A View From the Sears Tower's Ledge
Illinois Is Getting Fatter
Mayor Blames Violent Holiday Weekend On Booze, Heat
Kuma's Pats Itself On Back With Block Party
Chicagoan Involved In Mount Rushmore Ruckus
Have you ever heard a song by a band and totally been turned on to that band, rushing out to buy their record, listening to it, and then excitedly telling your friend all about your "discovery", saying, "Hey, have you ever heard of this band called The Rolling Stones??? They ROCK!" only to have your heart crushed when your friend tells you that band's old news? (Tankboy has to do it to me all the time.) We hate to be "that friend," but...
Yesterday, the New York Times' Jeff Zeleny looked at the "renaissance" of Chicago in his cheekily titled article, "A New Wind Is Blowing in Chicago." One doesn't necessarily envision Zeleny and his colleagues (Maureen Dowd, perhaps?) sitting around a computer looking at pictures of Chicago with wonder and saying, "They have...buildings! And...parks!" but judging from the article it feels like they haven't actually stepped foot in Chicago in quite a while. It's all O'Hare, Obama, and Oprah to these people, isn't it?
Now, we're proud to call this city home and marvel at its wonder all the time, but things ain't all grand; our response to a lot of their points is, "Yes, but..." For instance, the article gushes about the Donald's new tower going up downtown -
A spire is finally poised to be placed atop the Trump Tower here, bringing the skyscraper to 1,361 feet, the tallest American building since the Sears Tower was built three decades ago.- but doesn't mention the financial crapper Trump's dealing with to get things going, nor does it mention the big hole in the ground that would be the Chicago Spire. Fortunately, the Reader's Ben Joravsky has a nice post doing just that.
So, instead of piling on, I'm gonna take the Positive Patty view here. Yes, Obama's election has thrust us back in to the national spotlight, but it's not like we haven't been rocking all along.
Zeleny at least had the foresight to interview one of Chicago's musicians who's popular with the kids these days, Wilco's Jeff Tweedy, who interestingly said the "city never felt the inferiority complex that outsiders spend so much time musing about." Not that Tweedy was a bad pick as a cultural representative. On the contrary, we're sure he came off much more coherent than Kanye would have. Tweedy goes on to say, “There have been all these prevailing stereotypes, and people don’t know how big and urban Chicago actually is. People think of it as being in a cornfield.” The same can be said for Chicago's music scene. With the recent success of Lupe Fiasco, Chicago's music is pushing itself even closer to the front of the stage. Local rock bands like Walter Meego, Icy Demons, Tom Schraeder, Grammar, Shellac, and Dianogah make Chicago a great place to dive into local shows. And there's plenty more where that came from. We've been the home to Lollapalooza for years. And let us not forget our pals at Pitchfork who, besides being based here, put on a pretty great annual music fest of their own. And that's just the present; it doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of this city's rich musical past (Chess Records, Bo Diddley, Sam Cooke, Mavis Staples, Old Town School of Folk Music, the entire jazz scene, etc.)
And the culture doesn't stop at music. As Time Out showed us earlier this fall, Chicago is full of cultural icons. Whether it was a pair of thumbs or Studs Terkel, Chicago has constantly been involved in the conversation. And with new voices like Aleksandar Hemon, as well as culinary stars like Grant Achatz and Stephanie Izard, we're becoming even more visible. And as for all the superstars from the New York-based Saturday Night Live, including the beloved Tina Fey, where do you think many of them got their start?
As for sports, we know the Cubs' futility has been a fun story for outsiders, especially since the Times had to stop writing about the Red Sox bumbling four years ago, but this kind of raised our ire:
Chicago has long been a place that seems comfortable — or, at least, well adjusted — to losing, a place where you put your head down and shoulder through whatever hand is dealt you. (How could it be otherwise, considering all the practice that the cursed Chicago Cubs have provided over the years?)Wait, what? Because the White Sox won the World Series more recently (2005) than either the Yankees (2000) or Mets (1986). And what about the Bulls ridiculous 90's run of six titles in eight years? Sure, there's a sense of fatalism amongst Bears fans every time they see Rex warm up on the sideline, but "comfortable with losing?" Outside of Wrigley, I'm just not sure I see anything that makes a Chicago sports fan any different. Or even Chicago residents in general. We may handle things gracefully sometimes, but no one likes to lose.
I'm going to stop there because otherwise, I would keep going and going. Rest assured, others will pick up the torch. We know this city is far from perfect. The recent budget crisis and rise in violent crime is a not-so-gentle reminder of our faults, faults that every civic institution has. Sure, we have a transit system that's on the verge of collapse and a local government run on nepotism and cronyism. But nothing riles us like the tone of borderline mock-awe in the discovery we're not all Bill Swerskies. As Whet Moser points out at the Reader, the Times always manages to be condescending when remembering we exist, while Gapers Block's Jasmine Davila sums it up nicely by saying, "Um, yeah, thanks for noticing. Again." So, thank you, New York Times, for giving us a shout out, but we're doing just fine without it, thanks.
To paraphrase LL Cool J, don't call it a comeback; we've been here for years.
add to digg
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
We should just get used to it by now. It's always going to be that way when it comes to NYC vs. the rest of the world. There are greasy street hot dog venders who think they are more cultured and worldly than anyone in Chicago simply by virture of their being in NYC. I'd rather stay off their radar anyway.
"It's all O'Hare, Obama, and Oprah to these people, isn't it? "
Well, it used to be Al Capone, Michael Jordan and deep dish pizza, so that's a step up, right? (or down? Or sideways?)
Biggest flaw in that article: For all the good feeling Chicago is experiencing lately, there is--as in other cities and areas--an increasing level of anxiety as crime rises and services are cut and residents wonder if there will be another property tax increase in 2 or 3 years. You can feel it everywhere, whether on the El or in various neighborhoods. Here in Chicago, one strain of anxiety takes the form of people wondering if all the gains made from the mid-1990s to the mid-2000s will be reversed somewhat.
And no offense against Tweedy, but the simple fact that Chicago has to, over and over again, stomp its feet and wave its hands and scream "I'm a big boy, too," signals that the long-standing inferiority complex has yet to fade. It's not always a bad thing, the Second City mindset, but it still exists, and likely will as long as there is a NYC and LA (sorry, Houston, but no matter how big you get, you are not a real city as much as you are an oversized suburb).
Wow, people from Chicago sure do have an inferiority complex!
I got over my inferiority complex when I realized everyone I know in NYC is from Ohio (except my ex who was from Queens, and I loved her for it). They can pretend all they want - at least I'm from a real city.
Well, it used to be Al Capone
I travel overseas 2-3 times per year. Trust me, it is still Al Capone--hell, some people even make the machine-gun fingers when you tell them you are from Chicago (and these are well-travelled, educated people for the most part, and they are not being ironic or sarcastic). I doubt that will ever go away, and I doubt most people overseas will associate Obama with Chicago all that much.
The Windy City thing is so...fucking...old.
Seriously, a reference to the Columbian Exhibition that's still being used in headlines? Christ.
It's like calling San Francisco "Frisco". You get this look from residents there like you've just shit the bed.
"Wow, people from Chicago sure do have an inferiority complex!"
Nope, just want to be acknowledged for your work like any other "person". I personally don't care what the fuck a New Yorker thinks of Chicago (and having been to NYC I still think I have the better end of that deal), but constantly being told, "Oh, wow, look at what you did! Isn't that special?", yeah, I could see how that could annoy someone over time.
Zeleny isn't telling all about the installation of the spire on Trump's building.
Check out Blair Kamin's blog & you'll see that it's scheduled for Dec. 13-14, but that's not a sure thing.
http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/2008/11/trump-spire-i-1.html
If Chicago really wants to be a 'big boy' then Chicagoans should stop getting their panties into such a collective twist whenever
they sense the slightest snub about their city.
I got over my inferiority complex when I realized everyone I know in NYC is from Ohio
Yeah but everyone here is from Michigan...or Wisconsin or...Indiana.
I know so many people from New York that have come here, fallen in love (with the town, mostly) and then moved here. We've got a lot of the positives that New York offers with less of the hassles.
I think we need to get the Hog Butcher For The World slogan going again. I'd be happier if, when traveling overseas, I hear "Chicago...Oink! Oink!" instead of "Chicago...Bang! Bang!". Although, given the recent violent turn the latter's probably more applicable.
Both are true really,
Chicagoans have an inferiority thing going on and New Yorkers (and articles from The Times) are *always* at least a little self centered and condescending when discussing Chicago.
Yeah but everyone here is from Michigan...or Wisconsin or...Indiana.
Or Illinois. It's a big state with a couple million people who don't live in the Chicago area. Rock god Tweedy is from 300 miles downstate, for instance.
I agree with Navin.
And by the way, I'm originally from Colorado.
and Olympics... maybe?
(Summoning the great Carnak)
Ed McMahon: O'Hare, Obama, Olympics, Oprah?
Carnak: Name four large scale disasters.
I'm from NY, and now I live in Chicago. I love both cities. All my friends from NYC or LI who have come out to Chicago have been pleasantly surprised.
And to be honest, not a lot of people I grew up with know what to expect when they come out here, but they like it nonetheless.
"If Chicago really wants to be a 'big boy' then Chicagoans should stop getting their panties into such a collective twist whenever
they sense the slightest snub about their city."
And New Yorkers don't do this? Actually, they tend to lauch pre-emptive strikes regarinding their cultural superiority. And it's not just Chicagoans that find quite a few New Yorkers insufferable...
Anybody who thinks everyone in Chicago is from Michigan, Wisconsin or Indiana needs to get out of Lincoln/Wicker Park once in a while and meet some real people. Locals know to stay out of the way of the transplants.
You know what's funny is that midwesterners in new york are hands down the most self-effacing bunch of neurotics you can ever hope to meet.
You'll ask "so where are you from" and they hemm nad haw and be like "I'm from 'around' but spent x years in new york" or just lie and say they're from anywhere but the midwest. It's like, who cares where you're from? I, the chicagoan, laugh at them under my breath. I also like really pinning them down and getting them to finally admit they're from Terre Haute in front of their Williamsburg friends.
When I'm in new york, people ask me where I'm from and I say "chi-town mo'" and I cock my hat and dance to kanye west.
Ok, I don't but I could.
One thing Chicago has really done to shoot itself in the foot has been to let it's signifant cultural areas go to waste or in most cases deliberately bulldozed them over. We don't have a Harlem or Bourbon Street to visit for one thing because their equivalents were basically laid to waste..
navin apparently hasn't been to Bronzeville lately.
"Anybody who thinks everyone in Chicago is from Michigan, Wisconsin or Indiana needs to get out of Lincoln/Wicker Park once in a while and meet some real people. Locals know to stay out of the way of the transplants."
Amen. Yes, many "hip" neighborhoods are largely comprised of transplants, but theres a whole other 2/3 of Chicago (and inner burbs for that matter) that most never even step foot in. I've lived in Berwyn for 25 years..we don't get too many wide eyed hipster wannabees from Iowa, and thats fine by me.
One thing Chicago has really done to shoot itself in the foot has been to let it's signifant cultural areas go to waste or in most cases deliberately bulldozed them over.
So true.
Historical buildings (in a city that has some of the best and most important architecture in the world) is one example. Recent attempts to gut the local music scene--combined with ongoing failures to promote it to a national audience--is another example of how Chicago has screwed up in culture.
Great article Marcus. Oops .. .you did it again!
To me New Yorkers come off as incredibly insecure with their blatant insistence that "everything is better in NYC" (Look at that spook dude for an example). At least in Chicago we know what we are, we have a pretty strong identity, and are quite content on being exactly what we are, nothing more, nothing less, with an air of humility to boot. NYC thinks they are everything to everyone.
This to me cries out "we're really insecure so we are going to attack other cities by saying how much better we are." Please. Nobody, except you guys, seems to care much.
On the whole supposed "inferiority complex," much as Tweedy said, that is a myth created by NYC people themselves. As a born and raised Chicagoan, CPS schooled, I can't remember anytime, past or present, where friends or myself have had discussions on why Chicago is better than NYC, it just doesn't happen. Now on the flip side, how many NYC people do you want to bet spend their time discussing why NYC is better than ANY city.
You see the difference is, we don't give a shit. You do. You lose.
Navin apparently hasn't been to Bronzville lately
Condos and museums replacing formerly vacant lots are nice but not the same. I'm not talking about whatever recent revitalization that has occured. I'm talking about culturally significant buildings and such, is there any doubt that urban renewal laid waste to a great swathe of Chicago? Would anybody from the earlier half of the last century even recognize the area as the former "Black Metropolis" of Chicago? And what of Maxwell Street? The Levee?
AMEN.
The slide of predominantly black neighborhoods was just atrocious. The Machine, the economy, the drug war, parasitic "Revs"...so much blame to go around on that.
I grew up here, born and bred. I've lived all over the north side, from West Town to Ravenswood. I worked for 3 years in Englewood and two years in Austin. I've been to New York, hell of a town. I'll take Chicago any day of the week.
I'm talking about culturally significant buildings and such,
There are quite a few still around:
Historic Bronzeville
And MANY of the old houses from the "golden era" of Bronzeville are still there, albeit chopped up into multiple family dwellings instead of the single family homes that they used to be.
Maxwell Street, as you stated, is a whole 'nother store, as is much of the West side. I think the '60 riots did a lot of that in, not urban renewal.
1930s-1980s: "Oh, Chicago! Al Capone, Bang-bang!"
1990-2000s: "Chicago? Michael Jordan! Bang-bang!"
2009: "You're from Chicago? Obama! Bang-bang!"
I'll make sure I call the secret service on that last one, Mathilda.
Stealth,
It seems like every other corner down there features 3 vacant/parking lots and one corner lot of post '50s construction but hey...
Perhaps we can just both agree that there isn't enough remaining to garner a significant tourism draw.
Stealth,
It seems like every other corner down there features 3 vacant/parking lots and one corner lot of post '50s construction but hey...
Yeah, there's a lot of that too. When I drive around there, I often wonder how the same huge vacant parcel of land would go for in Lakeview or Lincoln Park... if it would last that long before a CVS/Quiznos/condo was slapped on it.
Perhaps we can just both agree that there isn't enough remaining to garner a significant tourism draw.
Well, it depends on what your idea of "tourism" is. If you're looking for interactive museums, high-end shopping, Imax theaters, an Apple store, etc., then no. If you're looking to learn about the history of the area, then there are plenty of tours for tourists to take part in.
Bronzeville Tour 1
Bronzeville Tour 2
Bronzeville Tour 3
Those things are great but most tourists aren't as intrepid as us Stealth. Again I'm saying that a lot of other cities have managed to keep some of their historical areas largely intact, at least compared to Chicago.
Exactly what BeeRockafeller said!
Yes and also chicago has the largest black middle class community in the country.
Royce, never been to Atlanta?
As for the NYT article, my favorite part is the author seems to think that the New Yorker coined the term "Second City" in 1952. That was hilarious.
Navin, I don't disagree with all the historical buildings that are no longer in Chicago, but what major city has done more? Chicago doesn't have the long history that some East Coast cities do; it's about 100 years old. What city has done it better?
Did this this guy seriously just say Chicago is 100 years old? Okay you are disqualified. Please leave the room.
Beebee, look around the city. The vast majority of the housing stock was built between the 1890s and 1920s.
I found myself falling for all the attention from the NY Times at first, but just after reading the column I went outside, accidently brushed shoulders with a fellow Chicagoan, and she cursed me out. I rememberred then: there’s no place like home. I wrote about it all on my own blog:
http://bethfinke.wordpress.com/2008/11/20/my-kind-of-town/
Enjoy-
Aaron does that fact make our architecture any less historically significant? At what point in years gone by do we get a chance to be in the running then? 150 years? 200 years? Or are we just forever doomed because we will always be behind those pesky east coasters? On a worldwide scale, according to your logic, NYC could never compare with such older cities as London or Paris, as they have older buildings too! And of course nobody can compare with Rome, everybody knows that, simply because they have the Coliseum. I don't buy into your reasoning. Maybe I'm missing your point entirely, I don't know.
And let's talk quality over quantity (or for this matter, years accrued). Does giving birth to the skyscraper get us any history points from you? Does changing the face of modern cityscapes forever mean anything? Or how about the Chicago School? Wright, Sullivan, Halibard & Root, Rohe, Burnham, ring any bells?
While east coast cities might have *older* buildings, our buildings have been more historically influential than any other city in the USA. And regardless of age, that counts for just a bit more, sorry.
Our buildings can kick your buildings asses!
Beebee, show me where I said that made Chicago at all inferior to any of those cities.
I was responding to Navin's statement that Chicago has a poor preservation record. Because it is a city built up only since the late 19th century [and thus, is a much younger city than cities on the east coast], Chicago doesn't have the age of buildings that, say, many east coast cities would have [I would say it's rather comparable to Atlanta in terms of the timeline of urban growth]. Many cities have a poor preservation track record; but singling Chicago out for that is wrong--comparably, I think it has done a pretty good job when compared to most. There is no better city in the country to use for examples of very late 19th-21st century architecture.
I've lived in NYC, Chicago, and LA. Only New Yorkers play the stupid comparison game all the time, and it's tired and wrong, especially now that New York has become a boutique version of its former, edgy self.
Chicago and LA make up the cultural powerhouses of the US, but if you ask a New Yorker, all they see if Oprah and Hollywood. Says more about them than about us. If they were actually so seriously interested in culture: visual art, music, theater, street fashion, societal trends, they would actually know where these things were happening, and it is NOT in New York. That's so 20 years ago.
we live in a beautiful comic book and they all know it. our policemen ride hover machines from the future. they're just jealous.
First of all, I think it's great that people are proud of the city they are from/live in. I wish a lot more people were. With that said, I have been to Los Angeles and New York City multiple times, and can confidently say that all three cities have their own unique personality and pace of life. Los Angeles is beautifully situated on the beach, and has a laid back, superficial style that is enjoyable to experience on a vacation. New York City is awe-inspiring in it's size and history. I have enjoyed many a vacation in both places and will continue to visit them. Chicago, however, is my home and I think it's the greatest city in the world. What is so wrong with that?
I've been to every major* city in the world, and can comfortably** say that Chicago is second only to Bydgoszcz, Poland in delicious caramelized onions. That's a fact, and is just as important as art, culture, sports, history, et cetera.
-b
*your definition of major may vary
**comfortable only because it's like 70 degrees and sunny here in Venice, CA - the best place in the world.
Who cares if you are an "official" Chicagoan or a transplant. If you live there, you have a vested interest in making the city work.
People have been transplanting themselves to Chicago for over 150 years. Mexico, Wisconsin, Korea, Iowa, or Poland, welcome one welcome all. Go build a fence with Pat Buchanan haters.
I'm a Chicagoan who moved to NYC for almost two years and moved back. Chicago is such a great city... even New York can't beat it! We're so lucky because we have everything a big city has to offer with little of the hassles. My move and move-back taught me that "bigger isn't necessarily better." Chicago is where it's at. Sometimes you just have to recognize what you've got.
It is not only New York that perceives Chicago as dull, the world is not aware of any aspect of Chicago that is worth mentioning. There is no Broadway here, there is no Wall Street, no United Nations, no countless galleries of SoHo, no big publishing houses, no movie industry, there is no 45 milions of tourists a year. You are surprised when Chicagoans in New York are ashamed to admit they are from the area? How could this be any different when every of your claims to greatness is just wishfull thinking not shared by anyone else? You look really dumb even making them... Nobody sane perceives Chicago theatrical life on par with Broadway and off-Broadway productions, nobody views the Tribune as interesting outside of the region as compared to New York Times, Newsweek or Time, nobody thinks of the Cubs or Sox as much as of the Yankees and Chicago art is not New York art judged even by the number of galleries and active artists, even though many of New York artists came from Chicago.. You are proud of few skyscrapers, have you seen the island of Manhattan from a distance?
You think New Yorkers are insecure? Clinging to Obama's election, who by the way was born in Hawaii and educated in Harvard, as your claim to fame only makes your inferiority complex more evident. You want to see how the world really perceives Chicago? Travel abroad: Chicago? Bang, bang.
By the way, two Chicago baseball teams won a total of three national titles in the past 100 years. Does anyone know how many titles have the Yankees won in the same time? Stop making dumb claims.
You make some valid points on the international perception of Chicago versus New York. But coming from someone with an NYU email, your argument has to be taken with the same grain of salt ours does.
Marcus,
I wouldn't expect you to do anything else. My point is however that Chicagoans should stop being so defensive unless they really want to be treated the way they are and it is not only by New Yorkers. Absurd, inflated claims are not helping. Just think about it.
By the way Marcus, would my comments be as much suspicious if I used Columbia or Harvard's email like our next president?
Our next president worked his entire elected political career here, so any "claims" to Obama are, despite being kinda silly, justified. Also, I see you've been trolling the site and dropping the same broken record comments on several posts, pointing out Illinois corruption - rightly so - but ignoring NY's own political corruption. If anything, your apparent need to do that seems to undermine your original point about an inferiority complex.
Marcus,
Being in Chicago I just can't believe that you can have two governors in a row corrupt to the bone, one selling driver licenses to illegal aliens, the other selling the seat in US congres yet there is no public outcry and demand for total government transparency.
I just can't believe how complacent and resigned people of the great state of Illinois are.
[42] | Bert Green wrote:
"Chicago and LA make up the cultural powerhouses of the US"
Bert, let's just stop right here. The above is a bold statement. Maybe I am a little ignorant or maybe I just missed something but I thought that the only national publications out of Chicago is Playboy, only TV productions Oprah and Jerry. That's hardly a powerhouse... What did I miss?
I thought the cultural powerhouse was New York with Broadway/off-Broadway, most US publishing houses and most national publications. Which one of us was brainwashed?