Kenmore Square North (WHOOP) | 533-541 Commonwealth Ave | Fenway

[Hufer]

Question: Though I totally get the preservation-minded response, what's so special about this building? Aren't there thousands like it across Brookline, Allston, Brighton, Fenway, Cambridge, Roxbury, Dorchester...? (Asking for a friend, of course)

If there are thousand structures like the building in question worthy of being PRESERVED then those very Thousand never ever should be considered for demolition in the first place. See-once a city allows to systematically rid its Architectural Historic fabric and identity in the name of "progress", then is when we end up with the mess the likes of NYC with its past only seen in books ....

 

[FK4]

Hopefully they can be made to preserve this facade.

Sad that the city can apply so much pressure and they can be made to preserve a corporate citgo sign from a terrible company just 'cause people like the big red triangle and they don't really want to think about the state run big oil and repressive dictatorships that it represents.

And an aesthetically pleasing architecturally detailed facade in a prominent location has been so easily disregarded in the planning up until now.

Before sounding off about Venezuela like that state rep did ten years ago, consider that they donated lots of fuel to poor people in this state. At least in recent history. Personally, I find the kicking and screaming these days about signs and symbols tiresome. It's true, to a point, but in the end, changing superficial things has NEVER resulted in meaningful change and never will.

 

[Justin7]

Care to share 2-3 other examples?

Flood of good responses, but this is the one I would have asked. Seriously, I'd love to see a list because I'd love to see the buildings.

Before sounding off about Venezuela like that state rep did ten years ago, consider that they donated lots of fuel to poor people in this state. At least in recent history. Personally, I find the kicking and screaming these days about signs and symbols tiresome. It's true, to a point, but in the end, changing superficial things has NEVER resulted in meaningful change and never will.

I'm not seeing any kicking and screaming, but rather a simple statement on the disappointment of what we choose to prioritize.

 

[tangent]

I'm not seeing any kicking and screaming, but rather a simple statement on the disappointment of what we choose to prioritize.

I would e-kick and e-scream a bit more than that. I might even use ALL CAPS for a phrase or two.

I think regardless of other priorities, that the Citgo sign should be removed or replaced because the symbolism of a city landmark shouldn't be tied to a company that

1) Isn't local.
2) Is tied to a foreign dictatorship
3) Is a dead end company fatally tied to Global Climate change which will likely kill millions of people and cause mass extinctions in the coming decades.

Maybe if the company owned by a genocidal dictatorship was local I would be okay with the symbolism... because Go Sox! But it isn't local and the only reason people like the sign is because the triangle is cool looking and clean and it is red like the Red Sox and is near Fenway.

Speaking of removing signs that have a dark side, time for both to go:

 

[Beton Brut]

In all seriousness, could this work as a substitute?

 

[statler]

I read something that referred to the Citgo sign as "Boston's Eiffel Tower". I cringed so hard.

Easily the thing in Boston I am most embarrassed by.

Major US city landmarks in terms of coolness:

The Statue of Liberty
The Golden Gate Bridge
The Arch
.
.
Chicago Bean/Cloud thing
.
.
.
.
The LOVE sculpture
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . . . .
The Biggest Ball of Twine in Minnesota
.
.
.
The Citgo Sign

 

[tangent]

Before sounding off about Venezuela like that state rep did ten years ago, consider that they donated lots of fuel to poor people in this state. At least in recent history. Personally, I find the kicking and screaming these days about signs and symbols tiresome. It's true, to a point, but in the end, changing superficial things has NEVER resulted in meaningful change and never will.

I think you can count up all the good they have done, including sponsoring a fishing tournament according to wikipedia by the way, and still come to the determination that on balance Citgo is an evil company that props up an evil dictatorship.

THE SYMBOLISM OF THE CITGO SIGN IS THAT WE ARE PAYING FOR MASS MURDER IN VENEZUELA.

That might change and it does look like Venezuela is going to be forced to sell Citgo to its creditors, but that hasn't happened yet and the president of the company... the cousin of the former dictator is now banned from the US. Citgo is a cluster fuck of a company which at last check tried to sell out to Vladamir Putin's oil company.

I would be very much surprised if the brand survives, so Boston is going to be stuck with a sign as a landmark from a defunct company, tied to all this epic international murdery asshole BS.

Sticking with the Citgo sign is just sheer ignorance. Epic ignorance on a truly landmark scale. Forget the symbolism of Yawkey Way... he was merely a racist A-hole that as far as I know didn't murder people. And even if he did murder people... at least it wasn't mass murder.

So, yes kicking and screaming. Properly kicking and screaming.

 

[tangent]

In all seriousness, could this work as a substitute?

How about just go with the obvious:

 

[Smartiro]

Citgo sign is not our Eiffel tower. It's a kitsch outdoor advertisement similar to ones now on show on the Greenway. Which is where it really belongs - in a museum/art exhibition.

I'd say it again - save the building, put a tower in the place of the other 2, remove the sign. win-win-win

 

[FK4]

I think you can count up all the good they have done, including sponsoring a fishing tournament according to wikipedia by the way, and still come to the determination that on balance Citgo is an evil company that props up an evil dictatorship.

THE SYMBOLISM OF THE CITGO SIGN IS THAT WE ARE PAYING FOR MASS MURDER IN VENEZUELA.

That might change and it does look like Venezuela is going to be forced to sell Citgo to its creditors, but that hasn't happened yet and the president of the company... the cousin of the former dictator is now banned from the US. Citgo is a cluster fuck of a company which at last check tried to sell out to Vladamir Putin's oil company.

I would be very much surprised if the brand survives, so Boston is going to be stuck with a sign as a landmark from a defunct company, tied to all this epic international murdery asshole BS.

Sticking with the Citgo sign is just sheer ignorance. Epic ignorance on a truly landmark scale. Forget the symbolism of Yawkey Way... he was merely a racist A-hole that as far as I know didn't murder people. And even if he did murder people... at least it wasn't mass murder.

So, yes kicking and screaming. Properly kicking and screaming.

Kicking and screaming didn’t refer to you but the general climate with which I disagree. And I do disagree with you. But that’s ok. The problem is that inconsistency is a fundamental quality of individuals and society. It gets called hypocrisy when it suits us to do so, and otherwise ignored. But if you carry your argument to its logical conclusion, there’s simply no end to enforcing true consistency with values and actions. The US govt does tons of things that are terrible. It supports power structures, people, systems... etc... and I’m not talking about the usual hot button issues, only - eg, you benefit from an unequal system, just by being alive. The most you can do is live your own life according to principe and values that you cherish. This is NOT an argument for complacency, by the way.

And, what exactly is the complaint with the sign? If you don’t like Venezuela, how about we just buy the sign from Citgo? Or is it the fact that it’s a commmerical icon? That’s what so many people on here claim they “cringe” at... but it’s beloved by many people here- why is their love for this sign for its own sake totally invalidated by someone else’s superior intellectual knowledge of it representing nothing more than a corporate logo?

 

[odurandina]

The Citgo sign is a Boston favorite with many people. i can't deny sharing camaraderie for the sign as a visual beacon and nostalgic presence in the area.

i'm an unapologetic anti-communist. But, the status of the company or nation state being up or down, or people being killed hasn't made me wonder more or less about if the sign should stay or go. The sign is a Boston thing (in this context) as far as i'm concerned. i don't think it's going. i'm expecting to watch Kenmore Square grow around it.

But that corner street wall needs to be incorporated into the new construction. The building can be demo-ed. It should be. But figure out a way to preserve the facade; including devising a plan to expand it vertically with the new, higher floors. That will be costly, and challenging. But well worth it.

If it means adding a couple of floors, and raising the sign 25'--do it.

 

[Equilibria]

Citgo sign is not our Eiffel tower. It's a kitsch outdoor advertisement similar to ones now on show on the Greenway. Which is where it really belongs - in a museum/art exhibition.

I'd say it again - save the building, put a tower in the place of the other 2, remove the sign. win-win-win

Actually, that explicitly makes it our Eiffel Tower, which was built as kitschy outdoor art.

 

[HenryAlan]

Speaking of removing signs that have a dark side, time for both to go:

I disagree with you on the Citgo sign. It has a meaning in Boston that transcends association with the corporation or Venezuela's current government. I'm with you on Yawkey Way, but it already happened. It reverted to Jersey St. earlier this Summer, though I can't say with certainty that the sign has changed yet. I'm pretty sure it has, but I'll admit to not noticing last time I went to a game. I'll try to look tonight after win # 101.

 

[tangent]

I disagree with you on the Citgo sign. It has a meaning in Boston that transcends association with the corporation or Venezuela's current government. I'm with you on Yawkey Way, but it already happened. It reverted to Jersey St. earlier this Summer, though I can't say with certainty that the sign has changed yet. I'm pretty sure it has, but I'll admit to not noticing last time I went to a game. I'll try to look tonight after win # 101.

Citgo = murder

 

[Beton Brut]

Is the collective cultural affection for the Citgo Sign among some Bostonians an example of mono no aware?

I'll elaborate. My mother was a proper baseball fan. She grew up in a working class family in Winthrop, but somehow they managed to have Nights & Sundays season tickets to both the Sox and the Braves. She raised me as a Red Sox fan, and all of the games I attended as a kid were with her (my old man was always working, and deeply frustrated by their many failures).

I remember going to my first night game in 1978, excited to see a team that "was gonna win the Series." I was spellbound by the Citgo Sign that night. She could tell that I was mesmerized, and so she told be how she'd gaze at it between innings when she was just out of high school. It was new then, having replaced the earlier "Cities Service" sign. Back then, the Hotel Buckminster was topped by the equally prominent sign for White Fuel, and across Beacon Street, (atop the unloved and soon-to-be-replaced Citizens Bank) there was a large Gulf sign.

**This collection of signs all speak to the autocentric heritage of the Commonwealth Avenue corridor, all the way out to Packard's Corner.

Hugo Chavez was an asswipe. No right-thinking person should lament his passing. And we need more thoughtful discussions about symbols, and their meanings, associations, and evolution through history. And I'm frustrated that we all could lose a legitimately historic building for a replacement that will demure to a piece of advertising that isn't universally loved.

But could the sentimentality for the Citgo Sign be more about our collective memories than intellectual laziness and lack of principle about geopolitics or the corporate branding of public space?

I'm content to be wrong about this. I'm just a man with fond memories of his mom at the ballpark...

 

[statler]

No offense BB but that is almost exactly why I dislike the Citgo sign so much. Every other icon on my list has some sort of larger cultural significance. Our is, "Well, I can see it really well from the baseball field".

Personally, I find that ... lacking.

 

[cadetcarl]

I liked Beton Brut's suggestion, but to my mind the optimal solution would be a big red triangle on a white field, with no text at all. Like modern art and everything after, it allows the observer to impose their own meaning onto it:

If you like the Citgo sign because it's a landmark and icon on the landscape, you get to pretty much keep it. You can't read the letters from sufficiently far away anyway, and it does nothing to change your ability to use it as a reference point for navigation or a photo opportunity.

If you like the Citgo sign because its meaning in Boston transcends the brand it represents, or if you think the moral valence of Citgo is open to debate, you still get an iconic sign while appeasing the people for whom the debate is settled. (But deep down you get to "know" it's still the Citgo sign.)

If you hate Citgo but are willing to concede that not everyone is prepared to agree with you, you get the sign, and you get to know that Boston will no longer be associated with Caracas.

If you are a fan of modern art, you will be delighted to see the erection of a sign that acts both as a kind of citywide inside joke, and a meaningful entry into the discourse of what we do with problematic symbols.

If you are an outsider to the city of Boston, you will enjoy learning about the history of the big red triangle locals are up in arms about. Is it a religious symbol? Is it a road sign? A weather beacon?

If you want to see the sign torn down altogether, you're no fun.

edited to add: I advocate this solution for some of the above but also because on some level I find all advertising inherently disgusting, even the ones I sort of like.

 

[bigpicture7]

I liked Beton Brut's suggestion, but to my mind the optimal solution would be a big red triangle on a white field, with no text at all. Like modern art and everything after, it allows the observer to impose their own meaning onto it:

If you like the Citgo sign because it's a landmark and icon on the landscape, you get to pretty much keep it. You can't read the letters from sufficiently far away anyway, and it does nothing to change your ability to use it as a reference point for navigation or a photo opportunity.

If you like the Citgo sign because its meaning in Boston transcends the brand it represents, or if you think the moral valence of Citgo is open to debate, you still get an iconic sign while appeasing the people for whom the debate is settled. (But deep down you get to "know" it's still the Citgo sign.)

If you hate Citgo but are willing to concede that not everyone is prepared to agree with you, you get the sign, and you get to know that Boston will no longer be associated with Caracas.

If you are a fan of modern art, you will be delighted to see the erection of a sign that acts both as a kind of citywide inside joke, and a meaningful entry into the discourse of what we do with problematic symbols.

If you are an outsider to the city of Boston, you will enjoy learning about the history of the big red triangle locals are up in arms about. Is it a religious symbol? Is it a road sign? A weather beacon?

If you want to see the sign torn down altogether, you're no fun.

^this. Thank you for the thought in this.

"BOSTON" under it might not be bad either.

 

[Money]

For what it's worth, Citgo may not be Venezuelan owned in the near future. Apparently companies that lost billions of dollars via Venezuela's expropriation of assets could seize US-based Citgo refineries as compensation (I read this in Forbes...I'll try and find the article). Not sure the details of how this plays out...I think a Russian producer holds a lein against the company (like a 49.9% stake in the company), so who knows what will happen. Citgo retail locations are independently owned and operated, so not much would likely change on that end, since there is still a lot of brand equity in the Citgo name.

 

[JumboBuc]

In all seriousness, could this work as a substitute?

Or a slightly re-arranged version of this: