A Christmas Chicago Tradition At Macy's (Wheaton, Bloomingdale: university, live, shop)

[HOWELL_STREET]

Dear Friends:

From the above posted thread, what is so magic about the name "Marshall Fields?" To me, the most important thing is where one's money goes and how it is spent. So personally, I think that is what Macy's is trying to define so they can get their store(s) profitable.

People seem willing enough to say that they don't like Macy's - - but I sense that it is quite difficult to say exactly 'why' they don't like the company. And that is what I am trying to get to for Macy's benefit.

And here is another question for everyone? We all know about the Marshall Fields store on State Street in Chicago. That's where the beautiful Christmas tree is located.

But many years ago, Marshall Fields had a satellite store in Oak Park, Illinois. And that was located quite close to the railroad station. Has that store also become a Macy's store? Or does some other company own the building?

Carter Glass

[HOWELL_STREET]

Around cica 1948 my maternal grandmother took me with her to a trip at the Marshall Fields Store. Today, I don't remember how many floors that building has. But since it used to be a cabled elevator system, it is not too high. Elevator 'cars' of yesteryear were powered by cables. Today, buildings that are not excessively high are powered by hydraulic pistons. At some point in height, there is a trade off. However, I don't remember at what floor height the trade off occurs.

In the earlier years of Marshall Fields (and many other important Chicago buildings) - - there was a human being as the elevator car operator. Many building elevator cars were operated by African - American people.

On one particular trip in such a Marshall Fields elevator car, I can still remember the very nice African - American elederly man say, "Please move to the rear of the 'Cah'. Now I am reciting this as a pleasant memory and not derrogatory.

But around 1948, Marshall Fields installed the first electronic operated do it yourself elevator cars. So one only had to push a button for one's floor destination. That came about due to the invention of the transistor on December 23, 1947.

[Manigault]

I think I may have a rare view of this situation. I have shopped the Macy's main store on 34th St in NY and I worked the Field's State Street store. What many people don't realize is that Marshall Fields was the Cadillac of Chicago department stores and Macy's was really more middle of the road in NYC.

There were similarities -- Macy's had a very old escalator and Fields had a two block long corridor to the Men's store across the street to Wabash if you went on the lower level (The Men's store now on Macy's second floor -- Fields having concentrated its space). But Macy's was never Saks Fifth Ave., Bergdorf's or Bloomingdale's. Now, it owns Fields. I have examined the store since the takeover and it is not any worse. I wish Macy's good fortune in their running the store. But I, certainly a man of the people, like the upscale atmosphere of the old Fields.

[nanannie]

Interesting Manigualt. I was at NYCs Macys store a few times in the past. Macys always seemed very "blue collar" and Fields was far more upscale. The merchandise now is lacking in the quality that MF was once known for.Its more then just the name,its generations of tradition in Chicago. Would it be the same if they changed the name "Cubs" to say, Chicago Yankees? It wouldnt be that same Chicago vibe would it?

[Steve-o]

I think Macy's is far down stream from Fields in terms of quality and appearance. I know many people who wont shop there any more because of that (even though we still do check out the window displays during Christmas time).

[rgb123]

Howell Street....yes, all Marshall Fields stores are now Macy's....I think you asked that? or maybe I read it wrong.

anyway, one time last spring I walked into Hawthorn mall, in the same entrance I always did as it was placed close to fields and other stores I liked. I forgot for a moment about what happened and I just looked in the display windows as I walked by.....I thought it looked so bland, so boring...so not styilsh. Usually I look in the window and think, "I have to have that but can't afford it right now, but want to go in anyway and buy it" this time I didn't have that feeling, I thought "blech" well at least I wont be spending my paycheck there, keep walking....

and then it hit me...oh, yeah its Macy's now.....they really do S#%

Just making the point, that I even proved it to myself at that time, that I was not seeing this through jilted Chicagoan glasses....that experience was completley real!!

[sbd78]

I remember before the switchover happened seeing the CEO of Federated Department Stores (Macy's parent company) on T.V. He was saying in a very cocky, arrogant manner that market research has been done and Chicagoans have no problem with the switchover of Marshall Fields to Macy's. I bet he is eating his words now!

[gardener34]

Marshall field's was like Nordstroms is now. Dayton Hudson pillaged it and used the $$ to open up more targets. Even towards the end of their domain, the marshall fields ads even LOOKED like target ads.
DH ruined the fields brand. Macy's is just OK, seems very much like a carson's which I have one a few miles from our house, so why would I go to a macy's for a "destination" except to the state street one for chrismas time.
I agree, that is something to see.

[mdz]

Originally Posted by gardener34

Marshall field's was like Nordstroms is now. Dayton Hudson pillaged it and used the $$ to open up more targets. Even towards the end of their domain, the marshall fields ads even LOOKED like target ads.
DH ruined the fields brand. Macy's is just OK, seems very much like a carson's which I have one a few miles from our house, so why would I go to a macy's for a "destination" except to the state street one for chrismas time.
I agree, that is something to see.

Definitely agree. The Fields of 20 years ago was way better than the post Dayton Hudson Fields. Macy's is still a step below--the darn dress shirts I bought last winter that have already fallen apart are proof of that (my old Fields brand shirts are still going strong after wearing them once every week or two for 3 years). When there are so many other choices out there, and especially now that "Macy's" isn't "Ours" anymore (as in Fields), there's little reason to shop there vs anywhere else.

I do feel bad for the people who work there, most of the long-time fields employees I've talked to hate the change and agree that the quality has diminished somewhat.

[HOWELL_STREET]

Dear Friends:

Well, thank you for all of your quite - interesting comments in regards to the old "Marshall Fields" vs. the new "Macy's".

There seems to be two different "Fields" (Pun) of thought, here. First the old Marshall Fields is / was a Chicago Icon that won't go away. That's apparently so because there is a different product / pride distinction among customers who remember both Marshall Field and now Macy's.

So as a side point / question, I wonder what the level of product quality would be in the NYC Macy's store?

Does anyone know if they are both identical between Macy's NYC and Chicago?

One possible reason why Chicago's Macy product distinction seems inferior is that the products of Marshall Fields of 'yesteryear' were mostly made in American. And Macy's products of today are lower quality off - shore items.

The only exception to this might be the very expensive French Cologne and perfumes that Marshall Field sold many years ago.

Everytime I visited the Marshall Fields store with my grandmother, the 'tester' spray samples of exotic French perfumes were very prevalant (sp?) in the surrounding air once inside the store. And with such an aroma, perhaps that contributed to the subtle popularity of Marshall Fields(?)

So MAYBE Macy's doesn't know how to return to those hidden / subtle differences since they can no longer create a 100% market of mostly ALL products manufactured in the U.S.A.(?)

Best Regards,

Carter Glass