The Bee Gees: Imagine There's No Disco (It's Easy If You Try)

From Wikipedia: "The brothers relocated to Miami, Florida, early in 1975 to record. After starting off with ballads, they eventually heeded the urging of Mardin and Stigwood and crafted more rhythmic disco songs."

Play the Bee Gees 'what if' game if you will. What if they had not relocated to Miami and what if they had told Mardin and Stigwood to stuff it. Surely with that much talent they do not just wither away at that point. But what do they go into? Progressive, maybe? Or do they wait for the new wave economical/pop song thing to happen again and get a second wind on their careers as did the Kinks, Hollies, Mitch Ryder, Iggy Pop, Brian Wilson, etc?

RIP Robin!

p.s. For some really great disco, try this online radio station: http://www.radioitalo.com/

My Favorite Rap Names

Mos Def
Gucci Mane
Dun Deal
Playa Made
Da Hol' 9 (group)
Skur Quro
Nutcase
Hard Knox
Paper Boy
Thug Dog
Joe Capo
Tighty Whitey (OK, I made that one up)

Iron Law of History: Romney will win GOP nomination

Since primaries rather than smoke-filled rooms and caucuses became the predominant way for GOP to select its nominee (c. 1968), they've never nominated someone who was not: President, VP, son of a President, or runner-up in a previous GOP presidential race. Mitt Romney was runner-up in 2008.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_presidential_primaries,_2008 et al.

SLU Law’s High-Stakes Gamble

One thing you have to say for St. Louis University president Lawrence Biondi is that he "keeps it interesting."

After spending two decades cleaning up St. Louis University's main campus and adding some light, space and tranquility to the stressed-out urban environment that is midtown, what does he do but move his law school, the crown jewel of most universities, to an even more stressed-out downtown St. Louis, and into one of the ugliest, unretrofitted 1960s office buildings that could be imagined.

At first blush, this is madness. But when one considers that legal education and legal employment is an even more stressed-out commodity than decaying urban areas, the move may just be a stroke of genius.

The present SLU law building and library has been rehabbed and improved right along with the rest of the main campus over the last two decades. It is far from an eyesore now: state-of-the-art courtroom for mock trials, an elegant student commons, and an annex which consists of a beautiful Victorian house appointed with all the usual accoutrements: (fireplaces, hand-carved wood, grand staircase, etc. )  And for a modest sum the Law School could have easily been kept up to date.

In contrast, the Scott building definitely will not show well. It is not going to inspire prospective students or (and especially) their parents. A law student will spend most of his life as a lawyer in an ugly office building. So why start now? When you are inside the building, you will spend half your life on the elevator.

And please let’s not sugarcoat the “nuisance” aspect. You are going to get panhandled. Compared to a suburban college campus, parking is going to be a pain. You might even get your car broken into. In terms of national identity, the building and location of the new SLU Law School could not be more ill-timed, with the recent unfortunate ranking of St. Louis as one of the ten most dangerous cities in the world. “Law school is stressful enough already,“ some will argue.

But, in the midst of the worst legal services market in living memory, what the Scott building does, and does very quickly (within six months it is open for business!), is put the emphasis right where it should be: on no-frills education, practical experience and “jobs jobs jobs”. If moving into an ugly building can hold the line on tuition increases and crushing post-Law school debt, I am all for it. If moving closer to the legal community will give St. Louis University law students the inside track on internships, clerkships and “practicums” (mostly unpaid), and allow them to sit in on more trials, I am for that, too. The move is perhaps Biondi’s eloquent rejoinder to one of the most frequent criticisms of the value of legal education: the failure to prepare students for the real-world practice of law.

So St. Louis University law will stand in stark contrast to its competitor, Washington University school of Law, with its “Hogwarts-influenced” gothic Anheuser-Busch Hall.

And the stereotypes of the two student bodies will start to diverge more and more.

The Washington U student will be the conventional car-driving, keg-party hopping, graduate student who will probably date an undergrad and live in a tony Clayton or University City four-family flat and after graduation will get a job with a big firm or (if not in the top 10%) be hired through a family connection.

The St. Louis U law student will be a Metrolink riding, loft-dwelling, New Urbanist, careerist, holding down 16-hours per semester plus two part-time jobs but who “plays hard” with MLB, NFL and NHL and Peabody Opera House right out his front door, and one of the best entertainment strips in the Midwest, Washington Avenue, just blocks away. And he won’t even lay eyes on an undergad until commencement ceremonies. After law school, this student is ready to “hit the ground running” and likely joins a small firm or opens up a solo practice based heavily on net referrals.

For many students who have their choice of law schools, the downtown SLU law campus will be a "bridge too far", understandably. These students should not be criticized or, indeed, stereotyped. But I predict that a surprising number of students will bypass the sleepy suburban campus that feels "just like college" and choose the bright lights of Washington Avenue and become part of “Biondi’s bold adventure”.



Emmett McAuliffe is a partner in a Clayton-based law firm and attended none of the schools mentioned in this article.

The smaller the house, the more beautiful the Xmas light display

I visited the St. Louis neighborhood of Lemay last night.  It sits on the banks of the Mississippi river.  And in St. Louis, that is not generally a good thing for real estate value.  For historical and political reasons, Lemay escaped any kind of serious building code-based uniformity.  The result is beautiful tiny houses, each of them unique.  And their Holiday lights displays are every-bit the house's equal for quirk.  Poorer folks tend to hang on to their light displays to the point that they start to fade and change colors, ... sort of pastelize (sp?).

The house, the house of blue lights.

The home of Charles and Frances Cassaday at 1234 Dammert Ave, 63125.  There are a million Christmas wreaths in the world.  Almost all of them round.   The Cassadays dare to be ovular.

Santa landing by helicopter:

Ferris wheeled bears, precious moments, Elvis in the window and a classic example of the St. Louis Iron Pipe Hand-rail::

340 Rauhut in Lemay, a rental property apparently.  These renters really throw down:

A couple shots of 9453 Gentry.  Beauty in variety.  White light and glossy white picket fence with wreaths and bows:

 Faded blue lights, almost white.  Everybody knows I am partial to blue.  It's more winterish than red and green.  A minimalist approach at the rental property at 962 Dammert Ave.  Watch your step:

Un-raked leaves plus chaotic light placement, colors ... for an effect as beautiful as an abstract painting:

Having nothing to do with Christmas lighting, an apparently year-round display featuring three silhouettes of children running, at 9455 Gentry:

By being unafraid of being tacky, the denizens of Lemay end up being twelve times more tasteful than the lighting displays found on the typical McMansions of West County St. Louis.

Pick out one of these streets and drive for a half-mile around.  Neighbors have obviously influenced other neighbors ... but not in a "keep up with the Joneses" sort of way.  The Luxemburgers* gave up on worrying about that a long time ago.


*original name of Lemay

A Pujols Commentary You Haven't Heard Yet

There are far too many links to the Albert Pujols free agency story to list here, profitably.  Suffice it to say that Pujols is not leaving St. Louis on the best of terms and it might not be his fault.  But it is a shame that the St. Louis Cardinals improbable World Series victory* has to be tainted with a Leaving Controversy.  I see the Cardinals 2012 calendars, with Albert pointing skyward as the January photo, lying unbought at the St. Louis area Samsclubs and I know what's going on.  The sweet taste of victory has soured on the tongue of St. Louisans. It is like Bob Gibson started pitching for the Red Sox in 1968.  Or Ken Boyer bolted to become a Yankee in 1965.  Or, even worse, it is like Stan Musial bolted Eddie Dyer and the Cardinals in 1947 to go on to a solid ten years .. with the Dodgers.

Sutter, Porter, Ozzie, Hendrick, Lou Brock, Curt Flood, ... even Mike Shannon and Nellie Briles ... they were all back with the Cardinals the next year after sipping that World Championship champagne.  Clubs didn't "build for the future" the year after a championship.  They rested on their laurels ... and brought the champions back the next year for at least a victory lap.  Even the 1944 AL champion St. Louis Browns, beaten out by the Cardinals four games to two in the World Series, made only two moves in the off-season (selling backup shortstop Floyd Baker and signing future rookie-of-the year Roy Sievers).

I know that free agency makes everything different now.  But it is still possible to stay with a team.  Somehow, Pujols and the Cardinals should have made that happen,.  For old time's sake, if for nothing else.



* folks, lets face it, that series had EV-RY-thing from Tony LaRussa's Roman soldier/lawyer stoicism to Ron Washington's disco tap-dancing chipmunk cheerleaderism, plus Samuel Jackson-style locker room rants ... and everything on the field too.