Latest Chapter in Broken Angel Saga
The story of the Broken Angel has gone from being one of hope—pioneering, quirky artist saves whimsical design while making a few bucks—to tragic—lack of political will and a collapsing market drive pioneering artist to desperate lawsuits. Re: the latter, The Times’ new blog The Local marked its first day in business with a post…
The story of the Broken Angel has gone from being one of hope—pioneering, quirky artist saves whimsical design while making a few bucks—to tragic—lack of political will and a collapsing market drive pioneering artist to desperate lawsuits. Re: the latter, The Times’ new blog The Local marked its first day in business with a post about Arthur Woods’ latest effort to save the building he bought more than three decades ago and transformed into a piece of public, albeit not code-conforming, art. According to the blog, Woods has recently sued the lender that began foreclosure proceedings against the property on the heels of a Stop Work Order; his suit relies upon the claim that a notary purposefully put the wrong date on some mortgage documents, though it’s not entirely clear why that would nullify the terms of the $1.8 million construction loan. He’s also making litigious rumblings about his partner on the project, Shahn Andersen. The whole thing is just sad.
Suing to Save an Angel [NY Times]
Broken Angel Up For Sale [Brownstoner]
Broken Angel: DOB Overzealous or Just Doing Its Job? [Brownstoner]
at least this sad saga gives an interesting humorous string of posts. No person however should be joyful of other peoples misery unless his name is Bernard L. Madoff. Having a business in real estate is combining goals of artistic estetics with earning that buck. I do believe Shahn try to reach both and theres nothing wrong with that. Ego or no ego. Even if mister Shahn had a different agenda nobody forced the artist to deal with him. Poor judgment Arthur, you bet on the wrong horse and now deal with the consequences. Artists and business sense….tell me all about it….
cmu- you really need to duck. All those incoming missiles heading your way now 🙂
DIBS: “massive code violations, ’nuff said.”
Not your usual sentiment. If you don’t realize that at least some of the reason for “code” is to 1) protect the building trade 2) results in over-engineering to protect against litigation and 3) inhibits or prevents innovation, you should research it.
While I don’t know for a fact about this building, not being up to code means nothing except not being up to code; it may be a perfectly sound, safe and interesting building.
Good I’m back and I see Shahn Anderson is at the front desk. Where did I put my bat?
“You were not there. No expediter that is following the law can just “push the paperwork through the system”. A number of different architects and expediters worked on this project.”
Who are there and where are they at?! Did you do a assessment or dove head first into the depths of Fail?
” Arthur is not homeless. He has an apartment. I should print this out for him and let him sue you too. LOL.”
The Balls Shahn, the Balls.
“Arthur could have walked away from his home with a lot of money in his pocket. Instead, he chose to try to stop the DOB from trying to tear the building down. That was his choice, and I chose to try to help him with it.”
Ding ding ding! And guess what dumbass? There are going to tear it down anyway!!! At lease Arthur could’ve have some money in his pocket!
Shahn Anderson is full of crap and I’m so happy you are going down in flames…
The What
Someday this war is gonna end…
wow- apologies for the triple post- my computer went a little nuts there!
What- wasn’t going after you, just voicing my viewpoint which seems to be at odds with everyone else’s here. For years i went past Broken Angel and fell in love with it. I imagine Arthur didn’t want to give it up because he put so much of himself into it- not as an investment or a piece of real estate, but as his life’s work.
fsrq- for all the years that building stood, and i do think Arthur was very cognizant of his structure and its dangers, you’re writing a scenario of what might happen. Yes- it was a possibility, but then again,so was the possibility that pieces of cornice would fall from old buildings all over Manhattan and in fact did fall on Court St. twice in my life I have been under elevated trains when they dropped bolts a few feet from me. The fact that broken Angel wasn’t droping debris should say something.
Some are being lived in, some aren’t. My point was that these structures were looked at as art pieces, rather than architecture. A different approach. Agreed, art is very much subjective, and more often comes down to whether or not someone likes it, rather than its particular merits (just don’t ask me what I think of Warhol 🙂
“There are amazing artist created structures all over the world, that aren’t up to code, and they are revered as folk art and preserved.”
Well, hopefully people aren’t living in these. Dangerous is dangerous, regardless of whether or not it’s “art,” which is in itself a subjective issue at best.
What- wasn’t going after you, just voicing my viewpoint which seems to be at odds with everyone else’s here. For years i went past Broken Angel and fell in love with it. I imagine Arthur didn’t want to give it up because he put so much of himself into it- not as an investment or a piece of real estate, but as his life’s work.
fsrq- for all the years that building stood, and i do think Arthur was very cognizant of his structure and its dangers, you’re writing a scenario of what might happen. Yes- it was a possibility, but then again,so was the possibility that pieces of cornice would fall from old buildings all over Manhattan and in fact did fall on Court St. twice in my life I have been under elevated trains when they dropped bolts a few feet from me. The fact that broken Angel wasn’t droping debris should say something.