User talk:KeithTyler/John Hancock

John Hancock buildings

My reference is Lyndon, Donlyn, (1982), The City Observed: Boston, A Guide to the Architecture of the Hub, Vintage Books. I was interrupted during editing, something about "eating dinner," and may have screwed up, let me go back and look at what I wrote... Yeah, I got mixed up, it should have been Parker, Thomas and Rice for the 1922 building.

And I probably should have checked to make sure that a building, which existed in 1982 still exists. I'm going to try to do that... might be back later.

Lyndon lists:

P. 193, IV A 7

John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company Buildings

200 Clarendon Street
between St. James Avenue and Stuart Street
Parker, Thomas & Rice, 1922

175 Berkeley Street
between St. James avenue and Stuart Street
Cram & Ferguson, 1947

Hancock Place
between St. James avenue and Stuart Street, west of Clarendon Street
I. M. Pei & Partners, 1975

He says specifically "If you stand on the corner of Clarendon Street and St. James Avenue and look directly into the mirrored surface of the third Hancock, you will see reflected there the first two, aligned hieerarchically in an ethereal family portrait." So when he wrote it, all three of them existed at the same time.

[[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 22:22, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Well, 200 Clarendon Street indeed turns up the current tower. Lyndon's map, opposite p. 189, is perfectly clear. There are three locations labelled with a 7 in a circle. Once is in the block bounded by St. James, Trinity Pl, Stuart, and Clarendon. One is at the Clarendon Street end of the block bounded by St. Jaems, Berkeley, Stuart, and Clarendon. One is at the Berkeley Street end of that same block. The text describes the "first building" as being "on Clarendon street" and refers to viewing it from the observation floor of the "third John Hancock" and saying "the earlier tower remains walled up inside the additions" suggesting an almost-vertical view. From his map it looks as if the first and third building would almost face each other across Clarendon Street.

Any idea what might be going on? I shouldn't have put that stuff in the article without checking... [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 22:32, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

A Boston Globe article says (archives free online to print subscribers, in case you're wondering whether my house is stacked full of old newspapers)

HANCOCK SEEKS BUYER FOR TOWER COMPLEX

Author: By Thomas C. Palmer Jr., Globe Staff Date: 11/27/2002 Page: E3 Section: Business

It's official: The John Hancock Tower is for sale.

The 60-story tower in Boston's Back Bay, perhaps the city's most distinctive office building, is being put on the market along with two nearby company-owned buildings. Hancock officials would not say how much they will be asking for the properties, which include 197 Clarendon St. and 200 Berkeley St. as well as the mirrored glass tower. Nor would they say how much they expect to get.

That sounds rather like what Lyndon's map shows, with the first building being 197 Clarendon, the "old" tower with the colored beacon being 200 Berkeley instead of Lyndon's 175 Berkeley, and the third being 200 Clarendon. I wonder if he got the addresses wrong—or whether the street numbering was changed? Going to look some more.... [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 22:44, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

What's scary is I happen to have that same book but I've never cracked it.

*flip flip flip*... hmm. I think his addresses have to be off. "Hancock Place" is correct (it's the westmost one), because I know that the Tower is on its own block. I don't think the addresses on the street could have shifted the way you suggest, because that would require inverting the parity/side of street rule.

It's also possible that the mailing address for Tower mail goes across the street to 200 Clarendon.

Here... Here's a link to an online Boston mapping/aerial photo program from the BRA: [1] I can't view it right now, but it might provide some clues.

- KeithTyler 07:35, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)

Wow! Neat site. Well. I'm repeating stuff I have on the "Talk" page, but John Hancock's PR department confirms that a building at 197 Clarendon was owned by John Hancock, is currently known as the "Steven Brown building," and was known until a few years ago as "The Clarendon Building."

That mapping site doesn't show which side of the street an address is on. Both 175 Berkeley and 200 Berkeley seem to be reasonably well aligned with the old Hancock. Googling on 200 Berkeley tends to turn up "John Hancock Hall" while 175 Berkeley turns up things like Liberty Mutual's headquarters. I speculate that maybe it's all one building and that if they started renting or leasing space to other insurance companies, well, just maybe Liberty Mutual didn't like the idea of being in John Hancock Hall and there was some name-and-address shuffling? Just guessing, of course. Oh, the John Hancock PR department said that there is no street named Hancock Place, but that Hancock Place was a valid postal address for the big tower.

BTW, I'm about out of steam on Back Bay, Boston and Newbury Street, Boston. They could use work if you feel like doing anything on them. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 16:39, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Nope, Liberty Mutual PR says they're in a separate building across the street from the old Hancock. Completely separate, couldn't possibly have been anything but a gross error. I guess I just have to write Donlyn Lyndon's book off as careless and inaccurate. I don't know what, if anything to say about 197 Clarendon. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 17:04, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the work on John Hancock Tower.

A citation or two would still be good, of course, but it's much better now. The worst of the peacock feathers have been removed. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:49, 18 May 2006 (UTC)