Hi TLSers,

I've been browsing some threads about the Chicago schools and I keep reading about U Chicago's reputation for having a stifling and cut-throat student culture. Yet nobody has given any examples or evidence of this. Is U Chicago really that bad?

I've only been here for 6 weeks but I haven't found it to be that way at all. Of course, we haven't had any exams yet, but I don't see my classmates ripping pages out of books or anything like that.

I'd appreciate input on this as well from any current UChicago students. This is definitely my biggest concern about the school. Do students hang out with each other outside of class, what do most ppl do with each other, how's the social scene, etc.

How competitive can it really be? Their placement numbers are insane. I wouldn't be too worried if I was there.

I haven't seen any competition at all. Literally none. Everyone is open and nice to one another.

And we all hang out outside class. I've been way more social since getting here than I ever was in undergrad. Bar review is usually pretty crowded. I really don't know how Chicago got the rep of being a boring, competitive school...my experience has been opposite.

That's really great to hear. Also, I got the impression that UChicago has an older student body as opposed to places like UVA...what would you say the average age is? Out of the 200-student class, how many attend straight out of undergrad?

Thanks a lot for the info. And it's probably the UChicago undergrad that got the law school its reputation.

I have no idea what the average age is, but there's certainly a large chunk straight from undergrad. There's very few older students with families. I'd say most are in the 21-25 range.

And we all make fun of the U of C undergrads.

This is purely speculation, but I bet a lot of the older students with lots of WE and/or families go to Northwestern, since it's another T14 in the same city and caters more to that crowd. Since NW looooves that WE, all the straight from UG people who want to be in Chicago go to UChicago, so I'd imagine the age range is a bit self-selective, no?

thanks... do i know you?

I think Chicago sounds great. I don't need a big party or club scene, I think the the intellectual attitude of the school would be a perfect fit. I would be delighted if any other nerds wanted to join me to sit at home drink and debate politics or legal philosophy.

hyde park kinda sucks tho just saying great school tho

I feel the same way. I was crazy in high school and freshman year of college so I kind of got all that stuff out of my system...I'd be entirely content to go through law school with just a close group of 4-5 chill dudes to hang and pick up girls with. And 6-7 more ppl for fantasy basketball.

+1. If anything, I would be worried that the school is too rigorous (piled knee high in case law) to do outside stuff. I'm not too worried about that though, I think that there would be plenty of time for fantasy FOOTBALL.

I think that this is overplayed. I haven't actually been to Hyde Park but you can find something wrong with nearly every school's location.

Yale= According to Ken its shitty and unsafe
Harvard = Okay, this one is pretty awesome
Stanford= I've heard that COL can be spendy
Columbia & NYU= High cost of living in NYC and I've heard NYU's location can be a little bit too busy
Chicago= Hyde Park is a shithole...so they say
Berkeley= Living in the Bay Area isn't cheap but it overall does seem pretty awesome
Penn= You're more likely to be gunned down in Philadelphia than make law review (probably true)
Virginia and Cornell= Middle of nowhere

You get the picture. Not to derail the thread, but there are pro's and con's of every location and I don't think that the University of Chicago's is any different.

not really fair...the cons arent equally bad...

just using what you said, COL+ for Stanford and Berk != shithole lol. And being "a little bit too busy" seems a lot better than a shithole as well. Penn, ok, comparable haha. Middle of nowheres, okay, some may prefer shitholes over that. But for the rest...eh. (sans Yale, but i hear different things).

Not saying Hyde Park IS a shithole, but like Penn, its one of the schools that gets a lot of crap for being shithole-like...others dont. They may experience being called the other cons, but those are not nearly as bad...

That is very true, but the point I'm trying to make is the same. They all have pro's and cons. Chicago just has a slightly larger flaw than some of the other schools I pointed out.

Hyde Park isn't a shithole at all. Esthetically it's fine. It's just that there isn't that much to do compared with the rest of the city and even Evanston.

It's not even that unsafe. I don't walk around by myself at night, but there's no need to anyway. The bus system in Hyde Park is really great.

University City isn't a shithole either.

Why do I get the feeling that people on TLS who bash Hyde Park and Philly have either never been to those places or spent maybe an hour there? It's really annoying.

TBF, who can really stand to spend more than an hour in Hyde Park at a time?

I live in Hyde Park and personally I hate it. Something about feeling like you are not even a part of Chicago proper. There are no restaurants within walking distance of the law school at night, just the south dining commons. I think next year when I move up north quality of life will improve.

I agree it's not as dangerous as people say, but it still feels like it when you walk around at night.

I find it interesting how much Hyde Park maintains its character over time, for better or worse. Having spent a year working in Berkeley, my main complaint is that it is over-gentrified, which is not surprising given the about 30,000 students at the school. I don't have any nostalgia for it at all, because I can find American Apparel, the Gap, and Starbucks anywhere. I don't need to go to Berkeley for that. I think Berkeley used to stand for something cool and unique, but now it is just an over-priced East Bay suburb.

On the other hand, the size of UofC only supports a couple local places, but my impression is that anyone who has been there in the last 20 years all have this same experience of being regulars of Jimmy's Woodlawn Tavern, the Pub, Doc Films, Medici, Florian, Giordano's, or Harold's. I actually find that endearing, and preferable to the outdoor malls and food-courts that surround most schools. I always found it easy to take the metra or ride my bike downtown, too (incidentally, I was always frustrated that I couldn't bike to SF- anyone know whether they intend on extending the Bay Bridge walkway all the way across?).

Maybe I'm weird, though, because I'll defend downtown Oakland/Lake Merritt.

You can never have too much gentrification.

There was a study on this in Chicago a couple years back. The gist of it was that young poor hipsters would move into a chronically poor neighborhood, and there would be local cafes and vinyl record stores, and second-hand stores and art galleries popping up once critical mass was reached. Think Castro District in the 70's and 80's. Once the neighborhood is cool, the prices go up, the hip people get priced out, and wealthy people move in and more expensive restaurants and corporate-owned stores, arguably with less character, take over (think Castro present-day). The tell-tale signs would be a Trader Joe's, World Market, and a Starbuck's. The hipsters complain heavily, and then move into a new neighborhood, which would be maybe the Mission or SoMa in SF.

My ideal, in my college days, was not the end-result gentrification, but the middle-stage when the neighborhood was developing its own coolness. Hyde Park, to me, is constantly held to that middle stage because developers are still wary of investing in south side chicago. Berkeley jumped the shark long ago.

Don't believe the talk about Hyde Park- Chicago is the shit.

+ 1(000)

Lets just say that Chicago should really be #1 in USNEWS

/thread