Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Terrible news, but I'm still seeing luxury high rises sprouting up. It's done. It's over.
brand new one next to BBTB, at the Willis Ave bridge. they're razing the mountains of dirt over on 149th at the water by the 145th street bridge, for it is about to get real
I don't think one crime, despite how sickening and heinous, will cause people to sour on a neighborhood. People were still known to be mugged in the LES, Williamsburg, LIC in the 2000s but that didn't even put a dent in the gentrification wave. Anyone moving to Mott Haven will at least have some awareness of the poverty and culture of the neighborhood, and most likely will factor that into wither that semi-cheap rent is worth the risk.
While I don't have any specific comment on the current event, your mention of "Looking for Mr Goodbar" brings up some tangential associations. This in my opinion excellent movie (Diane Keaton really good in the lead role, young Richard Gere in his I believe first film role, beautiful camera) was based on Judith Rossner's also excellent novel of the same title, which in turn was based on a very unfortunate real event involving a young teacher Roseanne Quinn who lived on UWS, and was killed by a drunk guy that she picked up at a neighborhood bar. They guy was not a pervert or a racist (everybody involved in this story was white), just drunk, when he killed her, and he killed himself in jail a short time after he was arrested. The crime happened in the early 1970s, the novel and the movie came out about five years later. While the subject matter of the book and the movie is very grisly at the end, I like the book and the movie for their great portrayal of the 1970s, a time that some of us remember with profound nostalgia (I was a teenager in the 1970s, although growing up far from NYC - but I did visit NYC in the summer of 1976).
While I have both the film on a VHS tape (I don't think it ever came out in any other form, not on DVD to my knowledge), and the book in paperback, I am away from home, so someone with handy access to a library will have to fact-check me on this: the main character of the book is a young Irish-American woman that grew up in a pleasant, tidy middle-middle class area of the Bronx in the idyllic 1950s, and I am almost positively certain that the area where she grew up was PARKCHESTER! Somebody please check me on this, but I really think I am right about it (interestingly, although I remember the book somewhat well, and although I am such a Parkchester fanatic on this forum :-), and although I have owned a condo in Parkchester for 11 years, ONLY NOW after coming across Aeran's comment I made the connection between what I read in the book many years ago, and the actual Parkchester where nowadays I go to stay when I am in NYC. I cannot totally swear on a Bible, but I really do think that the main character from "Looking for Mr Goodbar" was actually from Parkchester! (ie, grew up in Parkchester - her murder happened at her apartment on UWS). Oh how I wish I could get hold of the book right now and check for sure :-).
Btw, the person on which the book and the film were based, ie, Roseanne Quinn, did in true reality grow up in the Bronx. I don't know whether she grew up in Parkchester, but that is a distinct possibility, since Parkchester, the Bronx in the 1950s was to a substantial extent an Irish-American Catholic neighborhood, and she was of that particular background.
While I don't have any specific comment on the current event, your mention of "Looking for Mr Goodbar" brings up some tangential associations. This in my opinion excellent movie (Diane Keaton really good in the lead role, young Richard Gere in his I believe first film role, beautiful camera) was based on Judith Rossner's also excellent novel of the same title, which in turn was based on a very unfortunate real event involving a young teacher Roseanne Quinn who lived on UWS, and was killed by a drunk guy that she picked up at a neighborhood bar. They guy was not a pervert or a racist (everybody involved in this story was white), just drunk, when he killed her, and he killed himself in jail a short time after he was arrested. The crime happened in the early 1970s, the novel and the movie came out about five years later. While the subject matter of the book and the movie is very grisly at the end, I like the book and the movie for their great portrayal of the 1970s, a time that some of us remember with profound nostalgia (I was a teenager in the 1970s, although growing up far from NYC - but I did visit NYC in the summer of 1976).
While I have both the film on a VHS tape (I don't think it ever came out in any other form, not on DVD to my knowledge), and the book in paperback, I am away from home, so someone with handy access to a library will have to fact-check me on this: the main character of the book is a young Irish-American woman that grew up in a pleasant, tidy middle-middle class area of the Bronx in the idyllic 1950s, and I am almost positively certain that the area where she grew up was PARKCHESTER! Somebody please check me on this, but I really think I am right about it (interestingly, although I remember the book somewhat well, and although I am such a Parkchester fanatic on this forum :-), and although I have owned a condo in Parkchester for 11 years, ONLY NOW after coming across Aeran's comment I made the connection between what I read in the book many years ago, and the actual Parkchester where nowadays I go to stay when I am in NYC. I cannot totally swear on a Bible, but I really do think that the main character from "Looking for Mr Goodbar" was actually from Parkchester! (ie, grew up in Parkchester - her murder happened at her apartment on UWS). Oh how I wish I could get hold of the book right now and check for sure :-).
Btw, the person on which the book and the film were based, ie, Roseanne Quinn, did in true reality grow up in the Bronx. I don't know whether she grew up in Parkchester, but that is a distinct possibility, since Parkchester, the Bronx in the 1950s was to a substantial extent an Irish-American Catholic neighborhood, and she was of that particular background.
Was a kid, but recall the film and adults (especially females) giving their opinions on what happens to girls who go with strange men they don't know. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roseann_Quinn
This being NYC in the 1970's all sorts of bad things were happening to males or females, but rapes and or murders of the latter had huge numbers. Out on SI a young teen went missing (Susan Jacobson) who was later found murdered....
OTOH the 1970's were also about "swinging singles", disco and a host of other things that came after and or built upon the women's lib movement of 1960's. Females were encouraged or whatever to shed some of the old ways (never going out unchaperoned, not going with or whatever strange guys....) but there was more; the whole "sexual revolution" that encouraged females to get theirs same as guys had done for ages.
This was a whole turn around from the 1950's and prior idea of a "good girl" who didn't do anything with anyone and saved herself for marriage.
After the book then later film came out "Mr. Goodbar" became an euphemism for a situation where bad things did or could happen to females.
Rape shield laws as we know them didn't exist at that time IIRC. So the 1970's weren't that much different than the 1960's or 1950's, etc.... If a female claimed she was raped there was first scandal. LE and others would ask "why were you there alone with this man?", "why did you lead him on?", "why did you wear such provocative clothing?" If the female was a barfly or known to be loose, that was it; her past and or reputation was used against both in court, as part of the investigation and so forth. All a guy had to say was "she was asking for it", and that was a pretty good defense back then.
That Roseann Quinn didn't call LE or otherwise report the first time a date she picked up beat (and raped?) her isn't surprising. Back then once word got out her reputation as a "nice girl" would have been destroyed. She may have even lost her job and likely would find it difficult to find another as a teacher.
Was a kid, but recall the film and adults (especially females) giving their opinions on what happens to girls who go with strange men they don't know. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roseann_Quinn
This being NYC in the 1970's all sorts of bad things were happening to males or females, but rapes and or murders of the latter had huge numbers. Out on SI a young teen went missing (Susan Jacobson) who was later found murdered....
OTOH the 1970's were also about "swinging singles", disco and a host of other things that came after and or built upon the women's lib movement of 1960's. Females were encouraged or whatever to shed some of the old ways (never going out unchaperoned, not going with or whatever strange guys....) but there was more; the whole "sexual revolution" that encouraged females to get theirs same as guys had done for ages.
This was a whole turn around from the 1950's and prior idea of a "good girl" who didn't do anything with anyone and saved herself for marriage.
After the book then later film came out "Mr. Goodbar" became an euphemism for a situation where bad things did or could happen to females.
Rape shield laws as we know them didn't exist at that time IIRC. So the 1970's weren't that much different than the 1960's or 1950's, etc.... If a female claimed she was raped there was first scandal. LE and others would ask "why were you there alone with this man?", "why did you lead him on?", "why did you wear such provocative clothing?" If the female was a barfly or known to be loose, that was it; her past and or reputation was used against both in court, as part of the investigation and so forth. All a guy had to say was "she was asking for it", and that was a pretty good defense back then.
That Roseann Quinn didn't call LE or otherwise report the first time a date she picked up beat (and raped?) her isn't surprising. Back then once word got out her reputation as a "nice girl" would have been destroyed. She may have even lost her job and likely would find it difficult to find another as a teacher.
R.Quinn (the real person on which the book and film were based) apparently led a double life of a quiet schoolteacher at a school for deaf kids in the Bronx by day, and a promiscuous UWS barfly by night. But in the 1970s, the reputation as a nice girl largely did not matter any more anywhere in the Western world (or even in trendy social circles in non-Western countries, where young people imitated the West - such as in the country in which I grew up), so I don't think that the split life that R.Quinn led had much to do with preserving any kind of image (or job), I think she probably just preferred to live that way. She didn't call police on the guy who ultimately killed her because things apparently deteriorated too fast between the two of them after she brought him from the bar to her apartment, not because she was protecting her reputation. This was before HIV appeared around 1980, and R.Quinn's lifestyle was not actually all that rare at the time - I would say, not really considered shocking or very unusual by most people. I think what happened to her was exactly what was shown in the movie: a sudden brief flash of rage that resulted in a pretty much accidental murder. What happened to R.Quinn seems to me more like a piece of bad luck than any predictable result of her behavior. People were largely very trusting in the 1970s, and the trust was in turn far less risky than nowadays. A lot of young women acted similarly as R.Quinn did, and the great majority of them did not meet any particularly bad end - nowadays they are just grandmas with some wild memories, if they even consider these memories significant enough to ever think about them :-). Again, I think R.Quinn's murder was just a bad drunken accident, and not typical of anything that would generally happen to "liberated" young women in the 1970s.
But the main point of my previous post was, of course, PARKCHESTER!!! :-)
brand new one next to BBTB, at the Willis Ave bridge. they're razing the mountains of dirt over on 149th at the water by the 145th street bridge, for it is about to get real
Dude, when I first saw the structure by the Willis Avenue Bridge I was like "that ain't no affordable housing" lol. That's the first of what I suspect to be many high rise towers coming. I'm using the high rise term very loosely. In Mott Havens case, any building that isn't a housing project that house 20 floors or more is a high rise. lol
The waterfront sides seem to be the target areas for them. I can see the marketing now. "Spectacular views of the city, minutes from the city."
It pretty much is. They have brand new one bedrooms now going for $2,700 a month... So there you have it...
I never thought I would see the day anytime soon. I saw occasional hipsters sprouting up, but not at this accelerated pace. It reminds me so much of Long Island City when it first took off. A once barren industrial wasteland. That whole area has that industrial feel, but at the rate it's going, artisanal shops, new bars, and restaurants will be popping up alongside the condos. Then come the treelined streets.
I am not upset with these changes, but it wouldn't hurt if they lower the price just a littleeeeeee bit. It's still Mott Haven, after all. The only selling factor is the proximity to the city at the moment. Still has a lot of development and cleaning up to do.
Slash the Studios down to $1,700 and one-bedrooms down to $2,000 and give a shot to the people making between $65,000 and $80,000 a chance to "live the life." I now fall into this income range and would love to live in one of those towers, but nope... still can't f*cking afford it, so what's the f*cking point now? Smh.
Mott Haven should not be more expensive than Long Island City. It should be an affordable alternative for us struggling lower middle class folk. lol
No victim blaming. But the question becomes, do we make decisions based upon our idealism, "no one should have to worry about something like that," v. the reality, "be careful, because something like that could happen?"
Do people not think any more about the value to be found in being street smart?
Decisions should not be made baed on idealism. Going along with a young man who lives in the projects in the Bronx--statistically that's putting yourself in extreme danger. Not gonna blame the woman because she might be inherently a bit slow on the intake... could be special needs, could be homeless and desperate, could have been forcibly moved there, could have been drugged, etc etc etc..
hopefully this person is locked up forever.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
