Edward Keegan: Why the Obama Presidential Center Challenges Chicago’s Architectural Identity

When Barack Obama aounced plans for his presidential library and museum on Chicago’s South Side, the city braced for a landmark that would reflect its storied history of bold, no-nonsense architecture. Yet, as Chicago Tribune architecture critic Edward Keegaoted in a 2021 critique, the Obama Presidential Center (OPC) promises to be a very un-Chicago building—one that breaks from the city’s gritty, functionalist roots in favor of a sleek, aspirational design. This tension between tradition and transformation raises a critical question: What does it mean for a building to be “un-Chicago,” and why does it matter?

In this deep dive, we’ll explore Keegan’s argument, the architectural philosophy behind the OPC, and what this project reveals about Chicago’s evolving identity. From the controversies surrounding its design to its potential cultural and economic impact, the Obama Center isn’t just a building—it’s a statement. Whether you’re an urban plaing enthusiast, a history buff, or simply curious about how cities reinvent themselves, this analysis will shed light on why the OPC is sparking such passionate debate.

—

What Makes a Building “Un-Chicago”?

Chicago’s architectural DNA is rooted in pragmatism, iovation, and raw industrial beauty. From the towering steel-frame skyscrapers of the late 19th century to the brutalist concrete structures of the mid-20th, the city’s buildings have long embodied a form-follows-function ethos. Think of the Willis Tower (formerly Sears Tower), the John Hancock Center, or even the Thompson Center—each is a testament to Chicago’s reputation as a city that builds for purpose, not pretense.

So when Edward Keegan describes the Obama Presidential Center as “very un-Chicago,” he’s pointing to a philosophical departure. Designed by Tod Williams Billie Tsien Architects (TWBTA) and Interactive Design Architects (IDEA), the OPC’s design is:

Elegant and abstract, with sweeping, light-filled spaces and a focus on symbolic gestures (like the “ascending” towers representing hope and progress).
Landscape-centric, prioritizing green space and public plazas over dense urban integration.
Inspirational over industrial, favoring warmth and accessibility over the city’s trademark muscularity.

Keegan’s critique isn’t just about aesthetics—it’s about authenticity. Chicago’s architecture has historically mirrored its working-class spirit. The OPC, by contrast, feels more like a global monument than a neighborhood anchor. As Keegan wrote, it’s a building that could “land in any city” without losing its essence, which is precisely what makes it feel out of place in Chicago.

The OPC vs. Chicago’s Architectural Icons

Building	Era	Design Philosophy	“Chicago-ness” Factor
Willis Tower (1974)	Modernist	Brutalist efficiency, steel-and-glass dominance	⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Thompson Center (1985)	Postmodern	Bold, controversial, government-functional	⭐⭐⭐⭐
Obama Presidential Center (2025)	Contemporary	Symbolic, aspirational, landscape-integrated	⭐⭐

—

Why the Obama Center’s Design Matters

The OPC isn’t just another museum—it’s a $500 million cultural hub that will reshape Jackson Park and, by extension, the South Side. Its design choices carry economic, social, and political weight. Here’s why the debate over its “un-Chicago” nature is more than academic:

1. Gentrification and Displacement Concerns

The OPC is expected to draw millions of visitors aually, which could drive up property values and push out long-time residents. Critics argue that the center’s park-like, open design—while beautiful—does little to address affordable housing or local business needs. As Keegan implied, a more “Chicago” approach might have prioritized mixed-use development or community-focused infrastructure over symbolic grandeur.

2. A Shift from Industrial to Aspirational

Chicago’s architecture has long celebrated its blue-collar roots. The OPC, with its soaring towers and reflective pools, feels more like a beacon of hope than a product of the city’s grit. This isn’t necessarily bad—it reflects Obama’s owarrative of progress—but it does mark a cultural shift in how Chicago presents itself to the world.

3. The Role of Public Space

The OPC’s design emphasizes open plazas and green spaces, which is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it creates a welcoming environment; on the other, it risks feeling discoected from the urban fabric. Chicago’s best public spaces (like Milleium Park) blend seamlessly with the city’s hustle. The OPC’s more campus-like layout could either become a retreat or an island.

—

Inside the Obama Presidential Center: Key Features

To understand why the OPC feels “un-Chicago,” let’s break down its most distinctive elements—and how they diverge from local norms.

1. The Museum Tower: A Symbol of Ascension

The centerpiece of the OPC is a 235-foot-tall museum tower with a facade of textured concrete and glass. Unlike Chicago’s blocky skyscrapers, the tower tapers as it rises, symbolizing progress. Inside, exhibits will trace Obama’s life and presidency, but the architectural narrative is just as important: the design encourages visitors to look upward, both literally and metaphorically.

2. The Forum: A Gathering Space Unlike Any in Chicago

The Forum building is a low-slung, circular structure meant for public events, lectures, and performances. Its wood-and-glass design is warm and inviting—but also decidedly non-Chicago. Compare it to the Jay Pritzker Pavilion in Milleium Park, which uses stainless steel to reflect the city’s skyline. The Forum feels more like a Scandinavian community center than a Chicago landmark.

3. The Landscape: Nature Over Industry

The OPC sits on 19.3 acres of Jackson Park, with designs by Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates. The plan includes:

A great lawn for gatherings.
A reflecting pool mirroring the museum tower.
Native plantings to restore the park’s ecological health.

While lovely, this approach is a far cry from Chicago’s tradition of industrial waterfronts (like the Chicago Riverwalk) or urban parks with hard edges (like Grant Park). The OPC’s landscape is soft where Chicago is usually sharp.

4. The “Ascending” Motif: Hope vs. Pragmatism

The entire complex is designed around the idea of ascent—from the rising towers to the sloping walkways. This is a powerful metaphor for Obama’s presidency, but it’s also a rejection of Chicago’s horizontal, grid-based logic. In a city where even the L trains run at street level, the OPC’s verticality feels almost foreign.

—

Controversies and Criticisms: Is the OPC a Missed Opportunity?

Not everyone agrees with Edward Keegan’s assessment, but the OPC has faced significant backlash from architects, historians, and South Side residents. Here are the most pressing concerns:

1. “It Could Be Anywhere”

Keegan’s central critique is that the OPC lacks site-specificity. Unlike Frank Lloyd Wright’s Robie House (which responds to Prairie School aesthetics) or the Cloud Gate (“The Bean”) (which plays with Chicago’s skyline), the OPC’s design doesn’t feel rooted in place. As one architect told the Tribune, “It’s a nice building, but it doesn’t belong here.”

2. The Battle Over Jackson Park

The OPC’s location in Frederick Law Olmsted’s historic Jackson Park has sparked legal challenges. Opponents argue that the project violates the park’s original design and sets a dangerous precedent for privatizing public land. The Obama Foundation counters that the center will revitalize the area, but the debate underscores a deeper tension: Can progress coexist with preservation?

3. Economic Benefits vs. Community Costs

Proponents claim the OPC will create thousands of jobs and boost tourism. Critics, however, point to studies showing that such projects often benefit developers more than locals. The Community Benefits Agreement negotiated with the Obama Foundation includes affordable housing provisions, but many residents remain skeptical.

4. A Lost Chance for Bold Chicago Architecture

Some architects wish the OPC had embraced Chicago’s iovative structural traditions. Imagine if the design had:

Incorporated exposed steel beams (a nod to the city’s skyscraper history).
Used recycled materials from demolished Chicago buildings.
Featured a rooftop farm (tying into the city’s urban agriculture movement).

Instead, the OPC feels like a safe, internationalist choice—beautiful, but not distinctively Chicago.

—

What the OPC Tells Us About Chicago’s Future

The Obama Presidential Center is more than a building—it’s a litmus test for Chicago’s identity. As the city grapples with gentrification, racial equity, and global relevance, the OPC embodies a crossroads:

1. Is Chicago Still a “Second City”?

Chicago has long defined itself in opposition to coastal elites—practical, hardworking, unpretentious. The OPC’s polished, aspirational design suggests a desire to shed that image and position Chicago as a world-class cultural destination. But at what cost?

2. The Rise of “Soft Power” Architecture

The OPC is part of a trend where cities use iconic, emotionally resonant buildings to attract tourism and investment. Think of the Broad Museum in L.A. or the Zeitz MOCAA in Cape Town. Chicago’s challenge is balancing this global appeal with its local character.

3. A New Chapter for the South Side

For decades, the South Side has been underserved and stereotyped. The OPC could be a catalyst for change—but only if it centers the community it’s meant to serve. The design’s “un-Chicago” qualities might actually be an asset here, signaling that the South Side is more than its industrial past.

—

How to Visit the Obama Presidential Center (And What to Look For)

The Obama Presidential Center is slated to open in 2025. If you plan to visit, here’s how to make the most of your trip—and what to notice through the lens of Edward Keegan’s critique:

1. Getting There

The OPC will be located at 63rd Street and Stony Island Avenue in Jackson Park. The best ways to arrive:

By L Train: Take the Green Line to Garfield (then a 15-minute walk).
By Bus: The #6 and #28 buses stop nearby.
By Car: Parking will be available, but public transit is recommended.

2. Key Areas to Explore

When you visit, pay attention to these design elements—and ask yourself: Does this feel like Chicago?

The Museum Tower: Note how its taper contrasts with Chicago’s blocky skyscrapers.
The Great Lawn: Compare it to Milleium Park’s more urban feel.
The Forum’s Wood Interiors: How does the warmth differ from Chicago’s steel-and-concrete aesthetic?
The Reflecting Pool: Does it evoke the city’s industrial waterways, or something more abstract?

3. Nearby Chicago Landmarks to Contrast

To fully appreciate the OPC’s “un-Chicago” nature, pair your visit with these quintessential Chicago spots:

Robie House (Hyde Park): A Prairie School masterpiece by Frank Lloyd Wright.
Thompson Center (Loop): A polarizing but unmistakably Chicago brutalist building.
Pullmaational Historical Park: A glimpse into the city’s industrial labor history.

—

Conclusion: Should Chicago Embrace the “Un-Chicago”?

Edward Keegan’s observation that the Obama Presidential Center is a “very un-Chicago building” cuts to the heart of a city in transition. Chicago has always been a place of reinvention—from the Great Fire to the rise of the skyscraper—but the OPC represents a different kind of change. It’s not about rebuilding; it’s about rebranding.

So, is that a bad thing? Not necessarily. Cities evolve, and architecture should reflect their aspirations as much as their history. The OPC’s design may feel foreigow, but in time, it could become a new chapter in Chicago’s story—one that balances global ambition with local pride.

What’s clear is that the debate over the OPC is about more than aesthetics. It’s about who gets to define Chicago and what kind of city it wants to be. As Keegan’s critique reminds us, architecture isn’t just about buildings; it’s about identity, memory, and the future we choose to build.

One thing is certain: Love it or hate it, the Obama Presidential Center will be a landmark—both for what it is and for what it isn’t. And that might be the most Chicago thing about it.

—

Tags: architectural criticism, Chicago architecture, Edward Keegan, gentrification, Jackson Park, Obama Presidential Center, presidential libraries, public space, South Side Chicago, Tod Williams Billie Tsien, urban design

Kebun Firdaus