Just wow. It is shocking that people thought the monstrosity that is Madison Square Garden and the horrible Long Island Railroad terminal could ever be an improvement over that grand building. However, the following quotes, taken from The Fall and Rise of Pennsylvania Station by Eric Ploksy, offer a window into the times.
He [Irving M. Felt,Madison Square Garden Corporation president] questioned the architectural value of Penn Station, going as far as to say that “he believed that the gain from the new buildings and sports center would more than offset any aesthetic loss.” (Later, when outcry over the station’s demolition reached a fever pitch, Felt went even further, saying, “Fifty years from now, when it’s time for [the new Madison Square Garden] to be torn down, there will be a new group of architects who will protest.” (25-26)
Further support for the Garden plan.
The Madison Square Garden Corporation received some public support for its development plans. Two letters in the September 1962 issue of Progressive Architecture were from architects not in the least bit sorry to see Penn Station go. “The basic question is whether the Baths of Caracalla have ever been appropriate as a railroad ticketing center,” posited one. The other harshly condemned the station as a “neoclassic behemoth” and insisted that it “…negates almost 1500 years of architectural progress. As was the vogue of that era, majesty could only be achieved by bastardizing a Greek or Roman temple; ergo, a multitude of our banks, libraries, and museums look like residue from a Caligulæan invasion.” Another
architect, writing to the New York Times, called the station “grimy,” “old,” and “an eyesore,” claiming that “today we know that a railroad station need not look like a Roman bath in order to be good architecture.” (26)
The period rebuttal,
Carl Condit notes that the $116 million Madison Square Garden complex is a “prime candidat[e] for the most poverty-stricken architecture in New York — indeed, it is questionable whether the structures and enclosures can be regarded as architecture at all.” … “The interior space consists essentially of two parts, a large ticket lobby embracing a much greater area than is necessary for the moving traffic, and a combined waiting room and concourse that is an insult to the user: it is too small, too low, contains too few seats, and provides access to all train gates in such a way as to guarantee conflict and confusion. The decor might be described as men’s room modern, and the food available in the restaurants ranges from unappetizing to unspeakable. (49)
A jab at Moses,
“We are an impoverished society. It is a poor society indeed that can’t pay for these amenities; that has no money for anything except expressways to rush people out of our dull and deteriorating cities. ” (38)
And Moses pops up again. (Morris was his hand-picked successor and lackey, and Moses was in charge of the 1964 World’s Fair, and saw Flushing Meadow as having the potential to be his crowning achievement).
In addition to the formal support by New York’s developers and businessmen, the Madison Square Garden Corporation counted on the tacit cooperation of certain officials within the New York City government. Chief among these supporters was Parks Commissioner Newbold Morris. Seizing upon the opportunity to appear as a savior, Morris, who had not otherwise been involved with the project, announced in early 1962 that he had begun to formulate a plan to save some of Penn Station’s 84 Doric columns. “He envisaged … a rectangular colonnade, surrounded by tall trees, with perhaps a fountain in the middle,” to appear in Flushing Meadow Park, where the New York World’s Fair would open in 1964. (27)
And again, the Moses-aligned Port Authority abdicated its responsibility for rails (when politicians began to call for toll-supported public authorities to subsidize rail transport, Moses worked with the Port Authority to tie up their surplus funds in projects).
But AGBANY’s platform, that Penn Station should be bought and operated by the Port Authority, was dealt a major setback only days after the group’s meeting with Wagner. “The Port of New York Authority, which owns and operates other gateways to the city — bridges, tunnels, airports — does not believe it has the authority to take over and operate the station, as [AGBANY] propose[s],” reported the New York Times on September 23, 1962. “In any case, its officials have indicated they have no desire to do so.” (45)
However, the destruction of Penn Station did spur the Landmarks Preservation act, which saved Grand Central Terminal. This very case provided the first court challenge to the landmarks law by going all the way to the US Supreme court (page 56-7).
Other Quotes
Why is the Farley Post Office across the street from Penn Station (designed by the same architects, McKim, Mead, and White)?
After Penn Station opened, the United States government “took the opportunity to build a much-needed post office across the street on Eighth Avenue. The Pennsylvania’s trains carried about 40 percent of the mail originating in New York City,” so a post office directly over the Pennsylvania’s tracks (which ran underground all the way to Twelfth Avenue) would be efficient; (15-16)
Ironically, this connection seems to be the impetus for turning Farley into a new Penn Station. (a nearly-dead plan, seemingly without any friends in government, especially since David Patterson took over as governor. The sports arena is such a powerful lobby that I don’t think any Penn Station deal can get done today without them having a role in the immediate vicinity.)
…Amtrak learned that space might be available within the Farley [Post Office], which shares platforms and rail access with Penn Station, and decided to evaluate the feasibility of moving its rail terminal facility to the Farley Building. (61)
It seems that the claustrophobic, overcrowded main concourse in current Penn Station is from the original 1910 station, although that is a little unbelievable. (Forgotten-NY has a page on the vestiges of Penn Station.)
The main waiting room of Pennsylvania Station will be left as is, and special
facilities, such as ramps and arcades, will be built to permit ready access to the
sports and entertainment facilities for persons using either the Pennsylvania
Railroad or the Long Island Rail Road. (23)
More scathingly,
“Have the railroads so completely capitulated to the airlines that a series of low-ceilinged, concession-strewn rat mazes is the best gateway to New York which they now can offer?” (35)
Perhaps most scathingly,
One entered the city like a god… one scuttles in now like a rat. (Vincent Scully, Architecture and Urbanism, 1969)
From the pictures I see of Pennsy, the building is a temple: simply too much to comprehend, in a scale too large for humans. In other words, it served its designed purpose well.
