Thursday, November 15, 2018
Music Neighborhoods News Politics More than 100 people showed up at a public meeting in order to save the Hideout
Posted By Marissa De La Cerda on 11.15.18 at 06:00 AM
More than 100 supporters of the Hideout piled into the auditorium of Park Community Church last night for a public meeting held by the city’s Department of Planning and Development (DPD) that was rumored to be about the 70-acre Lincoln Yards development, which would engulf and threaten the existence of the beloved music venue.
Tim and Katie Tuten, co-owners of the Hideout, had released a statement on Monday night saying they had asked the city to "delay any decisions on development, construction permits, and TIF’s until after the new mayor and city council are elected." The note was widely shared on social media with musicians, comedians, and lifelong Chicagoans voicing their support of the historic venue located on 1354 W. Wabansia.
Wednesday, November 14, 2018
Music Do This Pitchfork’s Midwinter brings Kamasi Washington, Slowdive, Laurie Anderson, and dozens more to the Art Institute
Posted By Leor Galil on 11.14.18 at 10:00 AM
Today Pitchfork and the Art Institute of Chicago announce the debut of Midwinter, a three-night event that will fill the museum's galleries with live music from February 15 through 17. Among the acts slated to appear are Kamasi Washington, Slowdive, Laurie Anderson, Panda Bear, Mykki Blanco, and Tortoise, who'll play all of TNT to celebrate the album's 21st anniversary. In its size and diversity, Midwinter's lineup looks like it belongs to an outdoor festival, but many of these acts don't make the kind of music that goes over well with thousands of sun-baked, half-drunk young people who've been on their feet all day. I'd prefer to watch William Basinski perform The Disintegration Loops in a museum, where there's at least a nonzero chance that the atmosphere will be appropriately meditative.
Gig Posters Music Visual Art Nobody’s getting this pearl on the gig poster of the week
Posted By Luca Cimarusti on 11.14.18 at 06:00 AM
ARTIST: Margot Ferrick
SHOW: The Cairo Gang (solo) and Caroline Campbell at the Hideout on Wed 11/14
MORE INFO: butterstory.tumblr.com
Tuesday, November 13, 2018
Arts History News Paranormal Politics Television Gender Issues What we learned at the Chicago Humanities Festival about witches
Posted By Julia Hale on 11.13.18 at 10:30 AM
Last Thursday, Kristen Sollée, writer, editrix of the sex-positive feminist website Slutist, and lecturer at the New School, visited the Museum of Contemporary Art to speak about her book, Witches, Sluts, Feminists: Conjuring the Sex Positive. According to Sollée, witches are having a moment (politically, aesthetically, and spiritually), and it's no coincidence that this comeback is happening now.
Arts Neighborhoods Performing Arts Will the Green Line Arts Center help turn the south side into ‘Florence during the Renaissance’?
Posted By Catey Sullivan on 11.13.18 at 06:00 AM
When veteran film and theater producer Pemon Rami was coming of age in Hyde Park in the 1960s, he didn’t have to travel to indulge his budding obsession with theater. Alongside other fledgling artists including Robert Townsend and Paul Butler, Rami honed his craft on stages that dotted the south side.
"When I left for L.A. in 1982, there were nine theaters on the south side," Rami says. "When I came back 25 years later, most of them were gone."
Saturday marked an important point in the pendulum swing back toward the theatrical bustle of Rami's youth. The opening of Washington Park's Green Line Performing Arts Center at 329 E. Garfield adds roughly 6,600 square feet of art space to the neighborhood, and builds on a foundation companies such as Free Street Theater, Congo Square, eta creative arts, Grown Folks Stories, and Court Theatre have labored to maintain for years.
Thursday, November 8, 2018
Music Hip-Hop Chicago-based Saint Louis rapper Smino gets ‘a lot more ass shaking’ on the new Noir
Posted By Julia Hale on 11.08.18 at 06:00 AM
Chicago-based MC Smino did a lot of singing on his 2017 debut album, Blkswn, but on his imminent sophomore album, Noir, he seems much more interested in reminding his fans that he can rap. Keeping with tradition, Smino has used this album of smooth beats and swift bars to uplift other artists in his circle. It includes features from Dreezy, Valee, Ravyn Lenae, Bari, and Jay2—the last three are all members of the Zero Fatigue collective Smino cofounded, which is based in Chicago and his old hometown of Saint Louis.
Wednesday, November 7, 2018
Gig Posters Music Visual Art It’s hard to stay quit on the gig poster of the week
Posted By Luca Cimarusti on 11.07.18 at 06:00 AM
ARTIST: Josh Davis
SHOW: Jawbreaker, Naked Raygun, and Smoking Popes at the Aragon Ballroom on Sun 11/4
MORE INFO: deadmeatdesign.bigcartel.com
Tuesday, November 6, 2018
News Politics Joravsky’s election predictions—going where the New York Times is too scared to venture
Posted By Ben Joravsky on 11.06.18 at 04:00 PM
On Monday, the day before the big midterm elections, when all my friends were losing their minds with angst and anxiety, Nate Cohn weighed in with his election predictions.
Cohn's the numbers-crunching computer geek for the New York Times who goes through every poll from every district in every key race throughout the country to come up with rock-solid predictions about who's going to win what.
In other words, he's the Nate Silver of the New York Times.
Actually, Nate Silver used to be the Nate Silver of the New York Times—then he cut a better deal and took his blog to ESPN.
So now Nate Cohn is Nate Silver. Leading me to wonder—do you gotta be named Nate to get a numbers-crunching job with the New York Times?
Anyway, to ease my own election angst and anxiety, I eagerly dove into Cohn's front-page story. And this is what I read . . .
"Two vastly different outcomes remain easy to imagine. There could be a Democratic blowout that decisively ends Republicans' control of the House and even endangers their Senate majority. Or there could be a district-by-district battle for House control that lasts late on election night and perhaps for weeks after."
Are you kidding me? I mean, Nate Cohn—you call that a prediction? C'mon man, take a stand!
Essentially, Cohn wrote—the Democrats might win. Unless they don't. In which case, the Republicans will win.
Dude, I could have told you that, and my first name's not even Nate!
So allow me to do what the pros, like Cohn, apparently won't dare to do—make a real prediction in several major races, state and national. You can take it to Vegas, folks . . .
Governor: J.B. Pritzker v. Bruce Rauner All things being equal—and what's more equal than two billionaires running against each other?—politics is basically a popularity contest. In this case, you've got J.B., a fairly likable fella, versus Rauner. Nobody likes Rauner—not even the Republicans. Especially the Republicans. Pritzker wins—saving us from the potential nightmare of Rauner turning Illinois into a red state by gerrymandering the legislative and congressional maps after the upcoming census.
Attorney General: Kwame Raoul v. Erika Harold You'd think this would be a gimme for Raoul, the Democrat, what with Illinois being a solid blue state. But Harold has a chance because (1) She's a woman and this is said to be another "year of the woman," and (2) I think a lot of voters will feel compelled to vote for at least one Republican, if only to prove to themselves that they're independent minded. Of course, this prediction is contingent on the notion that Illinois liberals are so clueless that they'd rush to the polls to vote against all things Trump, and then turn right around and vote for an anti-choice Republican who wouldn't have the guts to stand up to the idiotic executive orders on everything from LGBTQ rights to the environment emanating from the Trump White House. I predict Raoul.
Fourteenth congressional district: Lauren Underwood v. Randy Hultgren This suburban congressional district was gerrymandered to protect the incumbency of Republicans—in this case, Hultgren, a Trump puppet. Yet, the district's drifting left as more Democrats move to the western suburbs. Yes, in 2016 Trump beat Clinton by four percentage points in the 14th. But that's down from the ten percentage points by which Romney beat Obama in 2012. Underwood's such a dynamic and exciting new face that she's winning many important endorsements. (Well, the Tribune's editorial board didn't endorse her. But its members also couldn't bring themselves to endorse Hillary Clinton—so I think we'll all agree that the Trib's pretty worthless when it comes to election advice.) At the start of the election cycle, many oddsmakers said Underwood didn't have a chance. But over the last few weeks the polls have tightened. I'm going with my heart—Underwood in a squeaker.
Sixth congressional district: Sean Casten v. Peter Roskam For as long as I can remember, the Sixth has been filled with DuPage County Republicans—it was Congressman Henry Hyde's old district. And yet, it too has been moving left—Hillary won it by seven percentage points over Trump. Roskam is an anti-choice, climate-change-denying Trump rubber-stamper who's done as he's been told to, even when it came to voting for last year's horrendous tax bill. I don't believe a majority of voters in a district that encompasses parts of DuPage, Lake, and suburban Cook Counties would vote for a climate-change denier over an environmentalist like Casten.
Uh-oh, between this race and the attorney general's, I’m exhibiting a lot of faith in voters. Man, this prognosticating thing is tough. No wonder Cohn wimped out. I'm going with faith, gulp. Casten wins.
U.S. Senate Alas, the calendar favors the Republicans, who already have a 51 to 49 advantage. In other words, there are more Democratic incumbents running for reelection in Trump states than Republican incumbents running for reelection in states that went for Hillary. So the Republicans will hold on to the Senate—even if the Dems win in Nevada and, dare I say it, Texas. But it won’t matter so much, 'cause . . .
U.S. House of Representatives The Dems will take the House.
Yeah, you heard it here first, people.
They need to flip 23 seats, and they'll do better than that—even with all the Republican gerrymandering.
So, yes, Trump will still be able to appoint judges, thanks to his Senate rubber-stampers. But the Dems will be able to provide some solid oversight in the House. And almost as soon as this election is over, guess what? We'll be gearing up for the next one.
That's right—2020 is just around the corner. I can't wait.
Cohn's the numbers-crunching computer geek for the New York Times who goes through every poll from every district in every key race throughout the country to come up with rock-solid predictions about who's going to win what.
In other words, he's the Nate Silver of the New York Times.
Actually, Nate Silver used to be the Nate Silver of the New York Times—then he cut a better deal and took his blog to ESPN.
So now Nate Cohn is Nate Silver. Leading me to wonder—do you gotta be named Nate to get a numbers-crunching job with the New York Times?
Anyway, to ease my own election angst and anxiety, I eagerly dove into Cohn's front-page story. And this is what I read . . .
"Two vastly different outcomes remain easy to imagine. There could be a Democratic blowout that decisively ends Republicans' control of the House and even endangers their Senate majority. Or there could be a district-by-district battle for House control that lasts late on election night and perhaps for weeks after."
Are you kidding me? I mean, Nate Cohn—you call that a prediction? C'mon man, take a stand!
Essentially, Cohn wrote—the Democrats might win. Unless they don't. In which case, the Republicans will win.
Dude, I could have told you that, and my first name's not even Nate!
So allow me to do what the pros, like Cohn, apparently won't dare to do—make a real prediction in several major races, state and national. You can take it to Vegas, folks . . .
Governor: J.B. Pritzker v. Bruce Rauner All things being equal—and what's more equal than two billionaires running against each other?—politics is basically a popularity contest. In this case, you've got J.B., a fairly likable fella, versus Rauner. Nobody likes Rauner—not even the Republicans. Especially the Republicans. Pritzker wins—saving us from the potential nightmare of Rauner turning Illinois into a red state by gerrymandering the legislative and congressional maps after the upcoming census.
Attorney General: Kwame Raoul v. Erika Harold You'd think this would be a gimme for Raoul, the Democrat, what with Illinois being a solid blue state. But Harold has a chance because (1) She's a woman and this is said to be another "year of the woman," and (2) I think a lot of voters will feel compelled to vote for at least one Republican, if only to prove to themselves that they're independent minded. Of course, this prediction is contingent on the notion that Illinois liberals are so clueless that they'd rush to the polls to vote against all things Trump, and then turn right around and vote for an anti-choice Republican who wouldn't have the guts to stand up to the idiotic executive orders on everything from LGBTQ rights to the environment emanating from the Trump White House. I predict Raoul.
Fourteenth congressional district: Lauren Underwood v. Randy Hultgren This suburban congressional district was gerrymandered to protect the incumbency of Republicans—in this case, Hultgren, a Trump puppet. Yet, the district's drifting left as more Democrats move to the western suburbs. Yes, in 2016 Trump beat Clinton by four percentage points in the 14th. But that's down from the ten percentage points by which Romney beat Obama in 2012. Underwood's such a dynamic and exciting new face that she's winning many important endorsements. (Well, the Tribune's editorial board didn't endorse her. But its members also couldn't bring themselves to endorse Hillary Clinton—so I think we'll all agree that the Trib's pretty worthless when it comes to election advice.) At the start of the election cycle, many oddsmakers said Underwood didn't have a chance. But over the last few weeks the polls have tightened. I'm going with my heart—Underwood in a squeaker.
Sixth congressional district: Sean Casten v. Peter Roskam For as long as I can remember, the Sixth has been filled with DuPage County Republicans—it was Congressman Henry Hyde's old district. And yet, it too has been moving left—Hillary won it by seven percentage points over Trump. Roskam is an anti-choice, climate-change-denying Trump rubber-stamper who's done as he's been told to, even when it came to voting for last year's horrendous tax bill. I don't believe a majority of voters in a district that encompasses parts of DuPage, Lake, and suburban Cook Counties would vote for a climate-change denier over an environmentalist like Casten.
Uh-oh, between this race and the attorney general's, I’m exhibiting a lot of faith in voters. Man, this prognosticating thing is tough. No wonder Cohn wimped out. I'm going with faith, gulp. Casten wins.
U.S. Senate Alas, the calendar favors the Republicans, who already have a 51 to 49 advantage. In other words, there are more Democratic incumbents running for reelection in Trump states than Republican incumbents running for reelection in states that went for Hillary. So the Republicans will hold on to the Senate—even if the Dems win in Nevada and, dare I say it, Texas. But it won’t matter so much, 'cause . . .
U.S. House of Representatives The Dems will take the House.
Yeah, you heard it here first, people.
They need to flip 23 seats, and they'll do better than that—even with all the Republican gerrymandering.
So, yes, Trump will still be able to appoint judges, thanks to his Senate rubber-stampers. But the Dems will be able to provide some solid oversight in the House. And almost as soon as this election is over, guess what? We'll be gearing up for the next one.
That's right—2020 is just around the corner. I can't wait.
LGBTQ+ Politics Reproductive Rights Activists protest pro-life event at Holy Trinity Church
Posted By Marissa De La Cerda on 11.06.18 at 11:00 AM
Despite the rainy conditions on Sunday night, members of activist groups including Refuse Fascism and Chicago Feminist Action gathered outside Holy Trinity Catholic Church to protest the closing celebration of 40 Days for Life, an annual campaign that mobilizes against reproductive rights for women.
Attendees circled the entrance of the church holding signs and yelling chants, including "Pro-life, your name's a lie, you don't care if women die" and "Abortion is health care. Health care is a right!"
Protester Tina Perona says she saw the event on Facebook and wanted to support the rights of the LGBTQ community. "I'm a queer black woman, and we need reproductive rights more than ever.”
As people entered the church, protesters let their rage be known, with one woman yelling into a bullhorn, "What a woman does with her body is none of their goddamn business."
Others then passed around the bullhorn and discussed issues being attacked by the Trump administration and the 40 Days of Life supporters, such as abortion rights, and the oppression of communities of color and trans and gender-nonconforming people.
"There is unity between the white supremacy and the patriarchy that we are seeing forced upon us," said a member of Refuse Fascism. "That's why Refuse Fascism is saying this regime between Trump and them has to go."
Activist Marge Parsons said more protests are planned for after the midterm elections. "We're calling on people to come out on Wednesday and Saturday after the midterms—whether you voted or not, and regardless of who wins—to hit the streets," she says. "There needs to be a sustained and determined movement in the streets to drive these fascists out."
Monday, November 5, 2018
News Politics Rahm’s legacy: fictitious narratives and real obligations
Posted By Ben Joravsky on 11.05.18 at 05:35 PM
As hundreds of enthusiastic Democrats packed the UIC Pavilion on Sunday to join President Obama's get-out-the-vote rally in the upcoming do-or-die midterms, Mayor Rahm never looked so irrelevant.
It's not just that he wasn't onstage with Obama, J.B. Pritzker, Susana Mendoza, and other leaders of his Democratic Party to take a stand against Governor Rauner and Trump. Or that no one particularly wanted him onstage. Or that there are still Democrats in Chicago who have a hard time forgiving Rahm for ruling more like Mitt Romney than Barack Obama in his first term.
It's just that in general it seems he's already left town since he announced a few weeks ago that he wasn't running for reelection. So let me just point out to all those wannabe mayors—Rahm's not gone yet. He's left two things that will haunt his successor for years: a fictitious narrative and some very real obligations.First, let's deal with the narrative, as Rahm made use of it in his final budget address on October 17. Bragging about a budget that calls for no new property taxes, Rahm did what he does best—patted himself on the back. He reminisced about the dark days of 2010, when he came home from the Obama White House to run for mayor. The city, he said, "had reached a boiling point"—"many believed our best days were behind us." Some, he warned, even predicted "Chicago would be the next Detroit."
But, he went on, the naysayers were wrong. "To those who thought demise and decay were preordained," he proclaimed, "Chicagoans showed resolve and resilience that define the character of this great city."
Nice try, Rahm. Too bad it's not true.
OK, Chicagoans do have resolve and resilience. After all, we survived eight years of Rahm.
But nobody was saying the city Mayor Rahm inherited resembled Detroit. On the contrary, most people were praising Mayor Daley—the mayor Rahm succeeded—from saving Chicago from becoming Detroit. As exhibit A, consider this glowing New Yorker profile of Mayor Daley, published in 2010, just a few months before Daley stepped down.
"Daley took office at a moment when Chicago was paralyzed by infighting and mismanagement," the story begins. "In 1987 William Bennett, the Secretary of Education, said that Chicago had the worst school system in the country—'an education meltdown.' The center of the city was a desiccating museum of masterpieces by Mies van der Rohe and Louis Sullivan. Infant mortality in remote neighborhoods was comparable to levels in the Third World."
And, then, in 1989, Daley was elected mayor. "In the years that followed, Detroit, Cleveland, and other former industrial powers continued to wither, but Chicago did not. It has grown in population, income, and diversity; it has added more jobs since 1993 than Los Angeles and Boston combined. Downtown luxury condos and lofts have replaced old warehouses and office blocks. New trees and flower beds line the sidewalks and sprout from the roofs of high-rises. . . . Chicago is a postindustrial capital of innovation from house music to fashion—the Milan of the midwest, as the Washington Post put it last year."
Wait, wait—there's more in that profile, which was indicative of many written about Daley at that time.
Alderman Joe Moore likened Daley to "a rock star" as he recalled other mayors at a national conference rushing to "shake his hand, get autographs, just express their admiration."
Ed Rendell, former governor of Pennsylvania, called Daley "the best mayor in the history of the country."
And former alderman Bill Singer, pointing to all the buildings sprouting up on the west side, proclaimed, "with wonder in his voice" that "people want to live here."
As though before Daley that thought was inconceivable.
So if Chicago had already been "saved" from going the way of Detroit (and Cleveland) by "the best mayor in the history of the country," how can Rahm get away with claiming credit for saving it again only eight years later?
Obviously, he's banking on Chicagoans—for all their resolve and resilience—having lousy memories. Or maybe he's hoping they'll believe whatever propaganda he feeds them. And we all know is that Rahm's been feeding us propaganda from the moment he walked into office.
The reality is that Chicago was not as bad as Daley's admirers say it was when Daley took over, and it wasn't so great when he left. So, yes, Rahm should get some credit for starting to confront the financial obligations that Daley ignored. Just as Daley's predecessors—Mayors Harold Washington and Eugene Sawyer—should get more credit for steering the city through some rocky times during the 80s. Like we'll ever see that happen.
Daley had a bad habit of pushing off debt to future generations, or trying to pay our bills with such scams as the parking meter deal. Anything to avoid raising property taxes. So Rahm ultimately had to deal with the backlash of raising taxes and fees—after having wasted his first four years in office trying to avoid property tax hikes.
And that brings me to the next thing Rahm's successor will inherit—the obligations. For all Rahm's talk about taking on tough challenges, he left billions of dollars of pension debt for his successor to wrestle with. His last budget is a classic election-year budget. By that, I mean it's based on rosy projections of income they expect to have on hand to spend.
Mayors love to make rosy budget projections at election time. That way they can run for reelection on a promise that they're holding the line on taxes even as they brag about paving streets, hiring cops, and offering summer jobs for youngsters.
As Mayor Rahm did in his last budget.
And then once they're reelected, they can turn right around and announce—oops, our income is less than we projected. Looks like we'll have to raise taxes after all.
Clearly, Mayor Rahm was still planning to run for reelection when he crafted this budget. At the very least, he didn't want to make his loyal aldermen have to vote on a tax hike before they run for reelection. So he resorted to a good-news budget that any incumbent would want to use in a reelection campaign.
Now that Rahm's not running, it will be up to his successor to break the bad news about higher taxes sometime next year. By this time, Rahm will be living the good life of an ex-mayor, giving speeches and writing books—probably about how he saved Chicago from becoming the next Detroit.
So it goes with mayors. You watch—in eight or so years, our next mayor—be it Lori Lightfoot, Toni Preckwinkle, Amara Enyia, Troy LaRaviere, Willie Wilson, whoever—will probably be bragging about having saved Chicago from financial ruin. If so, I only ask that he or she refrain from mentioning Detroit in that oration. Poor Detroit has been used and abused enough.
