December 28, 2005

The Riverdale Review
6050 Riverdale Avenue
Bronx, New York 10471

Reference: SERIOUS DEBATE ON LANDMARKING PROS AND CONS IS JUSTIFIED:
VILIFYING A DECEASED ARCHITECT AND HIS WORK IS NOT!

Dear Editor:

Recently, residents and members of the Riverdale community have been involved in serious debate about whether or not the residential area of Riverdale, known as Fieldston, should be designated the "Fieldston Historic District." During the last two years the interested parties, including the homeowners of Fieldston, have debated the pros and cons of landmarking this most beautiful and unique area of The Bronx. Many objective and well-reasoned positions have been proposed on both sides of the argument. Extensive public debate has been held. In depth studies and surveys have been conducted. And now the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission is poised to render its formal decision.

Regrettably, those in opposition to the landmarking of Fieldston have engaged in emotional and ill informed rhetoric resulting in the vilification of Dwight James Baum (1886–1939), an accomplished, distinguished, award winning, and long deceased architect. Not only has this well known architect been demeaned and denigrated, but the present Chairman of the local Community Planning Board's Land Use Committee (once a New York City Commissioner of Buildings), actually referred to him as a "hack architect." A scathing editorial in The Riverdale Review (December 15–21) referred to Baum as "an architectural plagiarist," a "very marginal architect," and "a super hack," saying Fieldston has nothing more than "250 nice but nondescript homes." These characterizations are grounded in ignorance regarding the history and practice of architecture. They demean the life's work of a creative and skillful professional who still commands the respect of his peers, past and present.

The reality is that Fieldston, and most of its early 20th century homes (at least half of which were designed by Dwight James Baum) is one of the most unique, significant, and well designed residential developments of its kind. It represents a body of residential architecture of classical revival periods that is unrivaled nationally. Clearly, the proposed Fieldston Historic District is worthy of designation.

It is unfortunate that The Riverdale Review, and others against landmarking, have elected to disparage Baum and his creations to win support for their cause. In doing so they show their own ignorance about the practice of architecture and how the design process works. By denigrating Baum, they are applying their same misjudgment to all architects. They don't understand what an architect does, nor do they understand the history of architecture.

Baum, like many architects before and since, was a practitioner able to synthesize historical references in a cohesive manner. He was an eclectic architect trained in the Beaux Arts School of design—typical of all architects of his time. His work was influenced by historic periods and informed by the needs and desires of his clients. He had mastered multiple architectural vocabularies through historic research and education that complemented and enhanced the style of the time: American Country Living. This was also true of the famous classical Renaissance architects, and the architects of ancient times. Many other truly great modern architects, such as: Frank Lloyd Wright, Richard Meier, and Philip Johnson were influenced by the work of their predecessors.

We are stunned that representatives of the legal profession and the newspaper publishing industry, who supposedly are noted for their objectivity and verification of facts, could be responsible for such misinformation. Rather than debating what the merits of a Landmark designation means, they have demonstrated their ignorance of how architects have worked through the ages, and how architecture is produced.

Shame on the editor of this newspaper. Shame on the Land Use Committee Chairman. They have engaged in an ad homonym argument to justify their position in opposition to the landmarking of Fieldston. Both have managed not to elevate the debate, as befitting their respective titles and positions, but rather they have diminished themselves.

We urge both to reconsider their unfortunate words on Dwight James Baum, and elevate the public debate to a civilized discussion of the issues of landmarking or not!

Very truly yours,
Antonio Freda, AIA
President , Bronx Chapter AIA

Martin Zelnik RA/AIA
Panero Zelnik Associates Architects/Interior Designers