Fall 2013 - Issue 6

TUFTS OBSERVER

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

VOLUME CXXVII, ISSUE 6

O

EPIC OLYMPIC CONTROVERSY ( PAG E 2 )

, POPPING TUFTS BUBBLE ( PAG E 2 0 )

EYES ON BLUE CINEMA ( PAG E 2 2 )

THE COST OF SOCHI by Flo Wen

CREATIVE COMMONS

2

6

ALISON GRAHAM

THE NEW SPACE RACE by Danielle Bennett

14

GRIFFIN QUASEBARTH

BEYOND CRAMPED WALLS by Nader Salass

EVA STRAUSS

GENIUS OR HACK? by Robert Collins

24

LIFE AFTER COLLEGE by Alex Wallach Hanson The Observer has been Tufts’ student publication of record since 1895. Our dedication to in-depth reporting, journalistic innovation, and honest dialogue has remained intact for over a century. Today, we offer insightful news analysis, cogent and diverse opinion pieces, creative writing, and lively reviews of current arts, entertainment, and culture. Through poignant writing and artistic elegance, we aim to entertain, inform, and above all challenge the Tufts community to effect positive change.

26

EDITORS editor-in-chief Molly Mirhashem managing editor Nicola Pardy production director Ben Kurland asst. production director Bernita Ling section editors Anika Ades Justin Kim Aaron Langerman Moira Lavelle Gracie McKenzie Alison Pinkerton Kumar Ramanathan Nader Salass Evan Tarantino Flo Wen publicity director Stephen Wright photography director Knar Bedian photography editor Alison Graham art director Robert Collins lead artists Griffin Quasebarth Eva Strauss lead copy editors Liana Abbott Sarah Perlman copy editors George Esselstyn Eve Feldberg Katharine Pong MT Snyder Nate Williams design assistants Sahar Roodehchi Anastasia Antonova staff writers Ellen Mayer

Tony Cannistra Sam Friedensohn Erinn Geyer Owen Martin Christine Motch Ross Schlaikjer Sarah Strand COVER BY: Tony Cannistra

November 25, 2013 Volume CXXVII, Issue 6 Tufts Observer, since 1895 Tufts’ Student Magazine

TABLE OF CONTENTS The Cost of Sochi by Flo Wen 2 feature The New Space Race by Danielle Bennett 6 news Austerity & Extremism by Allison Aaronson 8 news Second Class Citizens by Ben Kurland 10 opinion & prose Beyond Cramped Walls by Nader Salass 12 poetry inset Life at the Loj 14 photo The Marko Men by Jenn Oetter 18 campus Bubble Trouble by Jamie Moore 20 opinion & culture Blue Cinema by Ellen Mayer 22 arts & culture Slavoj Žižek: Genius or Hack? by Robert Collins 24 arts campus Life After College by Alex Wallach Hanson 26 off blotter

By Moira Lavelle and Aaron Langerman 28 police

FE AT UR E

The Cost of Sochi E

ach year, the Olympic Games continue to outdo themselves in grandiosity, overall costs, and now, controversy. Next year’s Winter Olympics have emerged as the subject of constant media attention. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) surprised many with its announcement of the Games’ location: Sochi, Russia.

Sochi, the subtropical resort city situated along the Black Sea, beat out six other cities that applied to host the event that will begin on February 7th. But given the location’s physical conditions—as well as the Russian government’s recently passed anti-gay law—people are challenging Sochi as an appropriate spot for the Winter Games. And with the costs of the event reaching exponential highs, concerns about the implications of the Games go beyond this year’s host site. Especially if hosted by a potentially hostile environment, have the Olympics gone too far in terms of labor and expenses? The event’s controversial location has kept it in the spotlight throughout its preparations, forcing us to evaluate the Olympics’ worth altogether.

The primary concern about the upcoming Olympics is the consequences for LGBT participants and spectators. Russian president Vladimir Putin’s June signing of legislation banning “the promotion of non-traditional sexual relations” for minors produced worldwide criticism.

2

TUFTS OBSERVER

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

by Flo Wen

The law forbids any discussion of gay rights or homosexual relationships that might be heard by children. Any instances of this so-called “gay propaganda” can result in fines of several thousand dollars or deportation for foreigners. But the vaguely-worded law leaves room for interpretation, giving leverage to nationwide homophobic attitudes and behavior. In Russia, the law has manifested itself through an absence of gay pride or any discourse related to homosexuality. Acknowledging one’s own homosexuality is considered a crime on Russian soil. The Russian LGBT community has been effectively silenced, at least on a public level.

Global protests of Russia’s anti-gay law have taken various forms, starting with a boycott of Russian vodka brands. The Olympics in Sochi immediately became a hot topic for protest; various countries voiced their concerns that LGBT athletes and fans at the event would face discrimination and possibly arrest for vocalizing anything at all about their sexuality. Petitions and letters calling for the repeal of the anti-gay law flooded into respective governments.

Organized by human rights group All Out, Swiss petitioners presented the IOC with 320,000 signatures demanding the abolishment of the law before the Sochi Games. Members of the U.S. Congress demanded that Secretary of State John Kerry “take steps to ensure the safety of

FE E UR AT

gay American athletes.” The IOC, however, issued a statement in September that Russia has not violated the Olympic Charter. Chairman of the IOC’s coordination commission Jean-Claud Killy said, “The Olympic Charter states that all segregation is completely prohibited, whether it be on the ground of race, religion, color, or other, on the Olympic territory… As long as the Olympic Charter is respected, we are satisfied.”

With an adamant IOC, Olympic fans have been confronted with the question of whether or not to support an event that takes place in such a discriminatory environment. Talk of Sochi Olympic boycotts have been popular, led by fans, athletes, journalists, and even government officials such as U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham. While some activist groups call for boycotting next year’s games altogether, others—such as the larger LGBT community in Sochi—request subtler protests: rainbow athletic uniforms, withdrawals of Olympic sponsors such as Coca-Cola, and the addition of LGBT symbols on their products. But given the formal regulations of the Games, it is unlikely that we’ll be seeing rainbow-painted Coke cans at the event. The IOC stated that it will enforce Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter: “No kind of demonstration or political, religious, or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues, or other areas.” So Russia’s law prohibits gays from showing any signs of their sexuality, and the Olympic Charter prohibits athletes at the Games from showing any support for the gay community.

Despite the obvious moral perversions embedded in the Olympic technicalities, the show must go on—at least according to President Obama. In August, the President rejected plans to boycott the Sochi Games, asking protestors to think of the American athletes who have

sacrificed so much for the event. The Olympics are, after all, about the sports competitions and participating athletes.

But is the pure, athletic nature of the Olympics still alive?

The 2014 Games are making history as the most expensive and extravagant ones yet. The estimated cost of the Sochi event has reached 51 billion dollars and continues to rise, beating out the 40 billion dollar Beijing Summer Games. The Olympic site, a two-year-long, nationwide project, has been named the world’s largest construction ground. The cost is largely due to Sochi’s transformation from a subtropical city—which usually rests at a mild ten degrees Celsius in February—to a location appropriate for alpine events. Snow collected from previous winters and generated by snow-makers will make the competitions possible— along with the pocket money reserved to manufacture winter in Sochi. Located in the mountains about half an hour outside of the city, these events will require highly functioning infrastructure to host the 500,000 expected spectators. Whereas the last Winter Games, hosted by Vancouver, took place in a city with preexisting winter weather during the contest, the 2014 Games require a transformation of both climate and infrastructure. When it comes to the Olympics, the desirable location comes first, and the environment necessary for the actual competition is later built around it.

U.S. Olympic Committee official Patrick Sandusky characterized the Olympic preparations as instrumental for the Russian government: “You can sense that this is very much on the happening agenda for President Putin and the federal government beyond just the organizing committee and the regional area of Sochi. This is a big project for Russia.” It’s a big project, and it’s a big

STEVEN BLEY, CREATIVE COMMONS

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

TUFTS OBSERVER

3

An under-commercialized region of Russia has quickly become the world’s most MICHAEL KÖTTER, CREATIVE COMMONS

statement; an under-commercialized region of Russia has quickly become the world’s most revolutionized fishbowl.

The grandiosity of Olympic preparations continues to spend governmental funding in the hopes of a resulting increase in tourism and affluence. Especially now, at a time when Russia is under political scrutiny, its government continues to strive for greatness.

This year’s Torch Relay contributes to these efforts, as the torch went far beyond the traditional journey from Olympia, Greece to the host site. In addition to venturing up Europe’s tallest mountain, sinking to the bottom of the world’s deepest lake, and traveling to the North Pole in a nuclear-powered icebreaker, the torch completed its first spacewalk. Tethered to two Russian cosmonauts, the torch orbited 261 miles above Earth for about half an hour. Although the Olympic torch was taken aboard a spacecraft in the 1996 Summer Olympics, its November 9th spacewalk was the first instance of the Olympic torch’s presence in free space. At an expected 400,000 miles, the ongoing torch relay will make history as the longest to precede any Winter Olympics.

The list of superlatives goes on for the Sochi Games, as does the list of concerns surrounding the event. The IOC approved Olympic construction at Sochi National Park and nearby nature reserves, plans that have been under fire by environmentalists around the world. Adding to environmental concerns, it was revealed in October that Russia broke its “Zero Waste” Olympic pledge; Russia promised the most environmentally-clean Games in history when bidding for the host position. But Russia’s rail monopoly has since been

4

TUFTS OBSERVER

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

dumping large amounts of construction waste into an illegal landfill. The landfill, located near a water protection zone, has been linked to Sochi’s water supply. “Water from here will be contaminating Sochi’s fresh water springs for the next 10 to 15 years,” said Vladimir Kimaev, a member of the Caucasus Environmental Watch. Environmentalists have condemned Russia’s 51 billion dollar budget for lacking any provisions to handle construction waste. These concerns are especially ironic given that it is “the year of the environment” for Russia.

Maintaining the national cause that varies year to year, the country has been hosting a series of events honoring the environment. So, as well as proving detrimental to the environment, Olympic preparations are manifesting the hypocrisy of the Russian government.

But accusations of environmental hypocrisy are mild concerns for the country that is under fire for its broader politics; prominent figures in the media have characterized Russia as “monstrous,” “barbaric,” and “criminal.” Transcending next year’s Olympics, boycotts of cultural events involving Russia or Russian participants have pervaded international news. New York City’s Metropolitan Opera faced picket-line protests on its opening night of the fall season. The Met’s black-tie gala celebrated the premier performance of Tchaikovsky’s “Eugene Onegin”—featuring Russian stars Anna Netrebko and Valery Gergiev. Guests at the Russian-themed event were confronted by rainbow-clad protesters, both outside the opera house and inside the theater.

Participants shouted, “Putin, end your war on Russian gays!” and cried that the Russian performers’ “silence” was

“killing Russian gays.” Preceding the event, 9,000 online petitioners called for the Met to dedicate the opening performance to gay rights in Russia.

Drafted by a gay American composer, Andrew Rudin, the petition argued that the opera’s performers supported an anti-gay government. Rudin said in an interview, “Here’s a chance for the Met, in an entirely benign and positive way, to use its great cultural influence to be relevant, to do something positive.” General manager of the Met Peter Gelb, however, refused. Gelb stated in an opinion article for Bloomberg News, “Artists from dozens of different countries—some with poor human rights records—will be performing at the Met. If we were to devote tonight’s performance to Russian injustice, how could we possibly stop there?”

Taking Obama’s stance on the Olympic boycott, Gelb emphasized the artistic content of the Met rather than its political implications. Both institutions present us with a crisis of values, the thin line between a cultural endowment and a violation of human rights. The establishment of the Sochi games, however, is complicated by various infringements on the rights of Russian citizens, powerless to the government’s choices. Draining governmen-

tal revenue in the name of grandeur, destroying and contaminating Russian soil, spotlighting a hatred of gays that has been compared to the Holocaust: these are the accomplishments of next year’s Olympics.

According to various officials, we shouldn’t boycott the Olympics because political statements would overshadow the hard work and cultural significance they are designed to showcase. But the Games became political as soon as Sochi was designated the Olympic site. We cannot completely separate the Games within the stadium from the external implications of our participation in the event. Our financial support and presence in Sochi inextricably associate us with the government’s recent transgressions. But Obama has led our nation away from boycotting the Olympics, and the Games will proceed as planned. So for the sake of the athletes—and the sake of culture, however excessively grand—we’re going to have to try. When sitting in Sochi’s Olympic stadium, we must appreciate the world’s foremost sports competition with the earnest fervor of spectators past. This time around, however, we must have an understanding of the sacrifices made to enable the event—and a determination to draw the line somewhere. O

JUSKA WENDLAND, CREATIVE COMMONS

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

TUFTS OBSERVER

5

S EW N

T

he space race is on again, but the rules have changed and the new competition looks nothing like the old.

Several countries have sacrificed national treasures to explore and exploit the daunting void for commercial and military purposes, and what was once a race between the United States and the Soviet Union has blossomed into a more global free-for-all.

On November 5, India launched a spacecraft into Earth’s orbit bound for Mars in an attempt to be the first country in Asia to reach the Red Planet. Named Mangalyaan, the probe will endure a hazardous 300-day journey. The United States, Russia, and the European Space Agency all took at least two attempts to reach Mars successfully, and India hopes to beat this record. Two years ago, China also launched an unmanned mission to Mars (on a Russian rocket), but the mission failed. China has vowed to try again, but another attempt is not likely for several years.

China’s most recent mission launched a probe on June 18 which was to dock with an orbiting space station once in space.

6

TUFTS OBSERVER

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

Once docked, the astronauts aboard conducted medical and scientific experiments at China’s experimental space laboratory, Tiangong. According to an article from the German newspaper Deutsche Welle, “Tiangong” means “heavenly place” and “is illustrative of the political ambitions China has in order to pursue its aims in space.”

A decade ago, China became the third nation to launch a manned spacecraft; it has also worked on a lunar rover and a space station. Indian space officials hope that a successful mission to Mars will compete with these achievements and greatly boost national pride.

To the nations competing, there seems no better way to demonstrate dominance than by launching high-profile space ventures. In space, a new kind of competitive landscape has emerged. The absence of political and economic limitations, the absence of the perception of time and, of course, the absence of gravity have created a domain of infinite possibilities. But are we truly in the age of a new “Space Race”?

The period that historians have deemed the “Space Race” lasted roughly from 1957 until 1975 and was more an

informal competition between the USSR and the US. In other words, it was an extension of the Cold War above the clouds.

In July 1955, the United States announced its plans to build the first manmade satellite. One month after this information was released, Russia announced similar plans.

Two years later, the first official launches into space begin. On October 4th, 1957, Russia launched Sputnik 1, an artificial satellite to orbit around the Earth. Just a few months later, the United States sent out Explorer 1, their first venture into space.

A constant battle for the next two decades saw the launch of crafts such as Russia’s Luna 1, America’s Able 1 and countless others. One of the most notable was Apollo 11, the craft that allowed American astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin to be the first humans to walk on the moon.

Many of these ventures were marked not only by an interest in being the first to accomplish them, but also an interest in the militarization of space. Among the spacecraft were satellites intended to spy on the opposing military organizations, anti-satellite weaponry to end the spying, a consideration by the US to drop an atomic PHOTO BY HUNTINGDESIGNS

N EW S

seems to have little standing in the way of its success as a space tourism company.

Other private space companies in the US include SpaceX, created by Elon Musk in 2002, which works with NASA and the US government. After creating X.com and PayPal, Musk decided to try his hand at space exploration, and through Space X he began developing and manufacturing space launch vehicles in order to advance rocket technology. In 2008, NASA awarded $1.6 billion to SpaceX for more rocket and space research, with the eventual goal of sending humans to live on other planets.

NASA eventually signed a contract with SpaceX to use their space technology to send cargo to the International Space Station, and in May of 2012, one of SpaceX’s vehicles, Dragon, made SpaceX the first commercial company to successfully send a vehicle to the International Space Station. When asked about space exploration,

]

NS

bomb on the moon to demonstrate their supremacy over the USSR and a Soviet Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) sent into lower Earth orbit to attack specified areas of North America. The end of the Cold War brought an end to this intergalactic struggle between the USSR and the US, and although they both had strong space programs, new powers emerged amongst the rubble of the Berlin Wall such as China, Japan, and India.

A “Modern Space Race” is not quite the most appropriate title for our relationship with space today—the issue is far more complicated. First, it is no longer a race in the formal sense of the term, but rather an age of exploration amongst competitors. While it is true that India’s Mangalyaan rocket was launched in order for them to be the first Asian country to reach Mars, there is not as clearly established a competition as there was during the Cold War. Brendan Fleig-Goldstein, a Tufts junior who co-teaches a first year Explorations class called “Robots, Space, and Civilizations of the Future” referred to a key trend in space advancements today: the movement towards private enterprises.

“There is definitely a transition towards more private enterprises in space,” Fleig-Goldstein says.

A prime example is the rise of private companies and their “space tourism” ventures. Various start-up companies have begun to emerge in recent years to leisurely explore the vast universe that exists around us, Virgin Galactic among them. On their site, the company boasts, “Your journey to space starts here” and in the section for booking a tourist flight to space, states, “This is your first step to becoming an astronaut!” To the tune of $250,000 per seat, that is. Says Richard Branson, owner of the Virgin Group, “The vehicles will allow an out-of-the-seat, zero-gravity experience with astounding views of the planet from the black sky of space for tourist astronauts and a unique microgravity platform for researchers.”

With the elite club of astronomers that the company creates along with partners such as NBC (which broadcasted their first tourist trip in 2013), Virgin Galactic

China, and Japan) will eventually lead the world in technological space advancements.

Though K Radhakrishnan, Chairman of the Indian Space Research Organization, has commented, “We are not in a race with anybody, but I would say we are in a race with ourselves. We need to excel, we need to improve, and we need to bring new services,” pundits argue that a race is on. Along with the recent Mangalyaan mission, India has plans to send out even more space missions, with a plan for independent human spaceflight by 2015. China and India, like the United States, are considering more engagement with commercial space companies in the near future, and Japan talks of independent manned spaceflights by 2020.

Although these advances may help future generations, some critics find it mystifying that India can spend 72 million dollars on their most recent space craft to Mars but neglect the fact that the nation is estimated to have a third of the world’s poor, with approximately 22 percent of the population live below the poverty line. In effect, how can these Asian countries with serious economic and political inequalities focus not on internal reform, but rather on places where not yet inhabited by humans?

Others, such as Nisha Agrawal, chief executive of Oxfam in India, defend India’s space advancements as a beneficial aspect of the country’s prosperity. Agrawal states, “India is home to poor people, but it’s also an emerging economy. It’s a middle-income country […] What is hard for people to get their head around is that we are home to poverty, but also a global power. We are not really one country, but two in one. And we need to do both things: contribute to global knowledge as well as take care of poor people at home.”

In sum, what we see is a confluence of space exploration, leading to a different kind of space race. This race, however, refrains from the bifurcated qualities of its Cold War predecessor. Today’s race is dominated more by private companies

A “Modern Space Race” is not quite the most appropriate title for our relationship with space today.

Musk responded, “An asteroid or a super volcano could destroy us, and we face risks the dinosaurs never saw: An engineered virus, inadvertent creation of a micro black hole, catastrophic global warming or some as-yet-unknown technology could spell the end of us. Humankind evolved over millions of years, but over the last 60 years, atomic weaponry created the potential to extinguish ourselves. Sooner or later we must expand life beyond this blue and green ball, or go extinct.”

While there is no formal “Space Race,” the most prevalent space competition appears to be amongst the Asian countries.

Many astronomers believe that, although they have not achieved the same level of space exploration as the US or the USSR, the main players in the Asian space stage (India,

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

TUFTS OBSERVER

7

S EW N

Austerity + Extremism Allison Aaronson

“A

ll the trash must be swept out of the country.”

Trash, in this instance, refers to the Roma people, who make up almost 10 percent of Hungary’s population. These are the words of Attila Laszlo of the Civil Guard Association for a Better Future, a Hungarian anti-Roma militant organization.

In August 2012, marchers took to the streets, terrorizing the Hungarian Roma population. The marchers were connected to the Jobbik party, a Hungarian extremist nationalist party. The party is growing in popularity, having won 17 percent of the vote in 2010 elections.

As austerity measures gain greater support in Europe, more and more people are turning to groups such as these as they become frustrated with mainstream economic policies. Until recently, Europeans enjoyed the luxuries of abundant social welfare programs, the loss of which has created enormous socioeconomic tensions. Faced with the onset of recession, many European nations have opted to cut spending in an attempt to reduce the defi-

8

TUFTS OBSERVER

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

cit, a policy that includes limiting welfare program eligibility and laying off government workers. The question of how to best allocate funding during a recession is one that has stumped nations for decades and has certainly been present in recent U.S. policy discussions. Advocates of austerity measures argue that budget cuts are necessary to decrease the deficit, claiming that shortages are a necessary part of the natural economic boom and bust cycle. Many Europeans are harshly disputing this policy, claiming that austerity only heightens the pain of recession by causing increased unemployment, leading to greater welfare spending and reduced tax revenue.

Eurostat, the European statistics database, reported that unemployment in the Eurozone peaked at 12.1 percent this March, with 26 million people unemployed. Even Germany, Europe’s economic powerhouse, is experiencing increased financial inequality as austerity measures are instituted. According to a recent Gallup Poll, over half of Europeans believe that austerity policies in the European Union have failed. Massive unrest and

protests have become commonplace, but there is a more serious concern with the quieter, disconcerting movement festering in the background.

Populist extremist groups are taking advantage of the newfound vulnerability tied to the economic crisis, gaining power through simple, crowd-pleasing messages.

Daniele Albertazzi and Duncan McDonnell define populism in their book Twenty-First Century Populism as “an ideology that pits a virtuous and homogeneous people against a set of elites and dangerous ‘others’ who are together depicted as depriving (or attempting to deprive) the sovereign people of their rights, values, prosperity, identity and voice.” Essentially, today’s populists use “scapegoatism” to account for society’s woes.

Extremist groups in France, Austria, Britain, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Finland, and the Netherlands are preaching an anti-immigration, anti-austerity, and antiunification platform that is gaining popularity. The National Front Party is a populist party that was established in France in 1972 to represent economically pro-

ART BY ROBERT COLLINS

N EW S

tectionist, socially conservative interests.

Marine Le Pen of the National Front Party won 17.9 percent of the vote in the 2012 French presidential election, an astonishing feat for a third party candidate. These ideas may not be new, but their popular reception most certainly is. “Populists are always there,” says former Danish Prime Minister Poul Nyrup Rasmussen. “In good times it is not easy for them to get votes, but in these bad times all their arguments, the easy solutions of populism and nationalism are getting new ears and votes.”

This new brand of nationalism seems to be shadowing its fascist predecessors, turning to “otherizing” as a unifying measure. European Commissioner for Home Affairs Cecilia Malmström warns, “hand in hand with the economic crisis, xenophobia has worsened.” The Golden Dawn, a far-right political party in Greece, published an article referring to Adolf Hitler as “a great social reformer.” The party also openly uses Nazi imagery. And they are not alone in their bigoted imagery.

The Jobbik party in Hungary has also expressed anti-Semitic tendencies and Geert Wilders of the Dutch Party for Freedom has expressed outright opposition to Islam. Some more subtle statements are equally concerning. The Danish People’s Party website declares: “Denmark is not an immigrant-country and never has been.

Thus we will not accept transformation to a multiethnic society.” The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies wrote a report warning that “the long-term consequences of this crisis have yet to surface. The problems caused will be felt for decades even if the economy turns for the better in the near future […] We wonder if we as a continent really understand what has hit us.” In other words, the resurgence of extremist sentiment may be the biggest disaster of austerity.

Additionally, the tactics of these extremist groups are becoming increasingly violent. 92 people were killed in Norway in 2011 after a right wing extremist, affiliated with the English Defense League and other anti-Islamic European Organizations bombed a government building and youth summer camp. In the same year, a neo-Nazi

group responsible for the murders of nine immigrants (the “Nationalist Socialist Underground”) was discovered in Germany.

Its trial is ongoing. More recently, on September 18th antifascist activist and rapper Pavlos Fyssas was murdered by a member of the Golden Dawn Party in Greece.

This phenomenon is not limited to Europe. In mid-September, the powerful Parti Québecois announced its plan to outlaw religious apparel in government spaces in Canada. The proposal follows a 2004 law passed in France that prohibits wearing religious symbols and is considered to specifically target the wearing of hijabs. The policy was justified as a security interest as well as a reinforcement of

“In these bad times, all their arguments, the easy solutions of populism and nationalism, are getting new ears and votes.” the separation between church and state.

Despite this explanation, the Parti Québecois’ motivations remain unclear. The ban intends to prohibit religious attire and serving kosher and halal foods in public schools, yet the giant crucifix hanging on the wall of Quebec’s National Assembly would remain untouched. The party may be alienating its small minority constituent as a means of emphasizing a Québecois identity, which would help in its battle to secure sovereignty from Canada proper.

Martin Patriquin of the New York Times writes that “by targeting Quebec’s religious minorities—in particular, veiled Muslim women, mostly in and around Montreal— the party is rallying its overwhelmingly white Francophone base.”

The American recession has also brought a wave of extremism, mainly in the form of the conservative Tea Party.

Unlike the European parties, the Tea Party advocates for smaller government. Nevertheless, its nationalistic and xenophobic fervor is strikingly similar to that of European groups like the Danish People’s Party.

Moreover, the emerging fear of “terrorism” in the last decade has led to a wariness of those who are different. This has been imposed through policies like wiretapping and “stop and frisk,” which target people of color and of Arab descent. Like the Parti Québecois’ religious attire ban, these policies are flown under the banner of national security but objectively they are being used to create a common enemy.

Benjamin Ward is the Deputy Director of Human Rights Watch, an organization that investigates and advocates against human rights violations. He speculates, “perhaps the focus on Islamist terrorism has come at the expense of paying attention to the activities of these groups.” In our obsession with the possibility of Middle-Eastern terrorism, we seem to overlook the fact that similar atrocities have taken place in the West. Maybe it is this newfound acceptability of anti-Islamic or generally bigoted sentiment that has allowed these politically marginal ideas to develop. Ward worries that the newfound respect for these groups is dangerous, saying, “the mainstreaming of the politics of extremist political parties is a very important part of understanding why they pose such challenge to human rights in Europe.”

Some pundits have begun to question if today’s economic downturn could put us at risk for the kind of social unrest that led to the Holocaust and Second World War. Among them is Christine Lagarde, the managing director of the IMF. She cautions, “The risk from an economic point of view is that of retraction, rising protectionism, isolation…This is exactly the description of what happened in the 30s, and what followed is not something we are looking forward to.” This seems like a reach, but it is evident that with recession comes vulnerability and manipulation. It remains to be seen whether or not today’s recession-hit nations will be able to weather the storm of economic downturn without succumbing to the allure of extremism. O

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

TUFTS OBSERVER

9

N IO PI N O

SECOND CLASS CITIZENS

BY BEN KURLAND “Tufts, like almost every other elite college and university in the country, has published costs of attendance for its undergraduate and graduate programs that exceed the annual income of most U.S. households.”

—Tufts Strategic Plan, 2013-2023

T

he quote above was included nonchalantly in Tufts’ recently finalized Strategic Plan. It came without mention of this concept’s absurdity, without consideration that this ought not be the status quo, without understanding the effect that the banality of this assumption has on students from those households.

This normalization of the divide between elite colleges and the low-income population leads us down dangerous roads: through this phenomenon, the university enforces mandatory luxuries on a population that largely cannot afford them. It endorses these luxuries, both explicitly and tacitly, to such degree that it raises the question of whether Tufts is engaging in administrative classism.

Before delving deeper, it’s necessary to issue a disclaimer: I don’t think that this classism is the administration’s intent. Tufts exists within the context of similar practices employed by similar colleges and its actions often serve the purpose, both stated and likely actual, of trying to provide the most complete liberal arts education possible. However, this vision of education comes with a vision of the Tufts student as someone who can afford to spend ten grand more on annual tuition than most families will earn 10

TUFTS OBSERVER

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

that entire year. And this vision leads Tufts down dangerous paths to policies that continually perpetuate this problem.

The Tufts residency requirement may be the most glaring of these policies. Tufts students are required to spend at least eight full-time semesters on campus in order to graduate, regardless of the number of credits earned. This means that even if a student completes all of his or her distribution and foundation requirements, and finishes up a major (or two or three), he or she must keep spending as much as $60,000 a year to receive a degree he or she has already completed.

It is not my goal here to criticize this policy for its greed, but to point out that this rule is constructed with a certain image of a Tufts student in mind. The Tufts Bulletin attempts to provide reasons for why these eight semesters are crucial. “Students need time,” it says, “to reflect on and absorb knowledge.” It says this as if we couldn’t have absorbed extra knowledge in our previous semesters’ classes, as if we couldn’t reflect on that knowledge after graduation; as if the stress of spending the equivalent of three new-car price tags wouldn’t impact our ability to reflect and absorb knowledge.

In explaining this policy, they also emphasize the importance of being “enriched by study in a foreign country,” a luxury that doesn’t make sense for many. It suggests that students use their extra time “to survey the cultural, recreational, and educational opportunities of Boston and New England.” For only a $60,000 surcharge, Tufts students aren’t supposed to worry about how to pay rent or buy groceries or pay off a continuingly mounting load of student debt, but are instead supposed to travel around New England, going apple-picking and ice-skating and horseback riding. I don’t mean to criticize these activities, but rather to point out the ridiculousness of spending a year’s tuition—what it would cost to go apple-picking 2,500 times, and come back with 150,000 apples—so that students have the opportunity to explore New England’s recreational activities.

The residency requirement has exceptions, of course. A student can get out of it with 5 AP credits, for example. This seems like a reasonable rule until you consider the fact that of the almost a million people who took an AP exam last year, only a quarter of them were low-income students. Of those, less than half scored above a grade of three or above on any AP they took in high school. Tufts only accepts grades of four and five for credit.

According to the Southern Education Foundation, in the United States, 48 percent of public high school students are defined as low-income students who qualified for reduced price lunches.

The vast majority of these students never had access to these tests and even fewer were given anywhere near the level of preparation that students at affluent schools, particularly private schools, received. The result: At Tufts, the official, carefully-crafted, and mechanically-applied policy only allows a student from an upperclass family to graduate early.

This isn’t the only troubling policy. All first- and secondyear students are required to live in Tufts housing and purchase Tufts meal plans. This means that even though the housing costs at Tufts are above the average cost of a room rental in the area, students are required to live on-campus. It means that Tufts has officially banned the ramen lifestyle that can help keep college students out of massive debt. The only way out of these requirements PHOTO BY KNAR BEDIAN

O PI N IO N

is by living somewhere like a fraternity house, paying dues and opting out of the meal plan by, such as in the case of DTD, having a private chef. Once again, having the finances to pay for such luxuries is the only way out of sending money to Tufts.

Beyond the mandatory, Tufts continues this trend with its image of the Tufts student. Tufts encourages things like community service, study abroad, and entrepreneurship in admissions materials, mission statements, and strategic plans as formalized goals for Tufts students, all of which require money. To expect students to be able to spend their time on the community rather than on feeding themselves, or to be able to travel internationally rather than worry about the cost of getting to school at the beginning of the year, or to be able to raise capital for a venture instead of rent shows the depth of Tufts’ lack of connection to its low-income population.

In order to participate at a high level in Tufts extracurriculars, in a system where getting the TCU credit card takes almost as long as getting reimbursed for personal purchases, one has to have constant access to liquid personal funds, meaning that succeeding at Tufts is prohibitively expensive for many.

This isn’t theoretical. Low- and lower-income students exist at Tufts, even if the university has a way of sweeping them under the rug. Of this year’s freshman class, 39 percent are receiving need-based aid. It should be noted that this means that not everyone at Tufts is paying $60,000 a year. Still, Tufts’ pledge to meet “demonstrated need” stands on shaky ground. About a third of aid is coming in the form of long-term loans, and few students receive full rides. That means that students who could ill afford it took on upwards of 22 million dollars in loans last year. And for anyone with affluent parents who aren’t paying for their education, the financial concerns are just as real, but without aid. According to TCU surveys, 42.5 percent, nearly half, of Tufts students were worried about their parents’ ability to financially support their school year. Of people who knew somebody who transferred, 34.5 percent of those friends did so for financial reasons, and those are just the cases that people knew about.

The school is not in dire straits. Tufts brought in $431,000,000 in just tuition and fees last year, which was less than half of its total revenue. The year that Larry Bacow retired as president, he took home $2,223,752. That same year, even though he started halfway through, President Monaco took home $376,412. He was not alone. The Deans of Engineering, Linda Abriola, and Arts & Sciences, Joanne Berger-Sweeney, made $327,491 and $351,917 respectively. That year, Tufts also spent $402,965 on legislative lobbying. Without that lobbying, the institution could have provided a full ride for a student.

But these aren’t the discussions that Tufts has. Outside of general platitudes about diversity and equality, Tufts keeps discussion—real discussion—about the socio-economics of its students away from the public roundtable. In that TCU survey, Tufts scored worse on its ability to “prepare its students to handle issues of discrimination and equality pertaining to socioeconomic background” than it did any other issue, with less than a third of student respondents agreeing that Tufts had prepared them to talk about issues of socio-economic inequality.

The idea that Tufts wants to provide a well-rounded liberal arts education is a commendable one. Encouraging students to

Outside of general platitudes about diversity and equality, Tufts keeps discussion, real discussion, about the socio-economics of its students away from the public roundtable. reflect on knowledge, travel globally, and serve the community— these are admirable goals. But when these options are only available, are only possible, for upper-class students, when the majority of society is prevented from even attempting to access them, then perhaps the goal becomes less admirable. When the image of a Tufts student, as decreed by the administration, can only match a member of the upper class, then perhaps that image needs to change. When there isn’t meaningful discussion between students and administrators, when platitudes pass for equality and promises pass for diversity, then perhaps that discussion needs to happen. O NOVEMBER 25, 2013

TUFTS OBSERVER

11

PR O SE

BeYOND Cramped Walls

BY Nader Salass

S

taff Sergeant Tom Horowitz’s tiny bedsit has a view overlooking the soaring concrete walls of the 100acre Walter Reed Military Hospital. But he only looks out through the blinds when he knows that Kathryn Sullivan, his PTSD pathologist, is arriving or leaving. His medical file reports that although he’s been able to freely walk with his left prosthetic leg for several months, he hasn’t been permitted to leave the compound since his admission in 2010. Tom was assigned to her treatment program six months after his arrival. Since then, he has demonstrated staggering improvement in managing his trauma-induced stress.

Most days, while Kathryn rushes out of her red jalopy and zigzags across the parking lot, Tom watches her closely.

He spots what she’s wearing and organizes a compliment before she meets him upstairs for cognitive therapy. Until a couple of weeks ago, Kathryn never dressed in anything bold—just different color arrangements of the same flats, knee-length skirts, ruffled blouses, and casual blazers. But Tom is no longer surprised to see her in new heels, a pair of tight-fitting jeans, and a buffalo leather jacket, which complement the soft texture of her copper skin. As she

12

TUFTS OBSERVER

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

leaves work to go home, he almost always stares out the window at the stretch of highway disappearing under the D.C. skyline. Never actually taking in the endless view, Tom just sits there, fretting over what might have set off her abrupt sartorial changes.

Inside the “Brain Injury Therapy Lab,” a cramped room on the 15th floor, Kathryn has Tom practice simulated cognitive exercises on a computer. For two weeks, the room has been breathing in an exotic new fragrance. Tom had immediately been distressed by something familiar in the smell. He was convinced that Kathryn’s perfume contained hints of sumac—a scent that he remembered having permeating the mud-baked dwellings of Afghanistan. His nostrils couldn’t escape the smell that forced him back into the years he spent hunting for insurgent activity around Kabul. When the IED swallowed his leg whole and his face bleached pale in agony, he didn’t shriek. Instead, he funneled every shard of his consciousness into imagining the face of his prospective wife in his future home. He’s convinced that he would have captured the Mehsud insurgent group before Captain Freeman’s platoon got him if it weren’t for that explosion. Everyone would have esteemed him for it,

PHOTOS BY ALISON GRAHAM

SE O PR

and there would have been considerable possibilities when he returned. Only then would he find his wife. He always imagined a delicate, playful, and dependable type that would love him for his fearlessness.

Every day, as Tom stares into the computer screen that Kathryn insists will ease his trauma, he cannot help but think she could be that suitable type for him. Today is no different.

“Kat,” he groans as he swivels his chair around to face her desk. “Let’s swap some stories, huh? Tell me somethin’ wild ‘bout that university you graduated from. What was it? Vand-or-belt or something? Got a couple crazy stories myself, but you only know ‘em from peepin’ at my file.”

“Sergeant Horowitz,” Kathryn sighs, with her uncompromising blue eyes still fixed on an article in the Journal of Traumatic Rehabilitation. “While I’d like to hear them, if you’d just work hard on your exercises, you’ll go home in four months. Let’s focus on that. Okay?”

Kathryn hates being called “Kat,” but she never corrects him. It’s easier to keep him focused on the computer this way. The journals and her training at Vanderbilt assured her that the best way to help Tom’s PTSD is through simulated cognitive exercises. So, when Sergeant Horowitz gets distracted, flexes a mischievous smile across his wrinkled face, and asks her on dinner dates, she knows she just has to keep reading her journal.

He’s getting better, she often tells herself. The medical file shows that it has been six months since Sergeant Horowitz exploded into any violent physical outbursts—common for him—although Kathryn has never actually been there for any of his episodes.

Kathryn hears Tom clunk his left leg onto the ground.

He thrusts his chair over to Kathryn’s, and nudges her leather-draped shoulder.

“I like your jacket, Kat,” he says, controlling what seems like a casual smile. “Where’d you get it?”

Even though she is no longer reading, Kathryn keeps her eyes fixed on the journal.

“Please. Sergeant Horow–” “It looks expensive,” he interrupts. “Birthday gift or something?”

“My fiancé got it for me, okay? Just finish your exercises!”

When Kathryn realizes what she’s said, she immediately jerks her head up. She hopes Tom is still smiling like he usually does when he tries to get her attention.

She flinches when she finds him hovering over her.

Whatever smile he might have had a moment ago is gone.

Tom’s legs are parked a few inches from her chair like he can’t move. His face appears numb, red, and swollen, as if beaten. She feels uncomfortable under his gaze. His eyes look like empty slits, glaring down at her behind a pair of baggy lids. His nostrils seem like two vacuums, swallowing the odor that packs the cramped room.

“You don’t have a fiancé. You don’t wear a ring,” he commands, staring down at the woman and realizing how little she jokes or laughs with him.

“W-well, we can’t afford a ring, yet,” Kathryn stutters.

She begins to sweat under her jacket, beginning to feel like she might never help Tom. “I’m sorry,” she says, turning away from Tom’s eyes. “Maybe just finish your exercises tomorrow, if today isn’t great.”

Tom isn’t listening to her anymore. His eyes are fixed on a bright army recruitment pamphlet lying on Kathryn’s desk. He remembers how the ones he had received in high school weren’t printed in color. They weren’t flashy back then, but their purposeful words excited him. Lead the way.

Be all you can be. Others will follow where we lead.

His eyes stretch open to reveal a pair of dark pupils, shattered under two red webs of blood vessels. Kathryn isn’t meeting his gaze. He turns his head up to the window and now looks over Kathryn. Tom takes a deep breath, forgetting about the scent of sumac before suddenly dashing out the door. Even though Kathryn hears the “Brain Injury Therapy Lab” placard collapse onto the floor, she continues to stare silently at the cramped walls of the room, as if she can’t move.

After wiping a strip of warm sweat from her neck, she raises her hand to her nose. She takes in her own familiar scent and turns her head to the window. She tries to locate her empty studio apartment in the vast city backdrop, wishing a husband were waiting for her beyond the walls. Then it wouldn’t have been a lie. Her neck feels exhausted under a dizzy head. Kathryn starts to drop her face into her clammy palms when she suddenly spots Tom crashing towards the compound walls. She jumps out of her chair. Heat races up her neck as she scrambles for the emergency phone.

“Security, what’s your emergency?” says a muffled voice.

“M-my brain trauma patient,” she says, calming.

“Sergeant Tom Horowitz. He just ran from the PTSD lab and is almost at the Southwest Gate. He’s trying to escape.”

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

TUFTS OBSERVER

13

RE AT U FE

LIF

at T

L O DIRA DJAYA

TOP: TONY CANNISTRA, ROSS SCHLAIKJER BOTTOM: TONY CANNISTRA

IFE THE

O J SOFIA ADAMS

OWEN MARTIN

Nestled in the White mountains of n great escape from hectic campus lif Charm and accessibility to man

SARAH STRAND

]

SARAH STRAND

14

TUFTS OBSERVER

OCTOBER 7, 2013

ERINN GEYER

ains of new hampshire, the loj is open to all tufts students as a ampus life. It's just a two-hour drive away but its log-cabin style y to many a mountain hike makes it feel much farther removed.

TONY CANNISTRA

ALISON GRAHAM

KNAR BEDIAN

OCTOBER 7, 2013

TUFTS OBSERVER

15

S CA M PU

moving the tufts entrepreneurial spirit forward Jenn Oetter

O

nce a week, I abandon the college-student vernacular and use words such as amortization, revenue rollout, and in-group marketing. In the space of a business planning class, the world of entrepreneurship becomes accessible to undergrads and grad students with wide-ranging backgrounds. The Entrepreneurial Leadership program through the Gordon Institute, has consistently gained popularity as an undergraduate minor since its inception at Tufts in 2002. The curriculum’s core classes cover topics from corporate finance, to marketing strategies, and to in-depth work with business plans.

Each class presents a new challenge and a new way of applied to

18

TUFTS OBSERVER

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

the Tufts curriculum. As enrollment in these classes grows, it is becoming more and more apparent that entrepreneurial culture is taking off at Tufts.

Our campus is also located in the vibrant Boston community of creative startups and energetic tech ventures, only adding to our entrepreneurial spirit. Universities and innovative students come together in the business hub of Boston in a way that inspires and assists budding entrepreneurs. The resources and brainpower are available for those who want to get their foot in the door of entrepreneurship, which is exactly what the creators of Marko, a new iPhone app, are doing. Tufts University

S PU

AM C

students Amadou Crookes, Gabe Jacobs, Spencer Schoeben, and Nathaniel Hajian, are planning to launch Marko this month.

Their innovative new social media app allows users to upload location-specific photos to a newsfeed that can only be accessed within a certain radius of where the photos were taken.

The Marko team got together and sent the Observer collective email responses.

They describe the app as an “idea that brings ‘You had to be there’ to life.” It allows people to connect and share moments across space and time: imagine yourself at an a capella concert in Goddard chapel, unlocking photos of other concerts, services, and moments experienced by fellow Jumbos at that location. The team plans to target the app to the Tufts student body upon its launch, to learn from its initial user feedback and make changes accordingly. The app will be on the iPhones of Tufts students soon, though the path to Marko’s development has not been without error. After abandoning a first attempt at an earlier app idea, the Marko team continued with another idea. “We believed our team was still amazing,” they said. “So, we decided to build something risky, fun, relevant to our peers, and absolutely ballsy.”

Their attitude draws a clear picture of the spirit of entrepreneurship: results take a good idea, guts, and a lot of persistence. Luckily, the Marko men had some incredible experience to reflect upon and utilize in order to realize their vision. Like other entrepreneurs at Tufts, they have taken advantage of the start-up scene in the Boston area. Crookes is the developer behind the much-loved iJumbo, while Hajian, Jacobs, and Schoeben all have impressive backgrounds in the tech and start-up fields. Although each team member brings something different in terms of design, development, and experience, they all share both the drive to make an impression and the passion for their idea. The team says, “We all

PHOTOS BY CHRISTINE MOTCH

find great satisfaction in bringing the crazy ideas otherwise stuck in our heads to life. So that is exactly what we did.”

The team is confident in the future of this app. The trajectory is conservative, yet optimistic—the sort of contained excitement with which you’d expect young entrepreneurs to be armed. The team said, “We think with the right kind of marketing, Marko could get really popular at Tufts. If all goes well, we will try to expand into other communities. Maybe it could even become viral.” The impression I got was that the start-up tech game depends on sharp ideas and a user-focused purpose. In higher education, especially at creatively-inclined schools like Tufts, we are told that we have the potential to come up with the new iPhone, Zipcar, or Foursquare. This is the concept that creates the entrepreneurial culture, and ideas

If all goes well, we will try to expand into other communities.

Maybe it could even become viral. like Marko are what make this culture so tangible on campus.

Marko is just one example of the new ventures and examples of effort coming from young Tufts entrepreneurs. Between the ELS minor and the drive coming from inspired students, the capability of entrepreneurship on campus can’t be stifled. The Marko team attests to this, explaining, “We’ve all worked at unbelievable companies but we all have the dream of building something of our own.”

The guys behind Marko have been gearing up to join the tech game since high school. Crookes taught himself the process of developing for the iPhone on his own time, gradually improving his skills. Hajian has had internships in product marketing design at different start-ups in the area. Jacobs and Schoeben, who both work on development for Marko, were Compass Fellows their freshman year at Tufts. This fellowship helps mentor young students to take innovative ideas and organize them in ways to promote success—a skill essential for entrepreneurship.

The Marko team is a testament to the fact that, as young college students, we have a unique opportunity to absorb the culture and perspectives that surround us. It is this atmosphere that gives organic ideas life, so it makes sense that the entrepreneurship community at Tufts is thriving. We are given the chance to build our ideas into something more—in Marko’s case, this idea became an app.

And even if entrepreneurial ideas don’t always materialize immediately, the Marko team stressed the importance of the relationships that students can form by engaging in entrepreneurial projects. In other words, the potential for great entrepreneurship is only impeded when we stop brainstorming, stop engaging with each other, and stop putting faith in our projects. In this spirit, the Marko team mentioned that, “Depending on the success of Marko or the next few things we’ll build before we graduate, we might just pursue something together after school. If not, there’s no doubt we’ll all be building our skillsets and doing awesome work at innovative companies when we graduate. However, we all know that when the phone rings and one of us has the next brilliant idea, we’ll all be there 120%, ready to take the risk together.” O

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

TUFTS OBSERVER

19

O PI N

IO

N

FLICKR USER IDNTFD/EDGER (CREATIVE COMMONS)

BUBBLE TROUBLE by Jamie Moore

20

TUFTS OBSERVER

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

O PI N IO

of which I am confident, among all this change, is that pregame excitement will always trump petty problems like weather or traffic. Perhaps the most depressing thing about coming back from the games isn’t the material result, but rather the knowledge that I am executing a sort of dénouement. However, it must be made clear that the excitement of going almost always outweighs the bleakness of returning.

Amongst all that optimism, though, the distance remains somewhat daunting.

Tufts orbits Boston at an awkward distance, close enough to be with the city, too far to be part of it. If Boston is the Earth, Tufts is the Moon. It is near and distant in a way that is simultaneously tantalizing and disenchanting. Boston is where Tufts students go on the weekend—if there’s nothing better to do on campus, if it’s not too cold, if the Joey runs on time.

It is important to note our geographic barriers from Boston when talking about the Tufts Bubble. I already mentioned the river—the storied Charles—and the hill.

I haven’t yet mentioned the miles of city between Tufts and the heart of Boston, the hours of walking, the inefficiency of the trains, the traffic, the simple fact that cities are constructed in such a way to make blocks into continents and rivers into oceans. On some level, there is a bubble due to the rigid calculus of distance and time. In fact, forty-six out of sixty-seven of my peers agreed on social media that the Tufts Bubble has its origins in simple distance.

I can’t help but think, though, that distance doesn’t explain all of it. The distance to Boston is, after all, what we make of it.

The journey is shorter, or at least seems that way, when I have something to look forward to at the end; this stands in stark contrast to the interminable length of a mundane shopping trip undertaken over a much shorter mileage. There is that slippery element of perception at play here, one that seems present in much of the student body. The Tufts Bubble may arise from geography, but it is strengthened by the perception of distance and separation from Boston.

So what can we do about this? First, we should see the Bubble as what it is: a perception. Then, well, do to it what any conscious person can do to a restrictive

perception: try to change it. If Boston is Europe or the Earth, then build a tunnel through the Channel or launch the Apollo rockets.

This isn’t a complete solution—the geographic distance still remains, and the power of positive thinking is hard to pull off when the Joey is late, or the train is slow, or traffic is unbearable. But it is crucial to take away that since perceptions are involved, that means the Bubble can be changed on a personal level. Tufts as a whole is certainly wrapped up in a big bubble, but I’ve got my own little Tufts Bubble, and you’ve got yours, and those are a little easier to deal with. Getting out of the Bubble and having an adventure across the Charles can be as simple as convincing yourself that it’s worth it.

N

A

midst the hectic day-to-day of campus life, the Tisch roof serves as a refuge for students as they watch the sun set over the Boston skyline. But how many students actually bother to go into that city on a regular basis? The distance between Tufts and those skyscrapers, whether actual or perceived, creates the idea of a “Tufts Bubble.” Fair or unfair, this implies that we as college community hold ourselves separate from the towns around us, and more importantly, the big city across the river.

Since moving from Carlisle, MA to Tufts, I’ve experienced the effects of the bubble firsthand. On campus, I find myself watching Celtics basketball games online.

I like watching the remarkable feats of athleticism on display, even if this year’s Celtics are, for the most part, a putrid corpse of a team playing solely for the NBA Draft.

I like watching coaches strategize, knowing that no plan fully survives contact with the enemy, and the simplicity of having my team. But most of all, watching the games reminds me of times when I have seen them in person.

What’s interesting about those memories is how many of them don’t actually involve the games themselves. Rather, I remember packed train cars and headlights flashing in the alleys near the Garden just as much as I remember this rejection or that thunderous dunk. Going to the games is as much about the act of going as it is about the games themselves. This isn’t because the trip to the Garden is always perfect, but because I love the games so much—when I set out, I know that the destination will be worth it, which frees me to appreciate the journey more.

These memories are all from last year, though. I haven’t made the pilgrimage yet while at Tufts. The dynamic will be somewhat different: there will be the long subway ride under the city and over the river, and the hope of catching the Joey back up the hill tempered with the underlying realization that it’s never there. On one level, this change seems unwelcome, and with good reason: do I want to trudge across Boston in the dead of winter, especially if my team just lost? Even after a victory, do I want to sit on the train until the second-to-last stop, as people disembark and leave me alone in increments? One thing

geography, by the perception

It all goes back to the pilgrimage, for me at least. I expect I’ll get to go sometime soon, hopefully in the next few weeks. I have the ideal scenario sketched out: I’ll walk down the hill along my familiar route.

I’ll bump my wallet against the card reader, marvel for a moment at the world wherein rubbing plastic against plastic lets me magically pay for a subway ride. I’ll ride over the river, meet Dad with the tickets, get dinner, complain about the team; watch a valiant loss or maybe a close win, and feel ambivalent either way, the internal debate being between “ooh the draft” and “wait, winning is fun.” Afterwards, I’ll ride the train back, and it will feel slower despite my best intentions to view it otherwise.

The next day, my mind will shift Tufts back into orbit around Boston, but hopefully I’ll remember that it’s not a truly vast gulf separating them, just a river and a few city blocks. O NOVEMBER 25, 2013

TUFTS OBSERVER

21

AR TS

BLUE CINEMA B

efore the 1960s, if you wanted to see sex on-screen, your only option was to frequent a certain kind of seedy and furtive movie theater colloquially known in France as the Blue Cinema. The porn industry brought sex to the small screen, and watching sex became a more common if very private activity. It is only recently—through a confluence of boundary pushing in cable television and independent cinema—that graphic sex is becoming more common in mainstream film. In effect, sex onscreen has come full circle, and today, films like Abdellatif Kechiche’s Blue Is the Warmest Color have brought graphic sex back into the public experience of the movie theater.

The color blue plays a focal symbolic role in this French film about a young woman who falls in lust and love with a bluehaired art student. Appearing in splashes throughout the film, blue comes to represent the two women’s passion and sensuality, 22

TUFTS OBSERVER

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

ellen mayer

and there can be no doubt that the filmmaker fully considered the color’s many-layered symbolic value. Though perhaps an obscure layer of significance, the historically pornographic implication of the color blue seems particularly fitting for this film, given the controversy surrounding its portrayal of lesbian sex.

Since Blue is the Warmest Color took home the Palme d’Or at the Cannes Film Festival, critics and feminist-lesbian writers have been engaged in a discursive back-and-forth over the film’s seven-minutelong, profoundly graphic sex scene. It is either a courageous mastery of brutal realism, a fitting culmination of the character’s mutually voracious attraction, or an exploitative work of pornography.

With very few exceptions, the lesbian sex we see in mainstream film is presented with the same intent as its counterparts in pornography—for the viewership and pleasure of a male spectator. Plenty of Kechiche’s critics argue that his sex scenes belong ART BY ROBERT COLLINS

TS AR

to this pornographic tradition. Regardless of the filmmaker’s intent, plenty of moviegoers will certainly consume the sex scenes with a voyeuristic gaze. But there is another reason, outside the pornographic context, that viewers might want to watch the sex in Blue is the Warmest Color.

Any basic sociology class will teach you that we learn to define and construct our own identities through the images we see in mass media. Often this is a subconscious process, especially for those who find themselves extremely well-represented in popular culture (straight white males). But others look explicitly to characters on-screen for ideas of who and how to be. Think of the Rookie Mag generation of teenage girls who emulate the women of Buffy the Vampire Slayer or My So-Called Life to articulate themselves as female and as feminists. Or consider the questioning young queer women who binge-watch The L Word on Netflix as they struggle to understand and define their own sexuality.

While I doubt Kechiche actively considered the effect his directorial choices might have on teenage (or college age) tant one for young women searching for models of who and how to be. And I’m not alone. The IFC Center, an cinema in New York’s Greenwich Village, recently an-

cially on the unruliness of Adele’s teenage body. Her hair is always ratty and falling in her just too-tight jeans. In recurring close-

endearing obstruction. At least one of the hair. Instead, Kechiche has transformed The sex she has early in the movie with a boy named Thomas is equally realist. He is a senior in high school with an

and dim and just a little awkward. The camera rarely leaves Adele’s face, and we -

PERHAPS YOUNG WOMEN CAN AND SHOULD BE VIEWING EXPLICIT IMAGES OF LESBIAN SEX, FEMALE SEXUALITY, AND FEMALE PLEASURE.

but it is clear that she doesn’t mean it. It is

The New York Times Scott heartily agreed, noting that his own mature and inquiring 14-year-old daughter

fectly coordinated, marked by breathtaking endurance, and a contortionist’s ability

only dating him because she thinks she is

wrote in a statement, “This is not a movie for young children, but it is our judgment quiring teenagers who are looking ahead to

scene that was also a little messy. Hands could fumble. Knees might knock. Adele’s

anyone who has found themselves in sexual situations they’re not sure they want, regardless of orientation.

Unfortunately the second sex scene, doesn’t have anywhere near that level of realism and relatability. Instead, in his eawomen’s attraction, Kechiche has created

Amidst the controversy surrounding Blue is the Warmest Color, it is easy to forand declare that the scene is or is not true to lesbian sex. But the scene does not ring study of a young woman’s being and bebetween Adele and Emma, the blue-haired believably teenaged about Adele’s body as

Clearly Kechiche’s treatment of sex on-screen is far from revolutionary. Even where Blue is the Warmest Color rings true, it is only narrowly representative, depicting the lives and sexual experiences of two conventionally beautiful white women. Still, I think the film—and the discourse it has inspired—represents a small step forward in terms of media representations of sex and sexuality. With this film comes the suggestion, by members of the film world elite, that perhaps young women can and should be viewing explicit images of lesbian sex, female sexuality, and female pleasure.

It is by now a media trope that pornography is a danger to American youth, warping their understanding of sex with unrealistic images. But people rarely discuss the possibility that watching accurate and thoughtful portrayals of sex could have a positive and empowering effect on young viewers as they work to define who and how they are.

Watching sex on-screen continues to carry significant stigma in the United States as we make sense of the troubled relationship between cinema and blue cinema, art and pornography. Given that sex is an inherent part of being and becoming, this troubled binary does young viewers a disservice. At the very least, Blue Is The Warmest Color suggests a move towards a frank sexual realism, that should become paradigmatic as cinema continues to tell and re-tell the comingof-age story. O NOVEMBER 25, 2013

TUFTS OBSERVER

23

LT UR E CU

Genius or hack?

The controversial Slavoj Žižek by robert collins

I

oclasm makes him a dangerous cult leader. Noam Chomsky

-

which has no content.” The New Republic has called him “the

-

hilarious yet deadly serious man deserves our attention—not bebecause he encourages the kind of lust for rebellion that our sense

contradicts himself. of the question-and-answer session in Cohen Auditorium, which followed a screening of A Pervert’s Guide to Ideology 24

TUFTS OBSERVER

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

Some of that irrepressible energy is captured in A Pervert’s Guide to Ideology, an extemporaneous film essay on the insidious nature and origins of ideology. Like Žižek himself, the film appears brilliant, but is also profoundly exhausting. It’s a lengthy catalog of the covert intrusions of ideology into our lives, and it quotes everything from Brief Encounter to Titanic to The Dark Knight. The quotations are surprising non sequiturs, but Sophie Fiennes somehow arranges them to illustrate Žižek’s amorphous thesis. In addition to his narration, Žižek appears in costume in elaborate reconstructions of the sets of the quoted films to hammer in his points. The device works because Žižek is funny and the sets are impeccable. The part of ART BY GRIFFIN QUASEBARTH

RE TU UL C

the film that reveals ideology is most illuminating, especially if you’ve never thought about the origins of ideology so deeply before, as I hadn’t. But the documentary is also a critique of the ways people try to escape ideology, and this is where Žižek’s arguments fly closest to the sun. Žižek’s critique of ways to escape ideology is based on his concept of “liberating masochism”—the idea that in order to undermine the ideology that gives a master his power over you, you must force the master to act like a master and acknowledge his own power, undercutting the egalitarian pretenses of the modern boss. You do this, according to Žižek, by hurting yourself, like Ed Norton in Fight Club. In the question-and-answer session, Žižek said that “the good master kicks you out of your self-satisfied inertia”, and you can’t break out of that inertia by yourself. Žižek cited Mao Zedong as an example of a good master for his actions during student revolts at the time of the Cultural Revolution. Mao told the students that they had a right to rebel before mercilessly crushing them.

Some (most) would find this ideal confusing and paradoxical. But paradox, along with hyperbole, are Žižek’s preferred rhetorical devices. Like a true rhetorician, Žižek rivets his audiences and gives them the gift of fresh intellectual engagement. The very impenetrability of Žižek’s delivery is as essential to that purpose as whatever the message actually is. When Žižek claims in the film that Christianity is actually an “atheist religion” while standing

in the set of the nunnery from The Sound of Music, he is clearly eschewing the role of a serious philosopher, or even one of his chief influences, star psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan. Instead, he’s taken the role of an intellectual jester, using humor and provocation to inspire serious thought. Whether that thought is profound or merely superficial is another question. While scholars continue to debate that, we can agree that Žižek is one of the clearer and more effective examples of Marshall McLuhan’s expression, “the medium is the message.”

And so we should not be quick to write off Žižek as a charlatan or a hack. As Žižek himself said in an interview with Charlie Rose during the Occupy movement, philosophers are important because they “allow us to ask the right questions.” Žižek does this well; he irritates as successfully and indiscriminately as Socrates. Furthermore, his dubious reputation and hyperbolic delivery compel us not only to ask those important questions, but to frame the questions ourselves—an operative distinction for our generation, which is not keen on accepting grand pronouncements. Žižek has found a way to communicate serious ideas to a generation accustomed to irony, and this is central to his influence. In offering us his twisted, often absurd analysis of modern culture, Žižek encourages us to think a little harder and a little differently, and to gain a healthy touch of revolutionary zeal and psychoanalytic fatalism. To call Žižek genuinely dangerous is to underestimate his audience. O NOVEMBER 25, 2013

TUFTS OBSERVER

25

CA O M FF PU S

L

LIFE AFTER COLLEGE: How individual housing choices affect communities by alex wallach hanson 26

TUFTS OBSERVER

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

ife after college is full of decisions: What neighborhood should I live in? How much can I afford to pay for rent? What will groceries cost me this week? Questions like these fill the days and minds of twenty-somethings everywhere. Everyone who wants to move to New York City hopes to find the perfect spacious apartment for $800 a month near an express train to Manhattan. The story is the same in Boston and many other urban centers across the country, with few affordable apartments near mass transit in established neighborhoods. For the individual, affordability and convenience are practical.

But when multiplied across thousands of young urban implants searching for housing in ethnic, low-income neighborhoods, these logistical individual choices create the massively harmful urban phenomena of gentrification, and the subsequent displacement of low-income communities.

Here in Somerville, one of the best examples of gentrification lies in Davis Square. It may be hard to believe, but in the 70s, Davis Square was a blue-collar, working-class community with few restaurants and none of the commercial life apparent today. The essence of the neighborhood changed in the 80s when the state expanded the Red Line. This state investment sparked the revitalization of the neighborhood. People wanted to live near mass transit, so demand increased for housing and prices rose. The influx of people to the area generated a demand for commercial activity, which created the mix of restaurants, bars, and frozen yogurt chains that form Davis Square today.

On the surface, the recent history of Davis Square is one of community revitalization and economic growth. But there is another perspective to this story: Who benefits from gentrification and who is hurt by neighborhood change? In order to answer these questions, the process of gentrification must be understood. On one level, it is a process whereby communities experience new investment and increased economic activity as a result of an influx of relatively wealthier residents to a neighborhood. The economic growth this wealth brings is why gentrification and revitalization often appear to go hand in hand. This process is also linked to economic and cultural change because ART BY EVA STRAUSS

in search of affordable living, there is an effect. Their demand for different goods and services than those that currently exist in the neighborhood creates change. This is the reason that a new coffee shop just opened on Boston Avenue with $4 slices of homemade bread. This is the reason Whole Foods replaced local family-owned supermarket chain Johnny’s Foodmaster in several Boston suburbs. Low-income residents are priced out of neighborhoods they have lived in for decades just as these changes turn it into a “nice” neighborhood.

This displacement results in benefit to the gentrifiers, even as their actions negatively affect those who cannot afford access.

Because the societal forces of gentrification overwhelm individual choice, middle-class individuals cannot make an ethical choice in regards to housing—individual satisfaction or moral right will be compromised. Socio-economic structures ensure that a middle-class person can attempt to: 1) maximize their personal satisfaction by attaining affordable housing, contributing to gentrification and displacement, or 2) maximize their morality by removing themself from the gentrification trap and not buying affordable housing in low-income neighborhoods. Although they are stark, these choices exist on a spectrum, and it is one every student of privilege will face upon graduating.

On one end of the spectrum is the classic image of a gentrifier: someone who acquires affordable housing in a relatively low-income neighborhood, shops at Whole Foods, and spends all of the money he or she saves through having obtained affordable housing outside of the neighborhood in which they live. The other end of the spectrum is represented by someone who gives up the privilege of seeking housing in a low-income neighborhood and simply accepts paying more for housing as a cost of not existing within structures that create gentrification and displacement.

The former happens frequently, while the latter hardly ever occurs. In between these extremes lies a large swath of gray, for instance someone who chooses to take advantage of affordable housing but attempts to shop locally to support the existing neighborhood they move into. Yet this same person could spend their nights and weekends in other neighborhoods in

S FF U O P AM C

this new wealth is not created within the community, but brought from outside of it. This shift in where money and spending originates alters the commercial and residential landscape of a neighborhood.

Of note, gentrification disproportionately affects both low-income neighborhoods and communities of color. The issues of race and class are linked for many reasons—disparate wealth accumulation despite equal rights legislation, unequal educational opportunities, and widely varying employment prospects to name a few—but within this narrative the focus will remain on displacement for economic reasons.

Displacement is an integral component of gentrification and drives its subsequent demographic shifts. When a neighborhood becomes more desirable to outsiders—whether for cheap housing, mass transit access, or some combination of the two—more people want to live there.

The increased demand for housing causes rental prices for apartments and businesses to rise. Since the demand does not come from residents already living in the community, but from those outside of it, this price rise is often disconnected from the local labor market; people hoping to move into the neighborhood have more wealth available to purchase housing than those who already live there. Put together, these factors result in the displacement of lowincome residents in these neighborhoods, leading to gentrification. Even if they are not forced out immediately as a result of increased housing prices, throughout the course of the turnover of housing stock (the year to year choices people make about where to live), they will choose to move because the rent has simply become too damn high.

When faced with the pressures of gentrification and displacement, it is clear how the decisions made by middle-class individuals impact the poor. Even if the goal behind these choices is to live in a diverse neighborhood, “middle-class people often do drive the poor out of neighborhoods.”

Given this reality, does an ethical housing choice exist for the middle class? In short, no. Individual actions cannot be disconnected from societal change; the intent of affluent gentrifying forces does not matter. Each time a person of a higher income moves into a lower-income neighborhood

Who benefits from gentrification, and who is hurt by neighborhood change? search of “hip” bars to go to and bands to see. These actions overall would still lead to gentrification because there are dollars lost that could have been spent in the community.

The process of gentrification is the result of compounding many individual actions. Every choice about where to live, how much rent to pay, and where to go grocery shopping has an effect on neighborhood change. Students of privilege entering a dynamic urban landscape can easily focus on individual issues at the expense of these broader societal questions. But, just like the intrepid settlers of the American West, who took advantage of affordable land during the time of Manifest Destiny, taking advantage of affordable housing today is a dishonest choice. Affordable housing does not reflect the harm done both to the community and to individuals who are priced out.

If individual actions create the conditions for neighborhood change and result in the displacement of low-income communities, then individual actions can also strengthen neighborhoods. Buy locally, live locally, and engage locally. Organize within the community to ensure affordable housing exists for all residents, not just those who come from outside of it.

Keep asking: who benefits? At what cost?

What role do my actions play in this process? These are big questions, and there are no easy answers. But ask them of yourself. Ask them of your friends. Figure out where you fit in the spectrum of gentrification and then decide how to act. Life after college is full of choices—let yours be one that helps create a community, rather than one that destroys it. O NOVEMBER 25, 2013

TUFTS OBSERVER

27

EX TR AS

POLICE BLOTTER

By Aaron Langerman and Moira Lavelle

Show and Tell: Bong Edition

Public Urinator No. 1

Too Baked to Lie

Officers received a call from an RA in Wren Hall stating that she had seen a bong placed on a student’s desk as she was doing her rounds. When officers arrived, they could smell marijuana.

They knocked on the offender’s door.

The student opened the door and the smell of marijuana grew stronger. The officers asked if he had been smoking.

He said yes. The officers then asked if the student had a bong. The student pulled one out of the closet. He also had a grinder. Needless to say, TUPD confiscated everything. Stoners: don’t be so willing to show off your bong.

TUPD received a call from a student saying that they were witnessing a male publicly urinating outside of West Hall. Police arrived and the caller was standing next to the perpetrator.

The officers advised the urinator that public urination is an arrestable offense. The student interrupted, insisting that the police in his home town— Philly—have better things to do like “arrest murderers and rapists.” The police let the comment slide and went to leave. The agitated urinator, however, proceeded to stand in front of the police vehicle, refusing to move. After advising him of the potential consequences of obstructing police vehicles, the urinator left. Though he wasn’t able to stand his ground against the officers, at least he was able to mark his territory.

A smoke detector went off in Latin Way apartments and TUPD officers went to investigate the situation. Upon arriving in the suite, officers smelled marijuana coming from a bedroom. The inhabitant reported that the detector went off all on its own while she was eating in the common room. The student conjectured that it probably went off because a piece of paper had caught fire on her lava lamp. Officers then asked if she had been smoking marijuana. She admitted to smoking, but she insisted that she usually smokes outside, 30 feet away from the building, as fire code dictates.

Good save.

Nov, 7, 9:58 pm

Nov. 10, 12:55 am

Nov. 17, 10:50 pm

28

TUFTS OBSERVER

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

ALISON GRAHAM

ROSS SCHLAIKJER

OCTOBER 7, 2013

TUFTS OBSERVER

31

O

TUFTS OBSERVER SINCE 1895

www.tuftsobserver.org observer@tufts.edu @tuftsobserver

PLE A SE RECYCLE