Red Fire Escape (Ready, Set, Go), Meryl Meisler, March 1984
Blast from the past: I found a New York Times article from 1986 about the 70s blockbusting of Bushwick.
In a five-year period in the late 1960′s and early 70′s, the Bushwick neighborhood of Brooklyn was transformed from a neatly maintained community of wood houses into what often approached a no man’s land of abandoned buildings, empty lots, drugs and arson.
Five years is fast for such a steep decline. The article goes on to say that it was the abuse of FHA mortgage guarantees that is to blame, and that it was mostly one company that lead the wholesale flipping of Bushwick.
The key bit here is that if the Feds had not been guaranteeing mortgages (bailing out banks for taking reckless risks), blockbusting could never have happened. The FHA, in effect, financed the destruction of Bushwick and countless other communities across the country. The fires, the vacancies, all those empty lots — point your blaming fingers at the federal government for way overstretching its bounds. This world is littered with the ashes, rubble, and corpses of good intentions, and for a long time in Bushwick you could find all three.
Jon Williams June 15th, 2007 at 12:32 pm
Any clue where that photo was taken (address)?
Jeremy June 15th, 2007 at 12:51 pm
No but I’m sure none of those buildings are there now anyhow. Maybe Meryl remembers.
Mary June 15th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
Indeed an area where nobody really cared. Drugs, violence, slumlords, and poverty – it’s all been here, and some still is.
Jeremy are you a landlord, and whereabouts in Bushwick are you?
Wick_or_Stuy June 15th, 2007 at 4:09 pm
Jeremy:
Great Article:
I grew up in Bushwick through the 80′s and 90′s, those were rough years. As much as I love bushwick and as much as the neighborhood has come, something always happens that make you say “This is the Ghetto!” I also hate the fact that there are only a few blocks in Bushwcik that have some Houses with decent Architectural Detail. The stretch of Bushwick avenue from Gates to Myrtle, as well as the side along Wyckoff avenue Bet Putnam all the way to Halsey.
I guess this article put some questions into perspective, Everything was destroyed!.
Mary June 15th, 2007 at 5:06 pm
It’s true the neighborhoods have been neglected, and slumlords, and poverty are still here. But change is coming. We can’t get the architectural details back but at least lets be civic minded and care about our community more.
bushwicknative June 15th, 2007 at 5:37 pm
Having grownup in the 50s and 60s in Bushwick I saw the decline and now currently the re-emergence of the area. I was at the BOS arts festival a few weeks ago and was amazed at how the area is being revived. While there are still rough spots it is clear that there is a trend underway.
Simply the fact that Bushwick has become an acceptable place to be again and not hiding behing the “East Williamsburg” tag is an encouraging sign.
Mary June 15th, 2007 at 5:41 pm
That was the point I was trying to get at. At what point was East Williamsburg put on the map. It’s official now, but was it always that way. And will the rest of Bushwick not under the E.W. tag be standing on it’s own or will a new name or knickname have to be created in order for people to feel like this place isn’t so taboo.
Jeremy June 15th, 2007 at 7:21 pm
At this point, the name Bushwick is very safe.
anonymous June 15th, 2007 at 8:54 pm
Safe to say, or a very safe area?
Jeremy June 15th, 2007 at 9:03 pm
Read Mary’s comment (#7), and then mine.
anonymous June 16th, 2007 at 7:01 am
Perhaps as a result of this discussion, this blog no longer is devoted to bushwick, but also east williamsburg, and ridgewood queens (see wording under top picture).
Here I thought someone was finally give poor little Bushwick some credit and devotion by itself.
Jeremy June 16th, 2007 at 9:05 am
No, the idea from the beginning was to include those historically tied-in areas. Bushwick isn’t poor or little as far as attention these days, so I don’t know what the big deal is. If anything, those other areas are part of Greater Bushwick.
Brenda from Flatbush June 16th, 2007 at 9:06 am
My nabe, too (flatbush) supposedly “changed” completely in less than a decade due to blockbusting, and I remain puzzled by the way it worked, and particularly by the role the Feds played. Whose mortgages were they guaranteeing, those of poorer new homeowners? What was the actual cascade of events? My rough impression is that “agents would scare homeowners into white flight just to get the house to sell and pocket a commission,” but I’ve never quite understood the mechanics of redlining, much less the Fed’s role. Is there any parallel to the current threat of a wave of foreclosures due to predatory lending?
Jeremy June 16th, 2007 at 11:32 am
Brenda, the description of blockbusting has always confused me — just spreading rumors that black people are moving in is not enough to get an entire BOROUGH to up and move to the burbs, dumping their homes at firesale prices. You have to have money at the ready to snatch the places up, and you have to have mortgages lined up for buyers who aren’t terribly picky about where they end up. What kind of investor would give mortgages to people who can’t afford them? The kind who know that they will be bailed out to the last cent by the government. Without the feds, none of this could have happened.
Wick_or_Stuy June 16th, 2007 at 11:56 am
Jeremy:
“just spreading rumors that black people are moving”
Hummm!!!!
Bad choice of wording. I understood your point, but next time try to use the word “minority”, some people including myself might get offended. Just food for thought.
Jeremy June 16th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
It was specifically black people that they used as the boogeyman, so it was the correct choice of wording, and there is no way to be offended unless you misunderstood. So I hope this clears that up for you.
Wick_or_Stuy June 16th, 2007 at 6:50 pm
No harm done, just getting over a hangover…
Jeremy June 16th, 2007 at 8:15 pm
Ow, those suck.
will June 16th, 2007 at 11:34 pm
The FHA scandal was just one of many reasons why Bushwick, Bed Stuy, and almost every single inner city neighborhood in every single city in the entire United States went into a decline from the 1950′s to the 1980′s. In fact, you could argue that the FHA scandal was made possible by the conditions that already existed in Bushwick. To say that “if the Feds had not been guaranteeing mortgages… blockbusting could never have happened” is a huge oversimplification.
Meryl Meisler June 17th, 2007 at 9:27 am
The photo was taken on either Palmetto Street or Gates Avenue, somewhere between Central and Myrtle.
Thanks for going back and crediting my photos. (They are registered with the copyright office).
I appreciate your interest in my work.
Sincerely,
Meryl
Gus June 17th, 2007 at 11:40 am
The rise of Bushwick will inevitably change the ‘hood from all that it has represented in the last 30+ years. Having grown up in Williamsburg during the seventies and eighties, I am a witness to the worse times that these parts have gone through. But, I now live on Bushwick and feel the great energy of resurrection that is on its way. It’s still only the beginning, but the changes are coming. Good neighbors make good neighborhoods!
Sam Cono-Yapp June 17th, 2007 at 12:46 pm
“East Williamsburg” was common slang to refer to… the EAST part of Williamsburg, i.e. the largely Italian sector that’s east of say Leonnard. the area between say Bushwick Avenue & Knickerbocker was either Bushwick or NO MAN’S LAND.
The ersatz-hipster asswipes & the real artists who scurry around the Morgan stop on the L… are welcome to Bushwick, i suppose, but it’s laughable to think that’s the heart or even the liver of Bushwick as a whole, which is really Knickerbocker, Myrtle & Wilson.
Also, while Bushwick absolutely suffered, it’s remarkable also how much ** survived ** & there were even– yes– white people who stayed (mostly Italian).
I don’t have to time to educate the kids here about 1960s & 1970s New York but, uh… READ SOME BOOKS & don’t rely on the motherfucking Times, even when they’re not horrible.
Filipino Bushwick, arise!
bushwicknative June 17th, 2007 at 4:04 pm
in response to number 7 I have looked at maps from 1855 of the area ( no I am not that old LOL but was born in early 50s ( 1950s that is)).. in 1855 the area now called North Bushwick was actually tagged East Williamsburg and Ridgewood was tagged out by the Highland Park resevoir.
Ridgewood always had the Queens connotation and Bushwick the Brooklyn. As we all know neighborhood boundaries move over time (look at Little Italy in Manhattan where it is now hard to find a lot of Italians residing) but in the early 1950s people sort of thought of Ridgewood being north of the Myrtle Avenue el and Bushwick south of it.. I know this does not follow the Bklyn Queens border but it did seem to be the line of demarcation as Broadway divided Bushwick and Bed-Stuy
East Williamsburg always referred to that industrial area bordering on Flushing Avenue and “Morgantown’( another new moniker) today but it did not really matter because no one really lived there ..
As an aside East Williamsburg ( Johnson Ave, Ingraham, Morgan and the like ) was a great place to learn how to drive on a Sunday morning as there was absolutely no one there as all the industries were closed.
and the 11237 zip in bushwick is properly known as Wyckoff Heights… There was at one time a 11227 zip code used by the post office out on cypress avenue past myrtle but that was changed a while back to a more Queensy sounding zip code
bushwicknative June 19th, 2007 at 2:59 pm
further to the question of when did “east williamsburgh” first appear check out this website
http://www.bklyn-genealogy-info.com/Map/Newtown.html
which is an 1873 map of the area …
note the streets of bushwick into queens are all laid out in the grid system but I seriously doubt there were houses there yet… also note the “East Williamsburgh” tag was applied all the way into queens and Ridgewood is out where the resevoir is.
anonymous June 19th, 2007 at 7:20 pm
wow, does the map show anything interesting about the homes between evergreen and broadway, is that just plain bushwick, no other fancy word to give the area some status!
Kevin Backmann June 19th, 2007 at 11:42 pm
I was there when the blockbusting began, and the spiral downward happened so fast the breath of life was sucked out of the neighborhood in its wake. I believed then, as I believe now, that the spirit of the neighborhood was its diversity, and it’s sad to know that the true spirit of the neighborhood, as embodied by all its residents, was the very weapon that was used to induce white flight out of the neighborhood.
My parents were some of those who made the made dash for anywhere but Bushwick, and I wound up living with a family that stayed in Bushwick, at 296 Central Avenue. In 1969 a young Puerto Rican activist was fatally shot during a demonstration at the corner of Central Avenue and Harmon Street by the owner of a building on that corner. The owner of that building was Italian, and it spurred another flight of home owners out of the neighborhood. I believe the activist was named Sonny, but that I could very well be wrong. We knew each other in passing from hanging out in the neighborhood, but I did not know him as a friend.
Whatever promise the 60’s supposedly held at the beginning of the decade had long since dissipated following the deaths of Martin Luther King, Malcom X, Bobby Kennedy, and in a neighborhood called Bushwick the death of that young activist. The arson and looting of 70’s only served as the final paragraph of a 15 year monologue of greed and fear.
I’ve not read all of the feedback, but I get a sense that the spirit of the neighborhood survived after all, lurking in darkened vestibules and in damp, dank cellars in the interim until it was safe to come out and play again.
Kevin Backmann
bushwicknative June 20th, 2007 at 8:57 am
to number 25 the map on the web shows a large swath of brooklyn so you can see the streets laid out but not a lot of detail re the houses etc
If you go to the BHS they have very detailed maps from different years showing buildings etc.
KB seeing your other blogs as well as this we are from the same era although I went to St. Brigid
I remember as a 5 or 6 year old going to St. Barbaras with my grandmother for Bingo games
Kevin Backmann June 20th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
Yo, Bushwicknative:
I was always jealous of those St. Brigid’s kids for some reason. They appeared to be more affluent or something, of course that was mere illusion as we were all in the same boat more or less.
In the 60′s I hung out under the El at Wychoff & Myrtle. We would cluster around an abandoned shoe shine stand, across the street from Gottlieb’s restaurant.
Growing up there was a profoundly positive experience, once I got over the idea that I had been deprived somehow.
Are you still in the neighborhood? I’m in Dallas, TX, a circle of hell Dante never told anyone about.
bushwicknative June 21st, 2007 at 9:14 am
KB no I am not in the neighborhood having left in 1973 but have been back a few time since including early June. It really is changing again. I live in NJ now so am close enough to visit.
and I do remember Gottliebs (gone) and the Chinese place across the street. Corrados pizza still is there on Woodbine. Neidersteins (middle village) also closed.
I do not think we Brigids folks were more affluent either . There were just more of us. In those years we had 6 classes of 35-40 kids each in a grade. We were probably the largest school in the diocese.
valley guy July 14th, 2007 at 6:41 pm
A little Brooklyn history. I left Gates Avenue at Irving in ’65 but everyone else left in the ’50′s for Levittown and this may sound odd but once the Dodgers and Giants left, the communal concept of Brooklyn also disintegrated. When soldiers came back from WWII and were lured to the idea of the suburbs, they took a large chunk out of the economic base of the borough and left a lot of low-cost housing. Check the demographics but folks from Harlem moved into Brooklyn about that time. That’s where the diversity that we treasure came from. Before that time, the neighborhoods were relatively pure population pockets that were controlled by essentially people with similar backgrounds. Germans rented to (exploited) newly arrived Germans, Italians to Italians (see Bensonhurst), etc.
The real change in the borough was that before that time, there was no real reason to leave the neighborhood. As a matter of fact, hard as this may be to believe, many of the older people who lived in the neighborhood in the ‘50’s had never been to Manhattan. It was considered another city. There was no real curiosity. They knew it existed but were content with a much simpler life. They had theatres on Myrtle Avenue to see movies occasionally and most people couldn’t afford to eat in restaurants so they ate at home. They bought from neighborhood stores and watched TV. That’s it.
As far as white flight. It’s true. Folks left but please keep in mind that heroin was sold out of the neighborhood pizza parlors in the ‘60’s thanks to Little Nicky Scarfo et al, and that the factories to process it were in Bushwick/Bed-Stuy. Not wanting that kind of temptation presented to their children might have had something to do with families taking flight. Just a thought.