08/23/2006
New York's Stonewall Bar to Shut; Neighbors Glad
A piece in the current New York Observer reveals that the owners of Stonewall, the bar that currently occupies the space where the storied bar of 1969 once stood, are being evicted because they are $150,000 behind in rent payments.
The old Stonewall Inn (pictured here) closed shortly after the riots in the 60's and reopened 20 years later. The new owners, some charge, hoped to cash in on the historic cachet of the bar's name.
Said co-owner Bob Gurecki: "People don’t really care. We’re famous all over the world, but no one in New York cares. The younger community doesn’t even know what it is. The older community doesn’t go out or care."
Neighbors of the bar, like Bill Morgan who owns the Duplex bar down the street, are reportedly thrilled with the closing because they say the bar attracts a bunch of loitering youths: "They promote these urban youth parties. They pushed out the regular gay clientele in favor of this new, urban, hip-hop, gangster clientele. Then you bring a bunch of 18-to-20-year-olds in the area who have no place to go and start goofing off and being loud. It’s disruptive to the neighborhood and brings in the wrong element in the neighborhood."
David Carter, the author of Stonewall: The Riots that Sparked the Gay Revolution notes the irony in the complaints: "In Stonewall’s heyday you had underage hustlers, people selling drugs, and it was really a seedy place. Out of a fluke of fate, the Stonewall is probably closer now to what it was in 1969 than the super-gentrified, yuppified Village is to the bohemian Village of 1969."
Stonewall to Shutter? Queen Bees Stinging Glad! [new york observer]
Related
Laguna Beach Boom Boom Room Saved [tr]
The Friendship that Never Went Away [tr]
Posted 1:30 PM EST by Andy Towle in Gay Rights, New York, Nightlife | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Racist bigoted queers never cease to amaze me
Posted by: kimaninyc | Aug 23, 2006 1:33:36 PM
Well its really NOT about being racist and bigoted. When the "new" Stonewall took over the spot that chose to go for a younger rough trade sort of crowd. Its a VERY small bar to boot and the clientel wasn't profitable. It was a really bad choice and did bring in an undesirable element to the neighborhood.
Posted by: Wolf | Aug 23, 2006 1:42:20 PM
Wolf, that's bullshit. I live in the neighborhood, I work in the neighborhood and frequent many of the establishments, gay or straight. The "element" you're claiming is being brought into the neighborhood is not soley because of Stonewall. It's still the Village and the Village attracts all elements and to attribute that to the Stonewall is ignorant and silly. Bill Morgan of the Duplex is a business owner and glad that he may receive a boost in business, period. Bottom line for him is the bottom dollar.
Posted by: joe | Aug 23, 2006 1:50:24 PM
the kids in that pic from the 60's look like fresh faced little twinks - hardly seedy - and the chick in front looks downright glam. maybe it was an off nite.
Posted by: b mac | Aug 23, 2006 1:57:08 PM
You know, a good portion of my friends (and please keep in mind I don't really know any straight people) have no idea what Stonewall is. It blows my mind. I ask "Have you heard of Stonewall Democrats?" Most say yes, but had no idea the name meant anything. Sad.
Posted by: Kia | Aug 23, 2006 1:59:49 PM
AGREED Joe, I also live in the neighborhood.....
where should the "rough trade sort of crowd" and the "undesirable element" go wolf?
Maybe they should party in the projects, huh?
Yeah, your comments and the Duplex owners are so not racist or bigoted.
DIVERSITY and grunge is what makes the Village what it is....If you don't like it take your ass to Chelsea.
Posted by: kimaninyc | Aug 23, 2006 2:01:28 PM
I'm with Joe. The Stonewall isn't the reason that gay youth of color gravitate to the Village and I'm sure once Stonewall is gone other Christopher street bars will fill the void for that clientele. Bill Morgan sounds like a total douche, but sadly, there are lots of homos that think the same way.
Posted by: mp | Aug 23, 2006 2:06:47 PM
The 2nd best quote of the article has to be
“The gay community is not looking for a strip-club-mentality lifestyle.”
You could've fucking fooled me.
Unsuccessfully attempting to disguise bigotry as a moral view....so typical
Posted by: kimaninyc | Aug 23, 2006 2:20:56 PM
I was really sad to hear of this. When I came out I made a pilgrimage of sorts to Stonewall and have been going back every year. I am so sad to hear that it went down hill but I am a firm believer that maybe, just maybe someone will breathe new life into it and keep the memories going -- It is part of our history, our culture, our civil rights movement.
David Goulart
http://www.EDGEnewyork.com
Posted by: David Goulart | Aug 23, 2006 2:22:11 PM
Conventional economic forces are not going to be held in abeyance just because the place has an historical event associated with it, regardless of how significant it might be. This place failed to cultivate a desirable market segment. End of story.
Posted by: rascal | Aug 23, 2006 2:56:47 PM
if a lot of my friends didn't make their living working at the 'plex, i'd wish it the same fate as the stonewall. the drunk and rowdy straight tourists that i've seen come out of 'plex rivals the relative quiet i've seen whenever going by stonewall. and I would never call the inside of the club as small.
(suffice it to say that i am little more than a tourist myself, but still).
while time marches on and forces changes, i will say that the closing of stonewall will be a shame.
i wonder what would happen if mr. morgan said the same thing about the clientele of MONSTER, a club which caters to a more diverse crowd that his establishment.
Posted by: nillachino | Aug 23, 2006 3:06:14 PM
Laguna Beach was able to raise funds and awareness to rescue the tired Boom Boom Room. I know it is not the original, bubt why are New Yorkers so apathetic about Stonewall closing down. It's where the gay civil rights movement began!
And I'm surprised how the word "urban" is being tossed around in this article as a placeholder for "poor" "black" and "latino" and that this goes unnoticed, unquestioned in the post. I agree with KIMANINYC, where the hell are these kids supposed to go? I assume some would rather they stay in dangerous neighborhoods to get fag-bashed... as long as they aren't bringing in "the wrong element" to the West Village. Having some young kids "goof off" or "be loud" is hardly a hop, skip and a jump away from having gang wars and drive-by's taking over. Yet it appears some would do anything to keep those bloody tourists coming back, which includes turning a blind eye to history and kicking gay youth to the curb.
Posted by: GBM | Aug 23, 2006 4:27:58 PM
When I said that Mr. Morgan's thinly veiled comments "goes unnoticed, unquestioned in the post" I meant the article, not Andy's post. Just to be clear.
Posted by: GBM | Aug 23, 2006 4:32:29 PM
Well actually I worked bartebding in the bars in that area for years and am well versed with the neighborhood and the diverse crowd. My point was that The Stonewall chose that venue specifically and didn't make money off it so its closing. And the poster above is right. the Duplex is full of drunk Tourist...but its profitable. The Stonewall was way too small for the venue that it picked and its not a profitable venue. Across the Street you have The Monster (Piano, Bar, dance Floor) That does a great business. It was a bad choice of venue. Put a hifger-class bar in there and use the history of the place and i assure you it will make money.
Posted by: Will | Aug 23, 2006 4:52:25 PM
It's funny, I'm in college and have been going to detention at that bar since late 2004 when I was a freshman. It's actually the first gay bar I ever went to when I turned 18. I think it's a fun place, but maybe besides the history of it, there are better places to go, obviously. I personally don't think it's that wild there, or different from many other nightclub/bar establishments in the city. And it's weird, looking at the picture of those kids in 1969, they really don't look much different from people that go there today.
Anyway we're just trying to have a good time, stop hating!!
Posted by: Matt | Aug 23, 2006 5:57:46 PM
You wouldn't catch me in the Gay West Village for anything. I value my life more than a few overpriced drinks at bars with no personality, yet more than enough attitude if you don't fit into what they want. I'd rather hang in the East Village, Chelsea, or Hell's Kitchen anyday. Why? Because of the exact stock that is mentioned in the article - the young, urban, hip hop crowd. Between them in some of the bars, or the even worse riff raff on the street, you take your life in your hands when you walk down Christoper from dusk onward. And the other bar patrons are almost as surly, especially those "bear" bars. Talk about unfriendly!
Posted by: Kamasutra Jones | Aug 23, 2006 6:15:15 PM
"overpriced drinks at bars with no personality, yet more than enough attitude if you don't fit into what they want"
Let me get this straight - You would go to Chelsea to get away from overpriced drinks, bars with no personality, and attitude?!?!
You are DELUSIONAL
Posted by: kimaninyc | Aug 23, 2006 9:02:34 PM
Yeah, you're right. The drinks ARE overpriced in Chelsea. Scratch that phrase from my original post.
Posted by: Kamasutra Jones | Aug 23, 2006 11:33:45 PM
Seems a shame to me that the site couldn't be declared as a historical place, as it is 'ground zero' for the Gay Rights Movement. A Gay right's museum and exhibition space at Stonewall seems a natural. I don't live in N.Y.C. and don't know the neighborhood, so perhaps this idea is ludicrous. But a gay can dream can't he?
Posted by: rrspyke | Aug 24, 2006 12:38:55 AM
What a shame...
How quickly "ugly" can come out of some of us gays. Just read some of these responses...
I agree, however, that business is business. Still, it's a shame to see the place go. When I 1st came out in 1999, I remember being mesmerized in a sense by both Stonewall (I didn't know it was not the original) and the park across from it. To me, it seemed the crowds on Christopher St were different then. I remember when I first went there in college, there was a pier or something at the end. You'd find a mezcla of people there. I stopped going when the crowd became one I didn't vibe with so well. But then I realized, I go to Chelsea and I don't vibe with them either...
I'll be sad to see Stonewall go.
Posted by: Bobby Alexander | Aug 24, 2006 12:58:51 AM
It's where the gay civil rights movement began!
No it's not. Long before the Stonewall riots, there was the Mattachine Society, formed in Los Angeles in 1950 by Harry Hay. They were fighting for gay civil rights before some of the people in that picture were even born. Without the foundation that the Mattachine Society built, the Stonewall riots would have been just another blip of violence in a country that was experiencing race riots, MLK and RFK being killed, violent anti-war protests etc. at the time.
Posted by: Henry Holland | Aug 24, 2006 1:46:10 AM
The celebrated aspects of sociopolitical movements are rarely their formation--usually a few people in a living room or around a table--but events that become emblematic flashpoints. Rosa Parks, for example. Stonewall represents the tipping point, when all those who had been quiet for so long--including the press--finally found their voices. Still, this is New York City, where economic forces will trump almost ever other consideration.
Posted by: rascal | Aug 24, 2006 8:04:54 AM
In the from 1996-2000 I waited tables in the WV, the Stonewall was always our after work stop by place. At that time it was a notorious coke bar, there was always a line for the single stall bathrooms, and none for the urinals, LOL. In fact the drug dealers had shifts: "D" worked happy hour, "B" worked 9-12, and "R" worked 12-closing. They literally had a meeting among themselves to decide this. (I don't know what is going on there these days). They also had illegal gambling machines in the storeroom, I know, because I was always retrieving my ex-BF from the machines.
Also the real story (which was reported in the press) is that the current owner wound up with the place after the original owner defaulted on money he owed to the current owners construction company that did the renovations. I doubt they can't afford the rent, I'm sure the owner is just pocketing the cash.
As far as the crowd goes, doesn't matter what color they are....or where they are from, it's about how they act outside the bar, disturbing the neighborhood, and bothering people on the street. I live in Hoboken, and the white kids that come here to drink on the weekends....engage in the same behaviors!
Posted by: Dave b | Aug 24, 2006 9:40:58 AM
I've been to the Stonewall Inn and I know the history. It's a piece of history and needs to be preserved. Hopefully someone will pick up the slack.
Posted by: Daimeon | Aug 24, 2006 1:44:54 PM
Oh I forgotto add, the actual owners of the building have supposedly turned down offers to buy the building over and over again by people wantin to turn it into a GLBT museum.
Posted by: Dave B | Aug 24, 2006 5:10:07 PM