JivecitySTL

Thanks! Tonight's GLUE conference dinner is at the Great Lakes Brewing Co. It would be great to meet some of you there later. I'm not sure how structured it's going to be this time. If any of you guys decide to show up there around 8-ish, you can look for the Jewish twins from St. Louis and say hello!

St. Louis is actually doing pretty well, and it's one of the top 5 most Democratic cities in the country. While its rebound may have slowed down in the economic downturn, it's still getting better and better with each passing day. Greetings from Cleveland, by the way! It's always great to be here!

While I'm naturally rooting for STL, I think Cleveland is every bit as deserving!

I would really love to meet up, although I will tell you most of our time there is already committed with stuff. My bro (STLgasm) and I have to be in Chicago right after the conference ends. I am so looking forward to the tour of Cleveland neighborhoods that is planned for the first day. We'll let you know if we get some time because we'd love to meetup. You Ohio people are so awesome. Your cities are awesome-- they seem to get along so well. You guys have a lot of pride in Ohio, which is something we in STL certainly don't have for Missouri. I love OHIO!!!

I will be there! I have been an active member of GLUE since its first conference in Buffalo three years ago. What a great conference!

I stayed there about 7 years ago. The views made me want to play with my privates.

It's important to note that the reason downtown Clayton developed a major downtown is because it is the county seat of St. Louis County. As you know, St. Louis City is an independent entity and is not part of suburban St. Louis County. Therefore, downtown Clayton is the de facto government, employment and commercial hub of the County.

Great pics. A few things: 1) The highrises in your pics are all in St. Louis City, albeit on the far western edge. 2) The Esquire Theater is actually in Richmond Heights, the suburb immediately to Clayton's south. 3) None of those shots are actually considered Clayton's "main commercial district." That distinction would go to downtown Clayton, which is the metro area's 2nd downtown. Downtown Clayton is conspicuously absent from this thread. See below!

Great pics, by the way!

Yes and no. Those pics were taken in Forest Park Southeast (aka "The Grove"), which is in the central corridor. Tower Grove South and Tower Grove East are two South Side 'hoods.

You can't even compare New York and Chicago; they are in two different leagues. New York is just so much bigger and more intense in every way. But Chicago is a wonderful city with an extremely high quality of life.

I also had the privilege of participating in this conference on behalf of St. Louis. Like 8Shades said, it was one of the most impressive, inspiring and enjoyable experiences of my life. There is something so incredible about being amongst a group of such passionate, knowledgable and creative people who are so committed to improving the quality of life in America's most underrated cities. An absolute pleasure it was, and I look forward to many more future exchanges.

The depopulation the city has most hit North St. Louis the worst, where massive decay and abandonment is clearly evident. While there are still many functioning neighborhoods on the North Side, it is largely a patchwork of decline in various stages. The South Side and West End, with a few exceptions, have remained solid and populated throughout the years. This thread features pictures of all sections of the city, including many North Side neighborhoods.

8 shades...

Great pics! I'm in Chicago right now. Such a nice city.

...reminds me of my and that Atlanta guys argument with gych about his contention that Louisville was "midwestern". #### I will say this about St Louis. As a native Chicagoan, from the city of Chicago, no connections anywhere else in the US aside from Chicago and Wisconsin, and having relatives in St Louis we would visit now and then.... ...their, and their kids, accent was not a Chicago accent. It's not southern (we had relatives in Louisville, too), but it was not Chicago, either. I didn't say St. Louisans sounded like Chicagoans. I said the St. Louis dialect has features in common with the Chicago dialect. Here's a video of Steve Conway, former St. Louis mayor, now an alderman, and a generations-long native of St. Louis. This is the quintessential St. Louis City accent:

You have to admit it's fun though. At least fun enough to bring it to its third page! Hey, I just thought of a cool idea for a thread: to post a YouTube video of someone who typifies your city's accent. I think that would be so interesting.

Good points all. I have always found the Cincinnati accent very interesting. Like Pittsburgh, it is a true hybrid dialect: some Philly/Baltimore qualities, some gutteral Appalachia, some standard Midwest, all rolled into one. Trust me, I'm no hater. But naturally, it does kind of bug me when people assume St. Louisans speak with a southern twang, when in reality the dialect here is much more similar to Chicago and Detroit than it is like Memphis or Louisville. But I guess I can't blame them; St. Louis has the misfortune of being grouped with the rest of Missourah.

^No problem. I really don't make this sh!t up (look at the map). Professional linguists know about dialectical traits better than any of us. Don't shoot the messenger. St. Louis participates in the Northern Cities Shift dialect pattern, Cincinnati does not. I'm not really sure how anyone can dispute that, but I guess it's pointless anyway. I have posted links to relatively credible sources that substantiate my claims, yet no one who disagrees with me has posted any to substantiate theirs. So I guess I will just have to keep my own opinions based on personal observation. btw, African-American dialects are a different animal entirely. They all have profound southern traits, no matter the city, to varying degrees. This is all very nerdy but interesting, and I am definitely guilty as charged!

^No argument there. I just said that based on linguistic studies, Cincinnati appears to have a more southern-influenced dialect than St. Louis. It also appears to have some New York City influences as well. Dialects can have multiple influences. I would be open to any evidence there is that disputes that. And really, who said anything about "summarizing Cincinnati down to a tee"? When did I ever do anything remotely like that?

Well excuse me, I just think trained linguists know a thing or two more than a bunch of city freaks on an internet forum. And I don't have to tell you because you know as well as I do that St. Louisans don't speak with a southern drawl. If you deny that it's only because you have a personal agenda when speaking out on St. Louis-related topics. There is a difference between disagreement and sheer ignorance. btw, for checking out my thread though. I know how much you miss St. Louis. :)

You really don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about. St. Louis is a speech island and has a northern urban dialect, with many features in common with the Chicago dialect. Famous St. Louisans that speak (or spoke) distinctively "St. Louis": Harry Caray, John Goodman and Yogi Berra. Cincinnati and Indianapolis have much more southern-influenced dialects than St. Louis. Read on: http://www.ling.upenn.edu/phono_atlas/NationalMap/NationalMap.html#Heading13 Here's a summary of a study about the St. Louis dialect done by none other than your neighbors at Ohio State University: http://www.ling.ohio-state.edu/NWAV/Abstracts/Papr135.pdf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Cities_Shift http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inland_Northern_American_English And the evidence goes on and on and on. There are countless studies about the St. Louis dialect because it is so unique, and ALL of them conclude that it is a northern dialect. Not a single study has concluded the contrary. St. Louis is not to be confused with the rest of Missouri, which definitely does have southern influences.

David, I am wondering why you even bothered to respond to this thread if St. Louis is so shitty to you.

Well its a city today of just over 350,000, but in 1950 it had almost 900,000-- all packed into just 61 square miles. The majority of the city's decline was concentrated on the North Side, so much of the central corridor and South Side remained intact and inhabited. Another huge factor in decline is the overall reduction in household size, which often gets overlooked. A 4-flat that housed 6 families in 1950 may only house one or two today, so it's not like the all the remaining buildings are empty. This goes for many cities in the USA.

The city I live in, the city I love... ^Are you in? Good, but there's more...