Chicago speaks

If you thought I was being over-dramatic in our last Chicago Thursday post, particularly when I evoked childhood artistic inspiration to decry the renaming of an icon of our city (and our country, and our hemisphere and, you know, architecture everywhere), then you should have seen the cover of the Red Eye on Friday: 

One of the Willis guys was reportedly surprised by the uproar, saying he thought people should be happy they were brining business and money to Chicago, instead of letting this theoretically beloved icon sit with so much empty, ignored space.  Another person pointed out that everyone morning the loss of the “Sears” Tower probably isn’t actually willing to throw their consumer/purchasing power into rebuilding the Sears Empire so they can move back into their namesake tower, clinching the name for good.  And I know, I know, I think we all know that this is the way things go, and no one, as far as I know, is planning any kind of large scale protest to tell the Willises to go back to their side of the pond…

I was talking to a friend of mine Friday night and brought up the fact that this is going to be one of those things we tell our kids, like “I remember back when this building here was called the Sears Tower.  Did you know that?  I remember when they changed the name!”  

To which our kids will respond, “oh my god, you are so old!”  

My friend’s response, as he shook his head, summed it all up: 

“Dang.” 

Tags: Chicago, skyscrapers