Living with Legends

Hotel Chelsea Blog

recent posts

about

Chelsea Adopts Anti-Child Policy

One of our fellow Chelsea Hotel residents received this bizarre and outrageous letter in her mailbox on Friday.  As you might infer from its wrinkled condition, this resident crumpled it in disgust and threw it into the trash, and that’s where we found it.  As, in addition to being an attempt to intimidate a particular family, the letter seems to articulate a general policy, we felt that it was important to share it Antichild_2 with the rest of the Chelsea community.  Parents, in particular, may be concerned to learn of the management’s disturbing attitude toward their children. (Click on the image to enlarge)
            The impetus for this letter occurred on Friday, when the child in question was hanging out in the lobby unsupervised, as he or she has done off and on for perhaps a year (the child is nearing adolescence).  A maid whom the child had not seen before walked by, apparently dancing around a bit as she walked.  The child said something like, “Who the heck are you?” (the child’s version), or “Who the hell are you, you bitch?” (BD employee Glennon Travis’ version, repeated to the parent), and the maid apparently complained to Glennon that the child was being rude.  (We decided it was best not to ask the maid to confirm or deny her employer’s statement, as that might put her in an awkward position.)  Perhaps the child should be disciplined, but regardless of the form the statement took, it hardly seems justification for this sort of draconian measure.

The children of the Chelsea are residents too, and as such have certain rights, among them the right to enjoy the use of public areas such as the lobby and the halls.  Glennon, whose official title is Director of Operations has reportedly been telling people recently that he is the manager of the Chelsea (actually, that’s David Bernstein’s title), but in this instance he is acting more like the dictator of a Banana Republic.  No matter what his title, we don’t believe Glennon has the authority to tell parents what to do with their children; it’s up to the individual parents to decide when and under what conditions their children need supervision.
             There seems to be a disturbing new trend emerging here: with this letter and with the recent edict that residents clear their belongings from the hallways (we address this issue tomorrow in a post written prior to this one), we see an apparent attempt to exert control over the common areas of the hotel.  Does this mean children can’t play in the hallways?  What next, a ban on animals in the hallways?  A prohibition against loitering in the lobby? — Ed Hamilton

Posted in

53 responses to “Chelsea Adopts Anti-Child Policy”

  1. Witness Avatar
    Witness

    This is outrageous. The Chelsea is that child’s home, not a vacation residence. I visited the Chelsea last week for the first time in a while, and was shocked and depressed to find notices posted everywhere forbidding people to leave belongings in the very spacious hallways, or to go up to the roof, etc. etc. etc., in absolute violation of every Chelsea tradition and century-long practice.
    How would these people have liked being told as children that they couldn’t go out in their back yards?
    It’s disgusting.

    Like

    Reply
  2. zonedout Avatar
    zonedout

    I hope this Glennon guy isn’t around when Nicky hosts Wallis’ b-day party in the lobby! Or else, he’ll be in for a big surprise!

    Like

    Reply
  3. LP Avatar
    LP

    Ah, yet more starchy rules in complete opposition to what the Chelsea hotel stands for. Nobody can disrespect the staff (except BD Hotels and the imperious minority shareholders) but the tenants are disrespected left and right. Glennon, you’ve shown your true colors. Asshole. Yep, the great Chelsea Hotel and all it has stood for is being slowly killed by the small-minded and shallow BD hotels at the behest of Marlene Krauss and David Elder. A curse on you. You’ve destroyed something rare, rpecious and beautiful and you’re too thick to realize it. History will remember your names.

    Like

    Reply
  4. Avatar
    Anonymous

    Who is liable if a child breaks their neck in the hallways??? Is it Ed Hamilton?? Is it the parent of the child?? No, its the management of the hotel. The ignorance of some of the other tenants here is amazing to me.

    Like

    Reply
  5. resident Avatar
    resident

    This is a totally inappropriate way to deal with this matter. Stanley or David would have had a quiet word with the parent(s) in question and certainly would never have acted with such bizarre hostility to a little kid who steps out of line, which as it happens is what kids routinely do. Children have always formed part of the action and fun of the hotel, and residents (I can state from experience) are invariably kind and tolerant toward them.
    Also, any person under eighteen must be supervised? So our teenagers can’t go to school in the morning without parents escorting them to the front door? It’s pathetic, hostile, and probably illegal.

    Like

    Reply
  6. Sherill Avatar
    Sherill

    “I moved out of the Chelsea and into the world on roller skates that I learned to use in the hotel lobby. No one complained when I knocked over one of the brass spittoons by the revolving door.”
    –Hilary Masters
    (Edgar Lee Masters’ son)
    “Last Stands: Notes from Memory,” 1982

    Like

    Reply
  7. Avatar
    Anonymous

    Its a hotel, not a playground!!

    Like

    Reply
  8. Daily Intelligencer - New York Magazine Avatar
    Daily Intelligencer – New York Magazine

    Children Banned From Hotel Chelsea Lobby

    Chelsea: Children have been banned from the lobby of the Chelsea Hotel, reportedly because a rude kiddie called a maid a bitch. [Living with Legends]…

    Like

    Reply
  9. Ibiza Gold Avatar
    Ibiza Gold

    The letter in no way promotes an Anti-Child policy as the headline of this article suggests. This is an unfair representation of the hotel’s policy that their employees be respected. Verbal abuse is equally as intolerable as any other form of abuse.
    Instead of being outraged at the hotel’s policy, perhaps the parents of that child should offer an apology to the employee involved.
    Furthermore, to create a better environment all around, parents should discipline their children and teach them to show respect to their fellowmen.

    Like

    Reply
  10. LP Avatar
    LP

    It’s a home, not the fucking Hilton. Jesus H. You really don’t get it. Kids have always had the run of that place, and their pets too, and if the kids sassed someone, hell, that’s what kids do. It’s New York. Sticks and stones… This is the Chelsea Hotel, not parochial school, not some starchy faux-artsy BD hotel, not the Hilton. The Chelsea was a hotel, a home, a playground, a hotbed of creativity, a laboratory for testing social boundaries and radical ideas like racial and gender equality and gay rights. You want it to be just another crap generic hotel with nice architecture, bled of all authenticity, all humanity? BD and their evil overlords care more about their thin-skinned, new employees than they do about the old employees or the residents. See how you are killing this unique place, turning it into another robotic residence? Don’t you fucking see?

    Like

    Reply
  11. Miss H Avatar
    Miss H

    Now that the media glare has subsided, they are very bold in changing the atmosphere and spirit of the place, aren’t they? Chelsea children are a special breed, very smart, wise beyond their years, and yet still innocent children in the best ways. When they leave, they seem to harbor a lifelong love for the place and its former managers. I don’t know what the child said, but look at it from his point of view. He’s/She’s a kid, probably grew up there. He has watched as people he probably considered as family, the Bards, Jerry Weinstein, all the staff, were grossly disrespected. Familiar faces go and strangers come in. He might well be worried that his own home there is at risk. Maybe he’s confused and frightened, having grown up so far in a lively and creative place with a sense of community and now there’s a very different atmosphere, just as he’s approaching puberty. Should he have been rude? No, but let’s put this in perspective. I think we can find quotes and actions by the new management that are much ruder if we look a little. The letter is much ruder and the punishment, putting the children under virtual house arrest, is so extreme it’s funny, or would be if this whole situation wasn’t so sad. These people don’t understand children at all, and how they feel events such as these so much more intensely than adults. They have demonstrated no genuine sensitivity to the residents, or to the hotel’s legacy.
    If a kid said anything rude to one of the old staff, they’d likely get sassed back. I saw it. What’s more, nobody’s feelings would be hurt. It was just a little raw repartee, nothing to get worked up about.

    Like

    Reply
  12. Miss H Avatar
    Miss H

    Great quotation, Sherrill. Thanks.

    Like

    Reply
  13. Avatar
    Anonymous

    Perhaps the child should be disciplined? Perhaps??

    Like

    Reply
  14. Chelsearez Avatar
    Chelsearez

    You like that word, “discipline.” Wowee, the management has pretty twisted knickers. What an uptight bunch of twits. If a smart mouthed kid can get you so spitting mad, what would Brendan Behan or Herbert Huncke do to you?

    Like

    Reply
  15. TO Avatar
    TO

    are you really a tenant, unsigned poster cuz the things you say sound very un-chelsea like. they sound very much like something Dick Cheney would say.

    Like

    Reply
  16. Avatar
    Anonymous

    Witness…the notices about not leaving things in the hallways has been there for years under the Bards’ management. It’s simply fire code laws. It truly has nothing to do with new management, except that they’re attempting to enforce it in addition to the fact that some theft of property left in hallways has been reported.
    The same is true for the signs about not being allowed on the roof. They’ve been there for YEARS, there are just new ones now because the residents who have roof access have been complaining about guests going up there. The hotel roof is NOT for the public. I don’t now if it ever has been either. Again, this has nothing to do with new management. They’re just attempting to enforce this rule a little better, again, due to complaints from RESIDENTS.
    Zonedout… “Nicky” doesn’t live here anymore, but, if he does come back to throw a party, perhaps they’ll do it after Glennon leaves for the day. 🙂
    LP and Ed…ANIMALS do not belong roaming around the hallways unattended. This isn’t a zoo or the jungle. That’s such a ridiculous statement to make, Ed. Animals SHOULD be banned from being in the hallways without their owners! What if everyone who lived here allowed their pets to hang out in the hallway? It’s also against health codes.
    This place has never had hallways filled with roaming pets, nor should it, and I say this as an animal lover. I don’t know any building that allows people to let their pets hang out in the hallway. They’re not supposed to be roaming around outside unsupervised either. And part of this isn’t just for health codes (and people with allergies or fears of dogs or even cats), it’s for the pets’ safety as well.
    Loitering in the lobby is already banned (and has been for as long as I can remember) for people who aren’t residents or hotel guests…if it’s past midnight. I’d like to see them try and ban guests and residents from hanging out in the lobby! Especially after they claimed to want to make the common areas/lobby more lively.
    That said, I totally agree with “resident.” I think the letter is going a bit too far. Perhaps simply stopping the child’s mother and informing her of what happened and asking her to not allow her child to exhibit this behavior again along with asking for supervision would have been a more appropriate route.
    If only that resident got the letter, then this means other people’s children who are under 18 haven’t been informed of this.
    My opinion is that teenagers are fully capable of behaving themselves as well as adults. It’s only when they DON’T that they should get a warning and then discipline. How stupid for a 16 or 17-year old to have to be accompanied by his or her parent when they’re students in high school, working at jobs, driving cars, etc.
    Young children SHOULD be under supervision anyway, for their own safety and any responsible parent WOULD keep an eye on their kids.
    This is obviously an overreaction to an isolated incident with a child who, IF what was reported as having happened is true, DOES need supervision.
    EVERYONE was a child once…even Glennon.

    Like

    Reply
  17. Danielle Avatar
    Danielle

    Wow, suprised at the feedback. Sounds to me like a smart assed little kid got caught calling an adult staff member a bitch, got called out for it and now the parents are mad. Maybe if this kid’s parents taught him/her some manners and respect, they wouldn’t be in this cluster.

    Like

    Reply
  18. Joel Avatar
    Joel

    Oh you people MUST be kidding! Chelsea children are wise beyond their years?!! A special breed? The child, miniature peon that he/she is, engages in verbal abuse. And we all know its not the first time. The parents of these little demigods, “a special breed (indeed),” have repeatedly been told that their children cross the line. Many are abusive and arrogant and have an overwhelming sense of entitlement that interferes with other’s enjoyment. The rest of us are just supposed to take it because… what, their children are wise beyond their years?! God’s gift? Please. Spare me. Children should be allowed to be children, yes that is true. But only when their parents are responsible enough to discipline and control them. And everyone knows many in Chelsea that are not.

    Like

    Reply
  19. New York City Avatar
    New York City

    Dining News Elsewhere: Political Produce, Splitting the Bill

    – Thinking about the politics of produce. [ Gourmet ] – Ten books that any gastro-bibliophile should

    Like

    Reply
  20. Witness Avatar
    Witness

    If the child actually did behave disrespectfully, he/she should be made to apologize to the person he/she offended. But forbidding all children at the Chelsea to be in the public areas on their own, when they’re older than, say, 10, because of this one infraction, is clearly a draconian response.
    I know a couple of children at the Chelsea, and both are in fact wiser than their years, and more respectful toward authority figures than their parents, in fact.
    The real problem is that this response is based on the assumption that the Chelsea is entirely a transient hotel. It isn’t–it’s a lot of people’s permanent homes. Children can’t be cooped up 24/7 with no place to play, and no building to call their own.

    Like

    Reply
  21. Sherill Avatar
    Sherill

    John Sloan at the Chelsea, 1951: “To our apartment…enters a sample of modern childhood, a little boy from the apartment next to ours. He is about four years old. He strolled in nonchalantly, looking around and over us. I felt we should be greeted in some way, so opened with ‘Hello!’ No response…I felt indignent at this rude disregard of us….I told him that one should greet folks on entering their house, etc. He stood with a baby smile on his face, his hand at his side slowly raised with a toy pistol drawn from his holster directed at me. He still said nothing and I sternly ordered him out of the place. He left slowly and defiantly…”
    Later, Sloan introduced this boy to his pet white mouse and they became good friends. All without management intervention.

    Like

    Reply
  22. Sherill Avatar
    Sherill

    Stanley Bard told me in an interview that it took most of his childhood years to learn the layout of rooms at the Chelsea Hotel. If he hadn’t been allowed to roam the halls at will, he never would have figured out where everyone lived.

    Like

    Reply
  23. Sherill Avatar
    Sherill

    Later, after he grew up, Stanley was occasionally spotted chasing a laughing, naked, toddler down the corridor, trying to persuade it to put its clothes back on.
    Sometimes, when the parents were busy working on a project, he took their children home to play with his own kids so they wouldn’t be lonely.
    It’s impossible to imagine him ordering everyone to keep their children out of the lobby and halls.

    Like

    Reply
  24. zonedout Avatar
    zonedout

    Glennon should apologize to the parents! I heard that he made up the part about the curse words.

    Like

    Reply
  25. LP Avatar
    LP

    I’d take the word of the child over a BD functionary. I agree, the kids are wise beyond their years — I’ve never met a rude kid in the place. Nameless, if you are really a resident, you are part of a pod people invasion. No true Chelseaite would complain about a kid or for that matter a dog or cat wandering the halls, or even a kid who sasses. That free, home atmosphere was part of what made the Chelsea so special. They want to make it just another hotel, with a lot of rules and restrictions and a corporate attitude. Their idea of comfort is very different from mine. I was comfortable in a hotel where the kids and pets roamed freely, where you could hang out in the lobby and eat lunch with Jerome, and there was a surprise around every corner. It was human and it was stimulating. I’m not comfortabel in this uptight, anal-retentive, robotic corporate entity the hotel has become.
    Miss H, bravo. How about some sympathy for what the kids are dealing with due to this terrible takeover? Stanley cared. BD Hotels and krauss and Elder clearly do not. That says an awful lot about how they view the hotel, not as a home for people,as a refuge for artists and activists, but as a building and an investment currently inconvenienced by the presence of long-term residents.
    Chelsearez you hit the nail on the head. If they’re so scared of a kid, how would they handle a moody adult artist? Freaked out by a kid, in new York! In the Chelsea Hotel! These interlopers do not belong there. How about we discipline the rude BD people.

    Like

    Reply
  26. wage slave Avatar
    wage slave

    Does anybody remember Gaby, known in the newspapers as the “Eloise” of the Chelsea Hotel?

    Like

    Reply
  27. Kelsey Avatar
    Kelsey

    I didn’t know her personally but she was in this classic coming-of-age movie that every girl in my generation has seen called Now and Then. She was the daughter of Warhol Factory Superstar Viva, who allegedly wrote and illustrated a little book called Gaby at the Chelsea, which never went to press, I think. I may have learned the latter piece of info from this blog, though, so insert standard apology for repetition here. She was also in Sleepless in Seattle and her character was this really funny, precocious child who convinces the chubby son of Tom Hanks to go to NYC to find Meg Ryan.

    Like

    Reply
  28. Angry Miss H Avatar
    Angry Miss H

    Yes, animals have roamed those halls. You don’t know about Gengy, who sat in the lobby, just in front of the desk, his tail flicking like a metronome? Gengy had friends on every floor, and would often ride the elevators, get off where it stopped, and find one of his neighbors for a visit. Gengy was utterly charming. My own cats used to wander the third floor hallway or the balcony, and my neighbors cats did the same. There was a very smart, very affectionate rabbit named Demetrious who lived on the third floor balcony for some months. On some floors, the pets stayed inside, on some they wandered. Do you not know this? And then there was Kleinsinger’s alligator, though I guess that would be allowed since he kept the gator on a leash. And didn’t someone bring a bunch of lions in for a filmed production of Aida? Aida, performed in the Chelsea hotel. With real lions. Nobody complained of allergies as far as I know. If they had, we would have kept the pets in, or Stanley would have found them a place on a more sterile floor.
    It was truly a special place, and the kids and animals gave the place spark and color and, yes, humanity. You don’t like the Chelsea children? Then you are a grinch. Slander those kids at your peril.
    I saw no sense of entitlement among thm in my ten years, unless you mean they felt entitled to basic human rights and a creative atmosphere. Many grew up to sterling adults. I fell in love with a lot of kids there. How about Chelsea and Briannah, two girls with downs syndrome who lit up our lives for some years? After 9/11, Briannah went around hugging everyone. She didn’t understand 9/11, but it made her sad to see her neighbbors cry. Tosh is a great guy, thoughtful and kind, now a young adult but still a child when he lived in the hotel. And someone I’ll identify only as Turner, because he still lives in the hotel. He’s a wonderful presence in the hotel, smart, considerate, which is different from merely polite, and kind.
    If BD is getting attitude form a kid, or kids, then maybe it’s because of their attitude or simply because kids have attitude naturally. Good luck trying to turn them into marines. You want docile subservience? Go elsewhere.

    Like

    Reply
  29. TO Avatar
    TO

    Speaking of Stanley, Not once did I hear him refer to himself as an owner or co-owner of the hotel. He always referred to himself as “the manager.” He was more proud of the job he did running the place for over fifty years than he was of inheriting a stake in the hotel by being born.
    The sense of entitlement you sense… is not coming from the children. It’s coming from Krauss, Elder and BD Hotels. Don’t fall for their methods of distraction.

    Like

    Reply
  30. thekid Avatar
    thekid

    i was the kid and here’s the real story everyone that kids say who the “heck was that person” a lot so i asked the front desk that because i like to know empoyees names so i can call them that and glennon pops out of the back thinking i said who the hell was that bitch and he changed what i said and i apoligized

    Like

    Reply
  31. The Grinch Avatar
    The Grinch

    This letter is simply asking parents to take responsibility for their children, and not leave them unattended. Especially if they haven’t taught their children any manners and their children are spoiled brats. The so-called “Chelsea Children” are much like Paris Hilton: born into their palace.

    Like

    Reply
  32. LP Avatar
    LP

    I find you quite rude, Grinch. Your manners are nothing to speak of, labelling children you obviously do not know personally as spoiled brats. Like Paris Hilton? Come on. What spin. The people born into that palace are the do-nothing heirs Krauss and Elder, never did a damned thing for the hotel until they perpetrated their coup. Not leave the kids unattended? Must they be under constant hawk-eyed supervision in their own home? That’s not what the Chelsea Hotel was about, or embodied. Kids were safe at the hotel, when the Bards ran it. When in the lobby they were always under the eye of Stanley, Jerry, the staff or neighbors. We watched out for each other and for each other’s kids. Can you possibly understand that? These kids are exceptionally well-behaved. You remind me of the uptight church ladies of my childhood who said things like, children should be seen and not heard. But at least you acknowledge that you’re a Grinch. “May have been that his heart was two sizes too small.”
    Kid, you’re cool. Sorry they appear to be making you the pawn in their strategy to “discipline” all the children. The kids of the Chelsea have brought me nothing but joy in a dozen years. There’ll be an extra treat in your bags this Halloween!

    Like

    Reply
  33. The Ghost of the Chelsea Past Avatar
    The Ghost of the Chelsea Past

    Ah, the side of the grinches makes the same accusation over and over. No new arguments, Marle, ma bete? No need or desire to address the specifics of the pro-child arguments? Just parroting the party line are we? Let me see if I can remember it all..we must be unfailingly polite and respectful of BD Hotels, no matter what, but we can be rude as we like to children, is that it?

    Like

    Reply
  34. Avatar
    Anonymous

    to all of you who said we shouldn’t worry, the new regime wasnt going to change anything major, just spruce up the place
    told you so.
    there seems to be a deep hatred and fear of bohemia in the new regime

    Like

    Reply
  35. Carrie Bedsore /Cherry Ramone / Rob from Aus Avatar
    Carrie Bedsore /Cherry Ramone / Rob from Aus

    Let the children run free- some of my best Chelsea elevator conversations were with Chelsea kids, they are a special breed. Did someone say Uma Thurman?
    If they try cracking down on the cats they’ll have me to deal with!

    Like

    Reply
  36. Sherill Avatar
    Sherill

    Nameless who made this comment:
    “The hotel roof is NOT for the public. I don’t now if it ever has been either.”
    Just for the record–though of course things change over time–here’s what Philip Hubert, creator of the Chelsea, wrote in his original prospectus in 1884:
    “The rear half of the roof will be reserved for the exclusive use of the occupants of the building as a promenade…It will be fitted up with seats and awnings, and will be found a cool and delightful resort in summer. The view is one of the finest and most extensive in the city.”
    Hubert’s aim in building the Chelsea was to create a place in which New Yorkers of all different persuasions could mingle and converse.

    Like

    Reply
  37. Sherill Avatar
    Sherill

    Also, I don’t think management or residents complained when Shirley Clarke showed movies for everyone on the roof of the Chelsea in the ’70s.
    Didn’t those signs go up at about the time that the Board started pressuring Stanley, several years ago?

    Like

    Reply
  38. Miss H Avatar
    Miss H

    I don’t remember the signs from my time at the hotel, Sherill, so I think they must be very recent. Nameless must be a recent tenant in that case, if a tenant at all.
    Casebeer, Joe Myers, Norm and I had a wonderful party up on the roof one night. It was also from there that many of us watched the twin towers go down. Officially, only tenth floor residents had access to the roof, but other residents used it and nobody complained as long as nobody’s privacy was disturbed or invaded and no damage was done.

    Like

    Reply
  39. LP Avatar
    LP

    Damn straight. The new regime does indeed fear bohemia. They fear freedom. They fear the unregimented creativity of the hotel and want to quash it. This is very clear now.

    Like

    Reply
  40. Avatar
    Anonymous

    LP, you continually think to know what “TRUE Chelseaites” would or wouldn’t do yet you’re wrong. “TRUE Chelseaites” have spoken and just because they don’t fall into your line of, well…”special” thinking, doesn’t mean they’re any less of a TRUE Chelseaite than you.
    Miss H, you’re wrong. Tenth Floor residents who have ROOF access have access to their sections of the roof. Not ALL tenth floor residents.
    This place has changed over the years, people. I’m sorry to say that the bohemia of yesteryear has changed under the Bards regime. Gingy was a special dog but I’m sure that if people complained, something would have been said to the owner, out of respect for the other residents and hotel guests. Gingy, if she’d been aggressive or threatening, would certainly not have been allowed to have free run of the hallway or building.
    In the past ten years, there have been very, very few pets chilling out in hallways and, when there has been, there’ve been occasional problems, due to owner irresponsibility. I’ve heard about dogs going to the bathroom and their owner not cleaning it up, maybe even purposely letting them do it. That’s just WRONG.
    I’ve heard about a cat that not only was ALWAYS in the hallway but always hissed at people and the owner didn’t give a dam. They also completely ignored Stanley and David who told them many times to please not let the cat be in the hallway. I heard it bit a child as well.
    People have allergies and I’m sorry, but there are still laws to follow…even in the Chelsea. But more importantly, people should still have some respect for their fellow neighbors and hotel guests.
    Residents complain a LOT about people on the roof. Some complain more than others, but they complain. I guess the residents who have roof access DO change and people DO have to follow some rules and laws. Why is it so hard for some people to accept this and realize that it’s not all about “new management?” The Bards had been attempting to enforce these same things (not the children part, but the others).
    LP…if you’re of the mind that you can do whatever the hell you want no matter what management (including the Bards) say, or whether or not it effects other people just because you live at the Chelsea Hotel….I’m sorry to say, but you’re just wrong. Maybe you should move to your own private island where you can make all the rules, do whatever you want, and not care if anyone else is being disturbed or if you cause other people problems.
    Even at the Chelsea, respect for your fellow neighbors and guests is required to at least SOME degree. I’m assuming I don’t live next to you because, although I’m not much of a complainer, I’m sure you probably annoy the people around you, and if you think you don’t, great. You’re very lucky to have them on your floor.

    Like

    Reply
  41. Avatar
    Anonymous

    oh, and Angry Miss H…I think the important is “USED TO.” Pets do NOT roam the hallways unattended and haven’t for a long time. Not MOST at least. If a pet is very sweet and friendly, it’s much better than a not-so-nice one, but people do have allergies- especially do cats- and it IS a health code violation. Then there are those unfortunate people who are actually afraid of dogs and/or cats. You have to have some respect for other human beings and even the Bards were in agreement with this.
    Most people who book a room in a hotel- even the Chelsea Hotel- don’t expect to have animals roaming the hallways, especially nasty ones. Kids, sure. Sassy kids, hey, it’s Manhattan, right? If you come in contact with an unruly child and you’re an adult, you have the right to open your mouth and tell them that they’re being rude. If they listen is another story, but then, that’s a parental issue.
    Pets, no matter how much you or I love them (and I do, I have a few of them myself), they simply don’t have the same rights as another human being, and “another” human being includes children.
    That said, it’s still a fairly laid-back atmosphere, but things DO change and HAVE changed over the years, and The Bards have changed things as well. People make statements about what the Bards thought were okay but I’ve seen and heard them say it’s not okay with my own eyes. Perhaps we just have our own perceptions on what we thought The Bards view on things were?
    New management IS changing this place and making it less bohemian, but even bohemians have basic respect for people.
    blah, blah, blah……

    Like

    Reply
  42. Miss H Avatar
    Miss H

    Yes, things changed after I left under pressure from the minority shareholders. What a shame. But we all know how the Bards ran the place and how these poeople are running it. I didn’t say all pets roamed the hallways, did I? Some did, like Gengy for instance, and my cats, back in my day. You said that animals never roamed the hallways, IIRC. I corrected you. And did I say bohemians don’t respect other people? Au contraire. They tend to be more tolerant and respectful in my experience. I think the new regime doesn’t respect anyone but the transient guests because they represent greater profit. I do not believe you are a resident, and if you are, you came in the latter days of Bard management, probably not in search of the Chelsea’s unique atmosphere, but just because there was an apartment there. Really, how any “true Chelseaite” as you put it can defend the new regime after all they’ve done in such a short time is beyond me. Me, I’ll continue to defend what the Bards created in conjunction with their residents and transient guests. It was rare. If the new regime succeeds in doing things there way, that rare thing will be gone forever.

    Like

    Reply
  43. Miss H Avatar
    Miss H

    You are right, however, that all tenth floor residents didn’t have official roof access. I misspoke in that regard.

    Like

    Reply
  44. LP Avatar
    LP

    No, Nameless, you may be a Chelsea tenant, but you are not a True Chelseaite. A True Chelseaite doesn’t blink if they see a man walking an alligator down the hall, or a dog sleeping in the lobby. A true Chelseaite knows the hotel children and considers them part of his or her own family. A True Chelseaite cares about the bohemian spirit of the place. A True Chelseaite doesn’t need a lot of fancy decor because his or her imagonation will fill up the room. A True Chelseaite values freedom, creativity and surprise over sterility and “amenities.” A True Chelseaite recognizes what these invaders have done and can foresee what they intend to do. A True Chelseaite wants Stanley back.

    Like

    Reply
  45. Cowboy Avatar
    Cowboy

    So there’s Chelsea Residents and True Chelseaites. Let’s hear it for labeling and divisiveness!

    Like

    Reply
  46. LP Avatar
    LP

    It’s funny to hear you talk about labeling and divisiveness. The Chelsea has a certain spirit. There are many individual variations but True Chelseaites embody that essential spirit. People who can shrug as the last outpost of bohemia, at least in new york,is turned into something regimented and moneygrubbing do not. People who care more about renovations and amenities than authenticity and humanity do not. It’s a bohemian thing. Some people are here for the apartment but not into the Chelsea itself. although only a few that I know of.

    Like

    Reply
  47. Avatar
    Anonymous

    this is our last post. so tired of spending the time to visit and then have posts randomly censored or just not posted. bye!

    Like

    Reply
  48. Avatar
    Anonymous

    Ed obviously posts only those comments that are beneficial to his own agenda. After all, we all know that once the Chelsea is gone, so is Ed’s career. No blog, no books to write, what are you going to do Ed? Good thing you have some practice picking through the garbage outside of the Chelsea. I have a feeling I’m going to see you there in the near future. Your blog is a complete misrepresentation of the thoughts of many of us here. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    Like

    Reply
  49. Anonymous 2 Avatar
    Anonymous 2

    Ed never claimed to represent everyone. And there’s more in the world than the Chelsea for him to write about.

    Like

    Reply
  50. Cowboy Avatar
    Cowboy

    I’ll stick up for Slammin’ Ed Hamilton. He might be a bit reactionary and he might have agenda but he and Debby have done yoemen’s work to make the Blog the most informative site for all things Chelsea. If you don’t like Ed or his views you can take the time to make your own “unbiased” blog or simply troll somewhere else.
    I’m all for telling people when their sh*t stinks but to get upset because his blog isn’t representative of the masses is a bit intellectually dishonest. Blogs are made by people – not committee and Ed’s out there in the open taking bullets.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment