Marilyn Monroe’s former home saved from demolition in LA


Marilyn Monroe moved around a lot during her life, about 43 times in total. I think the instability she experienced in childhood became a subconscious pattern that was hard to break. She only ever purchased one home, in January of 1962, and it’s the house where she died in August of that year. It’s a landmark, albeit a very dark one. Someone bought the home in July and intended to immediately tear it down, and a demolition permit was issued. But then the Marilyn fan community sprang into action, inundating the LA City Council with thousands of phone calls. Councilwoman Traci Park responded by filing a motion to designate the house as a historic building, and the rest of the City Council voted unanimously in favor. Marilyn’s house has been saved–at least for now. If it is designated as a historic place, the new owners (who almost certainly knew that it was Marilyn’s house) won’t be able to destroy it. I have complicated feelings about all of this.

Demolition of the Los Angeles area home where Marilyn Monroe spent her last months has been put on hold by Los Angeles City Council, following a last-minute motion aimed at designating the house a Historic-Cultural Monument.

Councilmember Traci Park, whose district includes Brentwood where the legendary actress’s former home is located, said the house was sold in July and the new owners recently filed a request to have it demolished.

“Unfortunately, the Department of Building and Safety issued a demolition permit before my team and I could fully intervene and get this issue resolved,” Park said in a news conference on Friday.

When word of its looming demise broke on Wednesday, Park’s offices were inundated with calls to save the fabled bungalow that once belonged to the pop culture icon.

“At this point, it may be into the thousands,” Park said of the volume of phone calls. “All of our phones in city hall and the field office have been ringing off the hook for the last 48 hours.”

On Friday, the Los Angeles City Council unanimously approved Park’s emergency motion to begin the process to designate the house a historic building.

Demolition is on hold until the city’s Office of Historic Resources conducts a study and analysis of the home, according to Park.

It remains unclear who the new homeowners are as the purchase was made under a limited liability company (LLC).

“We have not been contacted at all by the property owner,” Park told CNN. “Most certainly they were aware of who owned the home previously and who lived and died there.”

[[From CNN]

I wonder who is in this murky LLC. I’m glad it’s not being demo’d yet, but the way people mythologize this house makes me uneasy. It’s hard for me to put into words. I’ve seen a lot of people in the Marilyn fan community refer to the Fifth Helena Drive house as “our Graceland” but that doesn’t sit quite right with me. Marilyn was proud of her little house–2300 square feet is quite modest for a superstar. She was enjoying fixing it up and making it her own that summer of 1962. One of the last things she did before her death was to buy a bunch of succulents and trees for the backyard from a local nursery (according to Donald Spoto’s well-researched biography). But because it’s where she died, it will always be a tremendously sad place and I think the energy of what happened that night has marked that house forever. I could not live there.

I get why people in the fan community feel so passionately about protecting it. In recent years people have done disrespectful things to Marilyn’s legacy. That terrible Blonde movie came out, packed full of lies, judgment, and explicit scenes that exploited Marilyn (and Ana de Armas for what it’s worth). Then Kim Kardashian destroyed one of Marilyn’s most iconic dresses just to get attention and probably damaged another dress of Marilyn’s just to get an Instagram photo. I think Marilyn’s fans just want to preserve anything that mattered to her at this point. In practical terms, the house on Fifth Helena could never become a museum like Graceland because it’s on a tiny dead end residential street with no parking. I think that Marilyn should have a museum, I think she is that important to the culture. But with how her estate was handled, most of her personal affects are in the hands of private collectors now (or “museums” that will loan out their artifacts to any Kardashian that asks). But some of her makeup and clothing is on display at the Hollywood Museum in the Max Factor Building, if anyone is interested.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos credit: Holland / Avalon, Topfoto Archive / Avalon and Getty

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

27 Responses to “Marilyn Monroe’s former home saved from demolition in LA”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Sumodo1 says:

    Eek! This is macabre. “Our Graceland” yikes!

  2. SAS says:

    Gorgeous selection of pics! I’m so surprised she only bought a home relatively late into her fame, although I suppose everything would have been in a husband’s name otherwise.

    I’m also a bit conflicted about the situation, sure it’s sad if it were demolished, but this element of fans brigading at some sense of injustice yet nobody protesting is actually in a position to do anything meaningful once they’ve succeeded, what’s been achieved?

  3. Smart&Messy says:

    I don’t know. It sounds unfair to the new owner. Just because someone used an LLC to buy it, it doesn’t mean something is fishy about the purchase. Now they are stuck with a property they can’t touch?

    • MissMarirose says:

      And we don’t know anything about the condition of the house. Although those real estate photos make it look nice, there’s no telling how good or bad it is structurally. So this action by Monroe fans could have the effect of saddling the owners with a crumbling house that’s too expensive to repair just so her fans can have something to continue to gawk at.

    • BeanieBean says:

      I tend to have Bravo on in the background while working (at home). This has always been one of the more remarkable things I’ve seen on Million Dollar Listing, that people will spend an enormous amount of money to buy a property that any of us would be thrilled with, but instead tear it down & build something bigger. This happens a fair amount with the older homes, even those with an historic Hollywood connection.

      This looks like a lovely little home (little for Hollywood standards), but the current style is for anything-but-modest.

      It seems as though they’re documenting this house & evaluating it for some historical property listing, but as someone who works in this line, I can tell you that listing on a state or local register, or even the National Register of Historic Places, doesn’t eliminate the possibility of demolition. It could end up being preserved through documentation–the historic narrative, architectural drawings, and large-format photos to be housed in the Library of Congress.

      Plus, when you’re the owner of a listed property, it’s not that you can’t upgrade–especially when we’re talking about interiors–but whatever you do has to be in keeping with the historic nature of the original–overall style, aesthetics, materials, and so on.

  4. Jjjj says:

    I thought that Marilyn lookalike tiktoker, Jasmine Chiswell, owned that house?

    • Mina says:

      She lives in a different home, I think the one Marilyn shared with Arthur Miller. Common misconception, and apparently she’s been absolutely spammed with hate comments from people who thought the same and believed she was responsible for the impending demolition

  5. Brassy Rebel says:

    I’m conflicted as well. I also don’t get why the new owners bought it only to demolish it. I can see buying it as a fixer upper, but tearing it down is strange since this is a residential neighborhood. Were they planning to build a brand new house on the property? Apparently, others have lived there since Marilyn. I also think that the cost of a museum for just one person would be prohibitive. Debbie Reynolds’ plan for a classic Hollywood museum to contain clothing and memorabilia from many classic stars is more practical but even that can’t get off the ground. It’s just sad because classic films and stars are an important part of history which is being lost.

    • Blithe says:

      Like any property, the new owners may have purchased it more for the lot and the location than for the aging house that doesn’t fit their needs — albeit an aging house with a meaningful history. My sympathies are with the new owners. If it matters so much to the fans and historians — I hope that they can fundraise, purchase the property, and provide funds to protect it.

      • Delphine says:

        I can’t say I agree. There are plenty of other less significant properties they can buy and tear down. I would be really surprised if they didn’t anticipate this reaction to their plans when they bought the property.

      • Blithe says:

        So, do you have any thoughts about what should happen now? And who should bankroll whatever comes next?

      • Bee (not THAT Bee) says:

        It really makes me sad whenever I hear about a historic old hollywood home being demolished for another generic McMansion. people have no respect for the past. too bad for them, they should have picked out something else.

        The LLC is probably for tax advantages.

  6. Lala11_7 says:

    I’m not conflicted…Marilyn bought it after NEVER having a home for SO MANY REASONS…I don’t want it torn down❤️

  7. Sussex Fan says:

    Read an article several decades ago that the wiring was set to snoop on Marilyn’s phone calls and doings in the house. FBI, CIA, or Mafia: take your pick(s).

  8. Chaine says:

    This seems like an unconstitutional interference with property rights. If the home was not a designated historic home or landmark when they bought it, they should be able to move forward with the permitted demolition. Maybe it’s a convenient location and nice lot for them but they didn’t want to live in some outdated bungalow that attracts morbid Lookie Lous.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Chaine, that was my thought, too. The demolition permit was already issued–then this came down. I think the property owners can sue and I wouldn’t be surprised if they won and demolished the house.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Hate to agree, but I do.

  9. Bumblebee says:

    Marilyn’s legacy and memory is as tragic as her life. I think it would be better to demolish that house so no one can exploit the place where she died.

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      Marilyn’s final tragedy is that she left no heirs, not so much as a distant relative who actually cares about her, to manage and protect her incredible (and profitable) legacy. Especially with the rise of social media, legacy management for deceased film stars is a growing field. All Marilyn has is a devoted but often conflicted and disorganized fan base who really have no idea what she would have wanted and no way to carry out her wishes if they did. This episode with her house just underscores how alone in the world she always was. I wish it were different.

      • moi says:

        thats not true. her mother/dad(s) outlived her & her sister died just a couple of years ago. pretty sure the sister had kids.

  10. Lady Digby says:

    RIP Marilyn a talented woman much under rated as an actress. Some like it hot always makes me laugh. I couldn’t watch Blonde and see her being exploited all over again.

  11. Concern Fae says:

    This sense of preserving everything and every neighborhood is why we don’t have enough housing for the younger generations. The future has a right to exist as much as the past does.

    Besides the ghoulishness, this isn’t healthy for society. It would be creepy as a museum and probably terrible to have to live in, what with all the tourists and nutso fans.

  12. ABCD says:

    Clara McGregor wrote on Instagram that her Mother is a neighbor. She talked to the owners who stated that they had no intention at all to tear it down. It seems confusing though that there are actual papers filed?