Some people aren’t happy that the Museum of Natural History is erecting a new building on its campus, and they’re coming after one of the most famous members of the museum’s board — the Tina Monster!
Cary Goodman say he’s organizing a group is planning to hand out report cards showing that Tina Fey got 6 F’s in science at the premiere of her movie Sisters this Friday at the AMC Loews Theater on 68th street and Broadway.
“There’s nothing funny about this,” Goodman wrote in a press release. “Ms. Fey owes her neighbors an explanation: why did she vote for this plan?”
Sig Gissler, who leads the Defenders of Roosevelt Park, which has opposed the museum’s plans, tells us that the Defenders group is not involved in this protest, even though Goodman does mention the group in his release. (We’ve updated this story to reflect that Goodman is acting without the larger group’s approval.)
Fey’s “report card” is below. It does show some initiative that she took six science classes, even if she did fail all of them.
Photos via flickr and wikipedia. Juvenile photo illustration by West Side Rag.
This is low.
Give it a break folks. AMNH is a world class institution that we should all be thrilled to have in our neighborhood. To those who complain about lost “park space,” the Museum is one block from Central Park, about 4 blocks from Riverside Park. We are one of the most “parked” neighborhoods in all of NY. We can certainly share a bit of lawn with one of our greatest neighbors.
Exactly!
Harriet’s comment says it all! Amen to that!!
Exactly my sentiments! We should be proud to have AMNH in our backyard. I give Sig Gissler and INCOMPLETE for the logic of the argument posed above in the report card.
Altho they did reduce the footprint required for this massively misguided expansion project in response to community objections – its still parkspace lost and hurts. That said…its small in sq feet and taller, so its sort of a win
It hurts? What drama for a little-used area. Plenty of places for the children and their nannies to frolic and more benches for people to sit on. Such complainers! This is a great thing.
Utterly ridiculous, though she Miss Fey is probably a karma victim considering her comedy routines, LOL!
Please explain how Tina Fey is “reinforcing segregation on the Upper West Side.”
Cary Goodman is the head of a Business Improvement District in the Bronx that wants this facility up in their area. However, he chooses to describe himself simply as an “Upper West Side resident,” rather than disclose here the commercial reason he’s complaining about this plan. He would actually welcome all of the items in the right hand column, if they were in the Bronx. After all this time, this may be the clearest example of how two-faced and dishonest the anti-museum cohort truly is.
UWS-ers are a lot of things, but stupid isn’t one of ’em. I think Cary just mortgaged his credibility and his BID’s credibility citywide for an amateur (seriously, amateur – this is report card is objectively dumb) stunt that is not going to disrupt the universal momentum to get this awesome new facility in our neighborhood. It’s gratifying that this page will come up in a Google search for his name in perpetuity.
Thanks for pointing this out, Jeremy. Following your lead, I did some more poking around to get the full story, and it looks like one DNAinfo article claiming that Cary Goodman lives near the museum points to another DNAinfo article that clearly identifies him as Exec. Director of the BID in the Bronx. Seems odd that an Exec. Dir. of a Bronx BID would live in Manhattan, and whether or not that’s the case, accusing Tina Fey of “reinforcing segregation” for supporting this expansion is absolutely absurd.
Find another way to get an educational museum in the Bronx (which would be great too, without smearing everyone involved in the AMNH expansion).
Here is the Nov. 9 article identifying Cary Goodman as Exec. Dir. of the Bronx BID: https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20151109/fordham/put-natural-history-museums-science-center-bronx-locals-say
Here is the more recent Dec. 14 article calling Dr. Goodman a local: https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20151214/upper-west-side/natural-history-museum-expansion-foes-protest-tina-fey-at-film-premiere
Good catch. Based on that Dec 14th, article, Cary Goodman seems like a stalker. In all seriousness, she may need a restraining order against this weirdo.
Oh my god! That is SOOOO sleazy! I guess I shouldn’t be surprised.
And THIS is the missing piece of information I’ve been looking for. Thank you Jeremy.
This expansion will be great for the museum and the whole city as it increases the opportunities for people of all ages to use this world class museum for education.
As for the report card – it’s an embarrassing piece of gutter politics. Couldn’t think of anything better huh??
These geniuses are only giving Tina some great material for her next book!
I think the AMNH should expand but going there recently I was amazed how much open space they have that doesn’t have anything. There were a lot of empty exhibit halls and giant empty rooms (probably used for catering I suspect). AMNH should update their lighting fixtures and do some remodeling (or just scrub the floors and walls) before they add another addition.
One of the largest empty spaces has been cleared for the 122-foot-long Titanosaur, coming January 2016, the largest dinosaur on display in the Museum and one of the largest displays in the world. Yes, there are some empty spaces but like ALL other museums they struggle with funding. We have 5 million visitors a year, that help keep our UWS businesses in businesses, educate us, and every part of the building and surroundings is available to us – we’re incredibly fortunate. I recently made a donation in honor of one of the guides there – that’s one way to support the museum. Maybe others can find a way to show their support for the new renovation.
This really is a sad joke. This is all over one quarter acre (!!!) of park space in a neighborhood more richly blessed with parks than any other in New York. I live nearby and love Roosevelt Park, but this project will have a nominal impact on the park while allowing a great neighborhood institution to grow. Meanwhile, a few nuts with no sense of proportion treat this loss of a quarter acre of park space as if the museum is leveling the rainforest. And reinforcing segregation, huh?? Surely there must be a cause more worthy of these busy-bodies’ energy.
How petty and ridiculous. I for one am thrilled to see the expansion going forward. Also, as a fan of Ms. Fey’s work I’m glad to see people of her caliber as part of the board of this great institution. I feel privileged to have the AMNH in my neighborhood.
I did not know Tina Fey had a spine but the photo about shows she has an extensive one. The claws were no surprise.
Pathetic. Also, most of the accusations are patently false: they are planning on planting more trees than they will remove, and you can’t clearcut a human created park–that’s not what clearcutting means. And what on earth do they mean by reinforcing segregation? As for greenhouse gases and ozone destruction–welcome to building or repairing anything in NYC.
What a bunch of major BS.
Park space should be sacrosanct. And the arguments that this valuable space is “just a block away” from Central Park don’t really cut it. If you’re someone who has mobility problems, the long block to Central Park (not to mention the walk across busy Central Park West and the walk into the park to find a place to sit and relax) is impossible. Beyond that, board members are fair game, especially when a quick look at the museum’s website shows the museum has placed other widely known people (Lorne Michaels, Tom Brokaw) on the board. Are these prominent board members not responsible for their decisions? Or is the point just to get their cash, and use their prominence to attract more dough?
Agreed that the two are not interchangeable – the park is also good for young teenagers who are just beginning to be out on their own; it is a good place for them to go that is not as isolated and unsupervised as the bigger parks. The dog run is also tremendously valuable – the big parks are actually less useful to many dog owners who can’t or won’t let their dogs off leash in Central Park.
But the park will still be there and only slightly smaller. I hope the dog run will be preserved (I haven’t been able to figure that out), and I hope they maintain the accessibility of the remaining park. They certainly do seem to be attempting to accommodate these issues. So, while I do think park space should be preserved, I do not think it is “sacrosanct”, and I do not think that sacrificing the less than a quarter acre is going to make a fundamental difference in the utility of the park for those people who do not find it interchangeable with Central Park.
Joe,
Unless you live in the museum and as you exit the museum door you get to sit on the first bench by the current art piece in the center, I don’t see how you can’t still enjoy the rest of the park and their benches.
The loss of park space has been typically derided by pointing out the proximity of other parks nearby, as one commenter says above. My own view is that only in very unusual circumstances should parkland be taken for other uses, even a small silver, and this isn’t one of them. It is progress that it’s less of a loss than previously proposed, but that doesn’t make it right.
I cherish green space as much as anyone, but the argument that there are no alternatives and this will become a watershed for taking parkland out of NYC is really disproportionate to the benefits that this museum expansion brings. Jobs for scientists and others! Education for children! Can one park bench provide this, Joe?
Tina Fey is almost as much a New York City treasure as the museum, and ruining her movie premiere is absurd. The people protesting the expansion are likely dog owners, who use that park for walks & the dog run. It will be a big loss for them to lose space. Perhaps people with views from their apartments are disturbed as well. Regardless, it’s going to happen, so maybe we should all be more concerned the temperature on Christmas Eve is expected to be 64 degrees.
Isilver said: “Tina Fey is almost as much a New York City treasure”
I have officially heard everything now. THAT was the missing bit…
NO to taking park space for expansion. NYC doesn’t need ANYTHING expanded at this point, except bike lanes and park space.
With all due respect, you couldn’t be more wrong. The tradeoff is worth it by almost any objective measure.
With all due respect, YOUR opinion is only YOUR opinion, all attempts to make it more than that make you sound childish.
This certainly won’t confuse the crowds for that other movie coming out this week.
Please note that this article has been revised to reflect the fact that Defenders of Roosevelt Park, which has opposed the museum’s plans, is not involved in this protest and has not endorsed it.
Meh. It’s clear to everyone that the Defenders group begat this entire clownshow, and needs to take responsibility for the bizarre actions of its membership. Gig Sizzler needs to fold up his tent and enjoy his golden years, or get his operation under control. It’s turned into a total joke.
In an already congested and polluted Manhattan, destruction of any parkland and its air rights is backward thinking. Do we need more O2 or less, more green houses gases or less, do people in this borough need more congestion or less. The Museum Of Natural History is misguided in saying this is being done in the name of advancing science.
They are planting more trees than are being taken out so technically we will have more O2, no? That sliver of park is barely park! It’s asphalt and some dirty benches. I swear people must look to be offended.
Joe R – I hope you are just a troll. The alternative would probably mean that you had to have some one write this for you.
i just recently visited the AMNH… Been years since I was a kid and went on a field trip. I mean, BOY, is that place BORING.
I have read all the comments and am very disappointed that so many of you are for the expansion of the American Museum of Natural History. If you really take the name into your heart, you wouldn’t want any of the natural habitat (the natural history) around the museum to be destroyed even if it is a very small piece. Why not have a science extension in a building that already exists. There are some buildings that have been vacant for years on the UWS and it would be good for business to have part of the AMNH somewhere else on the UWS rather than destroying precious parkland that once destroyed can’t be replaced even if the museum plants some new young trees – that is not the same as the beautiful 50 year old tree and the other trees that are slotted to be destroyed. Or use empty space in the AMNH itself. I imagine there is space there. I don’t live right near the museum but often enjoy sitting there as it is on my way to work. It is a safe place to sit even at night whereas Central Park is not safe at night. In this day and age of awareness about how healing it is to have nature around us you would think everyone would rise up to save this small precious part of the park around the museum. Those of you who make fun about it being used by a few kids and their nannies don’t realize that even if only some kids and their nannies used this part of the park (which isn’t true anyways) it still would be important to save this for them. Children are our future and they need places with trees and plants especially in NYC where there is a shortage of park space. True there is Central Park and Riverside park near by but that does not excuse destroying any of Teddy Roosevelt park and I mean any. I don’t know Tina Fey, but if she is behind expanding the museum into the parkland, then I am very upset with her and think the report card is a very clever call on her although I am not for putting down anyone but I am for calling on those who want to destroy any bit of our precious Teddy Roosevelt Park. About the segregation – yes, this idea of cutting down parkland to build one more building on the UWS, is dividing people to those opposed to the destruction of the park and those who could care less about the destruction of the park in their wish for a new building in their midst promoting science. As I said already, if it is the subject of science that the museum cares about then the exact location of the building would not be of paramount importance and could be elsewhere even in walking distance. More businesses would profit too from having an extension of the museum at another nearby part of the UWS but by using a vacant building. Harriet’s comment that we should be thrilled to have AMNH in our neighborhood. I am BUT I am not thrilled that they want to expand it into parkland that I love.
Do you have a filter?
You do realize that disagreeing with people, or even accommodating one position in a way that necessarily contradicts the views of others, is not at all what is meant by “segregation”?
How does this proposed change to the museum increase segregation of people by race, or have an effect that is in any way related to what has historically been referred to as “segregation”?
It’s always amusing when liberals eat their young.
I can’t think of a lower more degrading, scum-sucking way to try to squeeze and ounce of publicity for a misbegotten “cause” then picking on Tina Fey for this. The UWS is so much better than it was decades ago, there are now mature trees on every street. They are green and lush all Spring and Summer. The Parks have evolved and improved and Riverside Park continues to improve. The place is totally family-friendly, kids are everywhere, they have play places everywhere and what better place to have as a resource than the Museum of Natural History, the planetarium and all their ever-changing display and programs? They have given so much to us…. perhaps it’s time for us to give a little back to them. They need more space for educational and scientific endeavors. If we expect our families to continue to grow and use their space I think we can give them a little more space on their own grounds. They have listened to the community. There will still be green there. And it will be put to good use. Come on guys — get a life. Save it for a fight worth fighting.
If you can’t think of a more “degrading scum-sucking way”, then you must not have much of an imagination.
I wonder how often this crowd of protestors use the Park or the Museum? Get a grip people the Museum is a great addition to the neighborhood on a small foot print. There is another part of the same park that remains untouched.
The opponents seem either to have some sneaky commercial stake in the outcome (like Goodman, according to comment #6) or they don’t want any changes or disturbance in an area they frankly consider their personal “front yard” (like Gissler). I also have a hunch they’re distressed that the new, spacious entry to the museum might attract the unwashed masses to “their” corner of Columbus Avenue. In any case, the AMNH is one of great institutions and civilizing forces of our city — indeed, of the world — and the new exhibit halls and classrooms will be spreading knowledge and understanding long after these self-important, whining clowns have been forgotten.
I am a lover of the museum and delighted that I can walk there anytime I want and enjoy the park and walks. However, I think that alternatives should be VERY seriously considered before construction is approved–as an earlier commenter pointed out, there is much unused space in the museum which could be refitted to accommodate the museum’s needs. So I support the protesters, BUT I think that going after Tina Fey in such heavyhanded and un-nuanced manner is absurd. And frankly, I don’t “get” the report card and in fact find it slanderous. Hope she doesn’t sue.
As I am an UWSer but live 20 blocks north of the Museum, I couldn’t care less whether this happens or not –
But although I think the photo is sort of funny in concept, it’s a little lame and desperate and the report card a little overwrought, I give the campaign a C but A for effort (and, like in all schools, it should get a blue ribbon just for existing)
Anyway, more importantly, I’m looking forward to reading the complaints that will be posted on WSR a year after the building is complete from people in the immediate neighborhood who are supporting this now but will be bitching about the additional buses/noise/pollution (that’s after the complaints about the endless noise and traffic problems caused by building the actual extension).
My God, the level of complaints about the line down the street from Shake Shake was epic compared to the tiny amount of complaints about the erection of a wing of a museum.
Like I said, I don’t have a stake in this either way as I’m way out of the area, but just pointing out how fun it will be to watch everyone turn their opinion around when the negative effects of this start impinging on the daily routine of those supporting it now.
For not caring you sure made the effort to write about it.
The ‘artist drawings’ of the proposed interior look like a set for a new Flintstones movie. Ugly design, useless eyesore on an area that has always been a favorite of mine to sit peacefully. This isn’t needed or wanted. Stop this mess!
The expansion will be wonderful and the objections are specious, leveled by a selfish few who don’t want their view to change. Nobody owns their view in NYC. That’s established law.
I sincerely wonder if those who oppose the expansion understand the exact space that will be impacted. It is a small sliver of the park, and it is not even green space; it is a paved walkway connecting 79th & Columbus Avenue to a side entrance of the museum. A paved walkway that, every time I pass by it, is occupied by a handful of people, if anyone at all.
The (fenced off) lawns will remain. The dog run will remain. The fountain and stairs to the terrace will remain. The benches and grass and lawn and everything all along the walkway between 81st and the planetarium will remain. Something in the area of 95% of the park will remain, and the 5% that will be affected will be replaced by a worthy building that will highlight the active research arm of the museum and should help inspire generations of children to pursue natural science — a more worthy pursuit central to the mission statement of the institution I cannot imagine. Oh, and not to mention that the museum is taking care to plant more trees than will be cut down, and to include bench space near the future entrance.
All that said, I applaud the overwhelmingly sensible replies on this page. I am glad that most of us can see the value of this expansion, and the specious nature of its opposition.