Kiss My Frango Mints, Macy's!

Awesome - totally awesome. Thanks to those people for taking the time and energy to show Macy's that Chicagoans aren't taking the demolition of a city icon lightly.

And to all those who will say "get a life", "it's only a store" or "don't these people have anything better to do?"....I'm sure they do. They've also chosen to champion this cause, and I think that's great.

Long live Field's. Die Macy's, Die!

I spent $5,000 at Marshall Fields in its last year alone, yet have spent $0 at Macy's since it blew into town.

Face it, Macy's won't be around much longer!!!!

NYC pwning again! I also like how no self-respecting New Yorker would defend Macy's as a "vital part of the culture of the city".

Anyone else always think Field's was kind of stuffy and overpriced anyway? I suppose they must have done something right to garner this kind of loyalty from people to a department store. And #3, $5000? That's a lot of cheddar, I want to party with you sometime.
Also, that pie sounds pretty good.

Any protest the looming CTA cuts?

Thought not.

If people protested and screamed about the CTA, and the media covered those protests with as much fervor as this, maybe we would be in less of a transit mess.
Where are the priorities?

Are you freakin' kidding me? Isn't there a war or something happening out there? How many of those idiot protesters have health insurance or use the CTA or know someone serving in Iraq? This is not a cause; this is consumers programmed with brand loyalty taken to a ridiculous extreme. You've been played, consumers. If your opinion on this mattered, you would have been consulted long before the deal was signed.

Bottom line: Who cares? Jesus, you would think that a simple name change actually mattered somehow. It's a STORE. This iteration of the store sells the same crap that the last iteration of the store sold, it's just different people pocketing the proceeds now. Get a grip.

Who cares. Macy's is closing that store on State eventually anyway. Everyone knows retailing has moved off State Street to North Michigan.

Macy's is making decisions Target Corp didn't have the balls to.

Stay away from the pie!

Is the food court still closed due to the rodent infestation?

".....Are you freakin' kidding me? Isn't there a war or something happening out there? How many of those idiot protesters have health insurance or use the CTA or know someone serving in Iraq?.......(Comment by guest #13)......"

I love responding to that sort of critique. Does the above commenter not realize that, during the time that he/she wrote that comment, that he/she could have been working on those causes?

Why is the above commenter neglecting those causes? Why is the above commenter instead using his/her time to criticize pro-Field's Chicagoans?

The fact is that any person can work on more than one cause at a time. I happen to know a few FieldsFansChicago leaders. They are each involved in several other extremely worthy causes, giving far more of themselves than the average Chicagoans whom I know.

That commenter's peculiar line of reasoning has been debunked before. The pro-Field's Chicagoans are working to make this city a better place. Sanctimonious hipsters don't understand that.

The boycott is working!

Guest 18 says: "Most Chicagoans and a good number of non-Chicagoans realize that we are losing our history and cultural/civic institutions on a daily basis now. The loss of MF has was simply the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back."

Really, it was the loss of a freaking dept store owned by out-of-towners?

Not the public schools?

Not the struggles of small, unique, local merchants?

Not the CTA?

Not the continued decay of many historical and once grand parts of this city (usually where black or working class people live)?

Not the demolition of historic buildings?

Not the weakening of city finances through TIF gifts to the connected and/or rich?

You are right, Chicago is changing, and in ways that are not all good. But you are wrong on the focus on your efforts.

Ward: You may be amazed that not all the people who ridicule the MF people are "hipsters," whatever the hell that means anymore. Some of us are fairly prosperous, nearly middle-aged family people who simply think the MF protests suck up a lot of civic and media attention. If you don't understand this concern, I doubt you understand the full process of civic and community change, the limited energies available to causes.

Guest #21:

Hate to call you out on this one, buddy/buddette, but little explains your defense of Macy's other than personal affiliation with that particular national chain (employee, etc.); that you are a New Yorker flabbergasted that the folks in flyover country aren't quite taking to your store; or that you are indeed the aforementioned "hipster" who likes to rail on others that take up causes. On that point, I'm going to go out a limb and guess that those protesting MF/Macy's tend to particiate in many more causes than you, while you work off your personal agnst by criticizing them at a distance, online in some coffee shop in Bucktown.
:)

21: Further proof that people who make assumptions are fools. You didn't get one "fact" right, sporto. Not even close.

Feel free to play again, though.

Before this all moves into "who's a hipster" and who can be more snarky, blah, blah, blah, the simple fact is that legacy stores like Fields have a very stong civic identity that many people find important to their own civic identity. Target understood this, to some extent (and also received a LOT of complaints when it moved Frango operations off site when it ignored this). Personally, I rarely shopped at Fields, but always enjoyed the fact that it had a specific history to Chicago. When I moved here 20 years ago, people in my family would be excited by the idea of going there, simply because of that history. The fact some people, many of them I would assume to be preservationists, care about this just shows me that they have some civic pride. Whether their politics have them against or supporting the war, or whether they do or don't fight for other worthy causes doesn't seem all that important in my opinion. But then, it's only my opinion, right?

Some interesting comments.

Here's my position. I have many causes that I am involved in. More than a couple of these are probably more important that bringing back Field's.

I contribute substantial unpaid time in addiction recovery support on the North side area.

I assist with AIDS awareness--walks and some minor fundraisers akin to bake sales (I sell used LPs to raise money) to a group of fans who buy them and then donate proceeds.

I am a rabid supporter and advocate of fixing our very broken recycling program in the city. And personally I am to the point where I recycle more than I discard although since I don't trust the blue bag program, I haul a lot of recyclables around so I can drop them off when I pass the ward's recycling center.

I ferociously follow and write in to the media and officials about public transit. Part of it is that I am a transit aficionado.

During elections I donate hours to cell phone pools to help get out the vot.

I have other causes I am active it. I donate to those working to end the war in Iraq.

I don't watch TV much as I these don't leave me much time. When people criticize me about my causes and say I am wrong to waste my time--and that has happened for all the above--I ask if they watch TV or sports or hang at bars. Many do and I point out that some might argue the time spent on TV or rooting for sports teams, etc. could be better used towards solving the world's problems. Are the Bears as important as the War? Critics get kinda sheepish when I respond with that--although I believe those are good to recharge oneself.

As a design awareness goes, well, I am a teacher of design and as far as being "hip" goes--whatever "hip" means, perhaps I could point out that I was part of the large group of people who worked on Mosaic at the U of I back in the 90s. Does wearing black and cool glasses count?

I'm not sure if all that is germane to one other cause for which I am a co-organizer.

For a multitude of reasons--many more than just the consumerism of buying four shirts and two pairs of jeans and spending money--I am the co-organizer of FieldsFansChicago.org

Yes, nobody is going to die if Field's doesn't come back but people die will if we don't stop global warming, do a better job of recycling and so much more. But there are so many terrible aspects to Macy's taking over, enough that I was motivated to become involved more than I do for some other causes I believe in, based on what I do for a living. If the whole world participated in the cause of Field's to the same degree I do we'd have problems.

Sure, Field's has been owned out of town for sometime but it has been a huge draw and gives us cultural distinction still (it was the third most popular destination as of 2005, according to both Field's and Macy's literature, but clearly is not now). Having this cultural distinction--you might think of it as character or a sort of beauty--helps gives us some power and attention which can be leveraged to give us clout in these more serious issues.

Then there are some serious issues. Jobs are being moved out of Chicago. They are not jobs that are being lost--Macy's is moving them. While some try to rebuild the fashion scene of Chicago under a name associated with NYC, Chicago's local-based suit maker, HartMarx, has lost so much business and jobs because Macy's doesn't sell their suits as Field's and other May Company stores did. Those jobs effective have been lost from our city. And then there is how Macy's has moved 300 out of Chicago after they said they would not. Sure, 200 people could follow them to the new warehouse 50 miles away, southwest of Joliet, but really, it's pretty much a way to have people who have made a living wage here in the city quit and be replaced by cheaper workers, far away. Who's gonna move or commute 50 miles?

Then there is tourism: Although I am a Chicago native, I lived for a time elsewhere and came to appreciate how many people come to Chicago for Field's. Downstate they rent buses just pretty much to do that. Now with Macy's close to everywhere with a lot of the same merch, why make the special trip.

As someone in the field of architecture, I am appalled at how Macy's treats some of its gems. Like the Jordan Marsh flagship in Boston has a plaque about the store's history. Last I visited it in May, it was cracked, missing pieces, etc. And then I see how Macy's doesn't adequately clean the landmarked Field's plaques here.

There is the history, the nostalgia, the sentimentality to be sure--folks feel that and let's not discount that because it is what creates the sense of community and pride that so many critics of our cause feel is lacking. The idea that we have a department store with a history we can take pride helps bind us in community, something that can go a long ways as a front against crime, social problems, etc. Field's helps build community.

Beyond that, one side of my family and a number of my friends are from New York. Many are disappointed about the loss of Field's. I could live happily in either place but choose Chicago as my favorite US city with an international rep. Field's still helped contribute to that.

To be sure there was a little tarnish on Field's rep in recent years but ditto for Macy's (Macy's went bankrupt once). But all that aside, Field's could come back again as locally run business with an international rep. That's worth having in our community for so many reasons.

I can say a lot more, but before I do, let's hear from the "guests," and others above about THEIR causes, what they are actively doing, etc. I've presented (although somewhat reluctantly) my other causes and priorities...how can some of you critique others without explaining what you do for activities?

Jim McKay
co-Organizer
FieldsFansChicago.org
jjmckay@fieldsfanschicago.org

I say let the Fields protesters do what they will. They're taking a stand for local identity in a globalized age, which is a good stand to take. And--to offer a perhaps unfair generalization--having these probably suburban, middle-to-high income folks distracted from other civic activity probably isn't all that bad, as they're likely supporters of roads and wars. They probably drove downtown in their SUVs and are happy they don't have to pay any extra money for a sales tax subsidy. Those complaining about a lack of civic activism on the part of these people should be happy, because otherwise these people would be AGAINST them.

Another funny thing: What do you think Marshal Fields, supercapitalist that he was, would have thought of this? Other than the hurt ego from having his name removed, I think the free market expansion that brought it about would have been right up his alley.

The only thing I'm going to say on this matter is that the signs that include the playful take on the Macy's name, "Messy's," are just terrible. That's the best they could do? Messy's?

Gag. And "You can't turn an Emerald into a Zircon?"

These people really need a cause that lends itself to better quips and catch-phrases.

Why can't criticizers see that Marshall Field's was important to the success of marketing Chicago as a world-class institution. Just like preservationist protect historically significant buildings Field'sFans are protecting what is uniquely Chicago - Marshall Field's. Where the corporate headquarters are is irrelevant. Marshall Field the man gave Chicago so many institutions and Marshall Field's the store gave to Chicago in numerous ways. It is not the only cause but an important, local cause that impacts the city we live in.

BRING BACK FIELD'S - in quality, service, and name.

Fields did not "agree" to the sale - it was owned by the Target Corporation (who did a great job with Fields while they had it, IMO).

If it were only a matter of name, then I'd say, OK, not much need to protest, boycott, etc. However, let's look at what Macy's has really meant for Chicago:

1) Fewer employed (overall layoffs and shuttering of W. Diversey warehouse);

2) Loss of a tourist attraction;

3) Fewer taxes paid by Macy's to city and state;

4) Tacky appearance of stores and goods in city and 'burbs.

Is it really serving the City of Chicago to drive Macy's out of business? The State Street strip has already lost Carson's. It would not be good for all those who work in the area to lose another department store.

Sparky and Spook:

What gives? You always criticize the anti-Macy's camp for having too much time on their hands, not taking on other causes, etc.... So, what explains your dedication to and time spent on this paricular topic? Might you a couple of those cynical, sneering, chain-smoking and coffee guzzling hipsters in Wicker Park, described earlier? Logan Square perhaps?

A year later and these people still haven't gotten lives. Just an "hour and a half out of a year"? Right. I am truly embarassed for them.

46: I am embarassed for these people as well.

Guess what? There is still a lot of old and vital Chicago still around that needs your help. You are fighting a lost cause that wasn't worth the effort in the first place. If Chicago really loved MF so much, Chicago would have spent much more money there.

I too am critical. I also live in Logan where I'm very active in my community.I’m not cynical, neither am I optimistic. I work from that American Blues Tradition following in the great steps of Tennessee Williams, Tony Morrison, Eugene O’Neil, James Baldwin Coletrain,Fredrick Douglas, Harold Cruse and others who agree to tell the truth in spite of the growing American Myopic consumer culture of greed. I don’t smoke but do drink and work in the center of the power structure downtown where I hope I’m doing some good inspite of the bad I see I also know I’m helping to further democracy in my spare time and am working to reach a point where my life is dedicated to it.

Like Sparky I also do my research by reading a lot and broadly

And I agree with guest 31. The fact that this stupid store feels such a void in so many people's lives, is a symptom of the growing sickness that elected George Bush

I don't look like Jeanine Garofolo, aside from the glasses. I voted Republican for County Board, Green for Governor, and Dem for President, so I doubt that qualifies me as "liberal".

I get so riled up for many reasons, many I have listed in other posts.

1. Marshall Fields is gone. There is nothing to save except nostalgia. A song about Fields? Really?

2. There are many broad reaching issues affecting Chicago...CTA, destruction of small businesses, TIFs, the disparity between the rich and the poor, affordable housing, corruption. The MF supporters could tackle these large issues (MF is a part of these issues) with legislation and govenment. Instead, the MF consumers (because that's what they are, consumers) focus on one small issue that is part of a larger issue, and they take it on with one corporation, Macy's, who is only worried about dollars and cents.

3. Boycotting Fields is the best way to achieve your goals. Protests may get you on the news, and on a cute post in Chicagoist, but again--see point #1.

4. People acknowledge (see today's Chicago Tribune) that there are bigger things to fight for.

5. I am not just blaming the supporters, I blame the media as well. If the Transit issue got 1/10th of the attention as the anniversary of the "death" of Marshall Fields, maybe we would get somewhere. Instead the media focuses on a feel good fuzzy piece.

".......looks like a bunch of pudgy white suburban women who look like they transitioned from Field's to Wal-Mart. Looks like a bunch of fanatical grammas......(Commenter #26)....."

To the commenter above, if you wish to make a worthwhile point, calling people names and making fun of people's age, appearance, and weight is probably not the best way to do it.

By the way, your condescending observation seems to come from the Chicagoist photos, which focus on people who made their own signs. The photos of older persons are understandable, since virtually no young people at the rally made their own signs. Meanwhile a number of older, "craft-intensive" ladies did make signs...and that's what you see above.

The fact is that it WAS a diverse crowd, with teenagers, college students, African-Americans, and Mexican-Americans. I was at the rally and I spoke to protesters from all of those backgrounds.

In fact, the article in today's Chicago Tribune states, "From all appearances, such nostalgia and passion touches all ages and ethnicities. A 39-year old African-American man videotaped the protest and......."

The Tribune article when on to mention protesters taking the CTA to the protes. I mention that because some of the sanctimonious hipster critics above chastized pro-Field's supporters as not taking the CTA. By the way, in addition to the protesters in the Tribune story taking the CTA, I also took the CTA to the rally.

Oh, and about the Commenter #26's whining about the protesters being too old, I should point out that I spoke to some of the girls dressed in 1890's dresses before the rally. There were four college students from IIT, two students from DePaul, and one student from the School of the Art Institute of Chicago.

There were some other students dressed up but I did not get a chance to speak with them. I know that these students are involved in other causes because we had time to kill before the rally and people were talking about their other activities.

The bottom line is that some people are out doing things while others are sitting at keyboards plunking away in the effort to run down the activities of others. Hipsters. Cynical whiny crybabies who are mad at the pro-Field's supporters. Now, how's that for name calling?

1/10th was hyperbole. I apologize. But my point guest(s) is the CTA transit issue has been going on for many months and only recently has the issue gained enough momentum for major letter writing and other campaigns (Mayor Daley finally spoke up when--last week or the week prior?), and major media attention (other than Crain's Chicago Business, and an article by the New York Times, which seemed to show more interest in our transit system than we did as a city at the time). The day that SB572 failed, it wasn't even mentioned in the Sun-Times until the next day. Fox News nor WLS had it even remotely at the top of their newscast (it was Steve Fossett that trumped all that evening). I checked and I wrote emails to each of the stations/newspapers about it that evening. During the CTA public hearings earlier this summer, the coverage was merely a sound bite if mentioned at all by the major news sources of the city.

Was I being melodramatic? Perhaps. But, I find it ironic guest(s) that you accuse me of melodrama when you guys are singing a song about a department store to the tune of "I'll be home for Christmas".

I'm a native Chicagoan, but I lived in Washington, DC for eight years. While in DC, I shopped Hecht's, which was native to Baltimore/DC and was a pretty good chain along the lines of a Carson's. There were (and are) Macy's in DC, but they never gained much traction at the time, the local perception being that they carried basically the same stuff as Hecht's, but at twice the price.

While in DC, I also continued to shop my hometown Field's, ordering really neat Frank Lloyd Wright items, Frango's and Field Gear online. Of course, on return trips to Chicago, I'd make the requesite trips to Field's on State Street and Water Tower. It was so cool to be in a different store, with a unique experience and I loved carrying my stuff back to DC in a Marshall Field's bag while Washingtonians remarked how much even they liked Field's.

Now, Macy's has replaced BOTH Field's and Hecht's, as well as many other local legacy brands. That's simply made things less interesting, IMO. Macy's is still a Carson's or JC Penney's masquerading as "affordable luxury", but the items they carry (Alfani, INC, Donald Trump, Martha Stewart) are typuically neither affordable or luxurious.

Macy's should be ashamed of themselves.

you rock, 57.

Holy shit. What a bunch of arrogant jerks there are commenting on this board. Why aren't you out saving the world?

The pro-Field's crowd will continue to kill the Macy's on State Street. And they are making the world better in other ways. I know from speaking with them. They are busy doing things with their lives while the "My Cause is Better Than Your Cause" crowd here on Chicagoist cries into its hip-drink-of-the-moment.

The boycott is working. Macy's on State is a ghost town. And thank God for people like Jim McKay.

"But there are so many terrible aspects to Macy's taking over, enough that I was motivated to become involved more than I do for some other causes I believe in, based on what I do for a living. If the whole world participated in the cause of Field's to the same degree I do we'd have problems."

Oh my Gawd so many terrible aspects! And he mentions jobs being lost! What about when Fields closed down the Frango mints section with only a weeks notice, laying off those ladies who worked there for over 20 years! Where were the protest then?

I have apologized on this site before. But will not be one of those times!
Not when there are real scholars at UIC actually engaged in crucial problems of the world that are ignored by the media and most of you. This fellow is nothing more than a lake front liberal feel goodie hobbyist. These activities listed ring as hollow and shallow as the "aids bake sale". I could see this being engaged by a child
which might get publicized, but I’m sure the effort wasn’t put into this, like this protest.

And what about that professor who raised serious questions about America’s support of Israel and lost tenure at DePaul, compared to this?

Guess he should have stuck to bake sales and “charity lite” instead of questioning the powers the American Empire. Or supported in the way of being an intellectual cheer leader for a department store. I’m just simply so disgusted now, which is rare. And I hope I’m not the only one that will link the hollow “protesting” of a Stupid Corporate Chain Store started by a white male robber Baron to the University of Illinois at Chicago. I’m sure Jane Adams shudders now.
Also I would think that given that our economies tanking, perhaps an enlightened professor would choose not to celebrate a corporate empire. I am utterly amazed. And to think Cornel West got attacked at Harvard for creating a hip hop cd to reach inner city youth. Mean while a “professor” in Chicago is weighing in on the defense of a store.
Yes just more dumbing down of America, tricking on down.

Yea Lincoln was right, we get the type of government we deserve.

The bottom line is that Macy's killed the profitability of the State Street store with the name change and declining quality. They were warned but didn't heed the warnings. They said they'd heard it all before and it never came true in any other city. Chicago is no different than any other city, they said. But they were wrong, and they've been, quite literally, paying the price for their mistake.

At the end of the day, the State Street store will close, not because all the retail moved to Michigan Ave., but rather because Macy's incompetence drove it out of business.

Sparky, a hipster is someone who asks what "hipster" means when they know darn well already.

As an olive branch, though, let me say that your quip about "...a person who drinks PBR ironically..." is downright funny (no sarcasm).

As a former print supplier to both Federated (now Macys) and May Department Stores I would rather have it under it's current ownership. May Company used to skin your profit margins and ditch you if they thought they could do better. Federated partners with you. When problems arose May Company tried to put the blame and cost entirely on the vendor even if they owned the cause. May Company had a horrendous reputation in the print and paper industry. It was a dictatorship under May and the stores fell victim to it.
The only reason Marshall Fields did not was the Federated-May merger happened as it was to be implemented. Otherwise I can guarantee that you would have seen the same products in MF as you did in Kaufmann's, Foleys, Famous-Barr, etc.
I saw every May division buckle under the corporate pressure and become the same thing. Lord & Taylor was the only exception. Kaufmann's became Filenes and the rest would have followed.
I look at it like this, Change is constant and cannot be stopped. At least the downtown store is still open and some things have been brought backl to life. I am happy to have Macy's ownership rather than May and I find some decent prices for my tastes. Guess I'm the oddball here though.
My 2 cents.

I don't wish to burst your bubble but Marshall Fields is gone. It can never come back as Marshall Fields. What can happen is economics.
1. Protests continues, sales drop. Ever hear of cutting off one's nose to spite their face?
2. Macys Inc would sell that location to a private equity firm.
3. Once that happens I doubt it would be brought back as Marshall Fields or any store. The store as you know it there would close permanently. Most likely it will be gutted or torn town, turned into luxury condos with possibly some small boutique shops on ground level.

Oh yes, the store staff is also being hurt by your protest and would lose their jobs if you suceed but you don't care about that.

I wish Americans (Chicagoans) had this same amount of verve when it came to protesting U.S. political and corporate transgressions. Just imagine the real and valuable change that could occur...

If this isn't the very definition of a First World Problem, I don't know what is.

Chicago: GET A LIFE! Marshall Field's is a failed relic of the past! MOVE ON!

These stupid protests are selfish and counterproductive. It's time for Chicago to get its priorities straight and worry about something relevant and important.

As a Cheesehead who is originally from Chicago, I have to ask:

What has changed?

Do they still do the Xmas displays in the windows?