Gothamist: "Carousell" Stays in Brooklyn

dhex

Wed, 10 Aug 2005 10:59:54 -0500

i'm not accusing you of neo-luddite-ness or anything; it would most certainly be fun to import a bunch of teutonic ruffians and gaelic neer-do-wells and have them running about, clubbing hither and yon. maybe that doesn't tickle your funny bone; tis your loss. anyway, i was making a reference to constant flux, which is very much a part of the urban landscape here, where we call things 100 years old "old" and whatnot. and without that constant influx and exodus there wouldn't be as many people living here, simply because density would not continue to move. it's neither a tragedy nor a shining example of modern progress or any such nonsense which might come from the mouths of marty markowitz or bob moses. (may he rot forever) i have some friends who are deep into coney island and preserving the history and helping keep the non profit side going, and i appreciate their efforts and passion.

Jack

Wed, 10 Aug 2005 10:11:10 -0500

"without the constant bulldozing we'd not be having this conversation, however." Odd straw-man argument. Not too sure what it insinuates. Would we ourselves not be heer without the constant 'bulldozing' of this city? Would Gothamist not exist? Would the issue not exist? "it'd be fun to build a time machine to bring back german and irish residents of the lower east side from the late 19th century and have them chase off everyone there as carpetbaggers." I love it when someone criticizes overgrowth and constant plowing over of the old with the new and then somebody--like dhex--makes an argument that what is really wanted is to go back a few centuries. Where does that come from? I've never been against progress and I've never been against growth. But just because something old does not mean it's bad and just because it's new does not mean it's good. Case in point: Old Penn Station versus New Penn Station. No reason that place needed to be torn down in any way. Not every new piece of construction is a good or bad thing. On a case-by-case basis they are either bad or good. And in this case, preserving a piece of NYC history is a good thing.

iceberg

Wed, 10 Aug 2005 08:52:48 -0500

Jack, I live in gravesend, and visit coney island weekly, and in fact I just came back from there when I saw this post and responded. Having wide public access to a historic attraction is nice and all, but not when the money can be better spent. Yes, the way this city spends money is criminal, and unfortunately that makes $1.8m seem like a drop in the bucket. But I know better from being around charity workers and personally doing charity fundraising, that there are much worthier causes to blow $1.8m of taxpayer money on.

dhex

Wed, 10 Aug 2005 08:14:32 -0500

without the constant bulldozing we'd not be having this conversation, however. it'd be fun to build a time machine to bring back german and irish residents of the lower east side from the late 19th century and have them chase off everyone there as carpetbaggers.

Jack

Wed, 10 Aug 2005 01:02:09 -0500

Iceberg, if you ever went to Coney Island you'd realize that the carousel is/was/will be beloved by tons of people. Coney is a people's amusement zone. And it's unique in the fact that it still exists and is still accessible to people in different age and income groups. 1.8 Million is a drop in the bucket. And in this case I think it's good that the city is preserving a genuine piece of NYC history for all to enjoy. I'd rather see 1.8 Million spent on preservation than the constant bulldozing of the past that exists in this city. Preservation is particularly great in Coney Island where the melting pot of this city still exists.

iceberg

Tue, 09 Aug 2005 22:48:24 -0500

It's nice to see the city wasting our money on useless things, when if the people who cared about it so much about the relic could have gone ahead and raised the money thru private means. Not that I support the welfare/warfare state, but I'd rather see the $1.8 million go towards feeding and clothing hungry people then fulfilling the idle fantasies of a few Coney Island nostalgists.

dude

Tue, 09 Aug 2005 15:47:04 -0500

The best idea would be to move it to the Upper East Side or Central Park, so that wealthy people won't have to go to Coney Island to enjoy it. It should also be 5 bucks per person. That would be just.

MT

Tue, 09 Aug 2005 14:53:56 -0500

I, for one, am happy to see Bloomberg's commitment to keeping an eye on the details. It's the little things like saving the carousel and restoring playgrounds that really make this city shine.