POST #158: DEVELOPERS I HAVE KNOWN (and not loved)

One of the downsides of trying to preserve historic buildings is that much of your time is spent fighting development (and developers). Over the past years (decades actually) this has brought me closer to a cast of Trump-ian characters than I ever dreamed of knowing. The good part is that over the years they provided fodder for a lot of strong, satirical artwork, although recent events have far surpassed anything I could have invented. LIFE has now completely overwhelmed ART.  Nothing I might create would ever come close to what is going on today: the politicians, the shyster lawyers, the bimbos, their surgically enhanced wives, the Mussolini grimace our current leader thinks makes him look like Churchill.

I could probably name at least a dozen big time real estate developers I have locked horns with – their names will sound familiar. They range from pure, unabashed Mafiosos to pseudo ‘aristocrats’ with Princeton degrees and Saville Row suits. The relationship between them came to me one evening many years ago at a Planning Board hearing I went to with my late husband, a Clinical Psychologist. While we were listening to the proceedings, the next “item” on the agenda walked in: MR. BIGSHOT and his entourage. “Who are they? My husband whispered. “They look like gangsters.” “Oh, no!” I replied. “That’s ----------. He’s one of the most important developers in the country. He’s a well-known art collector. That’s his lawyer, his sons, their wives, the architect etc.etc. They’re here to present their next project.” - which of course required the demolition of a block of historic buildings in the downtown. Higher and Best Use, you understand.

I thought about the incident afterwards and how my husband, with his professional training, had intuited something about the expensively-dressed applicants, their attempts to look like gentry that only hid what they actually were: gangsters. I immediately began to draw (I never go to zoning hearings without pencil and pad.) Where else could I get such great subject matter – for free?

Recently, however, I find I can no longer be a satirist. Reality has gone beyond my gentle spoofs: too grim. It’s almost the way satire vanished in the Weimar Republic (George Grosz et al) once Hitler came to power. The brilliant social satirists of Germany in the 20s and early 30s left the country or hid away, hoping not to end up in a death camp.

There is however, a difference between Developers and Builders. Some of my best friends are builders. Most of them are small town guys who grew up and plan to stay here. They are essentially craftsmen and will save and restore historic buildings if given half a chance… and they don’t leave town with the profits as soon as the job is over. I’m friendly with at least half a dozen. They respect me and try to “do the right thing” both for the community and themselves. They do quality work and take pride in the finished buildings. Many years ago, a local planner and I got together and came up with an innovative zoning regulation that would allow builders to squeeze in a couple of extra units in return for preserving an existing historic building: Section 7.3 Historic Density Bonus. It was the first of its kind in the country. By using its bonus provisions, we’ve managed to save dozens of historic houses. In fact, it’s the only thing that has ever worked.

Of course, big-time developers are hardly ever interested in preservation; their plans are much too grand to waste time and energy saving old buildings. And what if they do tear down a local monument or affordable housing in the process? They don’t live here; it’s not their home.  One of them actually had the nerve to tell me that was why he didn’t live in Stamford: the City’s zoning regulations weren’t strict enough!

Renee Kahn

POST #157: CHAUCER UPDATED or Whores Are Not Bores

A friend lent me his precious modern translation of Chaucer’s “The Canterbury Tales” a few years ago because I wanted to do a blog about The Wife of Bath.  (Post # 80) Why is she so intriguing? I think it’s because her modern counterpart kept turning up in my life (relatives, friends) and now she’s on TV all the time. They are the lusty goddesses/ temptresses I loved to paint. My alter egos? The adventuress I would or could have been if I had had the guts (and the measurements.) 

Anyhow, the Wife of Bath in Chaucer’s tale (now married to her fifth husband – the previous four died) is a very modern woman. In fact, she is so modern she recently dominated television news in the re-incarnated form of a tart turned tactician with the nom de plume “Stormy Daniels.” She refused to be a victim, instead, using her ‘know-how’ and her natural (or un-natural) equipment to equalize the gender gap, telling the men who lusted after her: “If you want to use my body, I will control you.” Chaucer makes no bones about her methodology, allowing her to brag about her endowments and skill in utilizing them.

Chaucer’s “Wife of Bath” lived during the Late Middle Ages, a time when women were chattel; upon marriage their bodies as well as everything they owned became the property of their husbands. First married at thirteen, four husbands pre-deceased her leaving her their worldly possessions, plus what they had acquired from her at marriage. In the Prologue to her story, she makes it very clear that while the New Testament may have encouraged chastity, church leaders soon realized this policy wasn’t going to provide them with a lot of followers. It didn’t take our Wife of Bath more than a couple of husbands to learn how to manipulate men, keep herself from being a victim and get them to do what she wanted. Sound familiar?  $130,000? Not bad for a couple of hours of fun and games!

Every time I read a Stormy Daniels interview, I think of the Wife of Bath and how ‘the more things change, the more they remain the same.’ We are supposedly in an age of liberation and sexual freedom where women will no longer have to subjugate themselves to the whims of the men in their lives, I heartily approve of this brave new world, but women like Stormy surely make for interesting art. Where would Titian and Rubens be without them?