I want to commend The Independent's Nathan Stubbs for his revealing and forthright reporting in the article "Staging a Comeback" (Jan. 11). Even as a 26-year-old native who could arguably have been born a bit late to experience the true peak days of Grant Street, in my short bar-going years I've seen the club go from a venue that regularly showcased major nationally touring bands with huge crowds to a virtually abandoned club that is on occasion basically rented out by local acts and only filled up on the weight of the artist's own promotion.
I wholly understand that managing a club is difficult business, especially when that club is dedicated to offering live music on a regular basis, but it is evident that smaller venues such as the Blue Moon, 307, Renaissance and Caffé Cottage ' though no doubt have had their share of losing nights with live entertainment ' have been able to consistently attract large crowds and touring entertainers to their clubs in the past few years while Grant Street has been, by all obvious indicators, asleep.
From an audience member's point of view, Grant Street has rarely offered enough bookings to attract patrons in the last few years ' often leaving a bad taste in mouths of those angered by high admission and drink prices ' and it seems that the club's recent failure can be blamed more on the decisions of its management rather than the "decline of the music industry."
It seems to me that Don Kight, who as a reward for his inability to successfully manage the club has despicably removed what I understand to be some of the most treasured aspects of the venue's history (the drywall autographs), needs to simply concede defeat and allow another group to try its ideas on the dancehall.
I wish the best of luck to the new owners, and to Kight as well in his new endeavors. But overall I'm inclined to agree with C.C. Adcock when he said, "I think it's a bit selfish to think that it's all over there and that any one person would be the end of that place."