I have used Poe's short story 'The Pit and the Pendulum' to help illustrate the
processes that are involved in environmental monitoring of historic (old)
structures. A friend of mine thought that it was awful to use such a depressing
tale to help teach anything. He was not able to move beyond the situations and
images that Poe's sick mind found itself trapped within. Me? I see it as a great
tale of the discovery process that happens during a monitoring program.

Ray Vin

----------

Ken Follett wrote:

> In a message dated 8/2/00 1:16:13 AM Central Daylight Time,
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
> > 1.   The house is heavily altered from when Poe lived there (top two floors
> >  of facade intact (lower two floors pushed out with 1920's storefront).
> >  2.  Poe did not build or materially alter the house.
> >  3.  His occupancy was extremely brief.
>
> I remember one time a farm house along a roadway being pointed at and my
> being told Robert Frost had lived there. It did not mean very much to me as I
> had no idea, at the time, who Robert Frost was, or why a farm house looking
> to me like any other farmhouse was important.
>
> Poets often reference their environment, and architecture, space, in their
> work. They do this in both positive & negative ways. A negative way, as in
> negative space, is the total abscence of reference to any form of
> architectural space in their work. Discerning the presence of nothing in a
> literary opus can lead to tenure and a lifelong career. Why not the
> preservation or demolition of a building?
>
> I don't feel strongly that Poe was connected to any particular "realistic"
> structure in his consciousness as a writer, which, since I am invoking my
> feelings, is a subjective perspective on the question. When I think of Poe &
> the reality of space I think of a glass bottle, laying prostrate in a wet and
> damp gutter, or resting in a lonely grave -- connecting him to a building,
> for me, does not much to add to the story. I'm biased as I'm not all that
> certain, as a wirter, if I care if Poe's writings are preserved, let alone
> where he may have slept. As NJ Julip says, if the building is all NY has...
> well, if Poe's writings is all American literary culture has... then best
> hold on for dear life. Too many much greater and more interesting American
> writers don't even have their work preserved, let alone their temporary
> commode.
>
> If the structure is considered important respective of the cultural meaning
> of Poe as writer, then possibly it has merit to save. The structure may have
> historical value if Poe wrote something important to his body of work while
> at the building -- but I think not quite as much as if he wrote an angry and
> obfuscated note to a tavern keeper. If it is simply to save a building
> because a group of people like deconstructing Poe's lesser texts, and there
> is no arguably redeeming and unique architectural value, then, without having
> seen the building, I would assume preserving it is to build up more cultural
> kitsch, heritage clutter... or a local community political maneuver.
>
> I suspect that if Poe were presented with the question as to if he felt the
> building he stopped in deserved to be retained, based on his act of having
> slept there long enough to remember it if he was asked, that he would have
> not given a damn one way or the other. So, what I feel, in the end, is that
> someone should argue the preservation from a reenactment of Poe's current
> consciousness. I suspect the building will be relatively invisible from that
> vantage point.
>
> I see more sense in preserving the Brooklyn Bridge for the argument that
> poets like to jump off it and that we need to preserve this cultural
> infrastructure for the inspiration of future usage. You never know when angst
> will prevail.
>
> I think it also worthwhile to advise Stanley Kunitz to start burning down his
> former residences.
>
> ][<en