Why Edward Keegan’s Take on the Obama Presidential Center Stirs Chicago’s Soul

Picture this: A crisp autumn morning in Jackson Park, the kind where the lakefront breeze carries both the scent of fallen leaves and the weight of history. Now, imagine a sleek, towering structure rising from the grass—glass and steel reflecting the sky, its modern lines cutting through the familiar Chicago skyline like a bold statement in a room full of whispers. That’s the Obama Presidential Center, and if architecture critic Edward Keegan is right, it’s about to challenge everything Chicagoans think they know about their city’s identity.

Keegan’s provocative claim—that the Center “promises to be a very un-Chicago building”—hasn’t just sparked debate. It’s ignited a full-blown reckoning over what it means to build for the future while honoring the past. Is this a betrayal of Chicago’s gritty, no-nonsense architectural DNA? Or is it the evolution the city didn’t know it needed? Let’s break it down, brick by controversial brick.