Devil in the White City #2

I would have to say that the entire Fair, "in its extravagant size and cost" was an exhibition of arrogance. 


This is an exhibition of arrogance, because the Fair was intentionally built to surpass the greatness of the fair held in France. The fair in France received admiration for all it had to offer, such as art, cultural unity, and of course, the Eiffel Tower. The French, and other supporters, were quite bigheaded and believed that an American world fair could not be as nearly treasured as the one in France. The doubts that people all over the world had only strengthened the motivation of the constructors of the World's Fair. The constructors wanted nothing but to prove them wrong, and to do it well. Thus, becoming an exhibition of arrogance, because it was built to commend one city, of one state, of one nation only. 


The World's Fair was also built in arrogance by celebrating Columbus' discovery of the New World. Back then, when Columbus discovered the Americas, the New World was in the spotlight, leaving the Old World in the shadows. On this scale, the Fair was an exhibition of arrogance by paying attribute only to the new, the younger, the undiscovered. 


In Devil in the White City, Chicagoans were desperate for the World's Fair to be held in in their hometown. Chicago was originally looked down upon, popular for its stench and grimy streets. They hoped that if and when the Fair was to be held in Chicago, its popularity and good name would be restored. Famous cities like New York, and D.C. were the first places that came to mind for many people for the Fair to be held at, but Chicagoans disliked this since their city was the one that needed the pick-me-up. 


In the end, I do believe that these creative acts engendered darker, destructive parallels. By this, I mean it only would have been natural for other cities or countries, especially France, to be fed up with the World Fair's creation. If person has an opponent who is constantly trying to one up them, and if the opponent does so successfully, one is expected to be a little bitter about their loss. But I don't believe these creative acts engendered darker parallels, or at least, I don't understand who such a thing could have done so. This book makes it clear that a world exists with both good and evil, and that you cannot escape from either one, but I do not understand how the parallel to an arrogant, creative act could lead someone, or attract someone, to killing.


At the same time, however, H.H. Holmes was quite a unique character...

Devil in the White City #1

First, I will admit that I needed to look up the definitions for 'evanescence' (I've only heard of the band :P) and for 'ineluctable.'


evanescent |ˌevəˈnesənt|adjective chiefly poetic/literarysoon passing out of sight, memory, or existence; quickly fading ordisappearing : a shimmering evanescent bubble. 
ineluctable |ˌiniˈləktəbəl|adjectiveunable to be resisted or avoided; inescapable : the ineluctable facts of history.
The Devil in the White City reveals that good and evil cannot exist without the other. If the world, or more relevant to this book, Chicago, was purely 'good' or 'evil,' than it actually would not have a label at all, because it would be the norm. "The shadow proves the sunshine," and "In order for the light to shine so brightly, the darkness must be present" illustrate good and evil's codependency.  But that is only an "if" situation, and in reality and in this book, good and evil is in fact, ineluctable. 
Here, the Chicago World's Fair is good. It is a symbol of American patriotism, modern advancement, etc., especially to its creators and fellow Chicagoans. To the builders, including Burnham and Root, and Chicagoans, it was their pride and glory. Chicago was basically seen as nothing more than a stink-hole, and only the World's Fair could have given it the recognition that its citizens were desperate for.
While regular people, either locals or foreigners, marveled at all the fair had to offer, one man, H.H. Holmes, found dozens of opportunities to tarnish the World's Fair. He is infamously known as one of America's first serial killers, and used the White City to reel in his victims. 
The two main characters, Burnham and Holmes definitely have several essential differences between them. First being their passion (well, in Holmes' case, a creepy obsession). Burnham is passionate about drawing and architecture. He is concerned about doing his best, and constantly strives to one-up his competitors, and even his old work. At the beginning of the book, Burnham is quoted, saying "Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood." This quote emphasizes his spirit, and the good that he brings to the creation of the World's Fair. 
Holmes , on the other hand, is quoted at the beginning of the book, saying " I was born with he devil in me. I could not help the fact that I was a murderer, no more than a poet can help the inspiration to sing." While Burnham was given the gift of art and architecture and intentionally decided to make a living out of it, Holmes says this is such a way that almost makes him sound like he was taken advantage of. For example, when he says "I was born with the devil in me," he sounds like he is trying to convince an audience that he isn't the one to blame for all the murders, that there is something, or someone far worse who is actually the cause of it all. Then, he says "I could not help the fact that I was a murderer" like he didn't have any other choice but to kill. 
Even though the differences between Burnham and Holmes are quite evident, they did, in some twisted way, have things in common. For one, their minds were completely wrapped up in their occupation. Burnham was, as illustrated in this book, in love with his job and always tried to be the best. Holmes, always moving from place to place and scheming, was consumed by killing. Secondly, another thing they had in common was that they were good at what they did.