CHICAGO | Lucas Museum of Narrative Art

[J_M_Tungsten]

^^^

[Ryanrule]

Time to ban some nimby trash from this forum. Make sure to ip ban. Fuck them for supporting this bullshit. They now owe the city a billion dollars.

[Mr Downtown]

It's interesting to see how deeply Chicago observes the no-snitching code. When the mayor is caught violating the law, the immediate reaction is to attack those who called the police.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Ryanrule

Time to ban some nimby trash from this forum. Make sure to ip ban. Fuck them for supporting this bullshit. They now owe the city a billion dollars.

Uh - don't you think that's severely drastic? You may not agree with them, but it's their opinion, and I highly doubt that anyone in here gave enough money to block this (even Mr. D).

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by Ryanrule

Time to ban some nimby trash from this forum. Make sure to ip ban. Fuck them for supporting this bullshit. They now owe the city a billion dollars.

pathetic. people have differing point of view, and your solution to stick your fingers in your ears and pretend their opinions arent as valid as yours. or better yet, ban them from the conversation altogether.
north korea and china would love you.

this is why your side lost. too arrogant to even realize it.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

pathetic. people have differing point of view, and your solution to stick your fingers in your ears and pretend their opions arent as valid as yours. or better yet, ban them from the conversation altogether.
north korea and china would love you.

this is why your side lost.

I agree with your paragraph, up until this bolded part (which doesn't have much to do with the first). No, it's not why "the city of the museum" lost. It lost because Lucas didn't let it play out in court - it lost because of a lawsuit, and while stupid to block a museum as many people thought, still had enough legal grounding to continue in court. It's one thing to talk against someone who isn't open minded against other opinions, but to come on here and not even understand why the museum left Chicago as of right now is about half as ridiculous as what ryanrule said. And as far as I know, we're all for Chicago here - so even if you think that museum should have not been on the lakefront at all, Chicago lost the museum from going anywhere in the city - so both sides lost 100% if you can call yourself a Chicagoan and hope for progress in the city in general. There are no sides here anymore - we all lost.

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by marothisu

I agree with your paragraph, up until this. No, it's not why "the city of the museum" lost. It only lost because Lucas didn't let it play out in court - it lost because of a lawsuit, and while stupid to block a museum, still had enough legal grounding to continue in court. It's one thing to rally against someone who isn't open minded against other opinions, but to come on here and not even understand why the museum left Chicago is about half as ridiculous as what ryanrule said. And as far as I know, we're all for Chicago here - so even if you think that museum should have not been on the lakefront at all, Chicago still lost 100% of it and that is not something to cheer about especially if you come on here and post.

im not cheering. but lucas and rahm could have approached this so differently than they did. had they engaged the community earlier, been more open and transparent about the decision making process, and been more flexible around site location, this wouldnt have happened.

it was apparent this location would be challenged from day 1. they plowed ahead anyway, and then didnt even bother to let it play out in court. what was gained from all this? i question whether he ever truly wanted to be in chicago in the first place. its obvious CA was his first choice, and his wife talked him into bringing it here when it fell through. but i just never got the impression he thought of the city as anything other than something that should bend to his will. is he the type of guy you would ever see around town? engaging people in his idea? shaking hands with everyday people, garnering their support? outside of cloistered City Club esque lunches for the elite, never. hes a reclusive individual who is used to getting his way with a massive ego, and that dosent help when youre pitching an idea that is supposed to engage and benefit the community (if that is indeed what its really about).

it had nothing to do with Chicago, his legacy, or enriching lives. all he seems to have cared about from the beginning is being on the water.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

im not cheering. but lucas and rahm could have approached this so differently than they did. had they engaged the community earlier, been more open and transparent about the decision making process, and been more flexible around site location, this wouldnt have happened.

I'm not sure what you mean, considering most of the community and city was completely fine with having the museum. You would know this if you had bothered to follow the news from the beginning.

it was apparent this location would be challenged from day 1. they plowed ahead anyway, and then didnt even bother to let it play out in court.

FOTP did not have to bring about a lawsuit. This could have slid through. All bodies of government that needed to pass this to happen did so - all the way up to the Governor. FOTP was arguing based off of something that many people believe the city could have won - but FOTP still had enough of a claim to let the lawsuit continue.

but i just never got the impression he thought of the city as anything other than something that should bend to his will. is he the type of guy you would ever see around town? engaging people in his idea? outside of cloistered City Club esque lunches for the elite, never. hes a reclusive individual who is used to getting his way, and that dosent help when youre pitching an idea that is supposed to engage and benefit the community.

Who cares if he's reclusive? It's his life - not yours. It is not your job to judge someone because they don't like being in the spotlight. That is the lamest excuse ever for giving someone shit. "Oh he's reclusive." WHO GIVES A FLYING FUCK? You aren't him and he isn't you. Let people live their lives instead of judging them, just like your paragraph above says. I guess you only believe in what you said when you are essentially the one being attacked.

The guy has donated hundreds of millions of dollars to charity - including $25M to Chicago's After School Matters program and another $25M to the University of Chicago. He also has stated that he and Hobson will continue to reside in Chicago and donate money to charity in Chicago in their statement about the museum leaving. If he didn't care about the city, do you think he would have given $50M away to two organizations and vow to give more away in the future? The guy is also part of the Giving Pledge, and has pledged to give away at least half of his fortune to charity/philanthropic matters.

I truly don't think you read enough about why he wanted it in Museum Campus. One of the major reasons he wanted it there was because it was close to the other highly rated museums, and is a museum community. He spoke time and time again about how he wanted his museum to be near other museums so a family or individual could spend an entire day not only at his museum, but at the other ones and in the park. There were other sites offered up, but ultimately both sides agreed that the parking lot at Museum Campus near all the other museums would be the best spot for it.

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Who cares if he's reclusive? It's his life - not yours. It is not your job to judge someone because they don't like being in the spotlight. That is the lamest excuse ever for giving someone shit. "Oh he's reclusive." WHO GIVES A FLYING FUCK? You aren't him and he isn't you. Let people live their lives instead of judging them, just like your paragraph above says. I guess you only believe in what you said when you are essentially the one being attacked.

The guy has donated hundreds of millions of dollars to charity - including $25M to Chicago's After School Matters program and another $25M to the University of Chicago. He also has stated that he and Hobson will continue to reside in Chicago and donate money to charity in Chicago in their statement about the museum leaving. If he didn't care about the city, do you think he would have given $50M away to two organizations and vow to give more away in the future? The guy is also part of the Giving Pledge, and has pledged to give away at least half of his fortune to charity/philanthropic matters.

It may be his life, but its public land. Yes, my life is my life...Im also not petitioning to erect a structure on public land. If you want support for putting a building on land owned by the public, then you will actually have to emerge from the shadows and engage THE PUBLIC. What does USC and the MLK Memorial have to do with Chicago's lakefront? If you dont think people's perception of your intentions matter when it comes to a proposal like this, then again, I think its obvious why everyone thought it was simply a Star Wars gift shop.

If he wanted to keep "his life his life", then the solution is simple: acquire private land like everyone else and suddenly their opinions cease to matter

You still have this attitude that simply because he is rich he gets to do whatever he wants, no questions asked. That works in some aspects of life but not all, fortunately.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

It may be his life, but its public land. Yes, my life is my life...Im also not petitioning to erect a structure on public land. If you want support for putting a building on land owned by the public, then you will actually have to emerge from the shadows and engage THE PUBLIC. What does USC and the MLK Memorial have to do with Chicago's lakefront? If you dont think people's perception of your intentions matter when it comes to a proposal like this, then again, I think its obvious why everyone thought it was simply a Star Wars gift shop.

If he wanted to keep "his life his life", then the solution is simple: acquire private land like everyone else and suddenly their opinions cease to matter

You still have this attitude that simply because he is rich he gets to do whatever he wants, no questions asked. That works in some aspects of life but not all, fortunately.

I brought up other philanthropic endeavors to show that the guy isn't as full of himself as you really think, and he has given away millions, again, to two organizations in Chicago already and has vowed to give more in Chicago in the coming years.

No, I don't have that attitude, and never have. Funny, because on numerous occasions on this forum I have very clearly stated that if any person or organization would have tried to put something there other than a cultural institution, I'd be severely against it. Anybody who actually knows me as a person, other than on a message board, would know that what you said is a complete crock of shit and I have never favored rich people getting whatever they want simply because they're rich. To me, it doesn't matter who you are - and it shouldn't matter to anybody else either. I could care less if they're wealthy - I have wealthy people in my family and I deal with wealthy people at work everyday. I could hardly give a shit how much money someone has or doesn't have. That's not what makes a person. What should matter in this circumstance is what they're proposing to bring/develop. Please, stop trying to act like you know what I stand for - it's very clear you don't, and I've stated numerous times on here that I'm against developing the lakefront unless it's a cultural institution here and there.

[a very long weekend]

Originally Posted by marothisu

LOL "welcome to the big leagues" - Chicago is over 3X the population of San Francisco (the city) and has a 50% higher GDP than the San Francisco MSA. SF is a juggernaut especially when it comes to the economy in the last handful of decades - The bay areas GDP (SF + SJ) is almost the same as Chicago's. But please - spare us with this "welcome to the big leagues" bullshit. If you really think that, then you need to learn more about Chicago.

you half-wit, i meant "welcome to the big leagues" of nimby stupidity, where - i don't care what numbers you throw at me - we're number one by a long way.

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by marothisu

I brought up other philanthropic endeavors to show that the guy isn't as full of himself as you really think, and he has given away millions, again, to two organizations in Chicago already and has vowed to give more in Chicago in the coming years.

No, I don't have that attitude, and never have. Funny, because on numerous occasions on this forum I have very clearly stated that if any person or organization would have tried to put something there other than a cultural institution, I'd be severely against it. Anybody who actually knows me as a person, other than on a message board, would know that what you said is a complete crock of shit and I have never favored rich people getting whatever they want simply because they're rich. To me, it doesn't matter who you are - and it shouldn't matter to anybody else either. I could care less if they're wealthy - I have wealthy people in my family and I deal with wealthy people at work everyday. I could hardly give a shit how much money someone has or doesn't have. That's not what makes a person. What should matter in this circumstance is what they're proposing to bring/develop. Please, stop trying to act like you know what I stand for - it's very clear you don't, and I've stated numerous times on here that I'm against developing the lakefront unless it's a cultural institution here and there.

i apologize if i misread your stance. that said, it was the stance of the administration brokering this deal

from Kass' column:

"If you're spending a billion dollars to build a museum in Chicago, you should be able to put it wherever you want," a friend at City Hall said.

you think this narrative materialized out of the blue? it came from the top down. you dont understand why everyday citizens, even those who support the concept of a Lucas museum in Chicago, might be troubled and offended by that attitude when it comes to public land?

[VKChaz]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

.... i question whether he ever truly wanted to be in chicago in the first place. its obvious CA was his first choice, and his wife talked him into bringing it here when it fell through. but i just never got the impression he thought of the city as anything other than something that should bend to his will.....

I wouldn't make too much of it from the standpoint of treatment of a city. This is basically what happened with the Presidio in San Francisco. He was absolutely set on a location and finally became fed up and left. And people had said the same thing - isn't there someplace else. But he is quirky that way. Sometimes you just have to take the good with the bad and accept that people are the way they are.

[Ryanrule]

My opinion is harsh but true. Access to this forum, its content, and its discussion is a privilege. It would not be wrong to deny access to this resource to those who would use it to prevent progress is our cities/country. They have their own echo chambers.

[Mr Downtown]

The project thread has been closed, but some of you may find these two stories interesting:

Chicago magazine's Whet Moser did an excellent piece way back on June 7 explaining how the public trust doctrine presented a barrier to the Lucas Museum when there were already three museums nearby. In short: the public trust doctrine has been substantially expanded since those were built.

And in a Sun-Times story, Friends of the Parks Executive Director Juanita Irizarry explains the "demands" the group has been criticized for:

“The mayor asked us to negotiate. The first time we came back with terms to discuss, they accused us of extortion,” she said. “That goes to show they really weren’t interested in negotiating. Negotiations are a series of conversations until the parties come up with something they can agree on. But they summarily dismissed us. Mr. Lucas wanted his way or the highway.”