...in its "Chicago" section on how the city is trying to distance itself from Al Capone's legacy. As someone whose great uncle found himself on the wrong end of one of Capone's henchman's guns, I actually think it's kind of cool. Whatever.
But what really caught my attention was this paragraph:
Karen Vaughan, manager of communications for the Chicago Office of Tourism, said the city was not focused so much on negating Capone’s legacy as it was on highlighting Chicago’s other draws. “Chicago has become known as a world-class city,” she said. The city’s bid to host the 2016 Olympics and Mr. Obama’s presidency, she said, “helped to give a positive association to the city around the world.”
First of all, losing a bid for the Olympics is nothing to brag about. Any city can claim that. What's more, President Obama isn't really from Chicago (nor was Al Capone, for that matter).
But what I'd really like to tell Ms. Vaughan is that if you have to tell people that your city is "world-class," then it probably isn't. Do you think anyone in New York or Washington has to convince anyone else that their city is important? (And who uses the term "world-class" anyway? No one that's world-class, that's for sure. I haven't heard that since Ross Perot back in 1992.)
So can't it just be enough to say that Chicago is a very livable big city (with world-class pizza)?