April 23 to June 19, 2008
Monday through Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm
Sunday, April 27, 12:00 pm - 4:00 pm
Central Park Arsenal (5th Avenue at East 64th Street)
CentralPark.com
FREE

The Central Park Conservancy and the New York City Department of Parks & Recreation is celebrating the 150th Anniversary of the "Greensward Plan", the design for Central Park that was chosen by the Park Commissioners on April 28, 1858. Part of the commemoration is the exhibit, Celebrating Greensward: The Plan for Central Park, 1858 - 2008, a display of photographs from various eras in Central Park's existence that are organized by area, drawing attention to the changes the park has undergone.

The exhibit is a fairly modest affair and is displayed in what is essentially a large break room and dining area on the third floor of the Arsenal (the only occupied structure in the park that actually pre-dates the Greensward Plan). Many of the photographs have published extensively in books and on websites, but are nevertheless revelatory when exhibited in large-form and in the context of photos from different time periods.

The centerpiece of the exhibit is the actual wall-sized drawing that designers Calvert Vaux and Frederick Law Olmstead submitted for the 1858 park design competition. The intricately detailed diagram is in remarkably good shape for its age and despite significant subsequent changes to the design (notably the addition of the separated bridle and pedestrian paths and an extension of the park from 106th street to 110th street), the park remains today much as Vaux and Olmstead conceived it in their original proposal. While the drawing is frequently seen in smaller reproductions, being able to examine the map down to the level of individual rocks and trees is a unique experience.

A subtext to the exhibit is the idea of Central Park as the physical embodiment not only of the cyclical changes in the city's economic fortunes and priorities, but also the political struggle for control of the public sphere that still dominates political discourse in America.

In the mid-19th century, elite New Yorkers wanted a park similar to the great urban parks of Europe that would reflect America's growing wealth and importance. Uptown residents also wanted to rid themselves of the eyesores associated with the area's existing residents and increase the value of their landholdings on the newly developing areas that are now the Upper East and West sides of Manhattan. In that context, park designer Frederick Law Olmstead viewed his creation as a work of public art to be savored visually and spiritually.

By contrast the larger public (and their political advocates) saw the proposed park as a public amenity. Indeed, many politicians at the time decried the expenditure of such extraordinary sums for a single large park when more civic benefit might be attained with the creation of more modest recreational areas dotted around the city for the benefit of the city's burgeoning and densely-packed (pre-mass-transit) population.

The 843 acres that Central Park was built on, while considerably less developed than much of the rest of the city, was nevertheless home to quite a number of people. Aside from a large reservoir the area included a thriving African-American community (Seneca Village - across from the current Natural History Museum), a convent (Mount St. Vincent - just to the south of Harlem Mere), light industry (noxious rendering plants like the Menck bone boiling works on the site of the current Tavern on the Green) and a number of subsistence farmers (some of them squatters) who managed to eek out a living from the rocky land. In a manner similar to the overdevelopment wars of our own time, these largely powerless residents were summarily booted from their homes to make way for what could be considered a playground for the rich.

As the park was built and assumed a role in the life of the city, the tension over control of this public facility played out in the role of recreation in the park. While wealthy New Yorkers had free access to the carriage roads (now the park drives) for ostentatious displays of vehicular wealth, more humble wagons and carts that could give working-class residents a pleasant Sunday ride through the park were prohibited. There was significant opposition to philanthropist August Heckscher's funding of the park's first equipped children's playground in the 1920s (fearing it would promote congregation of poor children and their parents), but the supporters of recreation were ultimately victorious with the advent of the depression and a much-needed WPA-funded overhaul of the park that added numerous playgrounds and ballfields. Today, the park is a destination for athletic, civic and entertainment activities on a scale that Olmstead and Vaux never envisioned.

The most visible expression of the tension between public and private has been funding for maintenance of the park. Contrary to the sensory perception of the park as a natural oasis, it is actually a thoroughly unnatural human contrivance - a sprawling work of landscape art that requires extraordinary amounts of labor and capital to maintain its "natural" state. In contrast to the substantial funds found (at great difficulty) for the creation of the park, funds for proper maintenance often proved more elusive in the following decades. Public use of the park beyond the natural limits of the landscaping contributed to a slow decline through the end of the 19th Century.

This slow decline was temporarily reversed with Robert Moses' federally-funded (WPA) "modernization" of the park during the Great Depression. The subsequent decades saw further enhancements, although these, "consisted mainly of introducing active recreation features and increasing public programming -- often at the expense of the landscape art that made the park unique." As Moses was eased off the political scene in the 1960s, he left behind no lasting political infrastructure to provide for the park's upkeep. As the city's economic fortunes reached their nadir in the 1970s, maintenance on the park was reduced to sub-minimal levels and Central Park became a dangerous civic embarrassment and a visual symbol of lost faith in cities and in the public sphere.

The solution to this void was the formation of the Central Park Conservancy, a public/private partnership that took over maintenance of the park in 1980 and has restored it to a condition unseen since its halcyon days in the 1870s. Nevertheless, it is ironic that this open and, seemingly, most democratic of public spaces has only been able to thrive thanks to the largess of wealthy philanthropists and large corporations. But considering the nature of the park's original patrons and advocates, it is, perhaps, fitting.

On your way out the front door of the Arsenal, you may want to note the yellowed mural in the lobby depicting the history of the Arsenal and the park. As one block of narrative points out, the Arsenal was built prior to Central Park when the area was still fairly remote, over four miles from the population center of New York City that was still concentrated on the lower tip of the island. The siting of the Arsenal was dictated in part by an interest in storing dangerous munitions in a less-populated location where accidents would not cause unnecessary injury and loss of life. However, the location was controversial because it eliminated the ability to quickly muster the volunteers that would be needed to quell riots.

For those of us who might occasionally look at civil unrest and civil war around the world and feel that we are somehow inherently superior to those peoples, this threat of domestic riot, as well as the horrifically bloody American civil war that would follow the Greensward Plan by only a few years should be a sobering reminder that violence is an inherent part of the human condition that knows no ethnic or racial boundaries.

On May 6, 2008, two Democracy for NYC members, Bernadette Evangelist and Chuck Zlatkin, agreed to show Jani Saxell, award-winning Finnish journalist and book author, and wife and colleague, Susanna, some local, grass-roots, progressive activism.

At an anti-war, weekly stand-up with Chelsea Neighbors United Against the War, the Finnish couple got to photograph and question participants about their experiences protesting the Iraq war on 8th Avenue at 24th Street in Chelsea, each Tuesday for the past 156 weeks.

Afterward, over wine and pizza, Chuck and Bernadette shared their individual views and activist styles.  Bernadette described DFNYC's formation and on-going efforts to have a platform for political activists not necessarily content with more traditional political clubs.  Chuck extolled street-corner petitioning, organizing, and writing as his preferred methods to affect change.  Both expressed concern about the dire state of the Union and the need for all citizens to get involved. They believe that people need to speak up and work to restore and protect our rights and liberties.

Jani and Susanna, are writing a book about the contemporary United States from an alternative viewpoint: "We are focusing on critical voices in culture, the state of the US civil society and peace and human rights groups, social justice, anti-racist, environmental and feminist movements. We will try to get an overview of contemporary US society and culture in the last months of  the Bush administration, to hear the hopes and fears of different progressive movements in the USA."

The book, with a working title Alternative USA will be published by Avain, a Finnish publishing house, in 2009.

Jani made an earlier trip to United States with another colleague who is also involved in the book project in June–July 2007. They participated in the US Social Forum in Atlanta, GA, and then traveled to New Orleans to cover the post-Katrina situation.

This second trip was to focus on New York City and the east coast.

(Opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and
do not represent official positions of or endorsements by Democracy for NYC)

On March 17, two-term Queens Republican City Councilman Dennis Gallagher pled guilty to two misdemeanors, admitting that he sexually assaulted a woman in his Middle Village district office last summer while he was intoxicated. Part of the plea deal was a requirement that he resign his Council seat by April 18. Once Gallagher's resignation was official, Mayor Bloomberg called a special election for June 3, 2008 to fill the 30th District seat.

Special elections are technically non-partisan since there is no nominating process. Therefore, two Democrats and three Republicans will be running, assuming they all survive some nasty petition challenges. Aside from Crowley, none of the candidates seem to have official websites. However, the Queens Chronicle did some nice coverage of an April debate that gives a good overview of the candidates.

• Democrat Charles Ober is the president of the Ridgewood Democratic Club and longtime community activist with an extensive resume of community group leadership positions. He is the only openly gay candidate in the race. Ober has significant support in Sunnyside/Woodside, is fairly progressive and has been endorsed by the NY Times.
• Democrat Elizabeth Crowley ran for this seat in 2001 (at the age of 23) and was defeated by Gallagher. Both of her parents have held this seat and she is a cousin of Democratic County Leader and U.S. Representative Joseph Crowley. Needless to say, she has the support of the Queens County Democratic Party and most of the county's Democratic representatives. (Queens Courier Profile).
• Republican Anthony Como started his political career as an aide to Republican State Senator (and Queens power broker) Serphin Maltese and was most recently Commissioner for the Queens Office of Board of Elections. Como has been endorsed by the Queens County Republican Party. Como has achieved unwanted notariety lately for building an oversized McMansion in Middle Village that has been the subject of numerous community complaints and stop work orders.
• Republican Tom Ognibene held the 30th District seat for about 10 years until being term-limited out in 2001 and succeeded by Gallagher. Ognibene ran for mayor on the Conservative Party line in 2005. He has plenty of money to expend towards getting his old seat back, but the party's support is behind Como.
• Republican Joseph Suraci is a Queens attorney and former president of the Middle Village Republican Club. Suraci spent 20 years as a trial lawyer for Legal Aid and is surprisingly well-liked by a number of Democrats. Suraci is notable for being overlooked for Civil Court judgeship that was given to a Democrat who also happened to be the daughter of a crony of...Republican Serph Maltese.

On May 1, 2008, members of Democracy for NYC gathered in Roosevelt Park in Chinatown to stand with Justice Will Be Served! and immigrant workers. DFNYC member Chuck Zlatkin was asked to speak on behalf of his union, NY Metro Area Postal Workers, who have, along with  DFNYC, endorsed the Justice Will Be Served! campaign in boycotting restaurants and nail salons engaged in abusing the rights of their workers. Among the restaurants targeted because of unfair treatment of their delivery workers, are Saigon Grill on the Upper West Side and University Place, Ollies Noodle Shops and Flor de Mayo. The rally culminated with a march to Union Square to join with other workers gathered to celebrate May Day.

You can view photos from the event in our gallery HERE...

DFNYC members attending the rally were Bernadette Evangelist, and two candidates running for Assembly in the  64th AD:  Luke Henry and Paul Newell. 

Note: On May 2nd, we got the good news that Flor de Mayo had settled with their workers, and that boycott has ended with a victory for the workers.