Flights of Fancy: A Photographic Foray Through Chicago's Rather Illustrious Fine Arts Building

In my previous post, I reviewed a Chicago Opera Theater world premiere production of The Invention of Morel, which I saw in the beautifully refurbished Studebaker Theater within the Fine Arts Building.

Given my love of Chicago architecture, arts, history, theater and cinema, this was somewhat surprisingly my first venture inside the building at 410 S. Michigan, also known as the Studebaker Building, as it was built in 1885 to display and sell carriages made by the Studebaker Company.

After extensive remodeling in 1898, the building came to house many artist studios, instrument makers/sellers and other businesses pertaining to the fine arts. I mentioned "cinema" above as the building had housed the Fine Arts Theaters from 1982-2000, with all screens now removed in the spaces turned into the Studebaker Theater and the World Playhouse.

With at least one sheet music store and a bookstore open to the public, even on a Sunday afternoon, I was able to take the manned elevator to the building's top floor--where beautiful murals remain from the 19th century--and work my way down to the ground level, where one enters the Studebaker Theater.

I did not venture into any studios or offices, most of which were closed along with the intriguing L.H. Selman gallery of fine art paperweights.

Open studios are available for the public to peruse on the second Friday of each month, from 5:00pm-9:00pm, and I'm sure a deft photographer with the right permissions could create a rather compelling gallery of artists and students at work within the Fine Arts Building.

But simply from an art and architecture standpoint--including glorious carvings throughout--I was pretty dazzled with what I saw. And hence the collection of photos below.

Frank Imagery: Photographing My Way Wright Down Forest Ave. in Oak Park

I first became fascinated by Frank Lloyd Wright and his brilliant architecture 20 years ago, in 1993, likely right around this time.

Although I had grown up in the Chicago area, with a childhood enchantment with architecture and a sister who would study it, I don't recall knowing--or certainly much caring--about Wright through college or my time living in California from 1990-1992.

I don't think I had ever gone to Oak Park--Wright's home from 1889-1909 and the city with the largest concentration of his work--nor had I visited any of his glorious California houses during my time in the Los Angeles area (though I would later).

This memory and chronology may not quite be exact, but after returning to Skokie in early January 1993, I went to Europe for the first time (London and Paris, with side trips to Liverpool and Giverny) in May of that year.

Although I'd always cherished and explored Chicago, and L.A. for that matter, I believe it was my  experiences in Europe that truly turbo-charged my passion for becoming a tourist in my hometown, something I think everyone should do.

One aspect of this in 1993 was making a point of discovering classic movie theaters that still dotted the Chicago landscape, and though not quite as acute, I continue to relish old movie houses from the 1920s and such.

But I became even more ravenous about exploring the works of Wright, visiting his Home & Studio in Oak Park, seeing most of his homes (plus Unity Temple) in Oak Park and neighboring River Forest, elsewhere in the Chicago area, several in Madison, WI, his SC Johnson Wax building in Racine and subsequently places like the Guggenheim Museum in New York--my first visit to NYC was also in 1993, but only for a day, so I don't think I got to the Guggenheim--the Robie House in Chicago's Hyde Park, Taliesin in Spring Green, WI, the California homes, Fallingwater (near Pittsburgh) and many others. (Most I've only seen externally, but I have likely been inside at least 20 FLW homes & buildings.)

The Frank Lloyd Wright Home & Studio is at the corner of Chicago Ave. & Forest Ave. in Oak Park, and six other homes he designed or modified can be found on a 2-block stretch of Forest heading south from the home & studio, plus one other great one that sits just off of Forest on Elizabeth Court.

Though there are many other Wright homes in Oak Park and River Forest, making the area a prime destination for fans of America's greatest architect, I consider Forest Ave. the mecca of the mecca.

Though I believe I took my first walking tour of Forest Avenue in the spring or summer of 1993, that fall I got a job in Oak Park--about 45 minutes from Skokie--and would frequently drive down the famed street. That only lasted a year, but I've probably gotten to Oak Park at least once a year since, either to peruse the Wright sites or those related to the city's other favorite son, Ernest Hemingway.

As I wrote about in my most recent blog post, this Wednesday I went to Oak Park to try a Venezuelan restaurant called Aripo's, as part of my Chicago Dining World Tour. After also catching a movie, which enabled to rains to clear, I took a pleasant stroll down Forest Avenue.

Though I've seen these homes, and taken similar photos, many times, I thought I would share them here. Note that the homes are traditionally named for their original occupants, who commissioned Wright to design (or in some cases, remodel) them.

Frank W. Thomas House, 1901

Peter A. Beachy House, 1906

Arthur Heurtley House, 1902

Edward R. Hills House (remodeling, a.k.a. Hills-DeCaro House), 1906

Mrs. Thomas H. Gale House, 1909 (on Elizabeth Court)

Nathan G. Moore House, 1895 & 1923

Above two photos: Frank Lloyd Wright Home & Studio, 1889 & 1898

The following four photos are of Oak Park FLW homes not on Forest Avenue and not shot on my most recent visit:

William E. Martin House, 636 N. East Ave., 1903

William G. Fricke House, 540 Fair Oaks Ave., 1901-02

Oscar B. Balch House, 611 N. Kenilworth Ave., 1911

Harry S. Adams House, 710 Augusta St., 1913-14

New Twins Stadium on Target, Not Above & Beyond

Ballpark Review

Target Field
Minneapolis, MN
@@@1/2

For those keeping track (namely me), after a weekend expedition to the Twin Cities with my friend Dave to see a Twins/White Sox game at the new Target Field, I have now attended games in 38 major league ballparks, including 27 of the 30 currently in use. The only ones remaining for an initial visit are the new Yankee Stadium in New York, Tropicana Field in St. Petersburg and Sun Life Stadium in Miami.

While there are certainly stadiums that I have found better than others, in terms of design, special quirks, amenities, food, local flavor and various other criteria, now that all newly-built stadiums feature natural grass, open air (or a retractable roof) and asymmetrical dimensions, virtually all of them are great places to see a game, especially on an enjoyable day or night.

More than anything having to do with its appeal to tourists, a good ballpark should first & foremost serve the needs of its home team and fans, while fitting well into the fabric of its city (and hopefully not gouging local taxpayers too heavily).

In that regard, Target Field is a terrific success. It's well-situated in the western part of downtown Minneapolis, close to an active shopping, dining, music & theater district and next to the Target Center arena (home of the NBA's Timberwolves). It is easily accessible as the new last stop on a clean & comfortable light rail system that stretches to the Mall of Airport (and the airport). And although the "small market" Twins were well-supported and quite successful during their time playing indoors at the Metrodome--noted for its deafening din--Target Field seems to be a huge leap forward in terms of fan and player comfort.

Although economics that quelled a proposed retractable roof may be rued in Aprils to come--though I think the Twins have only had to cancel one game this year--the open air park is attractively clad in Minnesota limestone and looks good from a variety of exterior angles, particularly when seen across the adjacent expressway underpass.

Dave and I had some nice box seats and watching a close-knit game--fortunately completed in a blazing 1 hour and 52 minutes, before a tempestuous thunderstorm, including hail, rolled in--was perfectly pleasant, except for the Sox losing 3-2. And when I took a photographic stroll up to the top deck, I was pleased to see how nice the city skyline looked as a backdrop to the ballpark.


Although as I write the Twins are 50-45 and 2.5 games behind the White Sox, they seem to be acclimating well to their new home and rank 3rd in the American League in home attendance (well ahead of the Sox in that regard). Their fans should be quite pleased and the team rather proud of the new park.

All that said, there are a number of aspects that, at this point, keep Target Field from being considered exceptional.

First of all, there was nothing particularly unique about the interior scenery, other than perhaps the limestone-covered dugouts and the Twins logo within a Minnesota-outline in center field. Although I fully respect why money isn't wasted on "gimmicks" in these economic times, I like each ballpark to have something that makes it instantly distinguishable on SportsCenter, other than a team logo. Not every park can have a water landing like San Francisco's AT&T (which along with Pittsburgh's PNC stands out because of it), but I like the giant Coke Bottle & Glove in San Fran, the Train and Center Field Flagpole Hill in Houston, the fountains in Kansas City, etc. Maybe my tastes veer to the crass, but wouldn't a big Home Run Target (as in the Target logo) make sense?

Also, although Twins history is nicely conveyed in a variety of ways outside the ballpark--statues of Killebrew, Carew & Puckett, a display of oversized Twins baseball cards, championship banners on the park's exterior--there was nothing I saw inside the stadium that saluted the past or even provided some nice team-related decorations. I had read about a Minnesota Baseball Hall of Fame being built into the park, but perhaps this was nixed, as I saw no signs of it.

As you may have discerned, I'm an oddball who takes pictures of everything, and was disappointed that there was really very little to document within the stadium itself. But perhaps this will be remedied in years to come.

Finally, and I admit that this is more the complaint of a tourist than a local ballpark regular, but I found nothing special to eat. Not that I can readily name any foods the Twin Cities are particularly known for (a la Chicago's Italian Beef, the Philly Cheesesteak, even Fish Tacos that are served at Angel Stadium, etc.), but except for a Walleye at one stand for $11 that I passed on (don't know if it's fried, sandwiched, on a stick, etc.), there wasn't much fare that you wouldn't find at every other ballpark.

Dave's brother and his wife, who live in St. Paul, recommended a Polish Sausage from a local proprietor called Kramarczuk's, but even in seeking this out it was hard to find. Most stands seemed to have sausages by Klement's--a Milwaukee brand--and I only came across the Kramarczuk's stand (possibly the only one) as it was shutting down. But one thing I really like about Minnesota is that people aren't so hard-ass up there and I didn't even have to break out my sob story about having driven all the way from Chicago and not finding anything to eat yet at the game. Simply getting in line and staying there after I was told they were closing caused a server to let me get the last Polish of the night.

It was damned good.

And all in all, I'd have to say that Target Field is a ballpark that readily cuts the mustard, even if there isn't a whole lot special to relish. And that's being frank. From one who sausage better ballparks in Baltimore, Cleveland and Detroit, among other places (including Chicago, where Wrigley Field remains my favorite baseball venue anywhere). 

But, given the long ride (Dave did all the driving), foreboding forecasts and the nasty weather that followed, more than anything, I'm just delighted the game didn't get Purple Rained out.