I’m a little behind in my reading, so I didn’t see Tim Samuelson’s op-ed “Altering the Griffin Museum of Science and Industry’s entrances will destroy its essence” (Oct. 11) until a few days afterward. What a selfish, elitist opinion piece!
Yes, I understand the importance of keeping the historic landscape of buildings, but I also understand the importance of making those same buildings accessible to all. Putting free-standing pavilions “respectfully held away from the main building” is basically banishing those with disabilities to the basement. I guess we wouldn’t want people using wheelchairs or walkers messing up the photos of the museum.
I am angry, ashamed and disgusted by his selfish question: “Is it all going to be thrown away for superficial and inappropriate changes?” On behalf of those who would like to enter the building through the same doors with their family and friends, thank you to the museum for making the entrance accessible to all.
— Karen Adamczyk, Homer Glen
Harming a real artifact
When I read Tim Samuelson’s passionate op-ed, I was deeply saddened. I just retired from being a docent at the Chicago History Museum for 17 years, and it was my privilege to learn about and experience Chicago history; no subject was more prominent than the incredible 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition.
The Griffin Museum of Science and Industry is the only building left from that iconic and transforming period in Chicago’s recovery from the Great Fire that happened just 22 years before. In this unique building, Chicagoans can experience the real thing, an actual artifact in all its splendor.
The changes that Samuelson describes will, in the mistaken idea of improvement, remove from sight what remains of that “perfect” piece of architecture so representative of the times. One might as well put vinyl siding on the Chicago Water Tower to protect it from the Chicago weather.
— Ed Swanson, Northbrook
Changes are in poor taste
I agree completely. The proposal for the addition to the Griffin Museum of Science and Industry’s entrance is in poor taste and will compromise the building’s essence. In my opinion, it’s even worse than the pyramid in the Louvre Museum’s courtyard.
What’s wrong with peaceful classical architecture? Are we so enamored by the new and dynamic that we feel we must cater to it?
— Allen M. Breyer, Wauconda
Preserve wonders of the past
I agree with the opinion to leave the Griffin Museum of Science and Industry alone. My question first is: Who is the impetus of this, the namesake? If not, Ken Griffin needs to step in and halt this decimation.
We recently saw, with much egg on the city’s face, the Lucas Museum of Narrative Art open in Los Angeles when we had it served to us on a silver platter. We continually hear how Chicago needs to step up to remain relevant. Step one should be: Don’t let some nitwit architect think he’s Michelangelo and improve the perfect.
Part of a city’s greatness lies in its ability to preserve the wonders of the past in their full glory. Chicago is second to none in architecture. Let’s not prove the old description as “Second City” by making ill-advised decisions that can’t be undone.
— Todd Swift, Chicago
More information is needed
I can understand wanting to preserve the look of the Griffin Museum of Science and Industry. But for balance, we need to read about exactly what the changes are, what the changes will accomplish and how they will look, before we can judge them.
More Top Picks Best Budget Laptops For Students
— Kenneth Leone, Deerfield
Leave the museum be
Growing up in Chicago in the 1950s, I visited the Museum of Science and Industry often, with school groups and groups of friends. My parents told us about the development of Jackson Park and the creation of the museum as part of the 1893 World’s Fair. Later, I took my children to see the model railroad, coal mine and Titanic exhibits. It is a priceless gem.
Chicago has such great architecture, and we’ve lost too many historic buildings that have been modified or destroyed. Please don’t do that to this museum!
— Lawrence E. Allen, Wake Forest, North Carolina
Change only the name
The Griffin Museum of Science and Industry has been in the news lately due to proposed major changes to its entrances. An op-ed piece by Tim Samuelson argues against making such changes, and I agree.
As a boy, this was always my favorite museum in Chicago. I was fascinated with its many exhibits, such as the walk-through human heart, the huge O-scale model train, the U-505 submarine and the steam locomotive.
My daughter shared my love of the museum and as a young girl called it the “Museum of Science and Interesting.” I have always loved the name she gave it, so I now propose that if there are to be any changes made, please consider changing only the name, not the entrances.
— Bob Chimis, Elmwood Park
Design is laughable
Thank you to Tim Samuelson for alerting us to the upcoming alterations to the Griffin Museum of Science and Industry. While I’m always happy to see consideration given to those like me who have a disability, this project seems ill conceived and unnecessary. The museum already provides accessibility, and the design for the alterations is laughable.
Has anyone involved in the decision-making process driven past Soldier Field? Trying to blend architectural styles rarely works.
Sometimes, leaving well enough alone is just fine.
— John Krause, Glenview
Clout is alive and well
I agree with Tim Samuelson that the proposed changes to the Griffin Museum of Science and Industry are unnecessary and destructive of this great building. But what can you expect of a city that gave up 20 acres of precious parkland to the Obama Presidential Center, a facility that would have done more good in another Chicago neighborhood?
Clout is alive and well in Chicago.
As a kid, Jackson Park was my playground and the museum magical and free.
— Patrick F. Cannon, Forest Park
Running together for years
I enjoyed reading Rick Kogan’s column (“Hitting the pavement and grabbing some memories with these Chicago Marathon men”) about five men who have been running together for multiple years throughout the city, doing marathons here and elsewhere, and who decided that this year’s Bank of America Chicago Marathon would be their last. I have a similar story with the same ending.
I have a friend who lives in southern Indiana across the Ohio River from Louisville, Kentucky. We’ve known each other since high school 75 years ago. About once a year, I go down to visit him. Over the years, we’ve enjoyed driving the old winding and hilly roads of southern Indiana through forests, passing old barns and farms and new subdivisions, on roads along ravines so deep you can’t see the bottom while hoping we don’t get lost. We walk across the pedestrian bridge high above the Ohio River, from Indiana to Kentucky and back again. We sit along the banks of the Ohio River and watch the huge barges go by. We always visit Louisville and walk the several blocks through a bit-worn downtown, noting what has changed over the years.
I was there a short while ago, and after our last walk through downtown, my friend turned to me and said: You know, this is probably our last time for taking that walk.
So, when I go down to visit him next year, we will probably just sit down at a nice bar in downtown Louisville, enjoy some fine Kentucky bourbon and just share our memories!
— Mario Caruso, Chicago
Disillusioned by police
Early on Oct. 1, I was crossing the street at a not-very-busy intersection in the suburb where I live. The light had turned green, and the “walk” sign was on. After I had stepped about 3 feet into the crosswalk, I was almost hit by an SUV whose driver was making a right turn, coming from my left, my blind side.
She was perhaps in her 40s, and she was well into her turn when she abruptly stopped. I slammed my left hand on the hood of her vehicle and used my left arm to push myself away from it. Not bad for a 68-year-old.
I angrily pointed to the “walk” sign that was still in my favor. She mouthed something obscene at me several times, then drove away. After I crossed the street, I called the police; after all, I could have been a victim.
As I waited, a woman in a white van — a good Samaritan — pulled up next to me, and she asked me if I was all right. Not only had she witnessed the near accident, but she had taken a photo of the woman’s vehicle and license plate!
When the officer arrived, my good Samaritan and I told him what had happened, and she showed him the photo on her phone. Before she left, I thanked her profusely. From the get-go, the young officer, who appeared to be in his late 20s, seemed to be annoyed, if not angry, with me. Since nothing had happened to me, he bluntly stated, what could he do?
To give him some credit, he did write down the woman’s license plate number, and he said he would try to locate and talk to her. Although the air between us crackled with tension, we shook hands. I walked away, more disillusioned than angry. Because of the young officer’s demeanor, I had little faith that anything would be done.
As the morning wore on, I thought about the woman in the van. Good Samaritans do exist, I told myself, and they often appear out of the blue, making their acts of kindness seem miraculous.
Mostly, I found myself sympathizing with those who have little faith in the police or who openly distrust them.
Faith and trust are hard to earn and are easily squandered.
— John Vukmirovich, Lemont
Critic needed for opera
Tribune critic Chris Jones knows theater. I read his reviews, and, while I don’t always agree with them, I find them thoughtful, well written, specific, fair and filled with context.
He needs to hire someone who knows opera, though, to provide those same qualities in reviewing what is a very different art form.
More Top Picks Best Magnifying Glasses With Light For Seniors
Jones’ review of Lyric Opera’s “Don Giovanni” (“Lyric delivers a blast of Falls’ operatic past,” Oct. 13) spends much space referencing what he knows — Robert Falls, Tennessee Williams, William Shakespeare and the play “Amadeus.” He describes the set and the costumes. He discusses the story and characters as if it were a play.
He does not mention the quality of the singing or of the extensive ensemble work here, the acting or really much about any of the performances. No mention of the excellently sung Commendatore, and Leporello is “self-effacing” — is this the best he can do?
Jones fails to say much about Amadeus Mozart and the opera itself — its rich history, comparisons with other singers who have performed these roles at Lyric, comparisons with other productions he has seen, comparisons with other Mozart operas, or even the fact that Christian Van Horn is a graduate of the Lyric’s Opera Center. He also fails to mention the tempi/pacing of the various numbers or the conductor’s take on the piece that, unlike in theater, is not the sole province of the director.
Several of his comments about the opera and the production left me going, “Huh?” Donna Anna must “usurp the title character”? Mozart is removed from the dramatic content of the opera? “Mozart’s own distinct kaleidoscope”? It’s unclear what any of this means. Jones seems confused as to how to review it or how even to talk about opera — which is OK. We can’t be experts in everything.
The bottom line: The city of Chicago and its fine Lyric Opera deserve to have a reviewer who understands the craft of opera, including its music, its singers, its composers and its history.
— Bill Chamberlain, Chicago
Note to readers
With Halloween coming, we’d like you to share your most memorable experience related to the holiday, either as a child or as an adult. A costume that you’ve never forgotten? A trip to a haunted house that scared you silly? Neighbors who went above and beyond to make things fun for the kids? Send a letter, of no more than 400 words, by Friday, Oct. 23 to [email protected]. Be sure to include your full name and your city/town.
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected].