Los Angeles officials block destruction of property where movie star died, and consider it for historic preservation

The final home of Marilyn Monroe – and the only residence she ever owned independently – will remain standing for now after Los Angeles officials intervened to block the property’s demolition.

The news that the new owners of 12305 Fifth Helena Drive, where Monroe died at age 36, filed for demolition permits had attracted widespread outrage. Los Angeles city councilwoman Traci Park said she received hundreds of calls urging her to save the Spanish colonial-style house in the city’s Brentwood neighborhood.

“Unfortunately, the department of building and safety issued a demolition permit before my team and I could fully intervene and get this issue resolved,” Park said at a news conference last week, adding that there was a need for “urgent action”.

  • kaitco@lemmy.world
    428·
    1 year ago

    I think she was a beautiful icon, but this is asinine. What could possibly be so special about this particular house? If demolition is even an option, the house itself is likely in bad shape and not livable, so it’s just taking up space.

    • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
      135·
      1 year ago

      What could possibly be so special about this particular house?

      I have absolutely no idea. Presumably that’s why there is a a motion to initiate consideration of the home for historic preservation. Seems reasonable. And not asinine, on the face of it.

          • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
            12·
            1 year ago

            There was not a single thing in that article which makes that house special. The only claim to fame seems to be “long dead actress owned it for a couple years”.

            It’s all talking about how she was a famous icon. This is gross celebrity worship/fetishism.

            • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
              1·
              1 year ago

              There’s nothing in the article, because you, me, the author and the council don’t yet know whether there is anything of historical value in the building. That’s why they are proposing to take a look before it’s knocked down.

                • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
                  1·
                  1 year ago

                  Who said anything about architectural merit. Yes, she was an iconic actress, married to De Magio and Arthur Miller and she was also extraordinarily well connected. I know nothing about the property’s architectural or historical importance. But having a look before bulldozing isn’t outrageous.

                  I doubt the people who are lobbying are neighbours, so NIMBY isn’t really applicable

      • Venutianxspring@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        87·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, but why would this particular house warrant historical importance? She didn’t do anything of particular note. I know you’re not arguing for it, but it sounds stupid that nothing was done about it for decades until it was decided to be demolished.

        • BruceTwarzen@kbin.social
          85·
          1 year ago

          I don’t get it either. She was pretty and blonde. Are we gonna upkeep all the houses of tiktok celebrities when they die?

          • OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe@lemmy.world
            41·
            1 year ago

            She was pretty, blonde, typecast, potentially murdered (I’m not a conspiracy theorist but some point to her relationship with the president), a feminism icon for her push to end the ‘ditzy blonde’ that stapled and pinholed her career.

            She’s often listed as one of the most prominent figures in feminism due to her treatment of Joe Dimaggio, who she left after he got abusive with her and tried to restrict what roles and photoshoots she took… Joe loved her the rest of his life and begged for her back, and she made a point to say she’d never go back to a man who treated her that way, important for the 60s if you didn’t know about domestic abuse rates.

            A critically intelligent woman who was taken into the world of show business for her looks and her brains intentionally ignored, and then media campaigns to push that she’s just “pretty and blonde” still succeed to the modern day.

            I don’t deeply care about the woman, I liked some of her movies, some like it hot is a top tier film. But I’m also against preserving most people’s legacy, because ‘why care?’. Regardless of her impact, and the fact that that’s her only self-owned home, it’s land and stuff and we don’t need to be reserving any more land and stuff that isn’t significant. Expand public and national parks. Take good pictures of Lincolns childhood home and tear it out, people get one monument at the most, he can have his big stone chair or he can have his cabin.

    • flynnguy@lemmy.worldEnglish
      51·
      1 year ago

      If demolition is even an option, the house itself is likely in bad shape and not livable

      Not necessarily. I don’t know if this is the case here but some places, people view the property location as more valuable and have too much money so they buy the house/property and then knock the house down and build what they want no matter the condition of the original house.

      This happened to someone I know, their house needed a little work but was perfectly fine. The new owner didn’t even go inside to look at the house. Made an offer and then tore it down to build something new.