“There were greasy-spoon cafeterias, one-arm joints, taverns. I never yet heard of a writer who brought his manuscripts into a tavern.”

“Chicago never became the city it could have been.”

Could someone explain this to me? What could've Chicago become that it isn't?

NY has more character as Chicago is loosing it's personality in a hurry.

All things considered, there could certainly be less blight, less graft, fewer expressways, more jobs, but I think Chicago has done relatively well for itself, and it's not as if there isn't time or the means to improve it. Whereas all Detroit can hope to do is to stop the bleeding and refashion the city into a smaller, leaner, cleaner version of itself, Chicago has enough going for it to improve its lot. I mean, we all forget that New York was a fearsome shithole in the '70s, and bounced back under arguably-less-than-democratic leadership to take back its throne. Sound familiar?

Besides, which city should it try to be more like? Houston? Phoenix? Atlanta?

Look at the rest of the rust belt. That is what Chicago could have been. I would argue the city's transformation from an industrial town has been an unqualified success. Chicago could have become Cleveland, or Detroit, or Buffalo which were all very strong, essential, urban centers as little as 30 years ago.

Right, which is why I have zero clue what the hell Ms. New Yawk is talking about. I'd say it's a very good thing Chicago never became the city it could have been.

She's not happy about Steinberg's You Were Never in Chicago, either, which I enjoyed to some extent except for the revelation that Steinberg beat his wife.

I'm beginning to suspect that the author's hatred of Chicago is rooted solely in that loathsome State Farm radio spot. AWRIGHT SHE-CAGO.

"Goddamn Chicagoans. They're so proud of how proud they are of themselves, with their stupid bean and their blues fests and their CHEESEBURGERS. Whisk me away from this barbaric place."

If that's the case, I can't blame her!

Haven't had the chance to read it yet but here is her defense of this essay in Q&A format

http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/Felsenthal-Files/April-2013/Rachel-Shteir-QA/

Incidentally, as Richard LLoyd documents in his excellent book Neo-Bohemia: Art and Commerce in the Postindustrial City, this transmogrification has been completed through the infusion of "alternative" or bohemian artistic cultures into the city's mainstream economy. In this close examination of Chicago's economic development at the dawn of the 21st century, Lloyd shows how monopoly capitalism and oppositional aesthetics are deeply intertwined. Thus the NYT reviewer's assertion that Chicago is intellectually and artistically stultified by its obsequiousness to international capital fails to grasp contemporary economic dynamics: Neoliberalism has succeeded not because it has destroyed "alternative" aesthetics and ideas, but because it has absorbed them. In other words, it is precisely because Chicago has remained a "Neo-Bohemian utopia," a haven for a new "creative class", that it has thrived within the world economy (over a period of several decades). As a major cultural and artistic locus within global society, Chicago is likely to continue attracting the kind of young intellectual laborers that will further propel capitalist innovation in the immediate future.

In a piece called “Seinfeld Syndrome”—an essay that explains how the success of shows such as Seinfeld, Sex in the City, and The Sopranos helped gentrify New York—Svenonius writes:

what's the problem with the UB dogs guy? I like that place. Back in the day I would've eaten there every day, but I don't eat that kind of stuff anymore.

http://www.chicagoreader.com/Bleader/archives/2013/04/21/chicago

Pretty good rebuttal in the Reader.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/steinberg/ ... agoan.html
Steinberg checks in as well.

Really? I found it a bit sappy, and the dialogue unrealistic. Hint of the Magical Negro trope, too.

“Well I’m a newspaper columnist, a writer,” I said. “I learned that on Sunday, the New York Times is going to slam my book about Chicago. A complete pan. On the cover of the Book Review. I not only embarrassed myself, but drew contempt upon the city.”