Area Soldier Killed In Fort Hood Rampage
Stroger Makes Hollywood Play
Put Down Your Nanowrimo And Leave The House
Sox Shuffle Continues
If there's one thing we can be sure of, it's the high level of vitriol with which locals despise Macy's for forcing out Marshall Field's. But now we've come up with a plan that may allow you to get a little bit of revenge and help a charity in the process. Macy's is running a campaign this holiday season called Believe based on the New York Sun's famous 1897 editorial, "Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus." Ha ha. Anyway. Each store is equipped with a "Believe Station" at which the young and young at heart can write a letter to Santa and drop it in the Santa Mail box. For every letter received, Macy's will donate $1 to Make-A-Wish, up to $1 million. So that got us thinking: how can we make sure Macy's has to shell out the full cool million and allows us to express our contempt for the store at the same time? Why, by stuffing the mailbox, of course!
We're encouraging our readers to write their own letters to "Santa" and stuff the box at the State Street Macy's. Heck, we're getting in on the act, too! Of course, this comes with a catch: you actually have to visit the Macy's on State Street to place your letter in the station. But we're sure you can get in and out before the stench of Macy's perfumes settles into your clothes and hair. Besides, it's for the kids! We sent writers/black-ops staff members Karl Klockars and Lauri Apple to get some pictures and they made it back alive with the report that the station is "in the center of the first floor, by the info booth and the fountain full of money." So now you know where to go. Also, if you want to spend as little time in the store as possible, head over to the campaign's site and print a letter out ahead of time.
In the spirit of the holidays, though, we'd like to ask anyone doing this to keep it clean. Don't cause the Make-A-Wish kids to cry, so keep the nasty "Fuck Macy's!" and death threats to yourself and keep it light-hearted. Our suggestion? Make item No. 1 on your list "Bring back Marshall Field's." Sends the message without getting the law involved. And for the record, our item No. 2 is a unicorn.
Let's get to it!
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Can I do this at the Macy's on Michigan Avenue? It's a lot more convenient. Plus I swore I'd never step foot in the State Street store again.
Yes. As far as I know, all Macy's should have these stations.
What an excellent idea!!
as one of the "locals" who despises the people who have time to dispise a store. Maybe I will just ask Santa to expand the parochial view of those that can't get past the fact that one store sold itself to another store, into a world view.
Mmaybe I (also as a Macy’s card holder) will also request that they attempt to win over the small minds of the above, by doing more charity work like donating gifts to those who have/ and are being foreclosured on. Well I guess this would not shut up the big fat suburban women who rode the metra( in tacky sweat suits) down to protest a store, but perhaps it might win over the few rational souls like Ingrid who for some reason got caught up in this stupidity. I mean we all have our strange proclivities. I just find the coming Zombie Apocalypse at lot more progressive than being concerned with one store that brought another store in capitalist America.
Can someone catch me up on why people are so bitter about one big corporate department store taking over another big corporate department store? I honestly would like to know why assumedly non-crazy people are willing to stand outside protesting Macy's and stuffing Santa's mailbox with meandering diatribes.
Thank you for the story, Marcus.
If you check the blog at http://FieldsFansChicago.org/blog, you will find that Field's supporters have been encouraged to and are already doing what you have described--submitting letters to Santa at Macy's, asking for the return of Marshall Field's. Thanks for reminding other Field's supporters who may have missed it that they should do the same.
Some Field's loyalists have reported writing the letter to Santa in green crayon or marker. Others have reported depositing an "I Want My Marshall Field's" button or one of our grass roots group's leaflets instead of a letter. As a personal opinion, I think a letter is the way to go since a) Macy's didn't say they would donate when buttons and leaflets are placed in the box, and b) the buttons and leaflets are probably more effective when passed along to other parties. I understand that the Woodfield and Oak Brook locations might also have such mailboxes; perhaps other Macy's have them too.
That said, this brings up a point of discussion. Isn't Macy's being good citizen when they have charity events like this or offer cultural events?
To a certain extent, yes. But if such activities were conducted in name, quality and spirit as Marshall Field's, they would draw much more good will for the community as well as greater funding support. In short, as Field's, they'd be raising a lot more cash!
In this context, consider the example of last spring's annual Macy's flower show which presented fauna from Latin cultures. Yet, how was one to take Macy's presentation of Latin floral culture seriously when they have disrespected the major piece of Chicago culture that they own in name, although not in spirit?
Because of Macy's attitude and actions, Field's supporters are still supporting Chicago stores and charities--but they have moved them to other retail establishments that respect what customers want and need. Field's customers are supporting the charities at those other "Chicago-respectful" stores instead.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this view. I wish "Make A Wish" success in the Macy's "Santa Letter" campaign, but it should be pointed ou they would have benefitted much more in Chicagoland if the store was Marshall Field's.
Jim McKay
Co-Organizer
FieldsFansChicago.org
Regarding Spook's comments: Do you take time rooting for a sports team? Why don't you despise people who "waste time" on that? I have given up watching most TV since I became involved. Is TV a better thing?
For "Brian" who kindly asked to be filled in, Field's was a department store, but it also became internationally known as one of Chicago's great icons, representing our city at its best. And unlike our sports teams, Field's was much more of a consistent winner, so much so that people would make it one of the top destinations in our city. What made it great? It's ties to the city. Even though no one named Field's has run the store in over 100 years, those who have run it since have helped make possible the Shedd Aquarium, the Merchandise Mart, the University of Chicago and many other institutions. Field's also set the standard for service. As recently as 2004 or 2005, Field's was ranked third nationally for department store service, even though it was a local/regional chain. Even if you didn't like Field's, there has been a loss in tax revenue because people can go to Macy's pretty much anywhere in the U.S. Why travel to Chicago when there's a Macy's in L.A., NYC, Miami, Seattle, etc? Field's contributed greatly to tourism.
There are many other reasons for the loyalty to Field's, but this is just a start. And please remember, those who are active in bringing back Field's are also active in other causes as well: among the core Field's supporters are those who also travel overseas for relief work; locally in the issues of greening the environment and architectural preservation; and those who assist in helping those with epilepsy and cancer. Outside of our Field's work, we're active in many other causes.
Spook,
It's not just a store.
And I've only been here for a few years, but it's a tradition and a huge part of history as well, and I always go for tradition and history was one of my favorite subjects in school...tradition and history get me all warm and fuzzy inside.
http://www.pdxhistory.com/html/marshall_fields.html
"...Dear Santa: Macy's is a great store....for me to POOP on."
"...Love, Triumph."
So consumerism + 100 or so years = nostalgia. Okay, got it.
Marshall Field did some great things for Chicago, but he isn't alive anymore and his store was bought by Macy's. It seems pretty simple to me.
Of course, I can't speak for the guy - he's dead, but I'm sure he'd rather be remembered for the Shedd, U of C, etc. than the place I buy jeans. The plaque is still on the building outside, the staff is friendly and helpful and the store is kept up the same as I remember it when I visited as kid - haven't any of you heard the whole "a rose by any other name" thing?
Ingride, there is alot of history( real history) that gets erased in Chicago with out protest. There are institutions that don't want to get erased, but do get erased. This is a major corporate store. The corporation that owned said store,wanted to sale it. They didn't sale it,NOT
because a gun was placed to their head, they sold it for money. They also sold it with out requesting that the name stay the same. They just took the cash and flew away. You don't think its silly to care about this especially during these times? Seems like its about small minds( you
not included) afraid to face real change.
But I am mystified as you you being part of this
Jim guess you missed my rants on modern sports, but interesting you compare this too modern sports
I don't go all mushy inside about buildings and such disappearing, etc.. I realize cities are ever-evolving organizism, but damn, can we have SOMETHING that made Chicago Chicago? If not, what's the point? Call it Centerville and make it as generic as you want it. Is this still "Chicago" if there's no Soldier Field, Wrigley Field, Sears Tower. Hell, even that dumbass Bean thing will work its way into our bloodstream years from now and will be part of what makes Chicago Chicago. I mean, every city does this when they lose a "landmark", not just Chicago, so why try to paint this place as the only provincial outpost in the nation? Does it matter in the long run that Field's is now called Macy's? Hell no. But I won't begrudge someone who is put of by the change and insist that they "get with the program".
Here's what at guy I deeply respect said about it:
"As your plane lands, you no longer see old landmarks, old signatures. You have no idea where you may be."
Quote 1
"Studs Terkel, at age 93 as much of a Chicago institution as Marshall Field's, called the name change "horrendous."
"Not because of its commercial value, but the name of Field's represents our past. The past is being erased," Terkel said."
Quote 2
"But another Chicago icon, 93-year-old Studs Terkel, says it's a big mistake.
"If the past is erased the present is impoverished. We are less," said Studs Terkel, author."
Quote 3
The boycott against Macy's is purposeful. It's putting a store that has HURT our city out of business---at State Street especially.
At the same time, putting this store out of business provides a chance that at some future date, a different owner could bring back Marshall Field's. In fact, that would be the most profitable use for the State Street building.
My point is that this is not just sour grapes. It is an action with a goal. As for the "action," people are simply shopping elsewhere!
Hey, Jim, I like sports. That's why I was so happy to see the Houston Oilers do so well this season. They just might make the Superbowl.
Of course, Jim's probably hoping the Colts will take another trophy back to Baltimore. He's probably gearing up for that Brooklyn World Series.
Spook,
You do make a valid point...why should I care about a corporation when all they care about is making their dollar and getting out.
Then again, so many people did not want this...maybe corporations should start listening to the people and stop caring so much about making billions. Yeah...I know...that's a naive thing to say...but if the Detroit car CEO's had thought of that, they wouldn't be in the position they're in now.
And this is hurting business downtown. Many people went downtown specifically because of Marshall Fields. And all of that tourism and local business is gone. So, as much as I can see your point, I really do think that Fields was so much more than just a corporation. Target is a corporation, Kmart too...but Marshall Fields was zeitgeist.
If you feel the Marshall Field's was just a store you're not familiar with Chicago, history, or the importance of keeping the unique treasures that make up a city.
Marshall Field's is just a store.
The Golden Gate Bridge is just a bridge.
The Hollywood Sign is just a billboard.
The CN Tower is just an observation deck.
The Eiffel Tower is just a flag post.
Big Ben is just a clock.
The Sydney Opera House is just a performing arts center.
not to mention the commercial landmarks in other cities...
Saks Fifth Avenue is just a store.
Harrod's of London is just a store.
Nathan's Hotdogs on Coney Island is just a hotdog stand.
The fact is that Marshall Field's helped define Chicago. It was not only a tourist attraction but also a place where locals went... knowing that it was "As Chicago As It Gets." Just imagine if someone closed down Harrod's in London, there would be chaos. Just like Marshall Field's, Harrod's is an institution that defines the city. Macy's will never win in this city, plain and simple. You can't slap someone in the face and then say... "Let's be friend." Sorry that doesn't work. Their continued failure in Chicago, Minneapolis and Detroit shows that people have "moved on" to Nordstrom, Target, Saks, Von Maur, Crate & Barrel, etc.
Bring back Marshall Field's in name, quality, and service!
Spook,
If the corporation Macy's Inc. really wanted to make the most money AND all it cared about was profit... it would leverage the biggest untapped asset it has "Marshall Field's." The very fact that they don't do this shows that (1) they not only don't care what customers want but (2) they don't care what shareholders want either (which is to maximize profit).
Both Customers and Business Experts agree... Macy's made THE biggest mistake in retail history.
Ward Up:
So you're hedging your bets that driving Macy's on State (which employs hundreds of people) out of business now in exchange for the slim chance that in the future some deep pocketed good samaritan will buy the rights to the Marshall Fields brand, refurbish the store and take shoppers back to the magical days of AAA retail? How altruistic of you.
Is there this much outrage over the Carson's building, which is much more historically valuable, or Wards, which is being turned into condos?
Ingride
Zeitgeist denotes movements and time periods of higher thought and culture, not consumerism.
With all the wrong in Chicago,
these people are protesting a store. What type has the time?
Let them stay away from downtown. But we should support Macy's like we support any store with Chicago workers. Oh and Ingrid, the "fields people" don't get into the fact that the Field's corporation fired all the Frango mint old ladies with a two weeks notice, many right before their pension kicked in. Where were the protesters then? The story ran one day with Daley complaining but saying that's bussines.
The current Field's protesters didn't care because it’s not about people to them. Its about their "commercial instilled values and class memories".
Remember it’s a corporation, and if you think corporate America cares about this then continue to kid your self
back in the day, my mom took me to shop at Sears. I have memories too. Pop corn, the candy store, etc. If Sears got sold, I would say good luck.
" if someone closed down Harrod's in London, there would be chaos."
Jason M
Nope, working people in London tend to be smarter than us.
The Eiffel Tower?
Sydney Opera House?
Am I suprised, to hear this stupidity nope
Spook,
I'm not sure why you have so much angst about people taking action about something they believe in. People protest all the time for a variety of reasons. Yeah Marshall Field's was a commercial entity, yeah Macy's Inc. had the right to do whatever they want with their trademark/building, but also true is the fact that Chicagoans have a right to say "Thanks, but no thanks. This is not what we want." What's so wrong about that? Are we suppose to be passive observers for the rest of our lives and say "that's commercialism... can't do anything about it"?
I admit the Eiffel Tower and Sydney Opera examples were a stretch but they were used to make a point. Nonetheless, retail folks from all over the world came to Chicago to see and learn how to run a department store. Field's had so many first's. There is a lot of history in the building on 111 N State Street. It did have an important place in history and Chicago. The building is on the National Historic Landmark and listed on the National Register of Historic Places. This isn't just a McDonald's in a strip mall! Even McDonald's keeps its first and iconic restaurant in Des Plaines, IL!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Field%27s
I am one of the people who does not like what Macy's has done with Field's. I don't go out and protest or boycott, but I don't like the disrespect for Chicago's heritage and traditions. Field's has been owned by a number of companies in recent years - that's not the problem. I don't like changing the name and removing a lot of the character of the store, and I question the business sense of these moves. Macy's owns other stores, like Lord & Taylor, and did not change their identities.
My fondness for Field's has little to do with buying things. It has to do with memories and tradition. Coming downtown from the southside every winter with my family to have lunch at the Walnut Room, look at the tree, windows, and the Tiffany dome means something to me. My family still gathers the saturday after Thankgiving to make our trip to State St. I am sorry if people like Spook find such traditions to be worthless or evidence of just commercialism. For me it was and is a time to enjoy the city I live in, to take in the architecture and guys preaching on the street. It's about an experience, not buying things.
I am sorry that Carson's on State St. is gone and that I can't appreciate the architecture there. I am sorry that Weibolt's on State St. closed. I have lived here my whole life. Each time I see a part of old Chicago slip away, it bums me out - whether it's a department store downtown, Red's (the local hotdog place we went to growing up), or the Wirsum mural. Yes, there is plenty to be pissed off about in our city and the larger world, and trust me I am plenty pissed - this is just one thing on a long list.
As a side note, the history of Field's is pretty interesting. It revolutionized approaches to customer service and to retail. It was one of if not the first operation to realize the buying power of women. One of the driving ideas of Field's was to create a socially acceptable and safe environment for women to go to downtown without a male escort. Sure the point was to get women to spend money, but along the way it helped give women a little more freedom and autonomy than they had before.
Are we suppose to be passive observers for the rest of our lives and say "that's commercialism... can't do anything about it"?
Jason, honestly its a corporate store.
You rallying around Marshall Fields is like being back in the 17th century rallying around the Louis XV. See, the Field's corporation ceased caring about you along time ago, if Fields ever really did. But you continued to care about them. Even when they abandon you. Just like they abandoned/fired the Frango Mint ladies( and a few old men) two weeks before Christmas. To them its just businesses. Hooking people into a "tradition" Business, firing the Frango Mint women two weeks before Christmas and their retirement, business.
That's how it works through out history, the poor and working class coveting the all shat shimmers and glimmers icon. And when the all that shimmers and glimmers icon spits in their face and splits for greener pastures, do they get angry? No, the miss them even more and fight to preserve their name.
"Yes lord they may have beat me, but honey, while dey were hear, they sho did love me!"
About the suggestion that the Marshall Field's boycotters are putting Macy's employees out of work, here are a few points.
First, shoppers who are boycotting Macy's are simply shopping at Nordstrom's, Lord & Taylor, and elsewhere, creating jobs at those stores.
Second, Marshall Field's was the number three tourist destination in Chicago. Think of the shopping and spending tourists (or suburbanites) that don't come to Chicago to shop at Marshall Field's anymore. Those visitors spend money at other places that are missing out on that revenue as we speak. And that also costs jobs.
The point is that Macy's caused this problem, making a bad business decision, and a lot of people have been hurt by it. And yes, there is hope for Marshall Field's to come back.
Spook,
So it's commercialism. But to many it's memories and tradition.
If it works for them, then they're getting what they need and the corporation is getting what it needs.
"Yes lord they may have beat me, but honey, while dey were hear, they sho did love me!"
(Beat me, I love it :)
Spook,
For someone so baffled as to why people would waste so much time and energy caring about Field's, you certainly are spending a lot of time and energy telling them why they are wrong.
Just because something is corporate doesn't mean that it is not part of history or tradition. The Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade is corporate, but it's a tradition for millions of people. Rudolph the Red-Nose Reindeer is tradition for millions, yet Rudolph was created as a marketing campaign for Montgomery Ward's.
While laying off the Frango ladies and moving the Frango operation out of state was a crappy thing to do and I agree that corporations repeatedly crap on the customers, I think it's misleading to act like corporations are the only institution to exhibit this behavior. Hospital, newspapers, the museum I work for, almost any entity that needs/wants to make money treats people this way. Even local independent mom and pop operations treat customers or employees badly sometime. Is it right? No, but let's not pretend that Field's/Macy's is unique in this way. In fact, one could argue that people who are vocal about the Macy's/Field's thing are actually speaking out against a corporation spitting in their faces and ignoring what they want.
Spook,
wow you really have a negative outlook on life! that's too bad. best of luck in life.
Boy, Spook gets all the attention -- well here's the history lesson for you Spook, again... Field's didn't 'sell out' to Macy's, not by a long shot. Simply, Field's was owned by the May Company. It was operated by May as Field's, happily and contentedly and profitably. But lo and behold, [insert Grinch music here], Federated Department Stores/Macy's-Bloomingdales then bought the May Company, and all of May's national holdings, including Lord & Taylor, Marshall Field's, Filene's, Famous-Barr, Foleys, Hecht's, and several other department store lines across the US. Federated then made the decision to sell off L&T (Thank Gd!), but convert all the remaining May stores to the "Macy's" brand name, including our Field's. It was purely and simply a land grab -- all the real estate these stores held made them so valuable. Why compete when you can simply buy up and eliminate any competition in one fell swoop?
For Field's, the change to the cookie-cutter, downmarket M brand was an extraordinary downgrade in both product and service, and sparked the incredible backlash we have witnessed these past two years. I mean when Roger Ebert publicly comes out and writes that changing Field's is a terrible decision, you know you got big problems!
And they now certainly do! Their stock is now almost as worthless as their cheap, knock-off lines of products.
Santa will definitely be getting a letter from me this Christmas! At least it will force that horrid, vulgar store to donate something to a good cause. Alas, there aren't enough donations in the world that could purify all that bad karma!
"Dear Santa, Field's is Chicago! Boycott Macy's!"
....And to all a good night.
Throughout the world, when someone sees the Marshall Field's name, they think of Chicago. This value to Chicago and tourism is created by Marshall Field's long history of generosity and leadership in Chicago, the many museums Marshall Field's created (the Museum of Science an Industry, the Field Museum of Natural History, the Shedd Aquarium (named for Field's president John G. Shedd), the Art Institute of Chicago (land and endowment to purchase the museums first collections provided by Field), the University of Chicago (land donated by Marshall Field, one of the University largest benefactor over the years with John Rockefeller) and of course the unique world-class destination department store that made all of this possible.
There's also the leadership Marshall Field's showed to help the city rebuild after the Chicago Fire and to survive the Great Depression when Field's completed construction of the Merchandise Mart and kept employees on the payroll, demonstrating his commitment to his store and to Chicago's future. Marshall Field's, the name and the store, have been a valued community partner and source of pride for Chicago that helped to define Chicago's style, culture and character for generations.
A name like Marshall Field's is not so easily replaced, especially not by Macy's, a rather generic mid-tier discount store and a name best known for a parade in New York City. Certainly the value of Marshall Field's iconic State Street store to Chicago can not easily replaced with an outpost of a national mid-tier chain.
Macy's deserves the disdain and anger it now battles to overcome in Chicago. Rather than to build its own new stores as has been done by most competitors entering new markets, Macys commandeered Marshall Field's in order to acquire prime real estate in highly desirable locations and to eliminate competition for the Macy's and Bloomingdale's.
For this short cut to national expansion, many have had to pay a very high price. Chicago and State Street have suffered the the loss of unique tourism appeal and the decline of high-end customer traffic so important to maintaining a vibrant shopping district. Chicago has lost the distinction of having its own world-class department store in a league with London's Harrod's, Paris' Printemps, Munich's KaDeWa and New York's Bergdorf Goodman. Customers have lost many cherished traditions that have been shared by generations - not with a building, but with Marshall Field's. Thousands of Marshall Field's employees were fired by Macy's in the first year, and those remaining have seen salaries, commissions and benefits cut. Many communities once served by Marshall Field's have suffered the loss of tax receipts due to the decline in Macy's revenues that began the day Macy's name went up on the more successful Marshall Field's stores.
The saddest part of all this is that Macy's insists on staying the course instead of chosing to take advantage of the obvious alternative in which everyone would benefit. To restore Marshall Field's on State Street and perhaps other select location in high-end markets would bring back customers, enhance tourist appeal, create new and better jobs, increase tax receipts and reward Chicago's pride in its iconic and elegant Marshall Field's brand. Macy's is losing hundreds of millions of dollars each year at former Marshall Field's stores, so certainly the cost to restore Field's would be quickly recovered when Field's customers and tourists return. Also, Macy's would hardly miss one or more underperforming stores and Macy's wanted to it could still build more of its own stores. The only damage would be to the pride of Macy's senior execs who put the failed conversion plan into effect. Fortunately, Macy's would benefit from having done the right thing, which might go far to offset much of the anger and resentment so many people feel as a result of seeing their beloved Marshall Fields erased from history while Field's traditions were commandeered and cheapened by Macy's.
I will leave yall with his
I remember and old SNL episode with
William Shatner taking questions at a star track convintion. He finally gets pissed and says "people it was just a show! It wasn't real. Don't you have lives? Get on with them. Its over." And the Trekies go right back to questioning him about what was he thinking when he drank the Vulcan blood
Ingrid
don't excite me! It aint even Thursday yet! ;-)
"No time to marry, no time to settle down and I ain't yet done runnin' around."
-Bessie Smith
I find this argument very interesting, especially since I can't decide who to agree with.
I'm not from Chicago originally, so I have absolutely no ties to the history, culture or nostalgia of Field's. I was only vaguely aware that it was some kind of store, and really wouldn't have been able to tell you if it was in Chicago, LA or New York. In fact, I've never visited a Marshall Field's store -- and probably never will unless y'all win.
But I can understand why people are mad. If Macy's bought out Belk and changed its name, I wouldn't be happy. After all, growing up in Charlotte, I have plenty of memories of shopping there, and the Belky Bears my sister would get for Christmas, and all that. And there's a certain local pride in the department store founded in your hometown.
On the other hand, while I understand that people are mad, there is something almost vulgar about protesting outside a store simply because another, worse, store took it over. It reminds me of the long lines of people camping out to buy an iphone here while I know parents in Mexico who have to camp out all night just to get their kids a place in school (and I mean school, not private school, not a special charter school, just school period). There are just so many good reasons to stand outside a building holding angry signs -- but I'm just not sure this is one of them.
But, in the end, who am I to tell you what to protest. Maybe you'll even get Field's back.
p.s the comments about me being mean and inhuman hurt, especially around this time of year. Yes I too have fond memories at Fields too. During the holidays, I use to sale wooden match sticks outside of Fields all day.
I suppose the point of all this discussion is that Field's was more than just a store that sold stuff. If it were that simple, then certainly Field's could be replaced with any other store that sold stuff. But here is where that elusive and valuable "good-will" comes to play.
Companies earn good-will through the quality of their products, their perceived value, their standards of service and their community involvement, among other things. These are not generic, interchangeable and transferable factors, they are closely tied to a particular brand for it is the brand that earns good will.
Macy's squandered the good will earned by Field's in Chicago. This has had a very real, very tangible cost to employees, tax receipts and tourism. We're not simply talking about touchy-feely emotions. We're talking about jobs and revenue. Even the most cynical posters here might agree that it's worth making an effort to stand up to companies that hurt our communities. It's also worth working to bring back Field's return to benefit employees and the communities Field's has served so incredibly well for 154 years.
By every measurable criteria, Field's outperformed Macy's and provided more for Chicago than Macy's. I can't think of one good reason why it's OK to simply accept Macy's failings, especially when the alternative of bringing back Field's is such a viable option.
Certainly it will be easier to restore Field's than it was to eliminate it and turn it into Macy's. It will also cost Macy's less that it is currently losing while it continues to operate the stores as Macy's.
Gee, I believe that Macy's was wrong to fire 10,000 people in 9 months, to slash orders for domestic goods so they could carry store brands made in China, to slash customer service to nothing, to have messy, dirty stores.
SHOP AT MACY'S? NEVER
Yeah, everyone flocked to Chicago just to shop at Marshall Fields! What a great reason for a road trip...it's not like they couldn't have just shopped at one of the other 60+ Marshall Fields stores, some of which were created by buying out some beloved local department stores in other cities..
To Joe Blow...
You mock the Field's tourism appeal, but you really can't disregard the fact is that millions of tourists each year did make Field's State Street store a shopping destination, and they don't do the same with Macy's. As a well known and respected Chicago brand, Field's was featured prominently in tourism advertising, movies and TV shows when scenes called for a unique and high-end location. That you don't understand or appreciate this really doesn't change the fact that to millions of other people in cities around the world, Field's is a prominent Chicago institution. Furthermore, the State Street store helped enhance the image that benefited other Field's stores throughout the region, just as other name brands build high-profile flagships.
As to your assertion that Field's bought out and replaced other beloved stores local department stores just like Macy's has done here, well, you're just plain misinformed. Field's didn't buy and changed Hudson's, it was the other way around. Dayton Hudson bought Field's and renamed their own Hudson's stores. At the time, Hudson's said that Field's was considered a higher end store than Hudson's and Field's reputation was international, and Hudson's customers were generally happy with the change. Don't forget that Field's influenced much of Hudson's own growth and traditions and Field's in Chicago was well known to Hudson's customers as a tourist destination in Chicago, the region's largest city.
Joe Blow: The State Street location was their flagship store (similar to what the 31st Street/location is for Macy ). It was the location that had the spectacularly themed Christmas windows every year, and it was also the only location that had the fantastic Walnut Room.
So every year, people would come from ALL OVER THE WORLD (as well as the locals) to walk down State Street to see the window displays for Marshall Fields, Carson Pirie Scott, and the other stores, shop, then eat in the Walnut Room. More budget conscious folks (or people who didn't like the Walnut Room fare) STILL did the walk down State Street to look at the windows but you ended up shopping at the other stores on State and eating at Berghoffs, Ronny's Steak House or McDonald's. So Field's State Street store brought in a lot of revenue not only for the store, but for the other stores and restaurants also in the Loop. In year's past you used to have to practically bulldoze your way down State Street this time of year.
I went downtown this weekend, and let's just say it wasn't quite as crowded OR "Christmasy" as years past; and I don't think all of that can be blamed on the recession either.
Macys could have bought MF but still kept the name and store structure intact (similar to what Starbucks did with Seattle's Best) as their "Midwest" branding. Instead, they got some mouthpiece to announce that they did a survey of Chicagoans (doubtful) that claimed "they didn't care one way or the other if the name was changed" and used that as an excuse to completely wipe a 150 year institution off the map. I hope they're enjoying the huge drop in sales! Especially considering that everything they do in Chicago (as opposed to their NY shops) is second-rate.
I don't begrudge Spook and other people who don't care and will shop there anyway; for some people a store is a store. *shrugs*
But all of the complaints being aired -- the memories of windows at christmas time, eating in the walnut room, the tiffany ceiling, etc -- they're all still there. The store just has a new name! That's what's especially ridiculous about all of the protests and complaints -- it's not like they shut the store down! It's still open, pretty much the same as it ever was..
No it's not. Have a look at those windows, then compare them to MF's Christmas displays. They don't even compare. The quality of the clothes they carry isn't there either (minus the designer gear); I'm convinced that they ship the stuff they can't sell in NY to Chicago. Every single thing they do here is second-rate in comparison to Field's and especially to their OWN STORES. If you go to Macys on State and then visit their flagship store in NY, the differences will be enough to PISS YOU THE HELL OFF.
I'm not going to waste my time picketing and protesting. I will, however vote with my feet.
The traditions were created by and shared with Marshall Field's, not with a building. Besides the fact that so many of the things customers loved about Marshall Field's have been cheapened and turned into crass marketing ploys by Macy's, commandeered by Macy's they're sad reminders of how Chicago's long history with Field's has been disregarded and replaced by a generic mid-tier national chain that has no ties or legacy of leadership and generosity with Chicago.
Inside a Macy's, the Tiffany ceiling can still be appreciated as a beautiful work of art, but it's no longer representative of a unique and world-class Chicago institution. Inside a Macy's, the Walnut Room is just another restaurant, poorly run I might add. And the Christmas Tree and decorations... are you serious? They're an embarrassment compared to the designs and installations created by Marshall Field's. Even if they retained the elegance and charm of Field's, they would no longer be a unique Chicago-only feature that would appeal to tourists, as is evidenced by the dramatic drop in customer traffic since Macy's name went up. Certainly the many expressions of dismay when tourists find a Macy's where they expected to find Chicago's own Marshall Field's reflect the appeal of the Marshall Field's brand and not that of a building.
Aside from some of the architectural elements that remain, Macy's merely occupies a building that it filled with Macy's "way to shop", complete with an abundance of low quality, mass-produced merchandise. The store as it operates today has very little in common with the distinctive Chicago tradition that is Marshall Field's.