Aesthetics in Context: Chicago Model City at the Chicago Architecture Foundation

By Lee Ann Norman

Architecture and design occupies an interesting place in visual culture. It speaks to the relationship between space and place, person and thing. It explores how manipulations of the built environment can utterly transform every aspect of culture and civic life. Through architecture (most plainly defined as the art and science of constructing buildings), ideas are communicated, dominion is enforced and reinforced, structure and routine is embedded in society in ways that we can’t imagine and often don’t notice. Investigating issues around land use and context is an essential part of understanding the role of architecture and design in our lives, especially for those of us who live in cities. Chicago presents a unique case for studying how architecture is not only about physical structures and buildings, but also about the social function of those objects through time.

The Chicago Architecture Foundation’s latest exhibit, Chicago Model City asks us to consider how culture, place, stratification and affiliation, and aesthetics underscore the lofty goals of good design and urban planning. Chicago is, of course, the city of broad shoulders, bold dreams, and consequently, big plans. Conversely, Chicago is also the most racially segregated city in the United States, and has the dubious distinction of being profoundly corrupt. Power struggles, dominance, suppression, and oppression are par for the course here. Chicago Model City tries to analyze how all of these issues impact real lives on multiple levels by exploring planners’ vision for Chicago: create a global, connected, green, beautiful, and new urban landscape. This idea is examined by looking closely at how many big plans have transformed Chicago over the years. The centerpiece of the exhibit is a 320-square-foot model of the downtown area that includes over 1,000 scale replicas of buildings. The model will be updated, as the Architecture Foundation hopes to make it a dynamic installation that will continue to grow and change along with the city.

Through an “everyman” philosophy in curating the exhibition (which spans the main lobby of the historic Santa Fe building, uses interactive kiosks, and takes advantage of vertical height by creating tower-like stands for photos, and textual elements), the Architecture Foundation tries to encourage the viewer to think about how plans are used to organize geographies for the greater good and lesser evil. Architecture is the most public of all visual forms, yet we discuss it publicly very rarely for fear we haven’t read enough Adorno, or shame because we aren’t currently in the market for a new home, or in the process of redecorating our living room.

As someone who often approaches art and culture with a critical perspective, I was surprised and excited to hear about this different curatorial approach. I often enter exhibitions and look for hidden meanings, try to consider the process behind the product, identify the decision makers, and try to discover the how’s and why’s of it all. It’s rare when traditional cultural institutions like an art museum use an approach that gives a firm nod to issues of social justice and activism, but given Chicago’s deep organizing history, it felt appropriate.

Moreover, architecture and design (which can sometimes feel like the ugly stepchild of the serious visual art world) is usually left out of critical art discussions all together. Most writing about design is relegated to the Real Estate, Home, or Lifestyle sections of the paper, and because buildings and structures cannot be purely aesthetic objects in the ways that paintings or sculpture are, these visual forms often feel more intimidating. It’s much more difficult to wax poetic about an object that maintains a functional and aesthetic nature all at once. The idea that this exhibit might provide a path to opening up dialogue about the politics and aesthetics inherent in design practice using Chicago as a laboratory was certainly intriguing, and I wasn’t disappointed, but I wonder how I’d feel if these issues weren’t already on my mind.

Through historic photos and extensive background and informational text, the exhibit examines the role of corporations, city officials, big business, developers, and ordinary citizens in decision-making processes. While never overtly taking a position or saying things like “It’s the Mob” or “Racism” or even “Machine Politics,” the exhibit provides subtle references and inferences, which will be noticed by one who is aware. Photos are positioned with text in ways that ask viewers to consider what people are listened to and what ideas are brought to the forefront, as well as those that are dismissed or ignored.

Again, the five themes of Chicago as a global, connected, green, beautiful, and new city are illustrated through unpacking 5 different big plans. “Global” city, for example, focuses on the original plan for O’Hare International Airport, which came about through the ambitions of city officials who wanted to position Chicago as a world economic destination. Officials realized that Midway (at the time, one of the busiest airports in the country) could not grow in a way that would accomplish this goal because of its proximity to neighborhoods and businesses. A photo of Mayor Richard J. Daley towering over one of the early models of O’Hare speaks volumes about the influence the name carries to this day. Plans for the current O’Hare expansion are noted, but the struggle to implement them is not given a larger context of power and city politics by, for example, mentioning the secret demolition of Meigs Field and its subsequent impact on Northerly Island. As a viewer, I am asked to consider the role of power in a neutral way, yet power is not a neutral at all, and its influence often spills over to seemingly unrelated areas.

This issue also stands out in “New” city, which explores the on-going plans for redevelopment of the south side. The images and text don’t shy away from controversies surrounding neighborhood redevelopment, urban renewal, or any of the other code words for gentrification and transforming so-called blighted areas into viable community spaces. Particular attention is given to the IIT campus project, perhaps because of its contribution to Chicago’s architectural legacy, however, we aren’t asked to speculate about UIC’s former Circle Campus expansion, a project that didn’t necessarily contribute to the city’s design legacy, but transformed communities profoundly nonetheless and continues to do so.

Chicago Model City does a great job of forcing us to reexamine the role of architecture in daily life by providing detailed historical context to each of the plans through a larger theme. As a viewer, though, would I have been challenged to expand my concept of the purpose and role of design in my daily life if I wasn’t already aware of Chicago’s peculiar nature?

I don’t know.

Will the average visitor to the Architecture Foundation who happens to view this exhibition walk away with a critical understanding of the idea that architecture is really about our relationship with the built environment and how design decisions influences those interactions?

Maybe.

As a cultural institution trying to challenge convention in this exhibition, using a more populist curatorial approach was a step in the right direction despite its tentative nature, but a step all the same. In a world where people don’t always recognize their right to speak critically about the ugliness of the newest condo development in the neighborhood or the significance of the structures destroyed to make room for it, experiencing an exhibit that in some ways, gives us permission to question is a welcomed change.