DOCSLIB.ORG

Preserving Rockefeller Center Dorothy J

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

.Sr 8 i- The Urban Lawyer The National Quarterly on LocUl Govermen t Law Preserving Rockefeller Center Dorothy J. Glancy Reprinted from The Urban Lawyer, Volume 24, Number 3, Summer 1992 Published quarterly by the Section of Urban, State and Local Government Law, American Bar Association Copyright 0 1992 American Bar Association 423 Preserving Rockefeller Center Dorothy J. Glancy* Professor of Law, Santa Clara University, School of Law; J-D., Harvard University, 1970; B.A., Wellesley College, 1967. VISITORS TO MIDTOWN MANHATTAN seem to gravitate toward Rockefel- ler Center’s Art Deco embellished low-rise buildings along Fifth Ave- nue. Farther west down the promenade, past the Channel Gardens, is the famous sunken plaza with Prometheus and, during winter months, an ice skating rink. At Christmas, Prometheus shares the spotlight with an enormous Christmas tree. Radio City Music Hall lurks behind the towering skyscraper located at 30 Rockefeller Plaza.’ More than just architecture and decoration give the many buildings in Rockefeller Center a unified sense of place. An era of American history binds together the limestone walls of what to the steely eye of a real estate economist might appear to be an under-built urban site. Preserving Rockefeller Center as America’s quintessential urban land- mark has become a matter of world-wide interest. In 1989 a Japanese real estate conglomerate purchased control over the corporation which owns the NewYorkCitylandmark.Ataboutthesametime,planstotransferdevelop ment rights from the landmark to a new Rockefeller Center building resulted in the creation of an additional layer of protection for some of the older parts of Rockefeller Center. The Japanese investment was extensively, even sensationally, reported in the press.* Plans for the new building, Rockefeller Plaza West, have also been the subject of extensive public comment.3 But * The author would like to thank Met-in Urban, executive director of the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission, wtthout whose assistance research for this article would not have been possible. The late Mendes Her&man of the New York Bar provided great inspiration and wonderful stories about how Rockefeller Center began. The author would also like to thank Jerome Reiss of the New York Bar for his wise counsel regarding the practice of New York real estate law, Professor Curtis Berger of the Columbia University Law School for his collegial advice, and W. John Glancy of the Texas Bar, for patient guidance regarding tax and finance matters. The many excellent people at the New York Landmarks Conservancy, the New York Landmarks Preservation Commission, and the New York City Planning Commission also helped to make this article possible. 1. For many years this central building was known as the RCA Building. Because of yet another corporate reorganization, it has been renamed the G.E. Building. 2. See discussion and sources cited, infia at notes 2274. 3. See, e.g., Paul Goldberger, A Gesture To the “Good” Rockefeller Center, N.Y. TIMES, May 21, 1990, H:32. 424 THE URBAN LAWYER VOL. 24, No. 3 SUMMER 1992 thestoryofthelegalsideofpreservingRockefellerCenterhasyettobetold. This article will tell that story. Its purpose is to consider certain aspects of landmark preservation which link together the Center, the develop- ment rights transfer and the Japanese purchase. The first section will dis- cuss the Rockefeller Center landmark and highlight certain aspects of its background. The next section will explain the complex transfer of development rights which generated additional landmark preservation measures for Rockefeller Center. The main part of the article will explore the innovative legal mechanisms employed in the new landmark preser- vation scheme. The following section will focus on the relationship be- tween these new landmark preservation measures and a foreign invest- or’s acquisition of control over the corporate owner of Rockefeller Center. The article concludes by examining the significance of the re- markable landmark preservation efforts at Rockefeller Center. Map 1. Rockefeller Center . Weat. 52nd. Irem. ..__.___.___....................... ,_._................Eut 52tk Stm( : ; : : : : : : :____..___.____.____......................~ _______..,.,..__._._.___________________._. :__._.________...... w**t 51.1 strwt Ewt 51 ti Stmt West 49th Stmt : : p-II i j : : _._._.....__________........ ~____.___._________...................... _: :......___.___...... Wwt 47th Strwt Eut 47th Str4.t Kev to Locations 1. Warner Communications Building 10. G.E. Building 2. Time & Life Bulldtng 11. Sunken Plaza 3. 1270 Avenue of the Americas 12. British Empire Building 4. Radio Clly Music Hall 13. La Malson Francalso 5. Associated Presr Building 14. McGraw Hill Building 6. Intrrnatlonal Bullding 15. Simon 6 Schuster Building 7. Rockefeller Plaza West (RPW building site) 16. Tan Rockefeller Plaza 8. Exxon Building 17. One Rockefeller Plaza 9. 1250 Avenue of the Americas 13. Manufacturers Hanover Trust 19. Celenese Butldlng PRESERVING ROCKEFELLERCENTER 425 I. The Rockefeller Center Landmark Physically, Rockefeller Center is a group of nineteen buildings owned or managed by Rockefeller Croup, Inc. As Map 1 indicates, Rockefeller Center extends from the east side of Fifth Avenue to the west side of the Avenue of the Americas (Sixth Avenue) between Forty-seventh and Fifty-second streets. Rockefeller Plaza West, to be built on the east side of Seventh Avenue between Forty-ninth and Fiftieth Streets, is expected to be the twentieth, and last, addition to the Center.4 The oldest parts of Rockefeller Center are concentrated in the three blocks bounded by Fifth and Sixth Avenues and Forty-eighth and Fifty-first Streets. The parts of the Center along Fifth Avenue are smaller in scale and have more decoration than other portions of the Center. The sunken plaza offers an oasis of open space, from below ground level to the sky. Not all of the Rockefeller Center buildings are included within the desig- natedRockefellerCenterLandmark. Onlythepartsconstructedbefore 1955 were eligible for landmark status at the time the Rockefeller Center land- mark was designated in 1985 .’ References to the ‘ ‘Rockefeller Center Land- mark’ ’ are usually to the exterior landmark, which includes the outside of twelve of the Center’s buildings (indicated by the shaded areas on Map l), as well as open spaces and sculpture. As an exterior landmark, Rockefeller Center is a bit unusual because it comprises several structures and spaces designated as a single landmark.6 In addition, the interiors of some of the buildings within Rockefeller Center, such as Radio City Music Hall: the International Builtig Lobby,’ and 30 Rockefeller Plaza9 are also desig- nated as interior landmarks The older part of Rockefeller Center is at least 4. THE ROCKEFELLER GROUP A NNUAL REVIEW (1989) I lhereinafter_ 1989 A N- NUAL REVIEW]. 5. Under the New York City Administrative Code 0 2%302n, prospective land- marks become eligible for landmark designation after thirty years. 6. The designation includes the exteriors of the following: the Warner Communi- cations Building (formerly the Esso Building), 1270 Avenue of the Americas, Radio Citv Music Hall. the Associated Press Buildina. the International Buildinn with the s&e of Atlas inihe courtyard, the RCA (now dE.) Building, the RCA Buil&ng West (1250 Avenue of the Americas), the sunken plaza with the skating rink and the statue of Prometheus, the British Empire Building, the Promenade and Channel Gardens, La Maison Francaise, the Simon & Schuster Building with its addition at 1230 Avenue of the Americas, 10 Rockefeller Plaza (formerly the Eastern Airlines Building), and 1 Rockefeller Plaza (formerly the first Time & Life Building). The Landmark Site in- cludes five lots. Landmarks Preservation Commission, Designation List No. 455, LP- 1446 (Apr. 23, 1985) [hereinafter Rockefeller Center Designation Report] 7. 7. Landmarks Preservation Commission, Designation List No. 114, LP-0995 (Mar. 28, 1978). 8. Landmarks Preservation Commission, Designation List No. 455, LP-1449 (Apr. 23, 1985). 9. Landmarks Preservation Commission, Designation List No. 455, LP-1448 (Apr. 23, 1985). 426 THE URBAN LAWYER VOL. 24, No. 3 SUMMER 1992 doubly landmarked, since it was also designated as a National-Historic Landmark two years after its designation as a New York City Landmark. Of these landmarks, only four of the buildings (30 Rockefeller Plaza, 1250 Avenue of the Americas, the British Empire Building, and La Maison Fran- cake), some of the open areas (the sunken plaza, the Promenade, and the Channel Gardens), and the lobby of 30 Rockefeller Plaza are protected un- der the newly devised landmark maintenance program discussed below. lo When the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission” des- ignated the exterior of Rockefeller Center as a New York City landmark in 1985, the Commission concluded that the Center “has a special char- acter , special historical and aesthetic interest and value as part of the de- velopment, heritage, and cultural characteristics of New York City.“” The Commission particularly found that “among its important qualities, Rockefeller Center ranks among the grandest architectural projects ever undertaken in the United States, [and] that, unprecedented in scope and inspired in its planning, it created a new symbolic and physical center for New York. “13 The Commission also noted “that the developers of Rockefeller Center consciously strove for high quality and achieved a harmonious
Recommended publications
  • R" Y. 1' '" Th May 11 , 2007

    R" Y. 1' '" Th May 11 , 2007

    Man at the Crossroads, Looking with Hope and High Vision to a New and Better Future by Benjamin Max Wood B.F.A., Digital Media San Francisco Art Institute, 2003 Submitted to the Department of Architecture in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Visual Studies at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology June 2007 © 2007 Benjamin Max Wood All rights reserved The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in any medium now known or hereafter created. D~'~~rt;;;~~'t;~fA'~~hi't~~t~~~ Signature of Author ,. '" " , r" Y. 1' '" th May 11 , 2007 Certified by , '" '" '" '" '" '" ., ..,, .. , /.":." ~.: .., -.: . Krzysztof Wodiczko , Professor of Visual Arts " Thesis Supervisor MASSACHUSEITS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY JUN 14 2007 LIBRARIES Man at the Crossroads, Looking with Hope and High Vision to a New and Better Future by Benjamin Max Wood th Submitted to the Department of Architecture on May 11 , 2007 in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Visual Studies ABSTRACT I am an artist. My work is doing the research, bringing together perspectives, ideas, people and expressing something that will be silent if I do not say. 73 years ago an artist, Diego Rivera, was trying to say something and he was abruptly interrupted, perhaps the story is not finished. Because of past work, my experiences in California and my exposure to Rivera I have become fascinated with so many issues behind his art, behind the murals. The thesis is a contemporary reawakening of a landmark moment in art history where Nelson Rockefeller covered and destroyed a Diego Rivera mural.
  • National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination

    National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination

    NPS Form 10-900 (3-82) OMB No. 1024-0018 Expires 10-31-87 United States Department off the Interior National Park Service For NPS use only National Register of Historic Places received Inventory Nomination Form date entered See instructions in How to Complete National Register Forms Type all entries complete applicable sections____________ 1. Name historic Rockefeller Center and or common 2. Location Bounded by Fifth Avenue, West 48th Street, Avenue of the street & number Americas, and West 51st Street____________________ __ not for publication city, town New York ___ vicinity of state New York code county New York code 3. Classification Category Ownership Status Present Use district public x occupied agriculture museum x building(s) x private unoccupied x commercial park structure both work in progress educational private residence site Public Acquisition Accessible _ x entertainment religious object in process x yes: restricted government scientific being considered yes: unrestricted industrial transportation no military other: 4. Owner of Property name RCP Associates, Rockefeller Group Incorporated street & number 1230 Avenue of the Americas city, town New York __ vicinity of state New York 10020 5. Location of Legal Description courthouse, registry of deeds, etc. Surrogates' Court, New York Hall of Records street & number 31 Chambers Street city, town New York state New York 6. Representation in Existing Surveys Music Hall only: National Register title of Historic Places has this property been determined eligible? yes no date 1978 federal state county local depository for survey records National Park Service, 1100 L Street, NW ^^ city, town Washington_________________ __________ _ _ state____DC 7. Description Condition Check one Check one x excellent deteriorated unaltered x original s ite good ruins x altered moved date fair unexposed Describe the present and original (iff known) physical appearance The Rockefeller Center complex was the final result of an ill-fated plan to build a new Metropolitan Opera House in mid-town Manhattan.
  • Diego Rivera and John Dewey on the Restoration of Art Within Life by Terrance Macmullan

    Diego Rivera and John Dewey on the Restoration of Art Within Life by Terrance Macmullan

    Dividing Walls and Unifying Murals: Diego Rivera and John Dewey on the Restoration of Art within Life by Terrance MacMullan Dividing Walls and Unifying Murals: Diego Rivera and John Dewey on the Restoration of Art within Life by Terrance MacMullan English Abstract In Art as Experience, John Dewey decried the estrangement of art from lived human experience, both by artificial conceptual walls and the physical walls that secluded art within museums. Instead he argued that making and enjoying art are crucial organic functions that sustain communities and integrate individuals within their environments. In the 1920’s Diego Rivera became one of the luminaries of the Mexican muralist movement by creating frescoes that were rooted in Mexican life, both in their subject matter and public location. Rivera and the other artists working within the government cultural program guided by José Vasconcelos created murals that boldly expressed the new values of democracy, peaceful revolution, racial equality and cultural pride. This essay explores the deep resonance between Rivera’s most prominent murals from this period and Dewey’s argument that art is a refined and integral feature of human experience. In particular, this essay will examine the great extent to which these men independently came to the common understanding that for people to thrive and grow they need to create and experience art that grows out of and remains rooted in their culture. Without claiming that either thinker influenced the other, this essay argues that their works mutually inform and enrich each other. Both men sought to free art from the museum, but where Dewey urged us tear down the walls that separated art from lived experience, Rivera transformed walls themselves into murals that unified and educated the people of Mexico and restored their culture.
  • Rockefeller Center Complex Master Plan and Exterior Rehabilitations New York, New York

    Rockefeller Center Complex Master Plan and Exterior Rehabilitations New York, New York

    Rockefeller Center Complex Master Plan and Exterior Rehabilitations New York, New York Developed for the purpose of planning maintenance and capital improvement projects, Hoffmann National Trust for Architects’ Exterior Rehabilitation Master Plan for Rockefeller Center encompassed the nineteen Historic Preservation buildings of John D. Rockefeller Jr.’s 22-acre “city within a city.” The buildings are subject not only to Honor Award New York City Department of Buildings regulations, including New York City Local Law 10 of 1980 GE Building at Rockefeller and Local Law 11 of 1998 (LL10/LL11), but also to Landmark Commission restrictions, making Center - Restoration rehabilitation planning particularly challenging. Hoffmann Architects’ Master Plan addressed these considerations, while achieving even budgeting across the years. The award-winning rehabilitation program included facade and curtain wall restoration, roof replacements, waterproofing, and historic preservation for this National Historic Landmark and centerpiece of New York City. In conjunction with the Master Plan, Hoffmann Architects developed specific rehabilitation solutions for the Center’s structures, including: GE Building, Sculpture Restoration and Building Envelope Rehabilitation Radio City Music Hall, Roof Replacement and Facade Restoration La Maison Francaise and The British Empire Building, Facade Evaluations and Cleaning Channel Gardens and Lower Plaza/Skating Rink, Survey and Rehabilitation Design International Building, Facade Restoration and Roof Replacement Simon
  • William Morris and Diego Rivera: the Pursuit of Art for the People Heidi S

    William Morris and Diego Rivera: the Pursuit of Art for the People Heidi S

    Rollins College Rollins Scholarship Online Master of Liberal Studies Theses Summer 2016 William Morris and Diego Rivera: The Pursuit of Art for the People Heidi S. Shugg [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.rollins.edu/mls Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons Recommended Citation Shugg, Heidi S., "William Morris and Diego Rivera: The urP suit of Art for the People" (2016). Master of Liberal Studies Theses. 75. http://scholarship.rollins.edu/mls/75 This Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by Rollins Scholarship Online. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master of Liberal Studies Theses by an authorized administrator of Rollins Scholarship Online. For more information, please contact [email protected]. William Morris and Diego Rivera: The Pursuit of Art for the People A Project Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Liberal Studies by Heidi S. Shugg June, 2016 Mentor: Dr. Paul B. Harris Reader: Dr. Patricia Lancaster Rollins College Hamilton Holt School Master of Liberal Studies Program Winter Park, Florida William Morris and Diego Rivera: The Pursuit of Art for the People by Heidi S. Shugg June, 2016 Project Approved: ______________________________________ Mentor ______________________________________ Reader ______________________________________ Director, Master of Liberal Studies Program ______________________________________ Dean, Hamilton Holt School Rollins College 1 William Morris and Diego Rivera: The Pursuit of Art for the People William Morris (1834-1896) was an English author, poet, designer, publisher, and socialist activist most famous for his association with the British Arts and Crafts Movement. The aesthetic and social vision of the Arts and Crafts Movement derived from ideas he developed in the 1850s with a group of students at Oxford, who combined a love of Romantic literature with a commitment to social reform, bringing a gradual change in certain aspects of society.
  • NELSON ROCKEFELLER-DIEGO RIVERA CLASH and MAKING of the US ART CULTURE DURING the 1930’S

    NELSON ROCKEFELLER-DIEGO RIVERA CLASH and MAKING of the US ART CULTURE DURING the 1930’S

    MURALS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS: NELSON ROCKEFELLER-DIEGO RIVERA CLASH AND MAKING OF THE US ART CULTURE DURING THE 1930’s A Master’s Thesis By GÖZDE PINAR THE DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY İHSAN DOĞRAMACI BİLKENT UNIVERSITY ANKARA September 2013 To My Parents…. MURALS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS: NELSON ROCKEFELLER-DIEGO RIVERA CLASH AND MAKING OF THE US ART CULTURE DURING THE 1930’S Graduate School of Economics and Social Sciences of İhsan Doğramacı Bilkent University by GÖZDE PINAR In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS in THE DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY İHSAN DOĞRAMACI BİLKENT UNIVERSITY ANKARA September 2013 I certify that I have read this thesis and have found that it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in History. -------------------------- Asst. Prof. Edward P. Kohn Thesis Supervisor I certify that I have read this thesis and have found that it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in History. -------------------------- Asst. Prof. Kenneth Weisbrode Examining Committee Member I certify that I have read this thesis and have found that it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in History. -------------------------- Asst. Prof. Dennis Bryson Examining Committee Member Approved by the Graduate School of Economics and Social Sciences. -------------------------- Prof. Dr. Erdal Erel Director ABSTRACT MURALS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS: NELSON ROCKEFELLER-DIEGO RIVERA CLASH AND MAKING OF THE US ART CULTURE DURING THE 1930’S Pınar, Gözde M.A., Department of History, Bilkent University Supervisor: Assist.
  • Megablock Urbanism Rockefeller Center Reconsidered New York, NY USA

    Megablock Urbanism Rockefeller Center Reconsidered New York, NY USA

    Columbia University GSAPP AAD Summer 2015 Critic: Jeffrey Johnson [email protected] TA: Jiteng Yang [email protected] Megablock Urbanism Rockefeller Center Reconsidered New York, NY USA Rockefeller Center - Original Design in 1931 Image: wirednewyork.com Intro: The world continues to urbanize, in many regions at an astonishing pace, and we as architects must find ways to intervene in its physical metamorphosis. We are for the first time in history more urban than rural. Existing cities are expanding and new ones are being formed without historic precedent. How we continue to urbanize is of huge consequence. And, how we understand this phenomenon is critical to our ability to participate in the future urbanization of the world. This means we must invent new ways of thinking about cities and be agile enough to continuously modify and/or discard even the most recently developed theories and strategies. What possible socially and ecologically sustainable solutions can be invented for accommodating future urban growth? What role does architecture play in these newly formed megacities? 1 AAD Studio Summer 2015 - Johnson Superblock / Megablock: For many cities around the world, large-scale superblock development provides the default solution for accommodating urban growth. Superblocks, in their contemporary form, are byproducts of modernism – from Le Corbusier; to Soviet microrayons; to Lúcio Costa and Oscar Niemeyer’s Brasilia; to Mao’s danwei (factory units); to Steven Holl’s Linked Hybrid in Beijing. Varying in size from 8 hectares to over 50 hectares, with populations from 1,000’s to over 100,000, superblocks are spatial instruments with social, cultural, environmental, and economic implications, operating between the scales of architecture and the city.
  • The Story of Comfort Air Conditioning

    The Story of Comfort Air Conditioning

    City Bank Farmers Trust, New York, 1931. The Story of Comfort Air Conditioning Part-2 The Air Conditioned Building, 1900-1939 Text Section Part-2 The Air Conditioned Building 1900-1939 On one trip in the late fall of 1902, Carrier had to wait for a train in Pittsburgh. It was evening, the temperature was in the low thirties, and the railway platform was wrapped in a dense fog. As Carrier paced back and forth, waiting for his train, he began thinking about fog. As he thought he got the “flash of genius,” as patent experts put it, that eventually resulted in “dew-point control,” which became the fundamental concept of the entire air conditioning industry. “Willis Haviland Carrier: Father of Air Conditioning,” Margaret Ingels, 1952. 2.1 Assorted Beginnings Around the turn of the century ventilation the need for adequate supplies of fresh air were preoccupations of heating and ventilating engineers in the United States. As a result mechanical ventilation had been introduced into a number of the new larger and taller buildings. At a meeting in 1899 of the fledgling American Society of Heating and Ventilating Engineers (ASHVE founded in 1894) the author of a paper, “Some Points Regarding the Ventilation and the Heating of Tall Buildings”1 described the mechanical ventilation systems then in use. Some systems relied solely on exhaust ducts and extract fans with natural inlets. Others had supply (blast) fans with natural exhaust. One plant, considered novel at the time, in Buffalo NY used the ventilation plant to entirely heat and ventilate the building without the use of radiators.
  • The University of Chicago Exquisite Schemes: The

    The University of Chicago Exquisite Schemes: The

    THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO EXQUISITE SCHEMES: THE AESTHETICS OF EXCESS IN THE LATE BRITISH EMPIRE, 1890-1930 A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE DIVISION OF THE HUMANITIES IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE BY JACOB HARRIS CHICAGO, ILLINOIS AUGUST 2020 Copyright 2020 by Jacob Harris. All rights reserved. ii Table of Contents List of Figures.................................................................................................................................................... iv Acknowledgements........................................................................................................................................... vi Abstract.............................................................................................................................................................. ix Introduction........................................................................................................................................................ 1 I. The arts of excess...................................................................................................................................... 1 II. Excess and empire in the fin-de-siècle and the early 20th century……......................................... 10 III. Method................................................................................................................................................... 15 IV. Chapter outline....................................................................................................................................
  • Imaging Axis Terror: War Propaganda and the 1943 “The Nature of the Enemy” Exhibition at Rockefeller Center

    Imaging Axis Terror: War Propaganda and the 1943 “The Nature of the Enemy” Exhibition at Rockefeller Center

    Imaging Axis Terror: War Propaganda and the 1943 “The Nature of the Enemy” Exhibition at Rockefeller Center Christof Decker1 Abstract In the summer of 1943, the Office of War Information (OWI) staged an exhibition titled “The Nature of the Enemy” at Rockefeller Center in New York City. It in- cluded huge photo-murals showing the destruction and displacement caused by the global conflict of World War II and six scenic installations depicting the cruel practices of the Axis powers. In this essay, I analyze the exhibition, which was de- signed by OWI Deputy Director Leo Rosten, as an instance of propaganda, relat- ing it to a series of posters on the same topic produced at the OWI by the Ameri- can artist Ben Shahn, but never shown to the public. Rosten’s exhibition depicted the enemy’s actions and alleged nature in a prestigious urban location and pro- vocative style, combining elements of instruction with thrilling entertainment. I argue that it signified an important yet ambiguous and contradictory attempt to represent the horrors of war from a “comfortable distance.” While Shahn’s poster series aimed for empathetic identification with the victims of terror, Rosten’s ex- hibition promised the vicarious experience of cruelty through the juxtaposition of enemy statements and installations depicting scenes of violence. 1 Fighting the “Nazi Method” In the early months of 1943, the domestic branch of the U.S.-Amer- ican Office of War Information (OWI) worked on various projects to inform the public about the war. While the majority of these campaigns dealt with practical, war-related matters such as keeping military infor- mation secret, preserving food, recycling precious raw materials, and intensified efforts in war production, other campaigns addressed larger ideological issues.
  • A Self Guided Tour

    A Self Guided Tour

    Things to See in Midtown Manhattan | A Self Guided Tour Midtown Manhattan Self-Guided Tour Empire State Building Herald Square Macy's Flagship Store New York Times Times Square Bank of America Tower Bryant Park former American Radiator building New York Public Library Grand Central Terminal Chanin Building Chrysler Building United Nations Headquarters MetLife Building Helmsley Building Waldorf Astoria New York Saks Fifth Avenue St. Patrick's Cathedral Rockefeller Center The Museum of Modern Art Carnegie Hall Trump Tower Tiffany & Co. Bloomingdale's Serendipity 3 Roosevelt Island Tram Self-guided Tour of Midtown Manhattan by Free Tours By Foot Free Tours by Foot's Midtown Manhattan Self-Guided Tour If you would like a guided experience, we offer several walking tours of Midtown Manhattan. Our tours have no cost to book and have a pay-what-you-like policy. This tour is also available in an anytime, GPS-enabled audio tour . Starting Point: The tour starts at the Empire State Building l ocated at 5th Avenue between 33rd and 34th Streets. For exact directions from your starting point use this helpful G oogle directions tool . By subway: 34th Street-Herald Square (Subway lines B, D, F, N, Q, R, V, W) or 33rd Street Station by 6 train. By ferry: You can now take a ferry to 34th Street and walk or take the M34 bus to 5th Avenue. Read our post on the East River Ferry If you are taking one of the many hop-on, hop-off bus tours such as Big Bus Tours or Grayline , all have stops at the Empire State Building.
  • Mexican Muralism: Los Tres Grandes David Alfaro Siqueiros, Diego Rivera, and José Clemente Orozco

    Mexican Muralism: Los Tres Grandes David Alfaro Siqueiros, Diego Rivera, and José Clemente Orozco

    Mexican Muralism: Los Tres Grandes David Alfaro Siqueiros, Diego Rivera, and José Clemente Orozco David Alfaro Siqueiros, Mexican History or the Right for Culture, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), 1952-56, (Mexico City, hoto: Fausto Puga) Siqueiros and Mexican History At the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) in Mexico City visitors enter the rectory (the main administration building), beneath an imposing three-dimensional arm emerging from a mural. Several hands, one with a pencil, charge towards a book, which lists critical dates in Mexico’s history: 1520 (the Conquest by Spain); 1810 (Independence from Spain); 1857 (the Liberal Constitution which established individual rights); and 1910 (the start of the Revolution against the regime of Porfirio Díaz). David Alfaro Siqueiros left the final date blank in Dates in Mexican History or the Right for Culture (1952-56), inspiring viewers to create Mexico’s next great historic moment. The Revolution From 1910 to 1920 civil war ravaged the nation as citizens revolted against dictator Porfirio Díaz. At the heart of the Revolution was the belief—itself revolutionary—that the land should be in the hands of laborers, the very people who worked it. This demand for agrarian reform signaled a new age in Mexican society: issues concerning the popular masses—universal public education and health care, expanded civil liberties—were at the forefront of government policy. Mexican Muralism At the end of the Revolution the government commissioned artists to create art that could educate the mostly illiterate masses about Mexican history. Celebrating the Mexican people’s potential to craft the nation’s history was a key theme in Mexican muralism, a movement led by Siqueiros, Diego Rivera, and José Clemente Orozco—known as Los tres grandes.