News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.8K     0 

A

Antiloop33rpm

Guest
An interesting critique of Millenium Park in Chicago. Ive heard mixed reviews of the park and having not seen it yet I cant really judge accurately but the author has lot of credibilty as a writer and his comments seem to echo a lot of the sentiment that many have for the park. However, even if it is almost a theme park, the fact that so many people have visited must say something. Similair in a way between the weird melding of public/private space one sees at Dundas Square. Enjoy.

slate.msn.com/id/2118377/

Chicago's Magic Kingdom
Is Millennium Park a theme park for adults?
By Witold Rybczynski
Posted Wednesday, May 11, 2005, at 4:36 AM PT

The great urban park was a 19th-century American invention. It's unlikely that we will ever again build anything as ambitious as Central Park, Golden Gate Park, or Boston's Emerald Necklace. Land is simply too expensive and cities are too poor—just maintaining the parks that they've inherited strains their budgets. In any case, despite their popularity, urban parks with their old-fashioned cast-iron benches and their winding footpaths are a throwback to a politer, more reflective time. We build theme parks, not urban parks.

Chicagoans obviously don't agree. The city has just spent almost half a billion dollars on Millennium Park, which opened last July. In its first six months, the downtown park has attracted more than 1.5 million visitors. This is an impressive number considering the park is only 24.5 acres—Central Park gets 20 million visitors annually, but it covers more than 800 acres. On a visitor-per-acre scale, Millennium Park must be the most popular park in the country.

Chicago's new park may not be large, but it is crammed with attractions. The most prominent is a band shell and a large lawn (called, inevitably, the Great Lawn) that together can accommodate 11,000 people. In addition, there are fountains, sculptures, a large garden, event spaces, a restaurant, a bicycle station, and a 1,500-seat music and dance theater. The whole thing is built on top of a three-level parking garage and railroad tracks.

On a recent visit, it struck me that in many ways Millennium Park is a theme park. In one corner is Burnham's World, which includes a Classical peristyle of fluted Doric columns, a formal lawn, lots of urns and formal planting beds, and light standards designed by the great Chicago architect Daniel Burnham. Nearby is the Not-So-Enchanted Forest. Conceived by Kathryn Gustafson in an edgy, chic style, the three acres of prairielike landscape behind a topiary of flowering trees include a diagonal boardwalk and a water-course that resembles an industrial sluice. Next door, Artland consists of two plazas: one with Anish Kapoor's stainless-steel sculpture (under wraps when I visited), titled Cloud Gate but known locally as "the Bean"; and Spanish sculptor Jaume Plensa's fountain. At first glance, the twin 50-foot rectangular prisms with water cascading down their glass-block faces look like leaky cooling towers. But the installation grows on you. Human faces are projected on the giant interactive video screens, which sounds corny but is curiously appealing and sometimes quite funny. The shallow pool is artfully designed to encourage wading.

Millennium Park even has its Cinderella Castle. Frank Gehry was an inspired choice to design the band shell. It is obvious by now that Gehry is the most accomplished Baroque architect since Borromini, and his exuberant confection is an ideal expression of music in the park. The gridded steel-and-glass high-rise towers of Michigan Avenue provide a perfect backdrop for his sculptural, freewheeling architecture.

The attractions of Millennium Park, which also include a strip of indoor and outdoor eateries facing a skating rink, are experienced individually, but—like most theme parks—they don't mesh into a coherent whole. That's a shame, but it may be inevitable, given that this is an attempt to appeal to a wide variety of tastes and sensibilities. It's also a shame that Millennium Park has not learned an important lesson from the Magic Kingdom. The presence of so many security personnel, in bright orange vests, is much too obtrusive. They wander suspiciously around like museum guards (or tool around on Segways). It is as if, having created this public space, the authorities don't quite trust us to behave. There are far too many signs, too—explaining, naming, directing, prohibiting. Corporate and private sponsorship paid for almost half the cost of the park, as we are ceaselessly reminded. But the most poignant of the signs are the ones that warn, "No Loitering." As if there was any other reason to go to a park.
 
Last time I was in Chicago Millenium park was under construction...we parked under it in the parking garage though! I would like to see it now that it is complete. In contrast to the all Chicago is good sentiment these days, I found the entire southern portion of central Chicago, an area that includes millenium park, navy wharf, the public library, much of the most significant heritage skyscrapers, buckingham fountain, the aquarium, the natural history museum, sear tower etc. emaculately kept but virtually lifeless outside of the 9-5 hours and quiet even then. I suspect the large visitor numbers have to do with special events and summer tourists.
 
I haven't seen the park but it sounds like Harbourfront with architecture. Harbourfront Centre, by the way is a 10 acre site that attracts over 12 million visits each year.
 
I should have added that the southern part of downtown Chicago is in contrast to the northern part which is well integrated and full of people. Packed beaches close to residential that you can actually swim at!
 
I haven't seen the park but it sounds like Harbourfront with architecture. Harbourfront Centre, by the way is a 10 acre site that attracts over 12 million visits each year.

I find it hard to believe that Central Park only attracts 20 million visits in the year. Perhaps their "visitors" really means unique individuals? That seems high, but if you consider a large portion of tourists to New York probably, at very least, walk through the park...
 
rb, I think figures like those on this thread can't be taken too seriously. How do you define a "visitor" to Harbourfront? If someone cycles by on Queens Quay are they a visitor? What about the people who live there?

The figures all seem a bit wonky to me.
 
Millennium Park exposes the dark side of the "public-private partnership" model of development. The land belongs to the Chicago Park District and is meant to be for public use. Yet on occasion large parts of the park are closed off for private events. I have seen this phenomenon at New York's Bryant
Park as well. Each part of the park has been divvied up by corporate sponsors, who never let you forget this fact by brandishing their corporate logos everywhere in their respective turfs. Compared to other Chicago parks, Millennium Park does have a lot of security personnel patroling around on foot, which gives the place a "Big Brother" chill to it. It almost seems as if the corporate sponsors make sure their "investment" is protected through the use of these numerous security guards. They constantly tell you where you can't go, what you can't do. Underneath Millennium Park is what may be the world's most expensive parking garage, a result of cost overruns as a simple park project morphed into Chicago's biggest boondoggle.
 
shumoon:

Isn't that similiar to what's happening at Dundas Square?

GB
 
I do not think being a theme park is necessarily a bad thing...and the author is not necessarily saying its a bad thing. Its just different than the 18th century idea of a city park.
 
I visited the park this past April. Like when Rybczynski visited, Kapoor's Bean was under wraps at that point. I have a FEW pictures from the park up on my flickr page - www.flickr.com/photos/cas...ts/803587/ - and there are many more pics of the park by other flickrers if you search for them.

Theme Park or no, it's definitely fun to wander through, and I have no doubt that it will prove to become famous enough over the years that eventually you won't have to say "Chicago" before "Millennium Park" for people to know what you are talking about. The park's varied features provide for many different experiences, with lots of triggers for the imagination. It's definitely worth a visit when you're in Chicago.

42
 
Isn't that similiar to what's happening at Dundas Square?

GB:

Good point. Chicago, New York, Toronto. I guess unholy alliances of public-private partnerships are popping up everywhere. Nothing is sacred any more. Everything is subject to possible commercialization. I guess Millennium Park caught my eye because of the sheer size of the place, especially when compared to Dundas Square or NYC's Bryant Park.
 
Speaking of Dundas Square, I think it's pretty much a success. A rather unattractive success, but a success nonetheless. I was walking past on a rather chilly day and noticed the whole place packed with people just sitting and enjoying themselves, exactly what we all feared wouldn't happen. It is ugly, though. Concrete pillars, permanently unfinished subway entrance, etc.

While I like the fountain, it has the unfortunate effect of closing off a large area of the square to people.
 
Dundas Square is busy and thank goodness people have accepted it, despite its many flaws.

The Square really lacks any 'warmth' or human scale. It could have been so much better.
 

Back
Top