Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Leonard Cohen's artist-filled neighbourhood

Sculptor Cheryl Kenmey bought this house for $8,000
Sculptor Cheryl Kenmey bought this home at 4255 St. Dominique around 1968 for $8,000 and sold it in 1988 for $75,000.
   When she moved in, there was a rope factor and a candle factory a couple of doors down and the block was full of immigrants and had a biker issue.
   She bought it because her mentor had recently moved in few doors up.
  Morton Rosengarten,who lived at 4307 St.Dominique, had moved there because he got the idea from Michel Garneau, a prolific playwright who wrote about 50 plays and now lives in Magog.
   Garneau was the first of the artists to move into the block and would be seen hard at work at a desk near the window, a Do Not Disturb Artist At Work sign prominently displayed.
   Rosengarten still owns his modest duplex, which was never renovated or even touched up much, it has an old fashioned-four legged bathtub right in the hall near the kitchen. But he is rarely there, preferring instead to live in Ways Mills in the Townships.
   He told me that artists were pushed out of downtown in the 60s as the area became jammed with bars and other commerce. Now he's a bit miffed that the Plateau has seen a similar fate, making is noisy and unpleasant as drunken youth galavant well into the night.
   When Rosengarten came, so too did his best friend, a poet named Leonard Cohen, who bought a triplex right across at 28 Vallieres, which he still owns but doesn't spend much time at. Cohen's property is evaluated at $298,000, which is very low, so it's probably not in great shape inside.
  Rosengarten and Cohen came from comfortable backgrounds that saw the neighbourhood as a symbol of immigrant desperation, the kind of place you try desperately to move away from, so it was a counter-intuitive move coming back to the area.
  But nonetheless, when Cohen bought in, the critical mass of artists kept sprouting and soon it became a real artists community right in the heart of the city.
  The neighbourhood saw artists break bread and discuss ideas, it was cauldron of creativity, as artist Charlie Gurd called it.
  And Cohen was at the centre of the action. 
  "We call him the master of depression but he has to be the funniest guy I ever met," said Kenmey. "It really made me feel like I was part of something, I felt like I was in the world because everybody was doing something."
  When Kenmey took off for a few years, a filmmaker named Derek May, now deceased, moved in and shot a documentary about Cohen in the neighbourhood.
   Another filmmaker George Ungar recalls the artistic energy that reigned when he lived there.
    "The presence of that kind of spirit, they engage in a creative field, it gives you energy, you take yourself more seriously  you pursue things with more conviction and that’s important  especially  in today’s world where the pressures of mercantile pursuits are enormous. It's like going back in time to a slower world w here instead of turning onto the TV you go and talk to your neighbours," he said.
   The area was so intimate that one resident reported that he was walking down the middle of the street and could hear people snoring on both sides. "It was like one big apartment," said Ungar.
  Historian Denise Beaugrand-Champagne lived in the area and has studied its history.
  She said that in a previous generation the adjacent Portugal Park had been nicknamed Communist Park because of all of the swap meets that saw people exchange goods to save money.
  She said it was a quiet neighbourhood almost exclusively populated by immigrants when the artists moved in. 
  But she, like Rosengarten, soured when the bars proliferated. 
  "When the immigrants started leaving going to the suburbs it became less interesting, and all those bars just ruined the neighbourhood." 

12 comments:

  1. Quaint-looking and valuable for nostalgic reasons, but clearly well worn out and thus virtual firetraps by today's standards. NO buildings would EVER be built like this today!

    These types of structures usually had no central heating, either. They were the notorious "cold-water flats" where children grew up at risk of contracting deadly diseases like polio and diphtheria. Residents had to provide their own coal or kerosene
    to feed an unsafe stove for heating. No fire escapes either. Have a fire? Jump out the window! Can't get to a window? You die.

    Many had no indoor toilets, either. Imagine having to get out of bed, get dressed, and go out back to the outhouse in mid-winter! Rats and cockroaches were widespread. The houses with outdoor staircases were an accident waiting to happen:
    steep and hazardous, obviously much more so in winter.

    Electrical outlets were not as prevalent, either, requiring later owners to make expensive wiring and fusebox upgrades.

    Seriously, WHO would move into such a neighbourhood today, especially with children? Despite these negatives, The Plateau
    district has one of the highest tax rates in the city! Go figure.

    When they could afford to, the residents couldn't move out of there fast enough--which they did in droves after WWII when new housing projects elsewhere in the city finally became available. The Jewish population moved from there west to Snowdon, NDG, Laval, and elsewhere.

    Mr. Cohen was probably (and very briefly, I'm sure) of the mindset: "Hey, I've made it! I think I'll move back and show
    them!". Did it matter? Did anyone care? I'd say he'd be better off living anonymously in "Le Sanctuaire" complex east of Wilderton Avenue.

    Having said all that, it IS true that some immigrants seem to enjoy crowded living conditions--places such as Chinatown, for
    example.

    It must be more than just tradition, though, because I knew a Chinese family living on both floors of a Coolbrook 1930s-era duplex with tiny bedrooms just large enough for a bed, dresser and not much else. Well, at least they DID have a rear fire escape and a small back yard!

    Overseas, the Japanese thrive in tiny homes, as well; perhaps not always by choice, I imagine. On television they once showed someone with their washing machine on the outdoor balcony.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Chuck4:37 pm

    Now UrbanLegend made me understand a bit better why Drapeau was demolishing slums neighborhoods in the 60-70s...The buildings looked nice but if that was the living conditions inside...ouch

    ReplyDelete
  3. Remember that there were no stringent building codes back then as we have today.

    Certainly the Plateau and Mile End were somewhat safer than than Old Montreal in the 17th and 18th centuries where the streets were (and still are) so much narrower and fires could so easily spread from structure to structure--which they DID, of course.

    It took such disasters, too, before cities realized the potential hazards of overcrowding.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous12:25 am

    @Urban Legend: You can have high density building(s) if they are built with intelligent building codes and nonflammable roof materials ie: metal & tin as found all over Quebec was useful in reducing fires. Overcrowding or high density is not necessarily the root of the problem,it was bad building materials in some areas. Notably bad wiring technology of the past decades and fireplaces/ heating stoves that was the source of problems...as they still are even in $500 000 homes. Many residential buildings in the province and Montreal were made of stone after fires in the 18th century where wood buildings burned to stop fires from spreading...unlike Toronto etc. Many cities (Amsterdam, London, Tokyo) have high density narrow streets with tens of millions living in those areas. North Americans are hung-up on space or wasting space. You get to know your neighbours and feel a sense of community that is stronger and more vibrant than suburban living. When I lived in Vancouver for a few years, my Italian mechanic visited relatives here up in Little Italy. He could not believe how people sat on the balconies and chatted and said hi to each other and to people passing by on the sidewalk. He noted he had never had convos with neighbours in whatever suburb he lived in - Surrey I think. It is not just immigrants who live in high-density areas. Also as noted in Richard Florida's concept of the creative class - they migrate to denser areas...and of course, thus, cause gentrification as seen in the Plateau etc. but that is another story. The people living in those places in the Plateau with families (especially if they are owners)are often living in totally retrofitted units sold as condos that have been redone by architects. The property taxes are in part high due to the 1000's of units that have been converted to condos and in turn raising the property values. And I suspect (and I have come across many) who live there as I have, as well as in other high-density cities, they are able to walk to work, bike or take the Metro more readily than in some subruban etc. The $1000s saved in fuel not traveling to Pierrefonds (and getting stuck in traffic for 30 minutes on the 20, then 30 minutes on St. Jean or Blvd Sources etc,) can cover the tax difference. Not too mention the time wasted...But too many people are not able grasp that relational swap of expenditures and or life priorities. Actually they are not stuck in traffic...they are the traffic...

    ReplyDelete
  5. High-density living can also have its negative aspects depending on the political and/or religious affiliation of the residents.

    I certainly would not feel comfortable living in such close quarters in Northern Ireland, for example, where religious squabbles and outright violence have occurred generation after generation.

    The "ghetto", the "barrio", the "favela", all have traditionally negative connotations. Ask anyone living there if they wouldn't rather move elsewhere. Obviously, the fortunate ones who CAN afford and DO move away can always visit "the old neighbourhood" whenever they please, just like those in Montreal who drop by Wilensky's and Fairmount Bagel.

    Even if everyone of one political mind lived cheek-by-jowl and down the block lived the "alternate
    religion" or whatever, how safe would everyone feel walking down that block through the "enemy's turf".

    Apartment buildings in tropical countries like Jamaica, Cuba, etc. are often places where neighbours squabble rather than socialize peacefully. That could very be a "cultural" thing, but still The potential for gossip, becoming a busybody, opportunities for criminal activity, etc., can easily run rampant.

    People need space to breath and to not be overly concerned about noisy, uncooperative neighbours who can make one's daily life a nightmare.

    It should not be forgotten why the New World was dreamed about and eventually settled in by waves of Europeans fed up with religious and political persecution, old stringent traditions, and pogroms.

    That is, of course, the Big Picture.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous2:33 pm

    @Urban Legend - you seem to be somewhat prone to defining the "other" as in the other cultures as unable to co-habitate. It is a question of poverty, religious and socio-economics that you are bringing up, and the latter which I noted has been drastically changed in the Plateau or Mile-End etc. And it is an educated economically rewarded population that I am referencing that make high-density possible with less of the strife previous attributed to such locales. Do you still view the Plateau and Mile-End as my mom still does, a dingy impoverished place where hope of success in life is a only a dream for all those non-Anglos etc. It has changed. Professors, architects, artists, high-tech computer programmers/designers have moved in. NYC has 60 storey condo towers, apartments that charge 3000-10 000 a month, and boast the highest density in North America, though some claim said it was the West End of Vancouver for a time; and people all over the world want to move there. Same goes for high density of central London, Paris (not the poor banlieus though). Funny I have known people who lived in Cuba for extended periods of time not as tourists, and did not remark about any such consistent social bickering among the people even as pissed off and under the thumb of the government. Cuba has the highest rate of education in Latin America - Jamaica has not faired as well. And Trench Town is not all of Jamaica. The arming of its citizens in the 1970's by the CIA to destabilize the elections where the left leaning Jamaican government the USA did not like, created a paradigm shift in social behaviour inserting a culture of violence that was not there before as armed gangs became part of the landscape. But that is another story...but at the root is poverty. In the hundreds of Condo towers in Vancouver, Toronto, NYC that are super high density, there is ample proof density does not necessarily create violence and antagonism. Tokyo at 15-20million has the lowest crime rate of any mega-city. NYC has dropped considerably. In wide open properties in the USA (Texas etc) people shoot others who come on their property and live adhering to a paranoid belief in turf as identity. The least dense areas of Canada (Alberta, Saskatchewan) oddly have the highest crime rates per citizen - in murders. No doubt poverty has something to do with it. Favelas, Barrios etc. are usually representative of structural inequality in the society. More than 60 of Brazil is coloured/black, yet less than 20% get into university, the political class as you may notice is of European background; in the Ghetto as in USA, it seems to me I recall they were/are mostly those "black" folks who had no barriers to education, access or voting rights in society. The relation of collective social disadvantages and poverty has no impact on socio inter-personal interaction. I kid there. High Density and low density both have the ability to be socially problematic but each is not a a priori prescription for such problems. West Virginia ain't no high-density place but it seems the peeple are in a ruckus with the kneeboors and own cousins/sisses all the dang nabbit time!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Yes, of course, I realize that poverty among people living in close quarters is often the root of crime, but--to reiterate
    my earlier point--given the opportunity to pick up and move elsewhere, they would definitely do so.

    Venezuela's Hugo Chavez
    is clearly a hero among the poor in that country because he has built new housing for many of them.

    The so-called "gentrification" of Montreal's (and other cities') previously run-down neighbourhoods is often simply the cheaper alternative to wholesale demolition such as what occurred in the old Goose Village, to the former slums of the Dozois Project district, to those formerly around the CBC Tower in the east end, and so on.

    Considering the outcry which would occur today should such expropriation/demolition take place again, it is no wonder that cities try to resell old dwellings
    instead as "fixer-uppers", thus leaving the responsibilities to the new owners--who all too often discover too late that
    they have been suckered into neverending expenses for upgrades such as new plumbing, wiring, and legally-required safety features. An endeavour not for the faint-hearted or for those without deep pockets.

    Nevertheless, I still say
    that the wealthy Leonard Cohen was only moving there to prove some point from which, evidently, he hasn't benefited since he rarely lived in the old house he purchased.

    I shudder, too, when I read about failed "urban renewal" projects in the U.S.A. such as Pruitt-Igoe and Cabrini-Green.

    Certainly there are some very nice homes and offices now situated in former industrial buildings in Old Montreal, such as along Rue St. Pierre south of Youville Square, for example.

    I am just saying that I myself do not find such neighbourhoods
    appealing enough that I would move there--especially because there are usually no shopping centres within walking distance, thus forcing one to own a car, find convenient parking, etc. I might indeed think differently, however, if I was employed in the area in order to save on transportation costs and travel time.

    To each his own.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous2:34 pm

    @Urban Legend, Firstly, Chavez is NOT giving away homes in the suburban sprawl development type, he is giving away homes (the word "home" is a place you live it can be an apartment, condo or a house) that are apartments! For example, outside of Caracas the development Caribia has 20 000 unites in 4-5 storey apartments in what you would call "high density". And they are in a sense. Caribia is planned to have 100 000 living in these types of units. The people are moving from tn shacks with dirt floors - it is not high-density they are happy to leave, but 10 AD housing quality. It is again, level of quality of the dwelling (plus education etc) that make living in high-density problematic. As well as access to work, transportion. Most American high density public housing projects after the late 1950's to 1060's lost public transportation that was useful in any meaningful way. You can get a bus out of St, Henri and a Metro, in many slums in the USA projects - you cannot! That in itself creates a condition that no well meaning planned community can overcome. One of lack of opportunities to make a living. Chavez building these units may have the same problem on his hands if he does not make public transport accessible to these people. A gilded cage is no fun unless you can get out when you want to work etc. And again, people in TO are paing 500 000 plus to live in high density condo towers etc downtown, because they do not need to drive to a shopping mall since they understand there are these other things called stores on street level that have been around for centuries. People do not go to NYC for shopping centres, they go for the fact there is street level shopping, and so do the millions who live there along Fifth Avenue above the stores. Because someone wants to drive car over poorly planned urban sprawl does not make it intelligent or desirable.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous2:41 pm


    Secondly, Urban Legend I cannot debate the interior ideas and or behaviour of Cohen, as I am not in his head, nor do I remember him saying anything to dispute or back up your claim. However, I have lived in that neighbourhood in the late 1990's and have seen him right near the house more than once. His new wife/girlfriend? also a singer often was with him. Yes, he moved to Greece, LA etc in the 1960's, 70's etc, but he is/was hardly at his LA home much either. He did tour a lot in the 80's and 90's. And is touring again. Not to mention the 3-4 years on a mountain being a Zen monk - or learning to be. Like any musician that is popular, you are not staying still. Hardly much of a criticism to say he is not living there much. I doubt the members of the band Arcade Fire are in MTL as much since they tour all the time since there eponymous debut CD 10 years ago. They are pretty well off, but still have places in Mile End. Sure they might be able to live in Westmount, NDG etc, but they key thing is in life - what matters is people in terms of friends, the accessbility to having people to feel community - even hanging out on a porch or in a basement like Waynes World.:) And if you are in the arts of any kind, there is an affinity to being near other interesting and creative people. It is not a hard concept to figure out. Only some sort of Fox type Glenn Beck cynicism would attribute Cohen living there was to prove something. I mean really, the MBA grad from John Molson who graduated 6 years ago, now drives a 5 series BMW, lives in a home in Cote St. Luc etc, joined the Montreal Athletic Association gym, and the Hudson Golf Course - no he is not proving anything. He/she is in debt up the ying yang but is just doing what is expected....or is he/she. Maybe trying to prove something. After all a 20 000 civic would get from home to the office at McGill College just as well, but a 300 hp BMW is just way more...way more of an item proving one is successful. Is eschewing material things if one is wealthy suspect to trying to prove something.... Due to having worked in the arts oriented areas myself (architecture, urban planning, and visual arts /writing); creative people tend to find atmosphere, and energies that come from interacting with other people more stimulating than Italian marble kitchens, Beemers etc. Though I admit I have had an Italian sports car - only because Bertone was a great designer, but still rode my bicycle(s) to work, If you choose sensible city bike you can wear a suit in good weather.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous3:03 pm

    My point above was that it truly sounds like you have not walked around any of the areas of the Plateau, Mile End etc. for 2 decades or more. It just reads completely out of date. If you live there, foods - fruits, veggies, meats, clothing stores, patisseries, drink, etc. from St. Laurent to Papineau, Pine up to Van Horne are all within 5-15 minute walk for 90% items including pharmacies.... Good God, St. Viateur, Parc Avenue, Bernard has everything. Hardware stores, dress makers, food, restaurants etc. Walking is not a crime. Have you walked down Mont. Royal lately? There is absolutely no need to go to a shopping center if you live in the area. Why the hell would shopping centre be considered a necessity, when for decades, local store (which means local money stays local instead of going to Arkansas - HQ of Walmart), it is a model that provides better stability for neighbourhoods. My tax dollars paying for out of shape 40 year olds who are overweight burdening our health care system with diabetes etc., because they walk less than 45 minutes in 7 days and sit in their cars for average of 5-6 hours a week. And a 15-20 minutes walk from the Plateau takes you where ? what...5-6 shopping centres, Les Cours Mont-Royal, Centre Eaton, Centre McGill-College, Les Ailes de la Mode etc. Yeah, they may not be your cup of tea, but it seems people are driving their SUV's from the burbs to go shopping in them with all the downtown parking hassles, and also go shopping on Ste Catherine Street. I am not sure if you are aware of the hundreds of empty suburban malls all over the USA that were closing long before the 2008 crash. Who wants smog filled collector roads like Sources etc. to get to Fairview Mall, parking on a concrete heat sink in summer(those parking lots are massive heat producers for cities), trudge into predictable-land of fast food chains. Well many do because we have created a stupid model of urban planning. 10-15 years ago Calgary then already growing fast, had an opportunity to plan its expansion to avoid the traps of urban sprawl where commuter bedrooms lead to traffic congestion etc instead of developing mixed expansion with work and living combined. Now everyone in Calgary is complaining, oh the traffic gridlock, oh it takes so long to go from my house to this place or that. It is their own fault. All the models were there to avoid following this path. But no, because the Chamber of Commerce organizations and other groups, in cities across North America have a LOT of sway to convince City Halls to rubber stamp unchecked developer planned sprawl. These people have absolutely no critical thinking skills with regards to urban history and best practices for city development. I have talked to them, I have heard them pressuring against the development of public transport systems in neighbourhoods. I have seen them hire polling firms to give evidence that citizens do not want public transit (light rail, buses etc) and instead want more roads with skewed questions. Even though every study show within 2-4 years 90% collector road is over max capacity and traveling time is doubled. But nobody mentions that... oh well, I guess it is like heart disease you can't turn it back once you have it, and sitting in cars getting fat, out of shape cannot be turned back in a culture that adheres to the myth of convenience of "the now" despite the inconvenience of costing $10 000's to taxpayers (and employers) with ill physical health at 45years old. Everything is connected. And that is the big picture. Check out the blog copenhagencyclehic.com Bikes with boxes for kids to sit in, or groceries. etc. Business people riding in suits to work, grandmothers, young folks etc. A model of urban movement that makes sense on the most efficiently engineered transport device man has created. The bicycle. And they ain't going to no shopping mall!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Yes, I do...

    go bike-riding, enjoy walking along Park Ave., St. Denis, St. Lawrence, Fairmount, St. Viateur, Mont Royal, in Lafontaine Park, around the Chalet and Beaver Lake, Parc de la Visitation, St. Helen's Island, do take advantage of shopping districts as well as shopping centres, don't have a car anymore, wouldn't buy a BMW, don't plan on moving to Calgary (or Venezuela), and don't live in a condo.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Best neighbourhood on the planet. Hard to say exactly why but I lived on St Dominique from 1983-1996 and would have happily died there. It was, and still is, my home -- beginning in 1964 when I entered Baron Byng High School around the corner (St Urbain Street between Rachel and Marianne) as a 13-year-old girl from the suburbs. If you're easily shocked, you should have had to walk by the Rachel Market (site of a very urban mini-park since about 1990) where chickens were slaughtered and hung out for sale, and the crumbling tenements that lined Boul. St. Laurent in those days. When I moved back, 20 years later, Cohen lived next door and music poured into my backyard from three directions -- a Celtic Punk band (the Wastrels) practiced weekly, and across the alley a Senegalese musician (now a well known oceanographer, storyteller and author) gave dance classes on the roof over the Portuguese hardware store. No violence. No ethnic warfare. Just the occasional fire. My rent in 1983 was $75/month.

    Down the street, next to the building in the photo, dancer/choreographer Marie Chouinard had an apartment with a balcony overhanging the sidewalk. She was famous, back then, for peeing on stage. I never walked under it without thinking about that.

    I would live in that neighbourhood again if I could afford the ridiculous rents. I've been told the area is a 5th dimensional portal, due in part to being constructed on the site of a Huron village which was destroyed by the early conquerors/ settlers. In 15 years, hard to imagine, nobody from the old days will live there anymore and the whole area will have turned to gold.

    Much of downtown Montreal is crumbling, hence the need for fabulous murals to disguise the decay and point the way into the next world.

    ReplyDelete

Love to get comments! Please, please, please speak your mind !
Links welcome - please google "how to embed a link" it'll make your comment much more fun and clickable.