Public Beauty
One of the obvious differences between Chicagoland and Texas (besides the weather) is the visual aesthetic of city infrastructure. Honestly, driving around Chicago everything is just ugly. Ignoring the fact that most of the year the roadways are covered in dirty snow and caking salt, it's the cement structures themselves that offend. They are stark, utilitarian, and generally falling apart. But here in Texas (and in New Mexico), public structures like highways are visually interesting. Nice brickwork, sculptural elements, color variations, and the ubiquitous symbols of the state adorn the roadways. It's nice to look at and far less depressing than the functional but ugly Chicago roads. In short, I like it.
But of course the issue goes much deeper than rather I like it or not. The roadways are paid for with tax dollars. And my gut reaction is to say that there are far better things for our tax dollars to be spent on than making our highways look nice. I'm sure the cost of those premium bricks could have gone a long way in a public school. Stop at bare bones functionality – no matter how butt ugly – and (theoretically) save money to be used elsewhere.
Yet the result of that line of thinking is that aesthetically pleasing environments then become available to those able to pay for it themselves. Beauty and art (of whatever variety) then belong to the rich while the poor just make do with the hand they are dealt. And that hand generally equals an ugly, utilitarian, and depressing environment. If you don't have money, you don't "deserve" beauty.
So in regards to the age-old argument about the uses of tax dollars, I can support public works projects that seek to bring beauty to all – even if it is as simple as the construction of highways. Trapping people – whatever their income – into something that is merely functional but ugly does little to uplift or encourage hope.
julieclawson(at)gmail(dot)com 
I really don't agree about Chicago. I've never been to Texas but have not been overly impressed with things I have seen in pictures, videos, etc. It doesn't help that W. is from Texas. But I love to visit Chicago. I always see it as much more the heart of America than any other city. I must admit to being strongly influenced by growing up on Carl Sandburg's poetry. I always loved the way his daughter referred to him as "the poet in our house." He was definitely the poet laureate at our house. And nothing says Chicago better than The People, Yes-
The people yes
The people will live on.
The learning and blundering people will live on.
They will be tricked and sold and again sold
And go back to the nourishing earth for rootholds,
The people so peculiar in renewal and comeback,
You can't laugh off their capacity to take it.
The mammoth rests between his cyclonic dramas.
With regards to the roads, agreed.
But the city? No. Have you ever taken an architectural tour, or explored the history of the old buildings? Seen the insides of the gorgeous theaters? Sat on the lake front when the lake is almost a Caribbean blue like it was when Jen, Kelsey and I were there last summer?
I like beauty, but I like meaning, and tradition, and majesty, and history. I love Chicago!
I feel more alive in that city than I do most anywhere, well except the ocean beaches of course.
As for the roads…. they get me there!
Oh – and I do understand and agree with your point…..
I agree with Julie. Chicago is my favorite "big city" in the eastern half of the US – better than Boston or New York or DC or Atlanta or Detroit or Pittsburg or Cleveland – but I wouldn't describe the area as beautiful. Sure, there are some picturesque spots and yes there is some neat architecture. But for overall aesthetics, especially if you are considering "greater Chicagoland" and not just the best parts of the city itself, that's a pretty bland and boring area of the country that isn't particularly enhanced by its public infrastructure.
I say that as someone who looks back fondly at spending 4 years in the greater Chicago area including many trips into the city itself, and loves to return for visits. It's a great place but for aesthetics both natural and man-made, there are a lot of areas of the country that would be much higher on my list.
I'm pretty sure Julie was referring to the public infrastructure (e.g. the highways, public transit, public buildings, etc.) of Chicago, not the privately built architecture.
ditto what Mike said…