Asketh The City: ‘Where art thou, Shakespeare plaques?'
Article History
There are updates to this article.
Two of Shakespeare Garden’s bronze plaques in Golden Gate Park were stolen earlier this month.
(Cindy Chew/The Examiner)
Two of Shakespeare Garden’s bronze plaques in Golden Gate Park were stolen earlier this month.

SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - William Shakespeare may have called the moon an “errant thief,” but it was likely a more earthly thief who stole two bronze plaques from The City’s Shakespeare Garden in Golden Gate Park.

Two of the garden’s six bronze plaques were stolen by an unknown suspect or suspects April 17 or 18, according to officers in the San Francisco Police Department’s Richmond District Station.

The plaques, donated before the bard-themed garden opened in 1928, feature different Shakespearean quotes describing different flora, according to historian and author Christopher Pollack. The garden is filled with flowers and plants that were named in the English playwright’s works.

Recreation and Park Department officials are working with the Police Department to investigate the theft, according to department spokeswoman Rose Dennis.

Golden Gate Park has been a frequent target for thieves, who have pilfered bronze pieces of the Ulysses S. Grant monument, purloined a bronze bucket from the Apple Press monument on the Music Concourse and snatched a plaque memorializing Domingo Ghirardelli in the 1970s, according to Pollack.

Other San Francisco parks have not been immune, either. A 160-pound bronze plaque memorializing the Armenian genocide, stolen from the peak of Mount Davidson in September, remains missing, according to Taraval Station Capt. Denis O’Leary. Burglary inspectors have declared the case inactive.

“The thief put a lot of effort into this — it’s a very large plaque, very heavy,” O’Leary said. “But the case remains unsolved.”

O’Leary said he believes whoever stole that plaque did so to sell it for the value of the bronze. Bronze is an alloy made of copper, whose value has risen to nearly $4 a pound.

It was nearly 30 years before the plaque memorializing Domingo Ghirardelli was hocked to a recycler about five years ago, according to Pollack.

“They can get melted down and disappear from history forever,” Pollack said.

bwinegarner@examiner.com


Name
Comments

characters left


Comments from Examiner Readers

1:14 PM MST on Thu., May. 29, 2008 re: "Parking officers prepare to deal with rising tide of anger"

Examiner Reader said:
People should leave the parking officers alone and assault city hall. The mayor and the planning department keep approving more and more development without adequate parking in a city with very limited parking as it is. People aren't likely to get out of their cars and use transit for their needs until the transit performs at an acceptable level. I don't believe anyone can honestly claim SFMTA operations in SF are acceptable.

Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

8:12 AM MST on Thu., May. 29, 2008 re: "Parking officers prepare to deal with rising tide of anger"

bee said:
There is no excuse for assaulting a parking officer. There is also no excuse for the rudeness of some parking officers, nor their double parking and blocking traffic with impugnity. Just the other day I saw three parking "officers" taking a break together in a North Beach bakery... Also, why are they called "officers" now that they are no longer under the Police department?

Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
9:32 AM MST on Thu., May. 1, 2008 re: "Asketh The City: ‘Where art thou, Shakespeare plaques?'"

Examiner Reader said:
this article was a exsotic amazement someone so selfish would take away the only wonderful time being art of william shakespeare he is a amazing designer and who ever shou take the art of an amazing person has a holed heart

1 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
7:21 PM MST on Wed., Apr. 30, 2008 re: "Cost of home-improvement permits to soar"

Dadee said:
They should reduce the number of employees. Most of them are incompetent and make it more difficult and expensive to get the project done.

1 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
10:43 AM MST on Tue., Apr. 29, 2008 re: "Skies darken for solar rebate plan"

Examiner Reader said:
That sucking sound we here is the Mayor playing to his friends and collegues at LENNAR CORP with the solar offer. The same people who are going to rebuild the Bayview for no cost to taxpayers. Really?

0 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
1:39 PM MST on Sat., Apr. 5, 2008 re: "Skies darken for solar rebate plan"

Eric Brooks - SF Green Party said:
One very important fact that your report fails to note, is that the Mayor's solar plan lets the SFPUC wave caps and allow an unlimited public subsidy to private corporations for building solar on their property. So under the Mayor's plan, if Lennar Corporation builds us a new stadium, it could also deck out that stadium with millions of dollars of solar panels and stick San Franciscans for the bill! Let's make sure that public money goes to public solar, not private corporations. We should scrap the Mayor's plan.

3 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
1:08 PM MST on Fri., Apr. 4, 2008 re: "Skies darken for solar rebate plan"

Examiner Reader said:
The city should not pay for these small, inefficient, expensive residential installations. They are poorly monitored and maintained, the actual output is unknown, it's like buying a pig in a poke. If the SFPUC can convince a private company to operate a large installation at Pier 96 and sell the electricity back to the city at a guaranteed reasonable rate, that would be a better deal. However, it's questionable whether or not the SFPUC can make such a deal.

3 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
3:04 PM MST on Thu., Apr. 3, 2008 re: "Skies darken for solar rebate plan"

Examiner Reader said:
Let me see, the supes find time to debate and pass a pointless bill on China, but didn't have time to look at and pass a useful bill actually pertaining to San Francisco.

1 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
 
 

(page generated in 0.11 seconds)