What was that name again? David Haenke in Conscious Choice (Summer): “The cure [for civilization] requires respectful recognition of ecological (‘wild’) boundaries, acknowledgment that the wild is sacred, and that nature–Earth-GAIA-ecological reality-wildness-God-Goddess-the Great Spirit–is really in control.”
Best of Chicago voting is live now. Vote for your favorites »
Chickening out. “Conservatives certainly understood the impact that homoerotic work would have on the public,” reflects Richard Bolton in the Chicago-based New Art Examiner (June/Summer). “By manifesting gay and lesbian desire, they argued, such art ‘promotes’ homosexuality, making it more acceptable. And, in a way, this is true….So why didn’t the art world press on with this issue? Instead the art world, on the whole, tactically decided to behave as if content didn’t matter, concentrating on First Amendment rights rather than the right to sexuality itself. Certainly it was crucial to defend the right of artists to speak….But the art world should have defended the broader social agenda–the legitimation of homosexuality–that it had encouraged and sustained through funding and exhibition. Instead, arguments for free speech merely aimed to protect the status of the art world as a privileged domain.”
Competition comes to the council. Number of aldermen winning their seats with 100 percent of the vote, in 1979: 20. In 1991: 3 (City Council/ County Board Report, Spring).
If only weather forecasters were this honest. The Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission opens its 1990 Annual Report with a graph showing how far off the mark its 1974 and 1976 population projections for the six-county area were. Instead of growing by the expected nearly 1.5 million people from 1970 to 1990, northeastern Illinois gained only 286,000.
