteed to fix the lawn, clean the garbage, etc., then it's a fine idea. but i worry that the lawn will be destroyed and it'll take a couple of years to fix.

boo

I agree with those upthread who are fearful of the clean up/restoration/police presence bill that will inevitably be passed on to us, not to mention the aggravation of having the neighborhood and park taken over for an entire weekend, not including the days/weeks in advance when it's taken over for setup, not including the weeks afterwards where it's all but unusable due to the grass being totally destroyed.

Sounds like a ball. I'm sure it would be great for local businesses, but then let them foot the bill, in total. I'll be damned if I want my taxes raised to pay for a bunch of folks to come destroy Prospect Park and make the neighborhood a living hell for a summer weekend.

Bad idea.

booklaw wrote: Ah... the old "Not in My Back Yard"!

It's a wonder there ever was a Woodstock.

Yep, not in my backyard.

That would be a big change from the 30th anniversary concert held upstate in 1999, which featured groups like Metallica and Megadeth, and was shut down amid riots and widespread violence.

i can't believe how many people actually like this idea. i know brooklyn isn't what it use to be and never will be again. but still. woodstock in brooklyn? come on!

oh crap. They just mentioned this on the Rachel Madow show on MSNBC

Will this be a BYOB [ bring your own blunt ] affair?

pima wrote: If we can trick 100,000 people to sit on the lawn in Prospect Park, maybe they can take all the dog shit stuck to their ass with them when they leave.

I'm for it.

Now that was funny.


MOD NOTE: tags fixed
-C

Discussion on tag-fixing moved to Ask Brooklynian.

i don't feel strongly about it one way or another, but i doubt it would be that big a boon to the local economy, as i'm sure vendors for the event will be decided on the usual bases of bidding and graft and won't necessarily (or even likely) be local.

sweet tea wrote: i don't feel strongly about it one way or another, but i doubt it would be that big a boon to the local economy, as i'm sure vendors for the event will be decided on the usual bases of bidding and graft and won't necessarily (or even likely) be local.

i would have to agree with this statement.

i remember how much i used to love Seventh Heaven because all the local stores would essentially move out onto the sidewalks and streets for the day. The food was also the local restaurants. i thought it was great. now it's all about tube socks and mozzarepas. so sad. but i digress...

booklaw wrote: Ah... the old "Not in My Back Yard"!

It's a wonder there ever was a Woodstock.

"Not in My Back Yard" would usually refer to someone touting something (i.e. - windmill energy) but refusing to be inconvenienced by it (i.e. - Ted Kennedy refusing to allow windmills to be placed in his "backyard" off Martha's Vineyard).

I could care less if this happened anywhere, but I definitely don't want it in my "backyard," where I'll end up paying for it, not to mention having to deal with the "weekend-of" inconveniences, destruction of the Prospect Park lawn and mountains of trash.

It'll will probably help local businesses, but how does that help me? The costs will inevitably be passed on to everyone in taxes, not just to the businesses that it helped.

So, yeah, not in my backyard, or anywhere else for all I care. Boomers, stop trying to recreate the "glory days" and start trying to fix the mess that you all have made for future generations.

booklaw wrote: So free public rock concerts are of interest only to boomers? Since when?

If the concert was in Central Park, rather than Prospect Park, would that be of more interest?

If so, then NIMBY applies.

1) The organizer is a baby boomer, trying to commemorate Woodstock. I'm sure there'll be plenty of people going who aren't boomers, but the idea behind the whole thing is to celebrate that era.

2) No. Like I said, I could care less where (or if) this happens. So NIMBY does not apply, to me.

And how, exactly, is this event going to be "free?" I suppose it would be "free" in the sense that attendees apparently wouldn't have to buy a ticket to hear the music, but it's certainly not free to put on or to police or to clean up afterward, and that's what I'm concerned with. That cost, whether directly, through taxes, or indirectly through inconvenience and aggravation, is going to be passed on to residents of the neighborhood.

I pay (high) taxes and (high) rent to live in a relatively quiet, low key, clean neighborhood, with easy access to a relatively clean, uncrowded, quiet park. I have zero interest in seeing all that disrupted for a weekend to have a bunch of bands I have zero interest in ruining the Park. If Jimi Hendrix was in the lineup, then hell yeah. But he ain't.

if it happens ,I hope they have a no stabbing section