more about SLU

Posted on by

The Saint Louis University News last Thursday (04/25/2012) carried an account of SLU President Lawrence Biondi’s appearance at the SLU Student Government Association meeting the day before. That account, which unfortunately doesn’t appear online at present, mentions that faculty members were asked to leave the meeting (as reported first by SLU Students for No Confidence, then by local media and The Chronicle of Higher Education) but also provides the only detailed summary of the President’s remarks I have been able to find.

According to the University News it seems fair to say that Biondi defended the faculty evaluation scheme that sparked no confidence votes last fall, defended ousted VPAA, Manoj Patankar, and had this to say about students and faculty who participated in the public protest outside last December’s meeting of SLU trustees:

This got out of control. I think some of you were manipulated by the faculty. Especially when there is a demonstration on the mall. Isn’t it curious that some of the students are related to the faculty member who is giving them a grade? Is there some kind of conflict of interest

The University News story also reports Biondi to have aasserted that:

[S]hared governance at SLU has always been in place, as student and faculty voices are always taken into account, but not every proposal can be accepted. Shared governance is voicing your ideas and opinions and letting discussions take place. Just because we reject some ideas does not mean there is no shared governance . . . There is no climate of fear. I’ve asked every faculty member on various committees if they feel as though they can’t speak their mind, and they say ‘no.’

In the past, Biondi has been fairly successful in constructing faculty echo chambers for his ideas, opinions, and ambitions. But in this instance faculty were quick to react negatively, with votes to censure the president taken in the Arts and Sciences Faculty Council and the University Faculty Senate. Senate President, Mark Knuepfer, has released a statement demanding Biondi’s resignation, and the Faculty Senate has released a report that includes these observations:

. . . [B]ecause of well-known cases of retribution and the President’s tirades about particular deans and faculty, deans often are reticent. It feels risky for them to openly express opinions that contest those of the President or the former VP for Academic Affairs. Some have said they worry about the well-being of their schools and their budget and personnel requests.

The penalties for dissent take many forms . . . : raises denied, laboratory resources restricted, highly-regarded deans and department chairs fired or forced to resign, lawsuits filed or threatened against individual faculty. Others fear retribution against their academic departments, programs, or schools through budget cuts, frozen hiring, or appointment of an unqualified dean over the objections of faculty.

This systemic dysfunction hinders the ability of faculty and academic units to further the University’s academic mission. Indisputably, such a culture of intimidation is incompatible with the principle of academic freedom, the bedrock of all other academic values. It is also morally and intellectually incompatible with our identity as a Catholic, Jesuit University.

None of this is new, as many have pointed out at the SLU Students for No Confidence Facebook page. The culture of intimidation is palpable and goes back decades. What is new is that it is being exposed—in the past the SLU central administration has been able to prevent public exposure of its cruelty and cynicism. And it is also new that SLU faculty have been able to find a unified voice in opposition. In the past it has been fairly easy for the SLU central administration to punish dissent for reasons the Faculty Senate report makes clear. Now, perhaps, the worm is turning. One can only applaud.

back at it

Posted on by

Progress Missouri has posted a new report on the activities of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) in Missouri. As of March 2013, 45 corporations and six non-profits — for a total of 51 private sector members — have publicly announced that they are cutting ties with ALEC, according to a report from ALEC Exposed. But the organization continues to make inroads into the politics of states like ours. The Progress Missouri report makes quite a read. What’s most disturbing about it, from my perespective, is that the ability of this organization of corporations to affect legislation is roughly parallel to the ability of huge pharmaceutical and agribusiness corporations to control and corrupt research about, and increasingly the production, and distribution of, food and drugs. If ALEC’s influence is waning, the influence of pharma and international agribusiness continues. And it is interesting, to say the least, to read a defense of ignorance such as this one at a blog whose subtitle is “free minds and free markets.”

Meanwhile, SLU Students for No Confidence are reporting a disturbing incident at last evening’s meeting of the SLU Student Government Association. Apparently two faculty members were ejected from the meeting. I’ll quote the rather lengthy anonymous eyewitness report posted just a short while ago:

I arrived at approximately 5:02pm. The opening prayer was being given when I arrived, and I did not enter the room until after the prayer had ended. I stood outside with a small number of people who had also arrived during the prayer. As I stood outside, I noticed a uniformed officer standing in the vicinity of the Senate Chambers. I noted this as odd at the time, but did not think much of it after that (I did not look over this individual closely, but I assume is was a DPS Officer). I entered the Senate Chambers shortly before Vice President Alberty began taking attendance. Prior to my arrival, one faculty member I recognized was already present in a corner of the Senate Chambers. Shortly after I arrived, a second faculty member joined the first in that same corner. After attendance was taken, there was some discussion about adjusting the night’s agenda due to Fr. Biondi’s presentation.

At around 5:20pm, Fr. Biondi arrived in the company of Fr. Stark. He and SGA President Blake Exline began speaking shortly following his introduction by President Exline. The conversation occurred in hushed tones, but was clearly audible. He was requesting that the two previously mentioned faculty members be removed from the meeting, citing their presence as “inappropriate” because the SGA was a meeting of “student representatives.” The two faculty members had not caused any sort of a disruption. They were sitting quietly in a corner. Following Fr. Biondi’s request, President Exline immediately turned toward the two faculty members and asked them to leave. No protest was made by President Exline, by the SGA Executive Committee, by the SGA Advisors, or by the SGA Senators. The faculty members left willingly and without protest. The entire situation lasted less than 20 seconds from Fr. Biondi speaking with President Exline, to the two faculty members exiting the Senate Chambers. It happened so quickly I believe most people in the room did not even initially realize what had happened. My own initial reaction was to walk out of the room in protest, but I believed at the time that I would be better off remaining in the room. I admit my own regrets in not standing up and protesting the removal of two faculty members from a meeting which is open to the public, as I believe that I failed to live up to my own expectations.

Following the removal of the two faculty members, the presentation by Fr. Biondi progressed smoothly. There were no interruptions of any sort. Fr. Biondi was presented with questions which had been submitted to the Executive Committee the week before by SGA Senators. I will not provide a play-by-play of the presentation, as that would be far too long and I did not have anything with me to use for taking notes.

I will, however, mention one particularly prominent portion of Fr. Biondi’s response to the second question presented to him, which asked him why he believed the No Confidence movement had started and why it grew the way it did. The majority of his answer was slanted against the faculty of SLU, and intended to make the faculty appear irrational and vengeful. Eventually, he reached the point in the No Confidence narrative when the first major protest took place in the Quad. It was at this point that he referred to the students who were participating as being manipulated by the faculty who were taking part in the movement, and even went so far as to say that students were going because their professors (who controlled their grades) were taking part in the movement. His clear and obvious inference was that students were participating in the No Confidence protest because they hoped to get a good grade from their professor.

This week’s University News is just out. I was hoping for more information about the SGA meeting, particularly with regard to what else President Biondi may have said—but see nothing. Perhaps the online edition will provide some details in due course.

CORRECTION: This week’s University News is not out yet. I was looking at last week’s edition. Perhaps by the end of the day.

Those lovesick blues, I just lost ’em . . .

Posted on by

I’ll be leaving this on the front page for a while. It’s not a review—you can’t review your friends’ work. Rather, it’s more in the nature of an appreciation. Appreciations are OK, and we once thought them legitimate criticism in the hands of say William Hazlitt, not to compare myself with that adorable genius.

A couple of years back I wrote about my friends, Pattie and Jack Le Sueur from Durham North Carolina. Jack had recently retired from the North Carolina Arts Council, and when I asked him if he and Pattie intended to continue performing around the Research Triangle area as they had since the nineteen-seventies, Jack told me that he was entering “legacy mode”—no more live performing, but that he had in mind to produce some recordings he and Pattie had made over the years.

The first of these (I say first hoping there will be more) is now available, a double CD/DVD set entitled Pattie and Jack Le Sueur and Cedar Creek Live at Learned Place. I hadn’t known about Learned Place, but here’s a history written by proprietors, Deborah Jakubs & Jim Roberts, that’s included with the discs. As you can see it’s as much about Pattie and Jack and the album as it is about the venue. I’ll quote it all in hopes it will interest readers as it interests me.

Learned Place Music was inspired by chance encounters and our growing friendship with Pattie and Jack Le Sueur, first admiring their performances at the wonderful Cedar Creek Gallery in Creedmoor, then conversations at kids’ soccer games. Having expressed admiration for their music, we were invited to hear them play an opening set at Peter Kramer’s farm in Orange County featuring a trio then barely known in the US – the Krüger Brothers. Not only did we hear the amazing Krüger Brothers for the first time, but we also met the full Cedar Creek band, with the multi-instrumentalist and fine singer Rick LaReno on banjo and lead guitar and Mike Foster on bass. Our sons were soon taking private lessons with Rick, and we became groupies of Pattie & Jack Le Sueur and Cedar Creek. And the Krüger Brothers, who have several times collaborated musically with Pattie and Jack and Cedar Creek. [You can read about the Krüger Brothers here. JL].

These friendships inspired us to begin sharing our home for acoustic music performances, what we dubbed Southern Roots music. We are now in our tenth year of the Learned Place Music series and have hosted over 50 concerts. Pattie & Jack Le Sueur and Cedar Creek took part in many of these performances until they ended their collaboration in 2009. This album, with songs recorded between 2003 and 2006, shows both the evolution of the band and the concert series. Through it all is the astonishingly beautiful singing of Pattie Le Sueur, punctuated by some great lead singing by Jack and Rick. In all our experience, it is hard to imagine a finer singer than Pattie. Were it not for day jobs and family commitments, these folks could have been making a mark on the musical world anywhere. But they chose Durham, and we are grateful. Their music is timeless and beautiful and rendered extraordinarily well in this collection.

This is a great collector’s item for fans of Pattie & Jack Le Sueur and Cedar Creek, for the faithful supporters of Learned Place Music, and for anyone devoted to fine acoustic music.

The album contains 34 songs. My favorites at the moment are the second two songs on the first disc: “The One Who knows,” a Dar Williams song about breaking away and letting go that Pattie calls contemplative. It displays some of the best things Pattie does as a singer, quiet and thoughtful things that require mastery both of her voice and of the microphone, as well as maturity and interpretive insight. My other favorite is “Lark in the Morning,” a wistful Kate McLeod song about loss and the memory of love–how’s that for country?–that Pattie and the boys in the band almost turn into a dance hall stomp. I say almost because the song their way still retains its seriousness. It just doesn’t protest too much. For a sentimental listener like me this song is the true gold, in the vein of A. P. Carter, et al.

Rick LaReno does some fine guitar picking in “Lark in the Morning” and many other songs on the album. For the second disc opener LaReno turns a performance of folk chestnut, “The Fox,” into an occasion for some splendid guitar riffs. He also sings well, especially in John Gorka’s “Gypsy Life,” and plays fine Scruggs style banjo. Mike Foster, the bass player, doesn’t get the spotlight much, but provides the solid bottom of the music that never rings false, sings harmony vocals, and sometimes contributes a bit of percussion by thumping his big resonator guitar.

Pattie and Jack’s son, Jon Le Sueur, a professional musician and filmmaker in his own right, plays guitar and accompanies his mother on “A Stor Mo Chroi,” a traditional Celtic lament; and daughter Sarah Le Sueur joins in the choruses of country favorites “New Night Dawning” by John Poythress and Tammy Kidd and Delbert McClinton’s “Two More Bottles of Wine.” Michael Borstleman and Jens Krüger fill out the ensemble with mandolin and banjo as needed.

All in all this new album is a great romp that spans genres from traditional folk to contemporary country and rockabilly. There’s even a good yodeling song, Jimmy Rogers’ “When the Cactus is in Bloom,” that shows off Pattie’s skill as a vocal acrobat. Jack’s “Administrator’s Blues” is included and his lovely wedding song, “Two Paths,” but not his “Waisting My Time,” which I miss; though I already have that song on Pattie and Jack’s earlier CD, Two Paths.

The back and forth banter as Pattie introduces the songs provides more good fun. At one point she quips that Jack is in administration, and Jack fires back that she (of course) is not, eliciting a big laugh all around. One has the sense that the jokes are as familiar to these friends as the songs are. There seems an easy camaraderie between them all, performers and audience alike. Jack plays mostly second guitar, filling in the rhythms and the harmonies, sitting back and letting others take stage. He was always good at that, though I’m sure that much of the thinking that shapes these performances is his.

On the whole this album seems exceptionally well-produced. The sound quality and the mixing are excellent, and the video quality is high. There are some flaws here and there, places where feedback intrudes, an intonation problem or two. But I think such things are to be expected in recordings made at live performances. What one gains from such recordings is a special kind of presence, something more than passion, a kind of focused immediacy, what Hazlitt called gusto. These are fine musicians at the height of their powers performing music that has become part of their being—for an audience of friends and neighbors to whom they are physically present.

Buy this album. It’s available from jack.lesueur@earthlink.net. Prices are $20 for the DVD, $15 for the CD, or $30 for both—plus shipping, of course. I’ve got both, so that I can watch indoors and listen in my car; and I plan to buy more copies for gifts to friends and family.

In the bonds of life

Posted on by

Our friend Marsha died just shy of a year ago. Today her family unveiled and dedicated her tombstone, following Jewish custom. My beloved and I attended along with other friends. We stood in the rain as a friendly Rabbi read the simple service. We were altogether about twenty, including Marsha’s small grandchildren who found ways to play in the puddles around us and to enjoy the weather that the rest of us fended off with raincoats and umbrellas.

The service was so moving that I eventually forgot the weather too. The Rabbi, who we guessed knew Marsha well, had written a poem about her, which he read. It captured her well, her brashness, her intellect–Marsha had two PhDs–her deep laugh that we all remembered as the Rabbi spoke of it, the mark of laughter she had need of as a polio survivor and at the end as she battled a liver disease, a lymphoma, and the devastations wrought by chemotherapy.

The memorial prayer the Rabbi intoned afterwards asks that the soul of the departed person be bound in the bonds of life (some translations say everlasting life). This Rabbi, today, spoke of Marsha’s soul as bound up with the souls of the living. As I looked about me at the friends and family congregated around Marsha’s grave, I knew it was so. I threw away my umbrella as I looked for a small stone to leave on the grave marker.