HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Midwest

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1021  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2018, 12:39 PM
glowrock's Avatar
glowrock glowrock is offline
Becoming Chicago-fied!
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chicago (Lakeview East)
Posts: 19,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baronvonellis View Post
How do you figure it's amazingly inexpensive? If anything it's pretty expensive. The Met in NY is way bigger and better, and it's free with a suggested donation.

The Louve is much bigger and better and is only 15 euros.
The 5 museums in Berlin on Museum Island together are only 18 euros.
My favorite museum The Prado in Madrid is only 15 euros.

I'm not interested in Asian art. Most of the contemporary art they buy is a huge rip off! Millions for a couple paint splatters on a huge canvas, a neon sign with a snarky comment, or some random photos that look like something any art student could come up with.

The Reina Sofia National Art museum in Madrid is my favorite modern art museum, It has a very excellent quality collection of Modern art. It's only 10 euro
Just checked on admissions policies at the Met, and yes, NY, CT, NJ residents are still suggested donation only. Non-residents of these three states are $25 admission. And again, I think this is a very fair price for such a ridiculously prestigious museum.

As for the specific artworks in the AIC's (or Met's, or Louvre's, etc...) collections, well, different strokes for different folks, right? I'm a huge fan of relatively contemporary pieces, plus impressionism. Give me Monet, give me Van Gogh, give me some Picasso, give me something like American Gothic, give me some Lautrec, etc., I'm a happy boy. I do happen to also like the more historical stuff like Asian, African, Oceanic, etc... etc... Not everything needs to be a bunch of Renaissance works.

Regardless, my point is that on nearly every world rankings list, the AIC is definitely right up there with the world's great art museums. And I don't think $20 is unfair in terms of admissions cost, especially when there are so many free and reduced-fee days for Chicago/Illinois residents.

Aaron (Glowrock)
__________________
"The three most beautiful cities in the world are Paris, St. Petersburg & Pittsburgh. If Pittsburgh were situated somewhere in the heart of Europe tourists would eagerly journey hundreds of miles out of their way to visit it." The New Yorker Jan. 9, 1989
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1022  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2018, 12:44 PM
glowrock's Avatar
glowrock glowrock is offline
Becoming Chicago-fied!
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chicago (Lakeview East)
Posts: 19,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
Not that long ago, entry fees to the Art Institute were "suggested." It's relatively recent that they became "enforced."
Fair enough. And many museums have done exactly that in the last decade or so. I remember when many museums I would visit in cities I've lived in had suggested admissions but weren't really enforced. Of course that was when artworks/artifacts could be acquired for far less than they generally can nowadays. My point is that I really don't see the admission at the AIC as being excessive, especially when anyone who wants to visit more than a few times in a year should really get a membership anyhow, as it's far less expensive. For example, it's what I did at the Shedd Aquarium, and just the lack of having to wait in those horrible lines is worth it for me, yet alone free admission!

Aaron (Glowrock)
__________________
"The three most beautiful cities in the world are Paris, St. Petersburg & Pittsburgh. If Pittsburgh were situated somewhere in the heart of Europe tourists would eagerly journey hundreds of miles out of their way to visit it." The New Yorker Jan. 9, 1989
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1023  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2018, 1:45 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is online now
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 14,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by glowrock View Post
Just checked on admissions policies at the Met, and yes, NY, CT, NJ residents are still suggested donation only. Non-residents of these three states are $25 admission. And again, I think this is a very fair price for such a ridiculously prestigious museum.

As for the specific artworks in the AIC's (or Met's, or Louvre's, etc...) collections, well, different strokes for different folks, right? I'm a huge fan of relatively contemporary pieces, plus impressionism. Give me Monet, give me Van Gogh, give me some Picasso, give me something like American Gothic, give me some Lautrec, etc., I'm a happy boy. I do happen to also like the more historical stuff like Asian, African, Oceanic, etc... etc... Not everything needs to be a bunch of Renaissance works.

Regardless, my point is that on nearly every world rankings list, the AIC is definitely right up there with the world's great art museums. And I don't think $20 is unfair in terms of admissions cost, especially when there are so many free and reduced-fee days for Chicago/Illinois residents.

Aaron (Glowrock)
Thanks for saying this in response to Baronvonellis’ silly post. Let’s not forget that a great amount of artwork in the Met is ancient near east/Egyptian stuff. We happen to have one of the world’s greatest collections of that here in Chicago, but not in the AIC. It’s at the Oriental Institute, a facility that doesn’t get as much acclaim as it deserves.

If seeing room after mind-numbing room of Renaissance paintings of random European nobles and Biblical scenes is really your thing, then yeah, AIC is probably not going to be your favorite place.

Also, don’t forget that Illinois residents still get free admission to these museums several days per year.
__________________
Stop villainizing market-rate housing
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1024  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2018, 5:31 PM
Emprise du Lion Emprise du Lion is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlajos View Post
^ it's not really fair to compare European art museums to US art museums in terms of cost. As we all know, Europe provides large subsidies to many things that US does not. It's like public transport there vs. the US. Just not comparable.

I personally think the Art Institute is one of the greatest art museums in the world. I love the Prado too, I honestly think AI is better though. Of course the Louvre is the best in the world to me.
Agreed, although this is something I miss about St. Louis. The majority of their major museums are free due to a local tax. You only have to pay extra for the special exhibits. This includes the St. Louis Art museum, Zoo, Science Center, and Missouri History Museum.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1025  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2018, 6:58 PM
Vlajos Vlajos is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by k1052 View Post
Though NYC has Community Boards screwing up basically everything they can get their hands on. I'll let the oversized city council live if that's an alternative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by left of center View Post
I think reducing the city council to 25 members would be pretty good in terms of representation as well as cost savings to the city. That would allow for roughly 1 alderman to represent 100,000 residents. That compares to 1 alderman per 170,000 residents in New York and per 250,000 residents in Los Angeles. The current ratio of 1 per 50,000 residents is frankly a pretty inefficient use of city resources...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khantilever View Post
Let’s be careful with what we wish for. Aldermanic Privilege empowers NIMBYism in some cases, but also makes development easier in many cases. First of all, with a centralized process we run the risk of a more restrictive zoning map applied to the entire city and a much more difficult re-zoning process. Second, the highly non-compact Ward boundaries allow for Aldermen to approve developments in areas under their jurisdiction which are relatively far from their core constituencies - I think Hopkins Ward 2 is a prime example of this, and I’ve heard stories about how Luis Gutierrez intentionally focused development in such parts of his ward when he was an Alderman.

I’m a PhD candidate in economics and I have a paper where I used this feature of Chicago’s process to look at development in the city, trying to find this effect in the data. And I see it. Homeownership rates are the prime predictor of opposition to development. But what I find is that when I have two block groups with similar homeownership rates and other characteristics which only differ in terms of which Ward they’re associated with, the one in the relatively renter-dominated Ward experiences faster and larger re-zonings.

I’m currently working on a model that will allow for some counterfactual simulations where I can redraw Ward boundaries or change the number of wards or even dissolve city council. But my intuition based on my existing results is that Aldermanic Privilege May well be generally beneficial to development. In general, Aldermen probably have an incentive to approve developments, thanks to the contributions they get — perhaps an instance of what we sometimes call efficiency-improving corruption. So even though they’ll cater to NIMBYs quite often, they also play a role in redrawing wards in a way that makes future development easier. I can’t claim to be privy to the details of the last redrawing, but I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the North Branch got lumped with a bunch of disparate areas. Obviously the big goal was to screw Fioretti, but it also gives surrounding Aldermen political cover to allow large-scale redevelopment to occur since its outside of their control.

And then of course we have the classic Tiebout sorting view that also suggests the system is better for us overall. You want low-density neighborhoods? There’s a ward for you. You want high density? We got you. If we were to instead create one standard for the city, because of their higher incomes and political participation the preferences of NIMBY homeowners are likely to be more influential than others’.
Well, look at this crap. The developer has a building permit and the stupid alderman is now trying to down zone the site. This is completely unacceptable. The time to stop this was long before a permit being issued.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/reale...-hotel-in-west
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1026  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2018, 7:12 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The Miami of Canada
Posts: 18,833
Quote:
Dorothy Brown to run for mayor

Fran Spielman @fspielman | email
Jon Seidel @SeidelContent | email

Embattled Circuit Court Clerk Dorothy Brown is jumping into the already crowded race for mayor of Chicago, despite a federal investigation that’s been swirling around her and her office for years.

A campaign flier circulated by Brown’s allies and a follow-up emailed announcement invites supporters to a campaign kick-off at 2:45 p.m. Sunday at the Chicago Hilton and Towers, 720 S. Michigan.

The flier uses the hashtag #Hope4AllChicago, underscored by the words, “Respect, Pride and Change.” Patricia Keenan, a spokesperson for the Brown campaign, confirmed the clerk would, in fact, join the crowded field attempting to unseat two-term incumbent Mayor Rahm Emanuel.
full article: https://chicago.suntimes.com/chicago...run-for-mayor/


my only question is why?

what's the play here?
__________________
He has to go.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1027  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2018, 9:17 PM
bnk's Avatar
bnk bnk is online now
પટેલ. કે ન
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: chicagoland
Posts: 9,449
She’s a “stalking horse” for Rahm.

She will wittingly or unwittingly draw the angry black monies, effort and if she stay in votes from a real candidate that could be a contender to topple him.

My guess she is doing it unwittingly or otherwise is going to get a lot of $ to do so.
__________________
facebook

Last edited by bnk; Apr 19, 2018 at 9:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1028  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2018, 9:56 PM
Baronvonellis Baronvonellis is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 557
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
Thanks for saying this in response to Baronvonellis’ silly post. Let’s not forget that a great amount of artwork in the Met is ancient near east/Egyptian stuff. We happen to have one of the world’s greatest collections of that here in Chicago, but not in the AIC. It’s at the Oriental Institute, a facility that doesn’t get as much acclaim as it deserves.

If seeing room after mind-numbing room of Renaissance paintings of random European nobles and Biblical scenes is really your thing, then yeah, AIC is probably not going to be your favorite place.

Also, don’t forget that Illinois residents still get free admission to these museums several days per year.
Lol. Well I went I went to the Met last summer it was free for everyone, maybe they changed it now. I spent 2 months in Europe last year, so the museums seemed alot cheaper there to me.

And yes, I'm a huge fan of Greco-Roman-European artwork. My favorite is Belgian art from the high middle ages/Renissance, Classical Greek and Roman. I know not everyone is into it as much. But the Belgian art from the middle ages is so extremely detailed, I really can stare at it for hours and get lost in the microscopic details. It takes so much care and patience to paint like that, you need a magnifying glass and a brush with only a couple hairs. I admire those artists that could paint like that. I just love fine details really, I'm not even very into the Christian themes personally, but that's all they painted in Europe till the Dutch Masters period in the 1600's. So, I loved the new Middle Ages wing at the Art Institute. I like modern surreal art such as Dali and Max Ernst which the Art Institute has alot of. They were expert artists as well.
I loved the Takashi Murakami: The Octopus Eats Its Own Leg at MCA! I'd like to see the Art Institute buy some of his artwork personally.

Yes, the Oriental Institute should be world famous! It's a shame because I go there often and it's usually pretty sleepy there. I don't think that hardly any tourists go there, it's seems to just be local Chicago people. Although, I don't know for sure. It's excellent, and that museum is free to go to! Maybe the Art Institute could build a wing to house the Oriental Institute's collection. I think alot more people would then view their collection if it were there, and the Art Institute would become even more famous!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1029  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2018, 2:15 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is online now
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Libertyville, IL
Posts: 14,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baronvonellis View Post
Yes, the Oriental Institute should be world famous! It's a shame because I go there often and it's usually pretty sleepy there. I don't think that hardly any tourists go there, it's seems to just be local Chicago people. Although, I don't know for sure. It's excellent, and that museum is free to go to! Maybe the Art Institute could build a wing to house the Oriental Institute's collection. I think alot more people would then view their collection if it were there, and the Art Institute would become even more famous!
Yeah, in typical (and forever annoying) Chicago fashion, we fail to reveal to the world how much of a treasure trove we have lying in waiting.

I haven’t been to the OI but I’m planning a trip. I’m certain it will be intriguing. I absolutely LOVE ancient history
__________________
Stop villainizing market-rate housing
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1030  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2018, 3:20 PM
Vlajos Vlajos is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,492
Red face

Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
Yeah, in typical (and forever annoying) Chicago fashion, we fail to reveal to the world how much of a treasure trove we have lying in waiting.

I haven’t been to the OI but I’m planning a trip. I’m certain it will be intriguing. I absolutely LOVE ancient history
Sad, but true for me as well. I went to the Oriental institute for the first time last year. It has an impressive collection.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1031  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2018, 6:18 PM
Baronvonellis Baronvonellis is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 557
Wow, you guys have to go to the Oriental Institute! I know I've talked to lots of people from Chicago that haven't even heard of it. It's sad. When I take them there, they are blown away by the collection! It's a equal to the Pergammon Museum in Berlin that is the jewel of their museum district, and the most visited art museum in Germany! 1.1 million visitors! But in Chicago it's barely even know, while being free!!!
It should really be moved to a central location, and marketed alot more. At least, it should be know by residents of Chicago! It's insane!

They have a huge collection of MONUMENTAL treasures from the near East and Egypt that were excavated 100 years ago by the University of Chicago. I suppose the UC would rather them stay put on their campus as a point of pride.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Midwest
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:16 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.