Tuesday, January 10, 2012

[Updated] A call for Patti Smith to cancel her upcoming performance at the Hotel Chelsea


Patti Smith, of course, was one of the many famous residents at Stanley Bard's Hotel Chelsea through the years, living with Robert Mapplethorpe in the early 1970s, and returning later in the 1990s as well.

The Hotel Chelsea blog today posted — with "great sadness" — the above invitation ... Per the post:

Patti must not know that the person sponsoring her upcoming event, Joseph Chetrit, is the same developer who took Stanley Bard’s beloved Chelsea Hotel away from him and his family. And surely she is unaware that this is the same Joseph Chetrit whose demolition crews recently gutted over a hundred historic Chelsea Hotel rooms.

The blog notes that Chetrit is currently trying to evict some 30 Hotel residents.

The Hotel Chelsea Blog is calling on her to cancel the event.

Read the whole post here.

UPDATED:

So many developments on this. She did perform for the new developers taking over the Hotel on Wednesday night, but canceled the show for residents on Thursday night.

Read updates at:

Jeremiah's Vanishing New York

Living With Legends

Gothamist

Per Gothamist:

Despite her insistence that she is not being remunerated for her involvement, we’re hard pressed to understand Smith’s motives. The resident we spoke to, who also happens to live on the same floor as Patti Smith’s old room (204, if you’re wondering), offered a theory: "Her room has remained completely intact, as a shrine to her career, while all the other rooms have been demolished."

10 comments:

  1. I looked at the invitation and down below it says it is only for residents of the hotel, so maybe that's why she is doing it? Maybe she wants to entertain the few old timers that are still holding on? I would love to hear what she has to say about this. I am wondering if there is some strategy behind her agreeing to do the show. Sometimes you can do more good from the inside, you know? Patti Smith is a pretty smart lady, so I find it hard to believe she would blindly do this show without a good reason.

    ReplyDelete
  2. $$$$ very often are a good reason. I'm not dismissing other theories, though I'm a tad skeptical. Why lend credibility to a bad landlord? The invitation has a certain slickness to it that seems more appropriate for an event at the Hotel Pierre.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It would be better if Patti did a fund raiser for the remaining Chelsea residents to assist their legal defense against the landlord....

    ReplyDelete
  4. Most of the old timers have conformed to the idea that we are a museum. I heard her say in an interview that if people wanted to do what she did that they shouldn't do it here. She said try Detroit or Poughkeepsie.

    Also this Christmas I sat next to someones father and his wife. They told me all about Patti Smith and Robert Mapplethorpe's relationship.

    How bad does it get.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Chris, you are so right on that one. this sounds like Chitrit's trying to win favor by having Patti do this show. i doubt any tenant will be falling for it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Patti ain't stupid....maybe she'll take the money and slam Chitrit when she steps up to the mike....

    ReplyDelete
  7. She's acting stupid, so....

    ReplyDelete
  8. I feel she is over-rated.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I would love to hear from the residents she will be performing for. We don't have the whole story. She must know a lot of them. Perhaps they asked her to do this. Patti has a lot of integrity so I am waiting to pass judgment until I hear her side of the story.

    ReplyDelete
  10. From NY Magazine:

    "Patti Smith Says She's Not Working for The Man'>

    Not too sure what to make of this. Doesn’t she have any idea of the tenant harassment that is going down there? Her response seems rather naive to me.


    http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/01/patti-smith-says-shes-not-working-for-the-man.html

    ReplyDelete

Your remarks and lively debates are welcome, whether supportive or critical of the views herein. Your articulate, well-informed remarks that are relevant to an article are welcome.

However, commentary that is intended to "flame" or attack, that contains violence, racist comments and potential libel will not be published. Facts are helpful.

If you'd like to make personal attacks and libelous claims against people and businesses, then you may do so on your own social media accounts. Also, comments predicting when a new business will close ("I give it six weeks") will not be approved.