Viewing page 100 of 110

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

The Los Angeles Woman's Building

from a skylight in the center of the roof, but the skylight had since been filled in.

We had, therefore, three floors of undifferentiated space-- except for regular steel and wood columns and wooden floors. The ten-foot ceilings, an elevator, and particularly the natural light that flooded the space from the many large windows on two sides of the building fulfilled some practical and inspirational needs. So, the actual building drew few negative responses, although the facade was somewhat formidable, and there was no easy, open-air access.5

The location of the building, however, brought mostly negative comment. Although we were to be between diverse ethnic groups, creating the possibility of new participants from groups not previously involved in building activities, the immediate neighborhood was industrial. There were active areas nearby-- the old center, Chinatown, Little Tokyo, and a Mexican-American community -- but our street was generally unfrequented, and the unfamiliarity of the site promised to make the building difficult to find. The seeming isolation could be misconstrued to mean that contact and interrelationships were not wanted, cutting the community in the building off from continued relationships with a large participating public and threatening the business aspects of the building.

The Creation of the New Building

In four months over 2,500 people helped to prepare the physical space for our use and to repair the emotional disorientation caused by the difficulties in finding and accepting our new home. To rebuild our community and restore our optimistic spirit, the design and reconstruction process had to be as inclusive as possible. When the third session of the Feminist Workshop Studio began in October 1975, its members had learned that barriers and growth are part of the process of creating a community through building its space. This shared participation in the process of cleaning, scraping, patching, sawing, hammering, and painting had recreated and enlarged our community. It is perhaps through this mass participation in the creation of the building that we have most completely actualized


Sheila Levrant de Bretteville  303

our intentions of bringing together people from all areas of the city, as well as people of all ages, classes, races, and ethnic origins. Each built a personal connection through seeing the impact of her work on the quality and use of the space, as well as by participating in the community of workers (see Figures 15.1 and 15.2)

Most of the space was prepared for multiple use by a variety of undetermined individuals and groups who could appropriate it for a specific period, maintaining their connection with the building, but not permanently owning the space. This was perhaps a more precarious model, demanding a more extensive outreach by our scant administrative staff, but it took account of the difficulties we had experienced when residents left or groups dissolved, and it had the potential for increasing the number of creators of events. Groups house elsewhere would be able to participate in program development by planning events to take place in the building. We could define the types of activities in terms of physical requirements, such as numbers of possible participants, amount of noise, need for natural light, and so on. Few of our actual needs were so specific as
[[blank image]]
[[caption]] FIGURE 15.1 Three women doing renovations on the Los Angeles Woman's Building. (Maria Karras) [[/caption]]