LGBT LANDMARKS: A Survey of Historic LGBT+ Sites in Central Indiana EXECUTIVE SUMMARY / AUGUST 2016 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY / AUGUST 2016 INTRODUCTION The National Park Service (NPS) launched its’ (Fire Island, NY), Cherry Grove Community LGBTQ Heritage Initiative on May 30, 2014, House & Theatre (Fire Island, NY), Dr. Franklin for the purpose of identifying and interpreting E. Kameny Residence (Washington, D.C.), the LGBTQ sites and stories, as well as James Merrill House (Stonington, CT), the nominating related properties to the National Furies Collective (Washington, D.C.), and Casa Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and as Orgullo (San Juan, Puerto Rico). San National Historic Landmarks (NHL). Currently, Francisco’s National AIDS Memorial Grove is a only two LGBT-related properties, NYC’s National Monument and the Stonewall Inn Stonewall Inn and Chicago’s Henry Gerber was declared one as well by President Obama INTRODUCTION 2 House, are listed as both NHLs and on the in June of 2016. Of over 90,500 NRHP SPONSORS 3 NRHP, and six other properties are also listed listings, these nine sites barely skim the on the NRHP, including the Carrington House surface of historic LGBT+ sites in the U.S. HISTORIOGRAPHY 4 METHODOLOGY 5 DATA SUMMARY 6 DEMOLITIONS 11 NRHP ELIGIBILITY 12 INTEGRITY ISSUES 13 ACTION POINTS 14 BIBLIOGRAPHY 15 The Damien Center, 26 N. Arsenal Ave. Largest HIV/AIDS service organization in Indiana Cover Page Info Image Courtesy of Kurt Lee Nettleton © 2015 Talbott Street Theatre Located at 2145 Talbott St. Known for its drag queen performances and as a popu- Local Significance lar dance club since the Why does Indiana need an LGBT+ survey? After the outcry and protests of the House Joint 1980s Resolution-3, a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage in the state, Closed June 2016 and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a law that grants religious liberty rights to First Image: Courtesy of Bass individuals as well as corporations with little protections to the LGBT+ community, the need to Photo Co. Collection, Indiana identify, protect, and celebrate Central Indiana’s historic LGBT+ sites becomes even more Historical Society, 1926 necessary. While many LGBT+ sites, especially in Indianapolis, have been listed in NRHP Second Image: Courtesy of neighborhood districts (and some additionally in local districts) as contributing for architectural Kurt Lee Nettleton © 2015 significance, we must do a better job of acknowledging the LGBT+ community directly. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY / AUGUST 2016 SPONSORS SPONSORS, CONTRIBUTORS & ASSOCIATED PROJECTS Why Landmarks? As the state’s largest non-profit preservation organization, Landmarks launched its own LGBT+ Heritage survey, following the lead of the NPS initiative. With the expertise of a local steering committee and the support of local LGBT+ non-profit Indy Pride Inc., Landmarks was able to document a portion of Indianapolis and Central Indiana LGBT+ history: this is history in the making. Landmarks will continue to survey Indianapolis LGBT+ sites, and Project Manager: Mark Dollase will expand the project statewide next year. Landmarks’ goal is to 2014 Surveyor: Travis Olson have all historically and architecturally significant LGBT+ sites in Indiana surveyed and analyzed for integrity, condition, National 2015-16 Surveyor: Jordan Ryan Register eligibility, and protection methods. Funding for this initiative is provided by the Efroymson Family Fund of the Central Indiana Community Foundation. IUPUI’s smartphone app, Discover Indiana, features a tour of LGBT+ heritage sites in collaboration with Landmarks. Indiana Landmarks was a 2015-2016 inaugural sponsor of Discover Indiana. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY / AUGUST 2016 HISTORIOGRAPHY SCHOLARSHIP ON LGBT+ PRESERVATION IS SLIM Gay Men Leading Urban Preservation? There’s a stereotype that gay men are the first to rehabilitate a historic neighborhood. Will Fellows describes the theories about gay men and preservation in his book, A Passion to Preserve: Gay Men as Keepers of Culture; gay men often have more disposable income and no children, so they have the money and time needed to take on historic rehabilitation projects, and without children, school quality and safety can play less of a role in certain dilapidated neighborhoods. Another theory is that gay preservationists are “attempting to create something that will live beyond them,” as in, rehabbing grand houses becomes part of their legacy. Perhaps a more psychoanalytic interpretation is that gay men take on the “marginal” work of preservation by taking “something degraded and making it whole and beautiful again, they are trying to prove themselves worthy of society’s respect and move up the social ladder.” There is no single LGBT+ experience or community Tension exists between heterosexuality/the State’s control of space and the appropriation of space by minorities, including LGBT+ City-County Building, 200 E. Washington St. Class, cultural, and racial divisions factor heavily in LGBT+ spaces; gays and lesbians do not interact with space in the same way Site of over 400 same-sex marriage licenses (gender privilege) after federal courts ruled that the state ban on As early as 1991, cultural diversity in the preservation field same-sex marriage was unconstitutional emerged as a key topic, at the 1991 National Trust Conference in Image Courtesy Kurt Lee Nettleton © 2015 San Francisco Questions to Consider How do we cultivate an LGBT audience as preservationists? How do we recognize the LGBT community for their key role in saving many historic buildings by simply residing in historic spaces—renting office space, etc.-when downtown was stagnant? Are we preserving the history of segregation in some ways? Do we need an LGBT Thematic NRHP Nomination for Indianapolis? Are we “outing” building owners when listing individual sites as LGBT-related? How do we grapple with the integrity of LGBT buildings when the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for historic alterations and the Period of Significance are in conflict? EXECUTIVE SUMMARY / AUGUST 2016 METHODOLOGY THE SURVEYING PROCESS First Phase The initial surveyor used historical documentation to locate and identify potential LGBT-sites, including resources at the Chris Gonzalez Library and Archives, the State Archives, and IUPUI’s digitized LGBT collection. This included viewing all issues of local publications The Screamer (1966-1967), The Works (1981-1987), The New Works News (1987-1991), The Word (1991-2000), and the zine The Mirror. Information derived from these sources was then organized thematically: Civil Rights, the Arts, Health, Businesses, Leisure, Residences, Events, Organizations, and People. Names, addresses, dates of significance, and a statement of significance were listed per each historic The Academy Building, 429 E. Vermont St. site. 10 interviews were completed as Location of the Chris Gonzalez Library & Archive well as photo documentation of 120 and Indianapolis LGBT+ advocacy group, IndyPride, Inc. sites. Image Courtesy of Kurt Lee Nettleton © 2015 Second Phase The second surveyor took the data derived from the first phase and developed an executive summary, including building a historiography which provided a national context and a methodology for the project. Then, the data was corrected and cleaned before the data interpretation and mapping efforts could begin. Each property was also checked for a listing in the State Register, National Register, and National Historic Landmarks via SHAARD, SHAARD GIS, and Interim Reports. Next, properties not already in the NRHP were preliminarily determined to be eligible or not for future NRHP nominations, pending DHPA approval. This list was evaluated and ranked on a three-tier system. Properties were also determined to have IHPC protections, Pride Fest 1991 on Monument Circle covenants, or easements as well as being extant or demolished. Some sites required additional 1 Monument Circle research or site visits. In the second summer, the Site of many protests, marches, candlelight vigils surveyor researched additional sites via the Image Courtesy of Hawthorn Mineart © 1991 Indiana Historical Society’s LGBT Oral History Initiative and Collections Initiative, along with new information available in collections from the Indiana State Library and the digitized feminist periodical, Womankind. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY / AUGUST 2016 DATA SUMMARY FULL DATASET ORGANIZED BY THEME ALL SITES THEMES 419 Locations 7 themes mapped NRHP Listed: 116 sites (28%) Civil Rights Leisure The Arts Residences NRHP Eligible: 60 sites (14%) Health Events Demolished: 59 sites (14%) Businesses Protected: 107sites (26%) Map of all LGBT+ sites surveyed as of 2016 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY / AUGUST 2016 DATA SUMMARY SUMMARY OF DATA ORGANIZED BY THEME CIVIL RIGHTS 51 Locations Locations in which protests, events, meetings, etc., for the purpose of ex- tending civil rights to the LGBT+ com- munity occurred NRHP Listed: 11 NRHP Districts: Herron (4-1 is NC), Monument Circle (3), Individual (2), Lockerbie (1), Wholesale (1) NRHP Eligible: 13 Demolished: 7 Protected: 12 IHPC; 0 covenants 22% listed; 25% eligible; 14% demolished; 24% protected THE ARTS 30 Locations Cultural institutions like theaters, cin- emas, art galleries & fairs, & perfor- mance halls which supported LGBT+ efforts NRHP Listed: 16—1 is also NHL NRHP Districts: Herron (3), Individual (3), Fountain Square/Fletcher Place (2), Mass. Ave. (2), Apartments (1), Chatham Arch (1), Irvington (1), Lock- erbie (1), Meridian