Bathing for What_The Birth and Death of Historical Municipal Baths in Manhattan

Bathing for What?

The Birth and Death of Historical Municipal Baths in Manhattan

Yunjie Ni

Advisors: Prof. Broderick & Prof. Ritter

GSAS New York University Summer 2016

Bathing for What?

The Birth and Death of Historical Municipal Baths in Manhattan .

The Public Bath Movement is a past story, but from the progress it

went through, it can be learned that the human nature tends to pursue

enjoyment after the achievement of basic needs, such as food, clothes,

and cleanliness. The future public constructions should correspond

with the human needs, providing functions that can truly benefit the

neighborhoods.

1

Bathing for What?


Contents

Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………………… 03

Section One

Historical Public Baths in New York City ……………………………………………………………… 05

Section Two

The Birth and Death of Historical Municipal Baths in Manhattan …………………………………… 09

Section Three

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………………… 36

Appendix

Events Chronology Related to Historical Public Baths of New York City………………………………44

Bibliography …………………………………………………………………………………………… 49

Figure Credits …………………………………………………………………………………………. 52

2

Bathing for What?


Introduction

“The bath and its purposes have held different meanings for different ages.”

-- Siegfried Giedion, <Mechanization Takes Command>, p. 628.

Originally existing in ancient Greece, public baths were carried forward by ancient Rome. Mainly

constructed for hydropathy, relaxation, and communal interaction, public bathing was an important

section in the ancient Roman culture and civilization, which later influenced the rest of Europe. The 1

essential components of public baths in ancient European daily life can still be seen from those

grand relics of Roman baths, such as the Baths of Caracalla ( Fig.1 ) and the Great Baths in Britain

( Fig.2).

Fig.1: David Edgar, The Baths of Caracalla, 2003. Fig.2: Diego Delso, The Great Baths, 2014.

Although the development of public baths in Europe were intended for sanitation, and leisure

eventually, the form of Roman baths did set an example for their design before the 1930s: a

rectangular pool surrounded by a colonnade, with changing rooms and warm rooms behind the

colonnade. Around the 1930s, reinforced concrete became one of the primary materials in

1 D., J. “Baths.” The Classical Tradition , 2010.

3

Bathing for What?


architecture, providing more possibility for the space form, which has led the construction of public 2

baths to competitive swimming pools and recreation complex.

Deeply and widely influenced by European culture, America has cultivated its history of public

baths. The “gospel of cleanliness” was the most significant motivation for the Public Bath Movement 3

of the Progressive Era. Based on the background of public baths in America, this paper is to sketch 4

the cultural and social history of this mundane architecture in New York City. A single paper cannot

investigate all aspects of the subject, but it will suggest the cultural origins of New York City’s public

bathhouses, discuss how the design of public baths changed, and explore the development of the

historical municipal baths in Manhattan, which were built during the Public Bath Movement.

A preliminary research shows that thirteen municipal baths were built during the Public Bath

Movement in Manhattan. Among them, seven were extant, including four which were updated to

recreation complexes and two which were converted to new uses; five were demolished, including

one that was rebuilt on the original site; and two that were abandoned and have been unoccupied

since the 1970s economic crisis. In the following discussion, this paper will also propose several

ideas for the future redevelopment of the two abandoned baths.

2 Dr Ian Gordon & Simon Inglis, Great Lengths , 2009. 3 Marilyn T. Williams, Washing “The Great Unwashed” . 4 Ibid.

4

Bathing for What?


Section One: Historical Public Baths in New York City

“Progressive Era reformers aimed to bring about a ‘humanity without smell’ … The bath, the site where this

transformation would take place, was enlisted in their reform movement.”

-- Andrea Renner, < A Nation That Bathes Together >, p. 504

Ancient Roman civilization has profoundly influenced the Europe. Aiming at hydropathy and

relaxation, the fashion for spas and mineral springs reached America during the colonial era in the

18th century via England. The popularity of this bathing culture continued with the second

immigration wave from the Eastern Europe in the first half of the 19th century. 5

From the colonial era to the 1850s, America made progress together with Europe almost

simultaneously in baths for water healing, enjoyment, and later cleanliness. As written in the article

The Early History of Cleanliness in America , a number of charged public baths, built by private

individuals for the wealthy and middle-class to wash their bodies, began to appear in America

before 1840. According to the history of Britain’s public baths, indoor swimming baths had 6

emerged in private houses in Britain before 1846. By charging a relevant high entrance fee, only

the upper- and middle-class could afford to enter. 7

Between 1846 and the 1870s, the government in Britain built public baths mainly for the poor

working-class to clean their bodies. However, the concept of improving the poor’s cleanliness was 8

not popular in America at that time. In the 1880s, when a massive immigration from Eastern Europe

and Asia settled in America, the government began to recognize the sanitary problems of the poor.

Those immigrants later became the main component of the working-class and lived in places with

bad conditions, like slums. Taken by Jacob A. Riis, the famous photograph, “The Only Bath-tub in the 9

5 Marilyn T. Williams, New York City’s Public Baths , p. 51. 6 Richard L. Bushman & Claudia L. Bushman, p. 1225. 7 Great Length s. 8 Ibid. 9 The Lower East Side , New York Public Library, p. 34.

5

Bathing for What?


Block” ( Fig.3 ), revealed the extreme shortage of washing facilities for the lower class, which

inevitably resulted in their terrible smell and dirty features. Nonetheless, in this period, social

classes were distinguished not only by money and education, but also by malodor. This contrast of 10

smell among classes widely connected cleanliness to gentility, morality, and civilization.

Fig.3: Jacob A. Riis, The Only Bath-tub in the Block, 1897.

Noticed by a group of urban reformers, who were mainly middle-class professionals, the

Association for Improving the Condition of the Poor (AICP) was organized in New York in 1843,

aiming to improve the sanitary situation of the working-class. The AICP played a significant role in 11

the Public Bath Movement during the Progressive Era of America (1890-1920). The AICP’s earliest

effort on improving the poor’s sanitation can be traced to 1852, when the first philanthropic bath,

141 Mott Street People's Bath, was established. However, it had to be closed in 1861, because

insufficient patronage could not make it break even financially. 12

After the failure of Mott Street People’s Bath, it was inevitable that the city neglected the idea about

public baths for the poor. The city even assumed that the working-class was indifferent in

cleanliness. Instead, by utilizing the river and wooden frames, it was more economical to construct 13

an open-air pool by the waterfront, which was called the “floating bath.” Between 1870 and 1888,

10 Andrea Renner, A Nation That Bathes Together , p. 504. 11 Marilyn T. Williams, Washing “the Great Unwashed” . 12 Marilyn T. Williams, New York City’s Public Baths , p. 54. 13 David Glassberg, p. 8.

6

Bathing for What?


administered by New York City’s Department of Health, fifteen floating baths (Fig.4) were established

along the riverside of the Hudson and East rivers, which were popular with the poorer citizens,

especially during the hot summer months. The city authorities applied a twenty-minute time limit for

bathing, aiming to solve the cleanliness problem among the working-class, whereas the patrons

treated these open-air pools more as recreation places. This conflict on floating baths, therefore, 14

became the main reason that brought the focus back to indoor public bathhouses, although other

causes led to the decrease of floating baths, such as water pollution and the difficulty of maintaining

the wooden structures. 15

Fig.4: Jacob A. Riis, A floating bath in the East River, 1897.

In the 1890s, there was a growing acceptance of the germ theory of disease by Americans.

Besides, the tendency of connecting cleanliness to morality and social civilization became stronger.

With the success of the 9 Center Place People’s Baths, which was a philanthropic bath and opened

in 1891, the government finally got involved in the construction of public baths and played a vital

role in the Public Bath Movement. The status of public baths began to shift from a philanthropic to a

municipal institution. 16

With the development of the water-supply system in the late-19th century, a private bathroom

started to become necessary for the upper- and middle-class life. Moreover, the legislations on 17

14 Marilyn T. Williams, New York City’s Public Baths , p. 54. 15 David Glassberg, p. 7. 16 Ibid. 17 Andrea Renner, p. 519.

7

Bathing for What?


tenement houses in the early-20th century encouraged apartment owners to equip their property

with private bathrooms. Thus, more residents began to take baths at home, which made it more 18

and more difficult for public baths to support themselves. To attract patrons, public baths in New

York had to transform into recreation centers, combined with gymnasiums and swimming pools,

although the Public Bath Movement had initially been devoted to “the gospel of cleanliness”.

Due to World War II, the number of immigrants decreased. Accordingly, the requirement for 19

public baths further declined, and the Public Bath Movement gradually terminated, leaving the

municipal baths with different fates in the following years. After the war, from 1934 to 1968, there

was a wave of constructing public infrastructure conducted by Robert Moses. During this period,

public baths were emphasized again, by means of renewing old bathhouses to recreation centers

and creating new leisure complex equipped with swimming pools. 20

The history of public baths in New York City went through a process from recreation to cleanliness,

and eventually back to recreation, revealing the natural desire for playing of most patronage. The

former “recreation” focuses more on water therapy, while the latter concentrates more on sports.

Although the initial purpose of the Public Bath Movement in America is to promote the social

civilization through improving the poor’s sanitary condition, gentility, and morality, the history of

public bathing has proved that enjoyment is the vital element for the construction and maintenance

of public baths in the long term.

18 David Glassberg, p. 18. 19 Andrea Renner, p. 526. 20 Robert Moses and the Modern City .

8

Bathing for What?


Section Two: The Birth and Death of Historical Municipal Baths in Manhattan

“[F]rom cleansing to play.”

-- Andrea Renner <A Nation That Bathes Together> , p. 522.

Following the history of public baths in America, excluding the floating baths, the evolution of

municipal baths in Manhattan can be roughly divided into three stages: baths with rain baths only;

baths with shower and swimming pools; and baths with shower and gymnasia (including swimming

pools). According to the record in the book Washing “the Great Unwashed” and the appendix in 21

Andrea Renner’s article A Nation that Bathes Together:

New York City’s Progressive Era Public Baths , there

were in total thirteen municipal baths being built in

Manhattan during the Public Bath Movement of

America. In Fig.5 , the Map of Public Baths of

Manhattan , these baths are number 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10,

11, 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17.

The six baths in the first stage, were Rivington Street

Baths, West 41st Street Baths, Allen Street Baths, East

109th Street Baths, East 11th Street Baths, and East

76th Street Baths. The two baths in the second stage

were West 60th Street Baths and East 23rd Street

Baths. In the third stage, the five baths were Carmine

Street Baths, Cherry Street Baths, Rutgers Place Baths,

East 54th Street Baths, and West 28th Street Baths.

Fig.5: The map of Public Baths of Manhattan, 1915.

21 Andrea Renner, p. 527.

9

Bathing for What?


As the first successful construction of the Public Bath Movement in America, 9 Center Market Place

People’s Baths set a prototype for subsequent municipal baths in New York City, especially the

baths of Manhattan built in the first stage. To satisfy the requirement of the city and the reformers

that public baths should be created for the purpose of cleanliness and not recreation, the People’s

Baths was designed to offer efficient showering in a minimal space. 22

When applied to the design, the volume of People’s Baths was as narrow as an ordinary tenement

house, and the facade was dull, with few ornaments ( Fig6. ). Meanwhile, the habit of bathing from the

ancient Roman culture had to change from tubing to shower. Most facilities in the bath were rain

baths ( Fig.7 ), which was widely considered as a fairly economical method by the reformers and the

city, under the city’s tight budgetary constraints and a growing consciousness on the efficiency of

the general American public. According to Dr. Simon Baruch, who was a vital leader in the

movement, suggested that “showers used less water, less space and took less time for each bather

than tubs.” 23

Fig.6: People’s Baths, New York City, 1891. Fig.7: People’s Baths, section, 1891.

22 Andrea Renner, p. 512. 23 David Glassberg, p. 10

10

Bathing for What?


1. The First Stage

Currently only one of the municipal baths built in the first stage continues to be used as a

bathhouse. As for the fate of the other five baths: three of them were demolished, with one rebuilt

on the original site; one was adaptively reused; and one was abandoned, staying empty until today.

a. 326 Rivington Street Baths

Present condition: Abandoned

Year of opening: 1901

Cost of construction: $95,691

Cost of land: City owned

Total Cost: $95,691

Fig.8: The original main entrance, 1901. Fig.9: The original swimming pool, 1901.

Located at the original 326 Rivington Street and opened in 1901, Rivington Street Bath ( Fig.8 ) was

the first municipal bath of New York City. The architects created a complex structure whose interior

layout followed the People’s Baths, while the exterior design referred to the general European

11

Bathing for What?


bathhouses. With large arched windows on the facade and delicate carvings under the eaves, it is 24

a large building which was equipped with 91 showers, 10 bathtubs, and a swimming pool ( Fig.9 ), to

serve the large Jewish population of the Lower East Side. Due to the city's financial crisis, the

building was closed and sealed in 1975, standing isolatedly till today. 25

Section Three will later present more specific analysis on the present situation of Rivington Baths,

including the environment of its neighborhood. According to these analysis, there will be several

brief proposals for the future redevelopment of Rivington Baths.

* * *

Fig.10: York & Sawyer, Public bath design for a 50-by-100-foot, Plan, 1902.

24 Andrea Renner, p. 513. 25 Michael Minn.

12

Bathing for What?


The large cost of construction and maintenance of Rivington Baths threatened the city budget, 26

which resulted in the failure of this bathhouse to break even. In 1902, York & Sawyer Architects

developed a standard architectural plan for a future bathhouse, a double lot arrangement ( Fig.10 ),

which was evaluated as economical by the AICP. With this plan, the cost of per bathing cubicle was

746 dollars, while it was 1,300 dollars for the Rivington Street Baths. 27

According to the plans of the prototype, on the first floor, two separate entrances led into separate

waiting rooms and bathing halls. However, the space proportion for men and women was not

equal: the waiting area for men was larger because more men visited bathhouses, while the

women’s bathing area was likely to equip with more bathtubs because in general, women took the

responsibility of bathing small children. More rain baths were on the second floor, which was in 28

the size of half lot, connecting to the men’s waiting room on the first floor by a staircase. Therefore,

a standard municipal bath type for the first stage was established, which was implemented by

various architects for the design of the other five baths in the first stage.

* * *

b. 327 West 41st Street Baths

Present condition: Demolished



Cost of land: $33,750

Total cost: $135,300

Designed by York & Sawyer, the

West 41st Street Baths was the

first bathhouse which implemented

the double-lot standard plan. Fig.11: West 41st Street Baths, 1904.

26 Andrea Renner, p. 513. 27 Ibid, p. 516. 28 David Glassberg, p. 16.

13

Bathing for What?


Unlike the plain elevation of People’s Baths, it was designed with a more decorative Beaux-Arts

facade ( Fig.11 ), with large arched windows on the first floor for the waiting room and glass skylights

on the roof. In Andrea Renner’s opinion, this design was to maximize sunlight, which was a rare

building strategy in the slums, helping to raise the sense of morality and sanitation for bathers. 29

As of this paper writing, the neighborhood is now a highly commercial area, with crowded Time

Squares nearby and many skyscrapers. In 1949, the Port Authority Bus Terminal was built on the

block to the south between 40th and 41st streets and was expanded north in the late 1970s to

occupy the half of the block just East of where the bathhouse may have stood ( Fig.12 ). Although 30

there is nothing obvious remaining to indicate the former bathhouse location, the Holy Cross Church

( Fig.13 ) across the 42nd Street may be able explain, because there was a popular saying that

“Cleanliness is, indeed, next to godliness.” 31

Fig.12: The Port Authority Bus Terminal, 2016. Fig.13: The Holy Cross Church, 2016.

c. 133 Allen Street Baths

Present condition: Transformed to the Church of Grace to Fujianese



29 Andrea Renner, p. 516. 30 Michael Minn. 31 Richard L. Bushman & Claudia L. Bushman, The Early History of Cleanliness in America , p. 1217.

14

Bathing for What?




Also designed by York & Sawyer, Allen Street Baths ( Fig.14 ) replicated most of the ideas on 41st

Street Baths. However, maybe because the land was not large enough, there is only one entrance

as the 1891 People’s Baths. The bath was closed in 1975 during the city's financial crisis era and

was sealed in 1988. With an increasing population of Chinese located in this neighborhood, in 1992,

it was reconstructed and converted into the Church of Grace to Fujianese ( Fig.15 ), a Chinese

congregation. 32

Fig.14: Allen Street Baths, 1905. Fig.15: Present condition of Allen Street Baths, 2016.

It is interesting that before the termination of Allen Street Baths, Allen Mall Bathhouse ( Fig.16 &

Fig.17 ) was built in the 1930s and closed in the 1950s, only a few meters away. Allen Street Baths 33

can be recognized in Fig.17 , the short white building behind the tree on the left side of the

photograph. The appearance of Allen Mall Baths probably resulted from the infrastructure heat

held by Robert Moses from 1934 to 1968, while the closure of it was owing to the similar reasons 34

for the former municipal baths.

32 Online article, Curbed, What Became of New York City's Ubiquitous Public Bathhouses? July 7, 2014. 33 Online article, Tanay Warerkar, Allen Street Bathhouse's Future As a Food Stall Gets a Nudge , July 20, 2016. 34 Robert Moes and the Modern City , p.134.

15

Bathing for What?


Fig.16 & Fig.17: The Allen Mall Baths, 2016.

d. 243 East 109th Street Baths






Fig.18: East 109th Street Baths, 1905.

16

Bathing for What?


Designed at the similar time with the Allen Street Baths by York & Sawyer, the bathhouse at East

109th Street also copied the ideas worked out on West 41st Street. Nonetheless, instead of arched,

the windows on the facade were square as Allen Street Baths, creating a plain style.

Fig.19 & Fig.20: Current view of the site, the Luis Munoz Rivera School, 2006.

It was built to serve to neighborhood of Italian immigrants and was perhaps demolished in the early

1960s for the construction of the Luis Munoz Rivera School ( Fig.19 & Fig.20 ). 35

e. 538 East 11th Street Baths

Present condition: Transformed to a private photograph studio





Designed by Arnold Brunner, the design of East 11th Street Baths learned from the principles of the

prototype for the first stage. However, instead of five, there were three wider openings on the

facade ( Fig.21 ), with two separate entrances. The present facade ( Fig.22 ) is almost the same as the

original, except for the three openings: there is only one entrance at present, using the middle

35 Michael Minn.

17

Bathing for What?


opening, which resulted in the change of the staircases; the entrance elevation step back, saving an

intermediate space to connect the street space to the indoor studio.

Fig.21: East 11th Street Baths, 1905. Fig.22: Bathhouse Photograph Studio, 2016.

The initial plan of East 11th Street Baths ( Fig.23 ) learned from the prototype of the first stage. The

design of a rain bath cubicle ( Fig.24 ) is still a common layout for the modern bathrooms. It can be

seen as two sections, the changing area and the shower area.

Fig.23: Initial first floor plan, 1905.

Fig.24: Details of bath compartments, 1905.

18

Bathing for What?


The Landmark Preservation Commission described it as “a highly intact example” of Arnold

Brunner’s work. In 1995, Pulitzer Prize-winning photojournalist Eddie Adams and his wife Alyssa

bought the building, and converted it into his studio, which keeps running in nowadays. Although the

interior was almost refurbished, it is a typical landmark of the old days when bathing was not

popular with the working class. 36

f. 523 East 76th Street Baths (John Jay Park Public Baths)

Present condition:

Demolished. New bathhouse was constructed with two outdoor swimming pools on the original site.





Fig.25: Seventy-Sixth Street Baths, 1906.

36 Online article, Dayton in Manhattan, Arnold Brunner's 1905 11th Street Public Baths -- 538 East 11th Street , Oct. 27, 2011.

19

Bathing for What?


This bath was established in John Jay Park, nestled in what was then a German neighborhood in

1906. The original bathhouse ( Fig.25 ) was demolished and remodeled in 1941 as a recreation

center ( Fig.26 & Fig.27 ) with an auditorium, gym, recreation room, shower facilities, and two outdoor

pools ( Fig.28 & 29 ). 37

Fig.26 & Fig.27: John Jay Park Recreation Center, 2016.

Fig.28 & Fig.29: The two outdoor pools, 2016.

* * *

37 Michael Minn

20

Bathing for What?


The city took cleanliness for the poor as the primary purpose of establishing public baths, which

resulted in the uniform design of Manhattan’s municipal baths in the first stage. The limited services

of a municipal baths were not able to attract enough patronage to break even with the

maintenance cost. None of the bathhouses built in this stage continues the original function.

2. The Second Stage

According to an article The Municipal Baths of Manhattan , written by Robert E. Todd, records

showed that the public baths were used frequently in the summer, while patronage in the winter

was sporadic and much less. This fact suggested that participants had a seasonal and recreational

interest in baths. Swimming pools could attract more patrons, which could represent a 38

fundamental shift in bathhouse ideology: from cleansing to play. 39

Realizing the limitation of the design principles in the first stage, the city decided to install a

swimming pool in baths again after the failure of Rivington Street Baths. The transition from

cleanliness to recreation was eased by the knowledge that sports were also able to morally uplift

the poor. Therefore, the construction of municipal baths in Manhattan entered the second stage. 40

a. 232 West 60th Street Baths

Present condition: Extant, updated to private Gertrude Ederle Recreation Center





Designed by Werner & Windolph, the 60th Street Baths with rain baths and a pool opened in 1906,

serving “the predominantly Irish Hell's Kitchen neighborhood to the South, the primarily Negro San

38 Robert E. Todd, The Municipal Baths of Manhattan , Charities 19 (Oct. 1907), p. 898. 39 Andrea Renner, p. 522. 40 Jeff Wiltse, Contested Waters: A Social History of Swimming Pools in America , Chapel Hill, 2007, p. 47-77.

21

Bathing for What?


Juan Hill neighborhood to the north, and longshoremen who worked on the then-active west side

docks.” 41

The Beaux-Arts facade of the baths ( Fig.30 ) was more decorative than the baths of the first age,

with double rows of openings and more delicate ornaments. Because of high land prices of New

York City, the government chose to build the baths with a swimming pool on multiple levels, unlike the

European custom, which usually selects a large plot to accommodate a swimming pool and baths

on one floor. 42

Fig.30: Werner & Windolph, West 60th Street Baths, New York City, 1906.

Looking through Fig.31 & Fig.32 , the architects created the complex on four storeys, including a

two-level basement. The pool was located below the street level, and the boiler and plumbing

equipment were in the lower basement. Entrances and waiting rooms were on street level, leading

to changing rooms and lockers. As patrons went to the pool from dressing rooms, the staircases

first led them to a communal cleansing room to wash their feet, in order to keep the pool water

clean and to convey the bathing manners to the participants. The staircases in the changing rooms

linked to the second floor, which contained shower cubicles.

41 Michael Minn. 42 Great Lengths .

22

Bathing for What?


Fig.31 & Fig.32: Floor plans of West 60th Street Baths, 1906.

The architects designed skylights on the roof ( Fig.33 ), which allowed light to pass through the

second floor and a spectators’ gallery, into the pool area ( Fig.34 ), creating a bright and elegant

atmosphere for the patrons. 43

Fig.33 & Fig.34: Floor plans of West 60th Street Baths, 1906.


23

Bathing for What?


By the 1920s, the West 60th Street Baths was even described as “almost as much of a summer

resort as Coney Island.” This comment indicated the popularity of baths with a swimming pool. 44

Designed by Belmont Freeman Architects, the refurbishment and westward expansion for the baths

started in 2009, and completed in 2013. Currently the bathhouse is called Gertrude Ederle

Recreation Center ( Fig.35 ), with a playground on the west side, connecting with the extension

volume ( Fig.36 ). The expansion is constructed with concrete, iron, and glass. The surface of the

concrete imitates the brick pattern and color, accommodating to the original style. The pool was

conserved ( Fig.37 ), as was the west elevation, whose walls are now the internal partition ( Fig.38 ).

Fig.35: The Gertrude Ederle Recreation Center, 2016. Fig.36: The Gertrude Ederle Playground, 2016.

Fig.37: The original pool section. Fig.38: The original walls are used as internal partition.

44 Bertram Reinitz, “On Public Bathing,” Special Features , New York Times, Mar.21 1926.

24

Bathing for What?


Fig.39: The overall layout, Architizer.

25

Bathing for What?


Fig.40: The overall section, from the north side, Architizer.

According to the design diagrams ( Fig.39 & Fig.40 ) on the Architizer online platform, it can be known

that the site has been a multifunctional complex with diverse recreation facilities, including a

computer room on the first floor, gymnasiums and dancing studios located on the first and second

floor. Conversely, the massive bathing equipments that used to occupy the entire second level were

torn down and replaced by a spacious studio, although there are still spaces for lockers, changing

and washing.

b. East 23rd Street Baths

Present condition: Extant, updated to Asser Levy Recreation Center



Cost of land: City owned


Opening in 1908, the East 23rd Street Bathhouse was co-designed by Arnold W. Brunner, the

architect of the East 11th Street Baths, and William Martin Aikin. With an exquisite Roman Revival

26

Bathing for What?


Style, this bathhouse was praised by Andrea Renner as a representation of “the most ambitious

offspring of City Beautiful and the New York City municipal bath.” 45

Fig.41: The original East 23rd Street Baths, 1908. Fig.42: The original plan, 1908.

The facade ( Fig.41 ) of this architecture was sublime. Four pairs of freestanding columns divided the

facade, “surmounted by a full entablature with modillioned cornices and a decorated frieze”. The

building occupies a large plot of land and stretches horizontally, following the European model of a

single-level bathhouse ( Fig.42 ). There was one swimming pool in the center with two

gender-segregated shower halls on the north- and south-wing. 46

Renamed as Asser Levy Recreation Center, this bathhouse remains in good condition. Two outdoor

swimming pools ( Fig.43 ) and a playground were added in 1936. In 1974, the building was

landmarked. It underwent another extensive renovation from 1988 to 1990. In 2015, the 47

playground ( Fig.44 ) was expanded, containing a diversity of outdoor recreational facilities. Since

then, neighborhood residents and visitors have been able to enjoy sports, exercise, and shaded

45 Andrea Renner, p. 525. 46 Ibid. 47 Michael Minn.

27

Bathing for What?


seating ( Fig.45 ) on what was once a two-way street ( Fig.46 ). With multiple facilities, it has been 48

running successfully since it opened.

Fig.43: The two outdoor swimming pools. Fig.44: Asser Levy Playground.

Fig.45: Asser Levy Recreation Center, 2015 . Fig.46: Asser Levy Recreation Center, 2006.

* * *

It can be considered that the opening of East 23rd Street Baths conveyed the message behind the

evolution of municipal baths that “recreation was overtaking cleanliness.” Thus, the second stage 49

soon entered into the third stage.

48 Online platform, NYC Parks, Asser Levy Playground . 49 Andrea Renner, p. 525.

28

Bathing for What?


3. The Third Stage

Learning from the design of the East 23rd Street Baths, the city decided to try a new strategy, which

equipped baths with gymnasia, allowing more activities into public baths. Five bathhouses opened

between 1908 and 1914, presenting the third stage of municipal baths in Manhattan.

a. 83 Carmine Street Baths

Present condition: Extant, updated to municipal Tony Dapolito Recreation Center





Originally addressed as 83 Carmine Street, the current address of the building is 1 Clarkson Street

and it sits on the corner where Clarkson, Carmine, 7th Avenue and Varick Street meet ( Fig.47 ), with

James J Walker Park on the west. One of the former separate entrances was sealed, with a slope

for the disabled constructed at the front, replacing half of the original staircase ( Fig.48 ).

Fig.47: The present Tony Dapolito Recreation Center, 2016. Fig.48: The outdoor swimming pool to the west side, 2016.

29

Bathing for What?


Fig.49: The Hudson Park Library on the next door, 2016. Fig.50: The outdoor swimming pool to the west side, 2016.

The Carmine Street Public Bath was built in 1908, next to the Hudson Park Library ( Fig.49 ), which

opened two years earlier. The building was designed by the firm of Renwick, Aspinwall & Tucker,

with showers and tubs on the first two floors, a gym on the third floor and an open air classroom

for sickly children on the roof. The gym was updated in 1911 for weightlifting and basketball. In

1920, an indoor pool was added. The Department of Parks assumed full jurisdiction over the

bathhouses in 1938 and added an outdoor pool on the west plot ( Fig.50 ) in 1939. In 2004, the

Carmine Recreation Center was renamed the Tony Dapolito Recreation Center. Connecting to the 50

park and public library, it is currently a popular spot for its neighborhood.

b. 100 Cherry Street Baths






50 Online platform, Curbed.

30

Bathing for What?


Fig.51: The current building on the position, 2016. Fig.52: The nearby Tanahey Playground, 2016.

If the current numbering scheme is correct, a Knickerbocker Village building is on the old site

( Fig.51 ). The south side of Cherry street is Tanahey Playground ( Fig.52 ), but that land was not

condemned for park purposes until 1949. Regardless, the Cherry Street Public Bath used to be

around this area, serving Irish immigrants only a few blocks from the Rutgers Place Baths. 51

c. 5 Rutgers Place Baths

Present condition: Abandoned





Opening in 1909, Rutgers Place Baths was built in a similar

method as the West 60th Street Baths in the second stage,

and even more extensive with four storeys above the

ground. However, the facade was designed with a plain

style as the baths in the first stage ( Fig.53 & Fig.54 ). Fig.53: 5 Rutgers Place Baths, 1909.

51 Michael Minn.

31

Bathing for What?


Currently located in Little Flower Playground ( Fig.55 & Fig.56 ), the Rutgers Place bathhouse is

surrounded by the LaGuardia Houses NYC Housing Authority complex that was completed in 1957

( Fig.57 ).

Fig.54: Rutgers Place Baths, South, 2016. Fig.55: Rutgers Place Baths, East, 2016.

Fig.56: Rutgers Place Baths, West, 2016. Fig.57: Rutgers Place Baths, North, 2016.

The large LaGuardia housing complex resulted in the demolition of the surrounding tenements and

street grids, removing Rutgers Place from the map and isolating the Rutgers Place Bathhouse,

32

Bathing for What?


which was abandoned during the mid-1970s financial crisis. These situations that the Rutgers 52

Street Baths went through are similar with the Rivington Street Baths. Section Three will later

present more specific analysis on the present situation of the Rutgers Place Baths, including the

environment of its neighborhood. According to these analysis, there will be several brief proposals

for its future redevelopment.

d. 342 East 54th Street Baths

Present condition: Extant, updated to Recreation Center





The East 54th Street Public Baths and Gymnasium ( Fig.58 ) opened with 79 showers for men and 59

for women as well as a gymnasium, and rooftop playground. A 54m x 17m swimming pool was

added in 1915. It was designed as a four-story neoclassical complex with delicate details on the 53

facade ( Fig.59 ), which was conserved completely until today.

Fig.58: E54th St Public Baths and Gymnasium,1911. Fig.59: East 54th Street Recreation Center, 2016.

52 Michael Minn. 53 Ibid.

33

Bathing for What?


Fig.60, Fig.61 & Fig.62: The reception area on the first floor, 2016.

Instead of two gender-segregated entrances, currently only one entrance is in use while the other

one remains closed. Through the glass of the closed door ( Fig.60-Fig.62 ), it can be seen that a

reception desk is near the main entrance and faces the indoor swimming pool, while corridors and

staircases lead to different sections of this recreation center.

e. 407 West 28th Street Baths






Designed by William Emerson, the West 28th Street

Bath ( Fig.63 ) was the last municipal bath constructed

in the Public Bath Movement during the Progressive

Era. In addition to showers, an indoor swimming pool,

and a gymnasium with an indoor track, the building

included public laundry facilities, a two-level indoor

playground ( Fig.64 ), and a roof garden. The bath was

built to serve what was then a community of Irish immigrants. Fig.63: West 28th Street Baths, 1914. 54

54 Michael Minn.

34

Bathing for What?


Fig.64: The two-level indoor playground, 1914. Fig.65: The Moran Postal Facility, 2016.

This bathhouse was demolished. The address now is the expansive Morgan Postal Facility ( Fig.65 ).

Currently, the block between 27th/28th streets and 9th/10th avenues is the Chelsea Park. The

north end of the park is home to a City Department of Health facility ( Fig.66 ), which might be the site

of the original baths, because it faces Church of the Holy Apostles ( Fig.67 ) across the 9th avenue,

which responded to the saying that “Cleanliness is, indeed, next to godliness.”

Fig.66: City Department of Health Facility on the left, 2016. Fig.67: Church of the Holy Apostles, 2016.

* * *

As the war came in 1914, and the tenement water-supply technology progressed, allowing more

and more residents to take baths at home, the Public Bath Movement had to decline gradually.

35

Bathing for What?


Section Three: Conclusion

“Whatever the reasons that lay behind construction projects, they are often presented to address a

community need.”

-- Rebecca Krucoff, < The Lower East Side >, p. 42

1. Evaluation for the construction of municipal baths in Manhattan

The early progress of the Public Bath Movement was largely due to the use of showers instead of

traditional bathtubs. Being more hygienic and easier to maintain, the rain baths brought efficiency

to the bathhouses, which was the essential contribution for public baths at the beginning. However,

as Andrea Renner pointed out in his article, the initial success also blinded the reformers to

recognize the actual working-class wants and needs. 55

The seasonal popularity of baths suggested that the poor were more interested in a place to swim

and play with water more than wash their body. However, the city and the reformers complained 56

that municipal baths should serve for cleanliness but not recreation. With this odd logic, the city 57

and the AICP insisted on building baths with showers as the main facilities. As a result, the municipal

baths that were established in the first stage were not be able to be self-sufficient financially, and

none of them still serves for cleansing at present.

After the success of West 60th Street baths which equipped with an indoor swimming pool, the

evident popularity of swimming pools caught the city’s and the reformers’ attention. The authorities

began to accept the belief that sports were also helpful in promoting the patrons’ gentility and

55 Andrea Renner, p. 518-519. 56 Marilyn T. Williams, p. 76. 57 Naomi Adiv, p. 434.

36

Bathing for What?


morality, by encouraging independence and manliness among the participants. The construction 58

of public baths eventually led to recreation.

The functional convention of bathhouses from hygiene to play is a significant shift, welcoming a

boom era for public baths. The design of the bathhouse finally could satisfy the real working-class

needs. Meanwhile, it was not conflict to maintain the baths’ character of efficiency and the purpose

of cleanliness that the reformers expected.

The Public Bath Movement is a past story, but from the progress it went through, it can be learned

that the human nature tends to pursue enjoyment after the achievement of basic needs, such as

food, clothes, and cleanliness. The future public constructions should correspond with the human

needs, providing functions that can truly benefit the neighborhoods.

Based on the analysis and brief evaluation above, the following contents will propose several brief

ideas on the redevelopment of two abandoned historical baths in Manhattan.

2. The Possible Futures for the Two Abandoned Baths of Manhattan

As mentioned in the former sections, currently there are two abandoned and empty historical

municipal baths in Manhattan, which are Rivington Street Baths and Rutgers Place Baths. Both of

them are located in the Lower East Side (LES), along the East River (No.3 and No.4 in Fig.68 ).

Fig.68: The position of the two abandoned baths in the Lower East Side (LES).


37

Bathing for What?


The New York Public Library describes in a study guide that “The Lower East Side of New York City is

a neighborhood of constant change, within which one can find the impact of local, national, and

international historical events.” During the late 1880s, a massive immigration left Eastern Europe 59

to New York City. Most of these immigrants were Jews who were poor and were pressed to escape

from their hometown due to political persecution and economic hardship. Many of these Jews

settled on the Lower East Side, making it the largest Jewish city in the world in the late-19th century.

Accordingly, both the Rivington Street Baths and the Rutgers Place Baths were built in the 60

early-20th century mainly to serve the Jewish neighborhoods.

Since the last 20th century, the Lower East Side also has gone through many transformations.

Small wooden tenements were replaced by taller brick or concrete housing complexes. Subways,

parks, and highways have been built to meet the needs of a growing and more mobile population. 61

The Rivington Street Baths and Rutgers Place Baths were eliminated during the acute changes of

the LES. Besides the similar location in the LES, either of them is nestled in a city playground within a

large tenement community.

Having been ignored for years, the present condition of these two former municipal baths is not

only a waste of valuable land but also suggests a negligence of historical and public sites. They

deserve a better future. As city-owned lands and serving the public in the past, these two

bathhouses would better continue to be reused for common activities, providing healthy services

that can attract patrons, or contributing to take care of their neighborhoods.

a. Rivington Street Baths

At present, the building is abandoned, standing in Baruch Playground ( Fig.69 & Fig.70 ), which is

nestled on the north side of Baruch Houses. The estate is a 2,200-apartment NYC Housing Authority

59 New York Public Library, p. 2. 60 Ibid, p. 24. 61 Ibid, p. 42.

38

Bathing for What?


complex that was completed in 1959. The street grid in this area was altered by the development of

this complex: Rivington Street was cut off, and thus, the bathhouse was isolated.

Fig.69: The isolate historical bathhouse, 2016. Fig.70: The bathhouse and Branch Playground, 2016.

The plot in front of the main entrance is now a trash recycle station ( Fig.71 ), which is smelly. The iron

fences block the staircase to the entrance. Baruch Playground is large and equips with a variety of

facilities, surrounding the baths from the west, north, and east ( Fig.71-Fig.74 ).

Fig.71: The trash recycle station on the south side, 2016. Fig.72: The basketball playground on the west side, 2016.

39

Bathing for What?


Fig.73 & Fig.74: The multiple playground on the east side, 2016.

However, not many residents are using them. The photographs were taken on a Sunday afternoon

when only a young mother and her little boy were there playing around the fountain. One key

reason may be that there is not a single shelter on the vast playground to protect patrons from the

sun for any activity except for sunbathing.

Fig.75: Nearby places that serve for recreation. Fig.76: Schools that surround Baruch Playground.

40

Bathing for What?


It is not appropriate to renew and use it as a recreation center because there are already two

spots near the building having relevant services ( Fig.75 ). Seahorse Fitness is a swimming club, and

Hamilton Fish Park is famous for its large outdoor pool and gymnasia. Surrounded by numerous

high schools and colleges ( Fig.76 ), this site may consider contributing to the youth. Accordingly, this

bathhouse can be adaptively reused as an indoor playground for rock-climbing and skateboarding

which are popular with young persons. Meanwhile, the outdoor Baruch Playground can also be

adjusted to these services, allowing the site to become a complex for fashion sports.

Finding that most schools around are for teenagers. Alternatively, this building can be applied for a

kindergarten. Children need to be looked after when parents are at work. With a large population

living in Baruch Houses, it will be ideal to have a kindergarten for children whose families are in the

same neighborhood.

b. 5 Rutgers Place Baths

The Rutgers Place bathhouse currently stands in the middle of Little Flower Playground ( Fig.77 ),

which is surrounded by the 1,100-apartment LaGuardia Houses NYC Housing Authority complex.

Equipped with basketball facilities, shade seats, a fountain, and a garden, Little Flower Playground

encloses the baths from the west, north, and east ( Fig.78-Fig.80 ).

Fig.77: The main facade, the south side, 2016. Fig.78: The basketball area, west, 2016.

41

Bathing for What?


Fig.79: The garden area, east, 2016. Fig.80: View of the south side, 2016.

The main facade of the baths with entrance adjoins an internal street within the LaGuardia Houses.

With big trees around, the shade seats and the garden are accessible. The day when the

photographs above were taken, passengers kept coming in and sat under the trees. Meanwhile, a

girl’s birthday party was ready to be held in the garden. The east section of this playground is

valuable for the neighborhood.

Fig.81: Nearby places that serve for recreation. Fig.82: Schools that surround Little Flower Playground.

42

Bathing for What?


Unlike Rivington Street Baths, there is no recreation center near this neighborhood ( Fig.81 ). It may

be ideal to revitalize and upgrade the original bathhouse to an entertainment complex. Being

similar with Rivington Street Baths that no many nearby schools are for young children ( Fig.82 ), it is

also appropriate to redevelop this site to a kindergarten.

For the two ideas above, the basketball courts of Little Flower Playground can be included into

consideration. Located on the west side of the bathhouse, the basketball playgrounds are not

comfortable for playing in the afternoon when is supposed to be the most proper time. However, by

enclosing with high trees or covering with shelters, it is possible to make full use of this plot as the

outdoor space for children in a kindergarten.

43

Bathing for What?


Appendix: Events Chronology Related to Historical Public Baths of New York City

● The 18th century: The vogue for spas, mineral springs and watering places reached the

American colonies via England (and the popularity of these bathing places continued

throughout the 19th century).

● June 22 1842: The Croton Aqueduct opened and introduced the city to the advantages of a

clean and continuous water supply, which can be seen as the start of the revolution in New

York’s habits of hygiene.

● 1843: A group of protestant middle-class professionals founded the Association for

Improving the Condition of the Poor (AICP) in New York, seeking to ameliorate urban poverty

through a variety of methods.

● 1843: The AICP built the People’s Bathing and Washing Establishment at 141 Mott Street.

Patronage was not sufficient to make it self-supporting, and this first public bath for the poor

closed within a few years.

● Mid-1840s: The connection between bathing and health was reinforced when the water

cure developed by Vincent Priessnitz in Silesia became extremely popular in the United

States as a treatment for almost all ailments.

● 1852: The movement in New York City took its first action, when the AICP built the first public

bath, the People’s Bathing and Washing Establishment, at 141 Mott Street.

● 1867: The Tenement House Act of 1867 mandated that structures built after the act had to

have running water, supplied through a tap in the yard or house.

44

Bathing for What?


● 1880s~1920: The United States experienced its third major wave of immigration. (From the

17th to 19th century, hundreds of thousands of African slaves came to America against their

will.) 62

● Late 1880s~early 1890s: Inspired by the European example, Baruch began his campaign

for municipal baths in New York City.

● 1884: A New York City Health Department inspector wrote that poverty and uncleanliness

went hand in hand “because these poor people have not the facilities to keep themselves

clean, … they have no baths.”

● 1887: The 1867 Tenement House Act was amended so that water had to be provided on

every floor and the Board of Health had the right to force any tenement house, old or new, to

supply their residents with running water, although most buildings only provided cold water.

● 1870~1888: The city erected fifteen free floating-baths over the Hudson and East rivers that

provided the poor with a place to swim during the hot summer months, administered by its

Department of Health.

● 1890s~1920s: Progressive Era. 63

● 1890s: There was a growing acceptance of the germ theory of disease by both American

physicians and the general public.

● 1890: John Brisben Walker, the socially conscious editor of Cosmopolitan, held a design

competition for public bathhouses. The selection of John Galen Howard’s plan-- an ornate,

Beaux-Arts structure housing plunge pools, Turkish baths, and steam rooms-- was an

attempt to place the United States in competition with Europe.

62 Online resource: http://www.history.com/topics/u-s-immigration-before-1965 63 John D. Buenker, John C. Burnham, and Robert M. Crunden, Progressivism , 1986, p. 3–21.

45

Bathing for What?


● 1890: The New York AICP decided to build the city’s first all-year-round public baths.

● August 1891: The People’s Baths, the first, year-round hot- and cold-water public bath in

New York City was opened. It was the first successful public bath in the city.

● 1892: New York State Legislature passed a law permitting municipalities to build public

baths.

● 1893: John Paton, president of the New York AICP, wrote, “There has never been an

important and interesting connection between cleanliness and civilization… ”.

● 1893: A federal Bureau of Labor investigation of the nation’s most densely populated slum

districts found that in New York City only 2.33 percent of families and 6.51 percent of

individuals in these districts lived in houses or tenements with bathrooms.

● 1894: Public baths became part of the city’s political agenda during the mayoral campaign.

● 1894: The Tenement House Committee recommended municipal baths “on the best

European models, affording every kind of bath desirable,” including swimming pools, as

their popularity would help foster a bathing habit.

● 1894: The Tenement House Committee wrote: Cleanliness is the watchword of sanitary

science and the keynote of the modern advice in aseptic surgery. If it apply to the street, the

yard, the cellar, the house and the environment of men it most certainly should apply to the

individual.

● 1894: The Tenement House Committee found that in a population of 255,033 people, only

306 had access to bathrooms in their dwelling places.

46

Bathing for What?


● 1895: A second bath law was passed, requiring first- and second-class cities to build

adequate bath systems.

● 1897: The New York Daily Tribune , editorialized that “the provision of baths… is a proper

municipal function which should no more be neglected than street lighting or sewers.”

● By 1897: Over half of the city’s sixty-two bathhouses (including Russian, Turkish, swimming,

vapor and medicated bathhouses) were owned and used by Jews from eastern Europe

seeking to uphold religious and social traditions of bathing.

● December 1897: The ground was broken for the construction of Rivington Street Bath.

● March 23rd 1901: The first municipal baths of New York City, the Rivington Street Baths, was

opened. It was the first successful indoor bathhouse in the country and was widely imitated.

● 1901: The Tenement House Law required that each apartment have a separate toilet.

Though not requiring bathing facilities, it mandated that builders provide water for each

floor in a tenement.

● 1902: The AICP submitted a report to Jacob Cantor, the Manhattan borough president, with

recommended sites and architectural plans, designed by York & Sawyer, for future

bathhouses.

● 1902: The American Association for Promoting Hygiene and Public Baths, a professional

organization of bath reformers and administrators, was founded, with Simon Baruch as

president.

47

Bathing for What?


● 1903: The Department of Docks and Recreation surrendered, allowing the baths to stretch

horizontally and echo the European model of a single-story bathhouse.

● By the late nineteenth century: The bathtub had not only become an internal part of the

middle-class dwelling, but in order to have a “proper” home, it was deemed necessary to

provide the bath with its own private space-- the bathroom.

● 1901~1910: Eighty-six percent of the new tenements built in New York City had bathtubs.

● 1903~1905: 72 percent of tenements erected in Manhattan had private baths.

● 1907 & 1910: Robert E. Todd noted in two articles appearing in the magazine Charities and

The survey that during the cooler months the baths were used at only four percent to

twenty-five percent of capacity.

● 1908~1911: The city tried a new strategy and opened four bathhouses with gymnasia.

● 1911: The city established the Public Recreation Commission, which took over the municipal

baths from the Department of Public Works.

● 1914: The last municipal bath was completed.

● By 1915: Thirteen municipal baths had been built in Manhattan. Seven were equipped with

indoor swimming pools. Most of them were in neighbourhoods populated by immigrants.

● 1920: The spread of individual family tubs was further encouraged by the development of a

technique to mass-produce the one-piece, double-shell enamel tub (the type used today).

48

Bathing for What?


Bibliography

1. First reference

Books:

● D., J. “Baths.” The Classical Tradition , edited by Anthony Grafton et al., Harvard University

Press, 2010.

Link:

https://ezproxy.library.nyu.edu/login?url=http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/

harvardct/baths/0 (Accessed: 07/22/2016)

● Gordon, Ian & Inglis, Simon, Great Lengths: The historic indoor swimming pools of Britain ,

English Heritage, 2009.

● Riis, Jacob A., The Battle with the Slum , The Macmillan Company, 1902.

Ebook Release Date: March 1, 2009.

Link: http://gutenberg.readingroo.ms/2/8/2/2/28228/28228-h/28228-h.htm

● Williams, Marilyn Thornton, Washing “The Great Unwashed”: Public Baths in Urban America,

1840-1920 , Ohio State University Press, 1991.

● Williams, Marilyn Thornton, “Public Baths.” Encyclopedia of Urban America: The Cities and

Suburbs, edited by Neil L. Shumsky, ABC-CLIO, 1998.

Link:

https://ezproxy.library.nyu.edu/login?url=http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/

abcurban/public_baths/0 (Accessed: 07/22/2016)

Articles:

● Adiv, Naomi, Paidia meets Ludus: New York City Municipal Pools and the Infrastructure of

Play , Social Science History, Vol. 39, Issue 03, September 2015, p. 431-452. Published online:

October 28, 2015.

Link: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0145553215000644 (Accessed: 07/22/2016)

● Bushman, Richard L. & Bushman, Claudia L., The Early History of Cleanliness in America , The

Journal of American History, p. 1214-1238.

49

https://ezproxy.library.nyu.edu/login?url=http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/harvardct/baths/0

https://ezproxy.library.nyu.edu/login?url=http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/harvardct/baths/0

http://gutenberg.readingroo.ms/2/8/2/2/28228/28228-h/28228-h.htm

https://ezproxy.library.nyu.edu/login?url=http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/abcurban/public_baths/0

https://ezproxy.library.nyu.edu/login?url=http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/abcurban/public_baths/0

http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0145553215000644

Bathing for What?


● Glassberg, David, The Design of Reform: The Public Bath Movement in America , American

Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2, Fall 1979, p. 5-21.

Link: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40641458 (Accessed: 07/22/2016)

● Renner, Andrea, A Nation That Bathes Together: New York City’s Progressive Era Public

Baths , Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 67, No. 4, December 2008, p.

504-531.

Link: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/jsah.2008.67.4.504 (Accessed: 07/22/2016)

● Williams, Marilyn Thornton, New York City’s Public Baths: A Case Study in Urban Progressive

Reform , Journal of Urban History, Vol. 7, No.1, Nov. 1, 1980, p.49-81.

Reports:

● Krucoff, Rebecca, New York Neighborhoods: The Lower East Side , New York Public Library,

2012.

Link: https://www.nypl.org/sites/default/files/lowereastsideguide-final.pdf

(Accessed: 07/30/2016)

Online resource:

● Allen Street Bathhouse's Future As a Food Stall Gets a Nudge:

http://ny.curbed.com/2016/7/20/12241898/allen-street-bathhouse-food-stall-conversion-r

fp

● Ancient Roman Baths: http://www.crystalinks.com/romebaths.html

● Architizer: http://architizer.com/projects/gertrude-ederle-recreation-center-1/

● Arnold Brunner's 1905 11th Street Public Baths:

http://daytoninmanhattan.blogspot.com/2011/10/arnold-brunners-1905-11th-street-public

.html

● Michael Minn: http://michaelminn.net/newyork/buildings/public_baths/

● New York Architecture: http://www.nyc-architecture.com/GRP/GRP034.htm

● NYC Parks: https://www.nycgovparks.org/

● Immigration and Citizenship in the United States, 1865-1924:

http://dcc.newberry.org/collections/immigration-and-citizenship

● Sharing the same water: Hygiene and Swimming Pools in New York City:

50

http://www.jstor.org/stable/40641458

http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/jsah.2008.67.4.504

https://www.nypl.org/sites/default/files/lowereastsideguide-final.pdf

http://ny.curbed.com/2016/7/20/12241898/allen-street-bathhouse-food-stall-conversion-rfp

http://ny.curbed.com/2016/7/20/12241898/allen-street-bathhouse-food-stall-conversion-rfp

http://www.crystalinks.com/romebaths.html

http://architizer.com/projects/gertrude-ederle-recreation-center-1/

http://daytoninmanhattan.blogspot.com/2011/10/arnold-brunners-1905-11th-street-public.html


http://michaelminn.net/newyork/buildings/public_baths/

http://www.nyc-architecture.com/GRP/GRP034.htm

https://www.nycgovparks.org/

http://dcc.newberry.org/collections/immigration-and-citizenship

Bathing for What?


https://citiesandmodernity.wordpress.com/rory-oconnor/sharing-the-same-water-hygiene-

and-swimming-pools-in-new-york-city/

● The Free Public Baths:

http://www.beyondthegildedage.com/2012/01/free-public-baths.html

● The Museum of City of New York:

http://collections.mcny.org/C.aspx?VP3=SearchResult&VBID=24UAYWRDL5PNE

● U.S. Immigration Before 1965:

http://www.history.com/topics/u-s-immigration-before-1965

● What Became of New York City's Ubiquitous Public Bathhouses?

http://ny.curbed.com/2014/7/7/10078888/what-became-of-new-york-citys-ubiquitous-publ

ic-bathhouses

2. Second reference

Book:

● Edited by Ballon, Hilary & Jackson, Kenneth T., Robert Moses and the Modern City , Queens

Museum of Art, 2007.

Articles:

● Buenker, John D., Burnham, John C., & Crunden, Robert M., Progressivism , 1986.

● Reinitz, Bertram, “ On Public Bathing,” Special Features , New York Times, Mar. 21 1926.

● Todd, Robert E., The Municipal Baths of Manhattan , Charities 19, Oct. 1907.

● Watson, Sophie, Mundane Objects in the City: Laundry practices and the making and

remaking of public/private sociality and space in London and New York , Urban Studies

Journal, Vol. 52 (5), 2015.

● Wiltse, Jeff, Contested Waters: A Social History of Swimming Pools in America , Chapel Hill,

2007.

Newspaper:

● Public Baths and Wash-houses , The New World, Vol. IX, No. 22.

51

https://citiesandmodernity.wordpress.com/rory-oconnor/sharing-the-same-water-hygiene-and-swimming-pools-in-new-york-city/

https://citiesandmodernity.wordpress.com/rory-oconnor/sharing-the-same-water-hygiene-and-swimming-pools-in-new-york-city/

http://www.beyondthegildedage.com/2012/01/free-public-baths.html

http://collections.mcny.org/C.aspx?VP3=SearchResult&VBID=24UAYWRDL5PNE

http://www.history.com/topics/u-s-immigration-before-1965

http://ny.curbed.com/2014/7/7/10078888/what-became-of-new-york-citys-ubiquitous-public-bathhouses


Bathing for What?


Figure Credits

Taken by the writer from July to August, 2016:

Fig.12, Fig.13, Fig.15-Fig.17, Fig.22, Fig.26-Fig.29, Fig.35, Fig.36, Fig.47-Fig.52, Fig.54-Fig.57, Fig.59-Fig.62, Fig.65-Fig.67,

Fig.69-Fig.74, Fig.77-Fig.80.

Fig.1: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/BathsOfCaracalla.jpg

Fig.2:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5d/Ba%C3%B1os_Romanos,_Bath,_Inglaterra,_2014-08-12,_DD_3

9-41_HDR.JPG

Fig.6 & Fig.8 :


Fig.14 :

http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/view-of-the-facade-of-a-closed-and-disused-public-bath-house-at-133-picture-i

d83836579

Fig.18 :

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-UYbHKAqczy0/Txwk0uhOJqI/AAAAAAAALLM/4HOEcEpQcD8/s1600/Public%2BBaths%2B1.jpg

Fig.23 & Fig.24 :


Fig.58 : https://media2.wnyc.org/i/0/350/c/99/photologue/photos/e.%2054th%20st%20bath%20historic_.jpg

Fig.63 : http://66.media.tumblr.com/f3d680da040b9c754c61ade6ee5e78d0/tumblr_nnacdfjCF21qgpvyjo1_1280.jpg

Riis, Jacob A., The Battle with the Slum : Fig.3, Fig.4.

Williams, Marilyn Thornton, Washing “The Great Unwashed” : Fig.5, Fig.31, Fig.32, Fig.68.

Renner, Andrea, A Nation That Bathes Together : Fig.7, Fig.10, Fig.11, Fig.18, Fig.21, Fig.25, Fig.30, Fig.33, Fig.34, Fig.41,

Fig.42.

The Museum of City of New York: Fig.9, Fig.30, Fig.53,

Michael Minn: Fig.19, Fig.20, Fig.46.

NYC Parks: Fig.37, Fig.38, Fig.43, Fig.44, Fig.45.

Architizer: Fig.39, Fig.40.

Google Map: Fig.75, Fig.76, Fig.81, Fig.82.

52

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/BathsOfCaracalla.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5d/Ba%C3%B1os_Romanos,_Bath,_Inglaterra,_2014-08-12,_DD_39-41_HDR.JPG

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5d/Ba%C3%B1os_Romanos,_Bath,_Inglaterra,_2014-08-12,_DD_39-41_HDR.JPG


http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/view-of-the-facade-of-a-closed-and-disused-public-bath-house-at-133-picture-id83836579

http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/view-of-the-facade-of-a-closed-and-disused-public-bath-house-at-133-picture-id83836579

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-UYbHKAqczy0/Txwk0uhOJqI/AAAAAAAALLM/4HOEcEpQcD8/s1600/Public%2BBaths%2B1.jpg


https://media2.wnyc.org/i/0/350/c/99/photologue/photos/e.%2054th%20st%20bath%20historic_.jpg

http://66.media.tumblr.com/f3d680da040b9c754c61ade6ee5e78d0/tumblr_nnacdfjCF21qgpvyjo1_1280.jpg

Documents

Bathing for What_The Birth and Death of Historical Municipal Baths in Manhattan