Issue 14

THE STUDENT NEWSPAPER OF AMHERST COLLEGE SINCE 1868

THE AMHERST

STUDENT

Like us on Facebook! @AmherstStudent

VOLUME CXLIX, ISSUE 14 l WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2020

AMHERSTSTUDENT.COM

President Martin Reaffirms Support for Students After Travel Ban Update Ryan Yu ’22 Managing News Editor

Photo courtesy of Sophie Caldwell ‘23

Above, students relax and converse during a late dinner meal. The new Val After Dark pilot program gives students a dining option between 9 and 11:30 p.m., with hot food and snacks as well as live entertainment.

Val Launches Late Night Dining Options Pilot Sophie Caldwell ’23 Staff Writer Valentine Dining Hall, known among students as Val, will debut a pilot program of extended dining hours called Val After Dark from Feb. 6 to March 13. Val After Dark will offer hot food and snacks between 9 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. on Thursdays and Fridays during its six week pilot.

The Association of Amherst Students (AAS) passed the final proposal unanimously on Jan. 31. The pilot phase of Val After Dark will last until spring break,

after which Director of Dining Services Joe Flueckiger, administrators and the AAS will decide whether the program has generated enough interest to continue.

Current plans for Val After Dark encompass more than latenight dining options. According to Flueckiger, the program will feature live music and entertainment, with the potential of installing a television as well.

Students and administrators have expressed interest in latenight Val hours for some time, but the plan began to crystallize after efforts from AAS senators

Sterling Kee ’23 and James Hulsizer ’23. In his election speech for AAS, one of Kee’s main proposals was extending Val hours.

Hulsizer later approached him to address the issue together on the plan.

“One of the first problems I noticed at Amherst was that I would be hungry after extracurriculars, and there would be no food options,” Kee said. “I wanted something that would be in the meal plan because it’s an equity issue — some students can’t afford to pay for Schwemm’s every night.”

Previously, the only latenight dining option on campus was Schwemm’s Pub, which is not covered under most meal plans. Students have to pay out of pocket for Schwemm’s unless they opt for the lunch and dinner meal plan, forgoing breakfast — an option that is unavailable to first-year students. However, Val After Dark will be open to all students since it is subsidized by AAS. Hulsizer and Kee met with Flueckiger to discuss the logis-

Continued on page 5

Following the announcement that the Trump administration’s travel ban will be expanded to six new countries, President Biddy Martin sent an email on Feb. 1 to students, faculty and staff affirming the college’s support for those from the affected countries while emphasizing that the ban will not affect students or recent alumni with existing authorization to be in the U.S. The travel ban, which was announced by the Department of Homeland Security on Jan. 31, severely limits immigrant visas for citizens from six countries — Nigeria, Myanmar, Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Sudan and Tanzania — and is set to take effect on Feb. 22. Seven other countries — Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, North Korea and Venezuela — continue to be affected by travel restrictions placed by an executive order issued by President Trump in March 2017.

Student visas are unaffected by both bans. However, according to the college’s Chief Policy Officer and General Counsel Lisa Rutherford, students from affected countries will likely face increased vetting, including “more in-depth questioning” before entry to the U.S.

Continued on page 4

News Jan. 27, 2020 – Feb. 2, 2020

>>Jan. 27, 2019 12:13 p.m., Amherst College Police Station An officer assisted an individual in locating their bicycle.

1:02 a.m., Morris Pratt Dormitory Officers responded to an alarm and confiscated marijuana from a room.

3:18 p.m., Marsh House An officer took a report of a stolen laptop from a room left unlocked.

2:09 a.m., Seelye House An officer confiscated alcohol left unattended in a common room area after a registered party.

>>Jan. 28, 2019 2:10 p.m., Hills Lot An officer responded to a report of numerous cars parked in a manner that obstructed passage through the lot.

3:21 a.m., Health Services Parking Lot A boot was placed on a vehicle on the boot list after it was parked in violation of parking regulations.

>>Jan. 31, 2019 12:13 p.m., South Dormitory An officer found a hole punched in the wall in the stairwell.

>>Feb. 2, 2019 12:21 a.m., Seligman House An officer responded to a report of marijuana being smoked inside a residence hall.

2:01 p.m., Amherst College Police An individual reported an item missing and it was returned shortly after it was lost.

12:39 a.m., Seligman House An officer responded to a group of individuals smoking marijuana inside a room.

11:25 p.m., Hitchcock Dormitory Officers responded to a report of individuals causing building damage by breaking Exit signs and other items.

1:22 a.m., Keefe Campus Center An officer took a report of damage to a bathroom.

>>Feb. 1, 2019 12:46 a.m., Morris Pratt Dormitory Officers responded to an alarm and found it was set off by marijuana smoke in a room.

2:28 a.m., Webster Circle A non-electric vehicle was parked in the electric parking space.

11:39 p.m., Merrill Science Building Officers responded to an alarm and found no issues in the area.

Lauren J. Leydon-Hardy Fresh Faculty Department of Philosophy

Lauren J. Leydon-Hardy is a visiting professor of philosophy. Her research concerns social epistemology. She received a bachelor’s degree from the University of Calgary, a master’s degree from Brandeis University and a Ph.D. from Northwestern University.

Q: How did you begin studying philosophy and what made you pursue it?

A: Well it was a total accident. I was a first-generation college student, and I paid my way through college waiting tables at bars. I always had at least one full-time job.

I was on my own since I was 16 [years old], and the way I managed going to school was I took three or four classes during the regular semester, and I took courses over the summer to try and make up the difference. This was back in the day where there was a big phonebook full of courses and there were fewer courses in the summer to choose from. I ended up in this class where the course description said that we were going to be writing about abortion and euthaniasia, stuff that interested me anyway. I took the summer course and did pretty well so the professor said that I should take another course with him in the fall. At the end of that course he asked me if I had changed my major to philosophy yet. When he said that, the clouds parted. I realized that there was a whole department of people who do this, which means that this is a job, and that means that I could do this for a living.

What I love about philosophy is the order and rigor to the subject. All that matters to doing well is trying to make sense, and that was deeply soothing to me.

Q: What is your research primarily focused on?

A: I am an epistemologist so I work in the philosophy of knowledge. In particular, I am interested in the intersection between our lives as epis-

temic agents, being able to acquire knowledge matters deeply to our lives going well and the kinds of social structures that shape our world and that animate us as social animals. I am interested in the ways in which we shape the world around us and how that bears on our ability to flourish as epistemic agents.

Q: Why did you decide to come to Amherst?

A: Well, it’s an amazing school. The students are incredible. I remember when I flew out to interview, and I had to start by teaching a class. I thought that it was going to be brutal because the students had every reason to check out. I was the third person that Amherst had flown out to interview for this position. I was teaching [Gottfried Wilhelm] Leibniz, and I thought it was going to be like pulling teeth, but the students blew me away. They were asking all the right questions, they were so engaged and it was a remarkable classroom experience. I also genuinely feel that as a scholar I am happier when I spend some of my week in the classroom — as much as I love researching. I also really like my colleagues. I really enjoyed the time I spent with them while I was here.

Q: Can you tell me about the book you are working on now?

A: The analogy between freedom of the will which is a metaphysical problem and the problem of epistemic agency is at the heart of a concept that I call epistemic infringement. The idea is that there are certain kinds of social behaviors that we might describe as epistemic

misconduct or actions that harm us as epistemic agents. For example, if I have some identity prejudicial attitude that leads me to systematically downgrade the credibility of somebody on the basis of their identity. This is one way we can do harm to one another as epistemic agents. Epistemic infringement is this concept that I am working on that is an example of epistemic misconduct that strikes directly at our epistemic agency. The idea is that it is relational behavior that involves the systematic contravention of social and epistemic norms in a way that undermines our epistemic agency. Examples of this include predatory grooming and extreme cases of gaslighting. It is a way of treating somebody that is so fundamentally disorienting that it changes who they are as epistemic agents.

The real world examples tend to be pretty harrowing.

Q: What do you like to do in your spare time?

A: I like to hangout with my dog Milo; I like to rock climb; I like to go hiking; and I like to hangout with my spouse.

Q: What do you hope to contribute to Amherst during your time here?

A: I hope to draw in philosophy majors. I want to be a good teacher, and I want to see my students flourish, to unfold as philosophers, as thinkers, as scholars and to find their intellectual identities. It seems like such a simple and obvious answer, and I mean it very deeply.

—Philip Corbo ’22

News 3

The Amherst Student • February 5, 2020

Coronavirus Scare Cancels Study Abroad Programs in China Sophia Harrison ’22 Staff Writer Partners with the the college’s study abroad program in China have decided to suspend the spring semester due to the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) epidemic. The college is among a number of other institutions, including Smith College, Mount Holyoke College and the University of Massachusetts Amherst that will not offer study abroad programs located in China for the spring semester.

Several universities in New England such as UMass Boston and Wesleyan have had students tested for coronavirus. “We have no reason at this time to believe anyone on our campus is infected with the novel coronavirus,” Dean of Students Liz Agosto said in an email to the college community on Jan. 28.

The decision to cancel Chinese study abroad programs stemmed from the recent warning from the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that discouraged all nonessential travel to China. The U.S. Department of State also enforced a “Level 4: Do Not Travel” warning for all travel to China on Feb. 2. An official web statement released by the Department of State reads, “Travelers should be prepared for the possibility of travel restrictions with little or no advance notice. Most commercial air carriers have reduced or suspended routes to and from China.”

The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the virus a “public health emergency” on Jan. 30. The novel coronavirus was linked to a Wuhan seafood market and has since spread to over twelve countries, including the United States, through person-to-person contact, according to the CDC. The virus has an incubation period ranging from two to 14 days and major symptoms include fever, cough and shortness of breath. So far, the virus has spread to over 17,000 people with 362 confirmed

Photo courtesy of mojnews.com

The coronvirus that is thought to have originated in Wuhan, China is not at threat to Amherst College at this time, Dean Agosto made clear in an email to the student body. One Massachusetts resident has tested positive for the disease. deaths. There have been 11 confirmed cases of the coronavirus in the U.S., including one recent case at the University of Massachusetts at Boston.

Although there will no longer be any study abroad program partnerships in China for spring 2020, Agosto affirmed in an email interview with The Student that “we have been directly in touch with the students who were affected and have worked to find alternative options for those who were impacted.”

Students planning on attending Chinese study-abroad programs expressed their disappointment with the cancellation decision. Sabrina Lin ’21, who planned to attend the School for International Training (SIT) in Kunming, China under the Health, Environment

and Traditional Chinese Medicine program, said that she was “definitely disappointed, but not surprised” by the program’s decision to cancel. “[SIT] had been sending us regular updates on coronavirus-related things for around a month prior to its official cancellation… For a while, they said they were monitoring the situation closely but didn’t want to make any changes to the program until after Chinese New Year was over, which is when people usually do the most traveling,” she said in an email interview.

“I got an email on Monday afternoon [the first day of Amherst classes] saying they had to make the ‘difficult’ decision to cancel the program due to ‘the deepening concern in China and

abroad about the coronavirus.’”

“When I did get the email, I mostly just kept hoping that there was still some way for me to study abroad. The thought of having to return to thirty-degree Amherst after classes had already started, drag all my stuff out of off-campus storage, find a new room, try to find classes that weren’t full … just felt really bleak to me,” Lin added.

The Global Education Office (GEO) and their partner studyabroad programs have been providing alternate pathways for impacted students. SIT offered Lin a transfer to a similar program in Amman, Jordan. The college has also offered affected students the chance to return for current spring classes. The GEO declined to comment and referred to Agosto.

Although there is no threat on campus currently, the college has since been taking precautions to ensure safety for the members of its communities.

“Stakeholders across campus have been gathering regularly since the first case was announced to stay up to date on the rapidly changing news in order to be as responsive as possible,” Agosto wrote in the campus-wide email.

“Those staffers are in close communication with public health offices and colleagues at other colleges and universities — specifically the five colleges — and are monitoring state and federal public health guidance vigilantly.”

Agosto also reiterated the absence of a threat of coronavirus on campus.

The Amherst Student • February 5, 2020

News 4

Travel Ban Sows Confusion Among International Students

Photo courtesy of Matai Curzon ’22

According to President Biddy Martin’s email, the Center for International Student Engagement (CISE), pictured above, has reached out to students affected by the new travel ban.

Photo courtesy of Matai Curzon ’22

International students study in the CISE above. Guillermo Rodriguez Medina ’22, in the center, is a student from Venezuela, a country affected by travel bans.

Continued from page 1 The original 2017 travel ban, which affected Yemen and Iraq but excluded North Korea and Venezuela, was met with strong opposition on campus, including a protest involving several hundreds of students demand-

ing more meaningful support for those affected by the ban from Martin and the college administration. Many students viewed the ban as discriminatory against Muslims, since the initial ban affected seven Muslim-majority countries. Each of the six new countries have significant

Muslim populations, including Myanmar’s Rohingya Muslims, who are currently fleeing genocide.

Given that “the uncertainty and anxiety arising from this new order will affect members of our community and their families,” Martin directed students

and alumni from affected countries to “confer with an immigration attorney before leaving the U.S., as a precaution.”

“We provide all of our international students access to legal advice from an immigration attorney, as needed,” said Rutherford. “We also inform them about potential and actual changes to immigration law and policy, including any actions we recommend they consider taking in preparation for any changes.”

According to Martin, Director of International Student Engagement Hanna Bliss has also been in contact with students from the affected countries. The Student reached out to Bliss, but she could not comment before press time, except to “encourage all students with questions to reach out to [the Center for International Student Engagement] directly.”

Students from the affected countries reacted negatively to the ban. Arzoo Rajpar ’22, an international student from Tanzania, noted that she “never expected Tanzania to be a country that the Trump administration would have something against.”

“The reason they gave for this ban is very vague. We do have our issues with regards to human rights, but this was not stated as a reason for the ban nor should it be since these violations and immigration to the U.S. really have no link,” she wrote in an email statement. “It’s all very confusing and overwhelming to be honest because now I have to be worried about what would happen when I reenter the U.S. or what treatment I might get as I am traveling. I’m also aware that this feeling is shared amongst so many people.”

“If you’re going to ban countries, that’s because you don’t want their people in yours …

It’s disheartening to know that I study and basically live in a country that doesn’t really want people like me here,” Rajpar added. “What happens to the students who choose to live here after they graduate? What happens

to the families that want to build a life for themselves in the U.S.?”

For Guillermo Rodriguez Medina ’22, an international student from Venezuela, the travel bans on many of the countries were, in his view, “xenophobic or protectionist.” However, he also viewed the ban on North Korea and his home country of Venezuela as motivated by different reasons.

“For most other countries, it is immigrants who will really suffer the consequences of the ban.

However, in the case of Venezuela, the ban specifically targets government officials and their families,” said Rodriguez. “The ban is a clear display of political enmity towards Venezuela’s dictatorial regime, not towards the Venezuelan people.”

Rodriguez also described some encounters with increased vetting. “It depends on the point of entry. For instance, in Boston Logan International Airport, as soon as they saw I was a student on an F-1 Visa, the process was quite smooth. However, when I entered through [John F. Kennedy International Airport], I did experience increased vetting,” he said. “I have also heard about other Venezuelan friends currently studying in the U.S. who have experienced more intense vetting whenever they have entered through the Miami International Airport.”

Martin ended her email by stressing the importance of immigrants to the nation. “We celebrate the contributions of people across the U.S. who have roots in countries affected by the travel bans,” she said.

“We welcome students, scholars and staff from those countries to Amherst,” Martin wrote.

“We recognize the importance of ensuring our national security.

We also know that the presence of immigrants from all over the world has been and continues to be essential, not only to the inventiveness of colleges and universities in the U.S., but to the well-being of the country — its economy, its cultural riches, its spirit and its identity.”

The Amherst Student • February 5, 2020

News 5

Late-Night Dining Launches After Increased Student Demand Continued from page 1 tics of extending hours. Flueckiger had previously noticed the demand for late-night food options, and Dean of Faculty and Provost Catherine Epstein had already submitted a proposal to the AAS for extended Val hours.

However, the proposal only included snacks such as bagels and cereal, as opposed to hot food.

Flueckiger, Kee and Hulsizer later met with Epstein to brainstorm options for late-night Val but faced logistical problems.

For one, Flueckiger and some AAS senators worried that the program’s extended hours would pull Val staff away from their families. Additionally, there were concerns about the additional expense of serving hot food.

Hulsizer proposed adding a few free late-night meal swipes for Schwemm’s, but Schwemm’s does not have the capacity to withstand a large increase in demand.

The meeting concluded without a satisfactory plan.

Hulsizer and Kee returned the matter to the AAS, and together they drafted a new proposal that would allow Val After Dark to serve hot food for the same price that snacks would have cost.

AAS also drafted a solution with Flueckiger for staffing, in which some willing staff members will work overtime with the promise that no one will work past midnight. Should Val After Dark become permanent, Flueckiger plans to hire extra staff — potentially from the student body — to work during the late-night hours.

Applications for student workers during the pilot program first appeared in the Daily Mammoth on Feb. 3.

The AAS played a crucial financial role in facilitating Val After Dark. According to AAS President Avery Farmer ’20, the AAS will help pay for the pilot program through their budgetary surplus fund, which is estimated to contain around $600,000. The budgetary surplus fund will cover for half of the Val After Dark expenses — around $2,000 — during the pilot program, and Val will pay for the other half through an “explained budget variance,” according to Flueckiger. If the program becomes permanent, administration will increase Val’s budget.

Val After Dark will also provide vegetarian and vegan options for those with dietary

Photo courtesy of Sophie Caldwell ’23

Valentine Dining Hall (above) will extend its nightime hours starting on Feb. 6. AAS will fund the pilot project out of its surplus fund. restrictions, according to Flueckiger, though it wasn’t made explicit from the menu sent to the student-body in an email from the AAS. Hulsizer noted students’ interest in Val After Dark after he posted about it on Instagram: his announcement was reposted

96 times by students. IK Agba ’23, who liked Hulsizer’s post, was thrilled that Val After Dark would provide food through the meal plan.

“There have been so many days where I’ve been on the verge of starvation but had no money,” Agba said. “I think it’s going to

be a real hit for people to know that they don’t have to order food [at the end of the school week] and that their community is providing for them at their worst hours,” he added jokingly.

“I’m excited to see how many other people this could matter to,” Flueckiger said.

Opinion

w

Denouncing the New Travel Ban On Saturday, Feb. 1, Amherst students, faculty and staff received a message from President Biddy Martin regarding President Trump’s policy to expand the travel ban, reminding us once again that there is a reason to vote in the 2020 election. The ban adds the nations of Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Myanmar, Nigeria, Sudan and Tanzania to the list of countries on which Trump has imposed travel blockades. The Trump administration’s choice to single out these specific countries may have wide repercussions for immigrants across the country. Nigeria, the most populous country in Africa, represents more than 14,000 approved green cards and 222,000 temporary visas alone. Writing this on Groundhog Day feels fitting: a Trump travel ban has become so repetitive, the news cycle has started to resemble Bill Murray’s day-on-repeat in the 1993 hit comedy. However, there is a slight difference in this iteration of travel regulations.

In contrast to Travel Ban 3.0 (the version that existed prior to these changes), nonimmigrants are excluded from the restrictions. As Biddy wrote in bold-faced type, this means that citizens of these countries living in the United States “on a temporary basis for study and research” will not face obstructed entry. This provision of the policy softens it relative to its ancestors. Amherst students from these countries will not be stopped from traveling to school from home. This distinction from previous travel bans is an intriguing deviation in Trump’s immigration policy.

So what does this nonimmigrant exception mean in the context of Trump’s foreign policy legacy? It may just seem like a footnote, but we might also speculate that exempting nonimmigrants from the restrictions bears some deeper meaning. One way to read the nonimmigrant exception to the travel ban is as something of a concession within Trump’s foreign policy stance.

Trump’s first travel ban, introduced in the first week of his presidency, shook many communities throughout the U.S. In particular, many college administrations spoke out about how this would adversely affect their students. For example, former Harvard University President Drew Faust commented, “Nearly half of the deans of Harvard’s schools are immigrants…Benefiting from the talents and energy, the knowledge and ideas of people from nations around the globe is not just a vital interest of the university; it long has been, and it fully remains, a vital interest of our nation…” It became clear from this backlash that what Trump had expected to be received as an act of putting America first had instead endangered its educational. Though he might not outrightly admit it, exempting nonimmigrants from the expanded travel obstacles could be seen as Trump’s

nod to the disapproval from college administration, acknowledgement that the most stringent policy measures may not, in fact, be in America’s best interest.

To be sure, this analysis of the nonimmigrant exception should not minimize the extreme nature of this policy. Just because Trump is allowing temporary residence does not mean he is balancing his stance on immigration.

After all, the timing of this policy in an electionyear cannot be ignored. There is certainly an element of political strategy at work here—Trump wants to reassure his voter base that he is still just as committed to an immigration crackdown as he was in 2016. Just because the nonimmigrant exception could represent a response to the reprisal from college institutions of Travel Ban 3.0 does not mean these new restrictions should in any way be seen as a fair compromise.

Let’s be clear: this travel ban will make the lives of international students at Amherst College more complicated and turbulent. It is important to remain cognizant that the underlying connotations of these policies have just as much of an impact as the tangible regulations themselves. There is no doubt that students from these very countries, including students at Amherst, would be discouraged from pursuing careers within the United States as their options for permanent residency have now been devastated as a result of this backwards policy. The policies of the Trump administration — despite the thoughts of some — matter; they have the power to uplift communities or destroy them.

For instance, when Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Chad Wolf includes in his announcement, “While the U.S. is the world’s most generous and welcoming country, unfortunately, there are evil people who seek to travel to the United States with the intent of harming and killing Americans,” he essentially paints an “us-against-them” portrait of the U.S.’s relationship with the countries that some Amherst students call home. Language like Wolf ’s makes it hard for students at this college to feel welcome in this country. Language like Wolf ’s make the Trump administration’s xenophobic stance on the contribution of hardworking students throughout campuses in the United States clear. Language like Wolf ’s chips away at the very moral foundations of our country — a supposed nation of immigrants — and instead replace them with xenophobic, racist and unfounded fears. On behalf of the Editorial Board, we want to reassure these students that they have the full support of the Amherst community behind them.

Unsigned editorials represent the Editorial Board (assenting: 12; dissenting: 0; abstaining: 1)

THE AMHERST

STUDENT E X E C U T I V E B OA R D Editors-in-Chief Natalie De Rosa Olivia Gieger Managing News Zach Jonas Ryan Yu Managing Opinion Jae Yun Ham Rebecca Picciotto Managing Arts and Living Seoyeon Kim Arielle Kirven Lauren Kisare Managing Sports Jack Dove Henry Newton Camilo Toruno Managing Design Zehra Madhavan Anna Smith S TA F F Publishers Emmy Sohn Mark Nathin Digital Director Dylan Momplaisir

Letters Policy The opinion pages of The Amherst Student are intended as an open forum for the Amherst community.

The Student will print letters under 450 words in length if they are submitted to The Student offices in the Campus Center or to the paper’s email account (astudent@amherst.edu) by noon on Sunday, after which they will not be accepted.

The editors reserve the right to edit any letters exceeding the 450-word limit or to withhold any letter because of considerations of space or content.

Letters must bear the names of all contributors and a phone number or email address where the author or authors may be reached. Letters and columns may be edited for clarity and Student style.

Publication Standards The Amherst Student is published weekly except during college vacations. The subscription rate is $75 per year or $40 per semester.

The offices of The Amherst Student are located in the basement of Morrow Dormitory, Amherst College. All contents copyright © 2020 by The Amherst Student, Inc. All rights reserved. The Amherst Student logo is a trademark of The Amherst Student, Inc. Additionally, The Amherst Student does not discriminate on the basis of gender, race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation or age. The views expressed in this publication do not reflect the views of The Amherst Student.

Connect With Us Email: astudent@amherst.edu Twitter: @amherststudent Instagram: @amherststudent Facebook: @amherststudent

The Amherst Student • February 5, 2020

Opinion 7

The Coronavirus and the Racism it has Unearthed Jiajia Zhang ’22 Contributing Writer In 2009, my family made the foolish decision to visit Canada.

While there, locals were sure to cast great distances between themselves and my family out of fear of catching what was then a newly discovered infectious disease — the American virus. I was confronted with a myriad of angry protestors sporting picket signs that demanded Canadian schools suspend their American students. Soon, the hashtag “#NoAmericansAllowed” flooded social media and storefronts around the world, from Britain to France to Japan. “You filthy Americans,” declared our taxi driver when our trip ended, “living amongst pigs. You deserve this.” His voice showed no sympathy for the estimated 575,400 people worldwide who would die from the American virus that year.

A few years ago, I was walking home from school when I passed out on the sidewalk. Later, in the Mount Auburn Hospital emergency room in Cambridge, MA, I was diagnosed with the European virus. In those few months, with the European virus at its infectious peak, people who read my name — Jia — before putting a face to it assumed I was Italian and panicked. People who heard my name — which most pronounced like Zsa Zsa — before putting a face to it assumed I was Hungarian and panicked. Thank goodness I wasn’t actually European. “Europeans,” I heard a classmate scoff to my British American friend. “You eat snails, maggots and sheep heads — no wonder you brought the bubonic plague, smallpox, cholera … and now this European virus? You deserve it.” Never mind that smallpox and the like happened in eras of limited technology and medical knowledge. Never mind that all groups of people, Europeans included, consumed foods that others found unusual. Never mind that Europeans were far from solely responsible for spreading a global pandemic. This classmate’s tirade emanated no sympathy for the millions who had died — 10,000 Americans in the past few months alone — from the European virus.

If you thought I made all of that up, you are absolutely right. I may have just pulled off the biggest fake news stunt in The Amherst Student’s history. There is no “American virus,” only the novel N1H1, widely known as the swine flu. There is no “European virus;” we call that seasonal influenza, or more colloquially, “the flu.”

Generally, and for good reason, we did not wield xenophobia upon the two aforementioned groups simply because a global pandemic erupted or originated in their countries. But as we Americans like to say, it’s the thought that counts. I ask you to take the bigoted scenarios I described above and reimagine the ethnic Chinese — rather than Americans or Europeans — as their targets and the “Wuhan coronavirus” or “Chinese coronavirus” as their instigators. If you do that, the fake news suddenly becomes very real.

I am a Wuhanese American. In 2004, I immigrated to the United States from Wuhan, where the novel 2019 Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was first identified. My maternal relatives — dozens of them, uninfected — are quarantined in Wuhan.

With the quarantine in effect, public transportation, gas stations and other public functions have completely shut down. Hospitals are so busy that even a call for an ambulance will go unanswered.

Wuhan is a bustling city known for many feats including its cuisine, cherry blossoms and architectural prowess. Wuhan contains 50 percent of the world’s long-span bridges — drive across the Yangtze River Bridge during the day and you’ll see greenery weaving amongst ancient and modern architecture for miles.

Yet, in the past month, Wuhan has become a cage which my immediate family cannot enter and my extended family cannot leave.

But if they could, where would they go? To Hong Kong, South Korea or Vietnam, where businesses have barred ethnic Chinese from entering their premises? (New York Times, 2020) To Canada, where thousands of parents have signed petitions to ban Chinese Canadian children from classrooms? “Stop the spread and quarantine yourselves or go back,” one Canadian petitioner

Photo courtesy of Wikimedia

The novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), which originated in Wuhan, China, has led to international fears of a global pandemic as well as xenophobic rhetoric aimed at Chinese citizens. recently told The Guardian. To the United States, where institutions like the University of California Berkeley are telling its Instagram followers that “normal reactions” to the coronavirus outbreak include “anxiety,” “worry” and “xenophobia?” (Time Magazine, 2020) Or should my relatives go to Australia, where The Herald Sun referred to their plight as “China Virus Panda-monium?”

Should they depart for France, where newspapers invoke warnings of a “yellow peril,” a derogatory term dating back to 19th-century U.S. and European immigration policy that actively excluded Chinese (The Guardian, 2020)? At various points in time throughout history, Chinese Americans have been denied citizenship, barred from public schools, driven from their homes in mass expulsions, hung, beaten, and burned to death in lynchings across the United States. Racists wielded some of the rhetoric that has rapidly re-emerged as of late, that people of Chinese ancestry “deserved” this because they were unsanitary and law-breaking, their governmentally corrupt. Should my relatives go to France, where these racist historical underpinnings are exalted?

Rationality is one thing — quarantine and provide treatment to the ill. Racism is another.

So perhaps it is best that my relatives are confined to their own homes. Or perhaps not, because when they open their computers to peer into the rest of the world,

do they see what I see? On Twitter, #ChineseDon’tComeToJapan is trending. On YouTube comment sections, viewers plead to “keep the Chinese in China until this is over” and proclaim that “if the Chinese stopped torturing and eating endangered wildlife, none of this would have happened.” “Build the wall,” one Mexican YouTube user wrote. “We don’t want the virus to go to Mexico.”

In one video’s comment section, a top commenter demanded that “[the Chinese] should just stay in their own damn country.” In response, another wrote that “honestly they deserve to get infected for eating dogs.”

When I try to reason with these individuals, others throw red herring arguments at me about President Xi Jinping’s human rights abuses in Xinjiang. I always welcome condemnation of human rights abuses, but I will not tolerate doing so in order to justify xenophobia. America is no stranger to this tactic. In World War Two, many used the Japanese Imperial Army’s war crimes in China to justify the internment of Japanese-Americans. Yet we ignored the Rape of Nanjing and its consequential pleas for aid until Pearl Harbor drew us into the conflict ourselves. In the Chinese Exclusion Era, Americans ranging from politicians to plebeians censured Chinese immigrants as pimps and drug dealers who abused their women. And these same women, often servicing white men in California brothels, would be burned to death in dozens

of mass expulsions as soon as a sexually transmitted disease surfaced in among white communities. Imagine the irony in simultaneously criticizing the Chinese government for human rights abuses, while denying ethnic Chinese of their human rights through overt demonstrations of xenophobia.

I am Wuhanese American. I can speak Wu Han Hua, a dialect that neither you nor — I imagine — Xi Jinping can thoroughly understand.

Wu Han Hua’s vocabulary differs from Mandarin’s in many ways, but our word for The United States is the same: “mei guo”–—the “beautiful country.” Those of us that make it to Beautiful Country are never taught that we and our ancestors made it beautiful. They gave their lives building gleaming rails running from coast to coast, gave their bodies to bullets in nearly every military conflict in American history, gave us the valencia orange and the bing cherry, the birth control pill and the mapping of HIV, the wireless microphone and deep-focus cinematography. But it is not because they made Beautiful Country beautiful that they deserve to be treated as human beings. It is because they — we — are human beings.

And what beauty will my nieces and nephews from Wuhan find if they should one day immigrate to my Beautiful Country, which legally and casually and for centuries on end called them a “question,” a “fever,” a “peril,” and now: a virus?

The Amherst Student • February 5, 2020

Opinion 8

Seeing Double: To Tutorial or Not to Tutorial?

Thomas Brodey ‘22 Columnist Like many Amherst College students, I frequently wake up in the morning with a happy flutter in my heart, knowing that the value of my Amherst liberal arts education will melt away all the irksome practical realities of life much like the melting snow. Almost immediately, however, my simple tranquility is shattered by a horrible realization: Williams College continues to exist.

Much like an evil twin, Williams holds many similarities to Amherst at face value. We share virtually identical sizes in student population, endowments, faculty and acceptance rates. We both lay equally strong claims to the “rejected from all the Ivies so I guess this will do” student demographic. With so many parallels between the two institutions, even small differences are of paramount importance.

Amherst, as we know, boasts the thriving and scenic metropolis from which it received its name and is located in the very heart of New England culture, a mere two-hour drive from Boston. Williams, on the other hand, rots in squalor in the hamlet of Williamstown (population 8,000)

and must sacrifice an extra hour to reach Boston (although the opportunity cost of that hour is admittedly lower than it would be for Amherst students). Amherst, of course, also benefits from the Five Colleges Consortium, from the dining halls of UMass to the instructive financial example of Hampshire.

Any Amherst student would have just cause to smile with satisfaction at the obvious superiority of their alma mater, but, dear reader, I must confess that there is a fly in the ointment, a Bud Light in the jungle juice of our content. Williams offers one benefit that, shamefully, we have not yet matched.

Williams students have access to a unique kind of class: the tutorial program. Up to 10 students can sign up for a tutorial, but instead of convening as an entire class, students meet their professor weekly in pairs.

That way, students can enjoy all the benefits of a three-person class without overburdening the student-faculty ratio. Each week, one student from the pair prepares a paper relating to the class’ subject, and the other student critiques the paper while the professor moderates the discussion.

The unique structure of Williams’ tutorials allows students to develop

skills not present in other class structures. Instead of writing essays that vanish into the void of their professor’s office, Williams students have to defend their work and articulate their views beyond the narrow confines of the page.

I’ve often discussed tutorials with former friends who attend Williams, and they always say (in the barely intelligible grunting that passes as the lingua franca of Williams) that tutorials give them a wonderful sense of academic agency, since the class is centered around a framework of their own making, rather than one chosen by the professor.

Perhaps aware of their deficiencies in other areas, Williams lists its tutorial program as one of its key selling points. Virtually every tour at Williams mentions the tutorials, describing them as a defining feature of the college. As a counter, I propose that Amherst seize the initiative by adopting a similar system.

Since the two colleges are already so similar, Williams’ tutorial system would adapt well to Amherst.

Many of our classes, particularly high-level ones, already have a cap at or below 10. Changing these classes to tutorials would elevate the class experience, since direct discussions

in a much smaller group provide greater insight and communication.

The more intimate academic setting would also discourage the traditional Amherst pursuit of shopping for Canada Goose jackets during class.

A skeptical reader, probably named Brad, might argue that professors wouldn’t be able to keep up with the extra class time tutorials require. But Brad ignores one of the major strengths of tutorials: their flexibility. With only three people involved, scheduling can be done over text, and classes can be at any time convenient for all. Moreover, increased class time is more than made up for by the fact that the students are doing the preparation for class, not the professor. In fact, tutorials are so popular that Williams faculty have consistently pushed for an increase in the number of tutorials offered each year.

Brad might also point out that Amherst already offers special topics courses, where students and a professor can work outside a formal classroom environment, but special topics courses are fundamentally different from tutorials. First, the focus of a tutorial is on discussion with peers, not the professor, as is typical for special topics. Second, only a tiny

number of Amherst students take special topics courses every year, always in advanced subjects. Tutorials, on the other hand, are designed to be widely accessible and available in courses of all levels.

Since tutorials work well for both students and professors, align with Amherst’s educational mission and don’t place any additional burden on the campus, there’s no good reason why Amherst shouldn’t adopt the system. Like a drowning man clutching at a straw, Brad might argue that we should let Williams be Williams and focus on our own issues, but let me ask Brad this: what is the point of our rivalry, if not to closely examine our mirror, find something that can be fixed and improve ourselves? To teach, we must first learn, and what greater demonstration of our learning ability is there than the challenge of learning from our foe?

Amherst has achieved near complete victory over Williams, but for total victory, we must adopt one more measure. If we “adapted” (academics never steal) Williams’ tutorial system, we would improve the quality of the Amherst education while, more importantly, putting the final nail in the coffin of the worst college in America.

A Letter Regarding the CAA and NRC In India

Members of the South Asian International Student Commmunity Contributing Writers

We are writing in regards to the protests in India against the Citizenship Amendment Act and the National Register of Citizens in India.

Through this letter, we hope to echo and amplify the concerns raised by students at institutions not only in India but worldwide, and we ask the Amherst College community to stand with us.

The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), passed by the Indian Parliament in Dec. 2019, seeks to fast-track Indian citizenship to Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians from neighboring countries. While this law has been portrayed as one intended to protect persecuted religious minori-

ties in India’s neighboring nations, it notably excludes Muslims, thus ignoring the persecution faced by minority Muslim communities in South Asian nations. Furthermore, the CAA violates Article 14 of the Indian constitution, which ensures that religion cannot be a criterion for Indian citizenship. Coupled with the National Register of Citizens, the CAA can be used to strip Indian minorities of their citizenship.

The National Register of Citizens (NRC) is an official register of people who are legal Indian citizens, administered by the state. It is currently operational only in the state of Assam and so far, 1.9 million people in Assam have already been declared illegal migrants. On Nov. 20, Home Minister Amit Shah stated that the register would be soon implemented nationwide. Under the conditions

specified by the NRC, anyone who cannot prove that they or their ancestors entered India before March 24, 1971 will be declared a foreigner and face deportation. The Indian government has begun constructing massive detention camps across the country for those who fail to prove their citizenship under the NRC. The NRC, in conjunction with the CAA, threatens Muslims in India more than any other religious minority. For example, a non-Muslim Indian who may not have the documents required to prove citizenship under the NRC guidelines is still eligible for citizenship under the CAA. As Muslims are not included under the CAA, a Muslim Indian in the exact same position would instead be declared a foreigner.

The right to express concerns about these developments in a

peaceful manner is enshrined in the Indian constitution as a fundamental right. With this in mind, we believe that the violence against peaceful protestors in India constitutes police brutality. The New Delhi police forcibly entered the premises of Jamia Millia Islamia university, released tear gas in the main library and assaulted students on campus.

Similar instances of police brutality were recorded at the Aligarh Muslim University in Aligarh. Furthermore, on Jan. 5, masked thugs brandishing large sticks entered Jawaharlal Nehru University and attacked students and faculty. These miscreants went unpunished by the Delhi police, whose response to the ongoing attack has been minimal. Meanwhile, there are reports that the state police of Uttar Pradesh have committed sexual crimes against underage pro-

testors held in custody.

We request that the Amherst College community support and stand with protestors in India. As members of an academic institution, we believe that we have an added duty to stand with the protestors and victims of police violence, many of whom are fellow students and faculty.

As such, we ask that supporters please sign the letters whose links are available under this article on the Amherst Student website.

1. Letter of Support from Amherst College affiliates: Support for Student Protestors in India and condemnation of the CAA, NRC and police violence: 2. Letter from Overseas South Asian Students: Condemnation of CAA-NRC and Suppression of Student Protests

Arts&Living

Interterm Class Allows Experience of Art Acquisition

Photo courtesy of Mead Art Museum

Skye Wu ’23 and Anna Hogarth ’23 (left to right) pitch Andrea Carlson’s “Exit” to an audience at the Mead Art Museum.

Manni Spicer Saavedra ’23 Staff Writer While many may decide to stay home after the holidays, the college provides numerous programs to fill up the January month with productive experiences or lowstakes classes. One such program was “Collecting 101: Acquiring Art for the Mead” through the Mead Art Museum, where a group of seven students were given the opportunity to select a new piece to be exhibited in the Mead.

Over the course of five days, students visited art studios and galleries to learn about the art market and experienced everything from hands-on printmaking to the behind-the-scenes interaction between artist and buyer.

The course began with students touring the Mead’s current collection in order to gain a better understanding of what kinds of artwork are valuable to a museum and how their purchased piece should fit in with the larger

exhibition space. Students then headed to New York to see the five pre-chosen artists’ work in person. “The trip gave us a closer look at how artists and galleries collaborate and how they choose where their artwork goes,” said Skye Wu ’23. “This year, we were given five different prints to choose from, all by underrepresented artists … each one of us gravitated towards different pieces,” she said.

Both Wu and Anna Hogarth ’23, gravitated towards “Exit,” by Andrea Carlson, which the Mead ultimately selected to add to its collection. “I was first drawn to the piece because it was trippy and confusing. This print is full of colors, some metallic, others as bright as a highlighter ... I could not help but stare at it for a long time,” said Hogarth.

When the students returned from New York, they began to research each of the artists in order to understand the context behind these paintings. For Wu, the most exciting part about the process

was the chance to actually talk to artists themselves. “We were given the opportunity to ask them questions about their personal lives or what influenced them in creating their work,” Wu said.

“That was really rewarding.”

All of this research and planning were building up to the final day of the course, in which the students were tasked with pitching the works to the Mead. “The students were never given the final decision, so we basically had to advocate to the public for this piece and why it was better [for the collection] than the other four,” said Wu. The public then had to take a vote for which piece they wanted most in the collection; they chose “Exit.”

As an indigenous woman, Carlson’s background clearly informs her work. In regards to “Exit,” Hogarth described, “Her piece focused on the story of an Indigenous Man Mound landmark in Wisconsin which has been cut through by a highway

and the associated fear of losing cultural landmarks.” She continued, “I loved how this piece brought attention to the often forgotten significance of a natural space: its cultural history.”

In the artist’s notes on the piece, Carlson detailed the destruction of such a history. She writes, “The west as a colonial project produced descriptions of the ‘Americas’ as new land, a new world, while actively destroying and uprooting evidence of the Indigenous ancient world.”

For Wu, this context is one main reasons why she advocated for the piece. “There are so many elements to this piece, and in order to understand all of them, you have to learn about them,” she said. “I believe that when you look at an art piece, it should somehow change your way of viewing the world. If you just look at something and understand it right away, you’re not really learning anything, and you might just think ‘oh, that’s pretty’ and move

on, but art should go beyond that.”

Hogarth echoed Wu’s sentiment. “When I presented on the piece, someone in the audience asked me how I felt about the fact that most of the meaning of the piece generally cannot be interpreted without external explanation. I said that I loved that.

By creating a print that did not have any standout Native American symbols or markers that one might expect, I have to look closer at the piece, ask myself questions about its symbols and understand that there is so much I do not know about Native American culture,” she said.

Both students had strong, positive takeaways from the course.

Hogarth explained that after taking it, she “had a new idea of the power an art piece can have in a museum.” She continued, “Now, I will look more closely at why certain art pieces are in museums, if it is still important to display them and which people are not represented in a museum’s collection.”

Wu described the course as an experience that gave her a greater appreciation for not just art overall, but specifically the Mead itself. She said, “I’m pretty into art, but prior to this course I don’t think that I’d ever been to the Mead before. How ridiculous is that?” She continued, “Now, after being a part of this program, I’m going to try and get a job there.”

Wu’s experience could be reflective of the larger student body’s lack of engagement with the museum. It’s easy to take the space for granted, given that it’s so accessible, but going into it with this heightened level of interaction could make the museum quite an insightful experience. Hogarth said, “Take a walk through the gallery and challenge the curator’s choices! If there is something missing at the Mead, you have the voice to say something about it.”

Arts & Living 10

The Amherst Student • February 5, 2020

Amid Controversy, Grammys Raise Questions of Relevance

Photo courtesy of 361 Magazine

Billie Eilish dominated major categories at the Grammys, winning Record of the Year, Album of the Year, Song of the Year, Best New Artist and Best Pop Vocal Album.

Hugh Ford ’20 Staff Writer The 62nd Grammy Awards Ceremony passed last Sunday with equal shares of pageantry and controversy. Before any red carpets were even rolled or awards handed out, this year’s awards were marred by the suspension of Recording Academy President Deborah Dugan just ten days before the ceremony.

The Recording Academy was supposedly responding to a complaint from an assistant that said Dugan created a “toxic and intolerable” workplace. Five days later, Dugan filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleging sexual harassment, unfair pay and corruption in the awards’ nomination process.

On the Saturday before the awards, hip-hop mogul Sean “P. Diddy” Combs added his voice to the growing number of artists and fans questioning the relevancy and fairness of the Grammys. Diddy, in particular, raised complaints about prejudice against hip-hop and R&B music. To Diddy and others, Dugan’s accusations seemed

to confirm the doubts about the Recording Academy’s judging capabilities.

Nevertheless, as the saying goes, the show must go on. On Sunday, Jan. 26, Alicia Keys hosted the Awards in the Staples Center in Los Angeles, CA. Earlier that day, former L.A. Lakers star and NBA legend Kobe Bryant tragically passed away in a helicopter accident. The untimely loss cast a somber shadow over the event set to take place in Kobe’s former home stadium.

Despite both the controversy around the voting process and the tragedy of Kobe’s passing, the Grammy’s shine would not be dampened. The ceremony featured performances from some of this year’s biggest breakout stars including Lizzo, Billie Eilish, Lil Nas X and Rosalía. Alicia Keys and Boyz II Men sang an impromptu tribute to Kobe Bryant with the song “It’s So Hard to Say Goodbye to Yesterday,” while DJ Khaled, gospel singer Kirk Franklin, John Legend, Meek Mill, Roddy Rich and YG all teamed up to celebrate the life of late rapper Nipsey Hussle, whose album “Victory Lap” was nominated for Best Rap Al-

bum in last year’s Grammys.

The standout performance from this year’s ceremony, however, came from Tyler, the Creator, who took home the Grammy for Best Rap Album for his record “Igor.”

Tyler, backed by Boyz II Men and Charlie Wilson, performed a short medley of “Earfquake” and “New Magic Wand”. A “Tyler, the Creator” set is not complete without its fair share of theatrics, and on Grammy night, Tyler went all out.

On stage with a fully constructed neighborhood of nine full-size houses accented by pyrotechnics and strobe lights, Tyler donned his trademark blonde “Igor” wig and flamboyant pink and red suit and ratcheted his erratic weirdness up to a new level. To top it all off, halfway through the performance, about two-dozen “Igor” clones in identical suits and wigs joined Tyler on stage as backup dancers. In a few words, the performance was nothing short of electrifying.

At the end of the day, the real allure of the Grammys lies in the awards themselves. Each year holds inevitable snubs and dark horses that raise outrage and backlash. This year, however, the awards may have been the most

unremarkable part of the ceremony.

One of the only notable headlines from the entire show was pop-sensation Billie Eilish’s domination in all four major categories. Eilish, who released her debut album “When We All Fall Asleep, Where Do We Go?” last year, swept the field for Record of the Year (“Bad Guy”), Album of the Year, Song of the Year (“Bad Guy” as well) and Best New Artist. She also won a fifth Grammy for Best Pop Vocal Album.

Other significant winners included Nipsey Hussle, who won two posthumous Grammys for “Racks in the Middle” (Best Rap Performance) and “Higher” (Best Rap/Sung Performance), Spanish singer Rosalía for her genre-bending take on flamenco music “El Mal Querer” (Best Latin Rock, Urban or Alternative Album) and, as previously noted, Tyler, the Creator, who won his first career Grammy for “Igor” (Best Rap Album).

Despite his win, Tyler was not afraid to voice his criticisms of the Recording Academy. In a radio room press conference, Tyler remarked, “it sucks that whenever

we, and I mean guys that look like me, do anything that’s genre-bending or that’s anything, they always put it in the rap or urban category … which is just a politically correct way to say the N-word ...”

Indeed, “Igor” is far from a pure “Rap” album; it is perhaps more aptly labeled as “Alternative.”

Whether or not “Igor” in particular was correctly categorized, the Grammys have a somewhat questionable history in regards to recognizing Black artists. Rap, a predominantly Black genre, has only won two Album of the Year awards.

As Diddy said in his complaint, “truth be told, hip-hop has never been respected by the Grammys.

Black music has never been respected by the Grammys to the point that it should be.”

Tyler’s experience raises questions about the relevancy of the Grammys in 2020. When the music becomes overshadowed by spectacle and controversy, when the artists feel boxed in by genre and race and when more and more the awards seem like a popularity contest, what place do the Grammys have in the modern music landscape?

Arts & Living 11

The Amherst Student • February 5, 2020

“1917” Takes an Experimental Approach to the War Film Lauren Kisare ’22 Managing Arts & Living Editor With over ten Oscar nominations and two Golden Globe Awards including Best Film and Best Director, Sam Mendes’s “1917” is a movie that defies all expectations. Released on Dec. 25, “1917” remains a breathtaking, non-traditional war drama that takes advantage of its unique and immersive cinematography in order to tell a larger narrative about unwavering perseverance.

Set during World War I, “1917” follows the story of Lance Corporal William Schofield (Dean-Charles Chapman) and Lance Corporal Tom Blake (George McKay) as they embark on a treacherous mission to carry a message over no-man’s land.

With the fate of the second battalion in their hands (Corporal Blake’s brother included), the film captures these two British soldiers’ scramble to prevent a potential bloodbath of thousands.

Having recently won five awards at the 73rd British Academy Film Awards (BAFTA) on Feb. 2, “1917” has captivated audiences not only for its sublime storytelling, but for its use of an ambitious film technique that facilitates the illusion of a movie shot in one take.

Similar to his predecessors, Alfred Hitchcock and Alejandro G. Iñárritu, Mendes has tailored a story originally inspired by his grandfather into a one-shot film experience that has resonated with millions.

“From the very beginning, I felt this movie should be told in real time. Every step of the journey, breathing every breath with these men, felt integral, and there’s no better way to tell this story than with one continuous shot,” said Mendes in a behind the scenes featurette interview with Universal Pictures.

True to his word, the film’s use of 360 degree cameras as well as sophisticated splicing together of eight to nine minute uncut scenes successfully gives the im-

pression of one continuous shot.

In an interview with Vox magazinee, cinematographer Roger Deakins noted that it took six to eight months of rehearsals in order to be able to do eight to nine segments without any mistakes.

When asked on “ The Tonigh Show Starring Jimmy Fallon,” what happens if one were to make a mistake during filming, actor George Mackay candidly replied “well, you can’t!” Such a response translates directly onto the screen as you can see how much meticulous detail and concentrated hard work went into fostering this immersive experience.

Watching the movie felt more like a VR simulation game than a film. As the actors cross through different backdrops and landscapes, one is made to feel as though they are experiencing the events of the film with the characters themselves, ergo the immersive nature of a “real time” film. The technical diversions that skillfully hid scene cuts further helped to facilitate the immersive experience as this film rarely ever lets a viewer’s attention waver.

My own personal favorite scenes were the moments where you asked yourself: “How in the world did they film this?” For instance, near the beginning of the film, Schofield and Blake take refuge outside the remnants of a dilapidated farm.

While resting, they watch as a dogfight between three enemy planes occurs above them, marveling at the battle in the sky. Things take a turn, however, when the defeated enemy plane unexpectedly crashes into the shed in front of them. The shed proceeds to burn slowly as the two gape at what has just occured.

Story-wise, “1917” bears striking similarities to an equally renowned war film — “Saving Private Ryan” starring Tom Hanks as Captain John Miller, a general whose mission is to inform a soldier that his three brothers have died while traveling over

enemy territory. “1917,” however, eschews common war movie tropes for a quieter, yet still equally horrific narrative.

Unlike classics like “Saving Private Ryan” that tout the image of the American hero, the protagonists in this story are not promoted as being the heroes of the film. Instead, they are depicted as being fairly ordinary despite the gravity of their mission and the payoff of what they can gain from completing their mission.

Moreover, horror in “1917” was sparse, but the few scenes that did incorporate it were powerful. Even though the film follows a simple path, that path is encroached upon by realistic depictions of a journey through a war zone, using the slow-burning tone of the setting to provide greater exposition into the characters as well as the world that surrounds them.

Although “1917” lacks the usual bombardment of war vio-

lence, it manages to convey war’s impact in small moments as well as grandiose ones. Rather than battering the viewer with horrific imagery, the film allows the entire audience to soak in critical moments.

It’s easy to see the downfalls of a movie that prioritizes this technique over a far more complicated narrative. While abandoning action for a single immersive experience that can resonate with any viewer is both ambitious and ingenious, the plot, in some parts, suffers as a result of the shift in focus.

In order for a film to operate under one continuous shot, only one or two characters can be the focus of the film. While other people can be involved in the background, the purpose of a one-take film is centralizing around one or two individuals, as that is what facilitates the feeling that an audience member could truly embody the characters. We don’t get too many battle scenes

occuring, and subsequently, the realism of the film becomes questionable as it almost feels like Scholfield and Blake exist within a very controlled, vacuum of a world.

With all this considered, I believe the goal of this movie was to advance one story. From the beginning, there is one clear, linear destination that the characters and plot follow, and I don’t think the film could have accomplished what it was able to accomplish had the plot been more complicated and action-packed.

Even though “1917” is simpler than its war film counterparts, it manages to convey exactly what it needed to: the experience of an ordinary soldier during war.

Although it makes for a perhaps weaker or less drama filled plot, the emotional strong point of the film is not within the story, but rather the way it capitalizes on experience and effectively projects that experience onto the audience.

Photo courtesy of a Palate Transcribed

“1917” is nominated for ten Academy Awards and has won two Golden Globe Awards this year, including Best Film and Best Director. It also won five British Academy Film Awards.

Arts & Living 12

The Amherst Student • February 5, 2020

A Guide to the Top 10 Vending Machines on Our Campus Sophie Wolmer ’23 Contributing Writer Picture this: you arrive at Schwemm’s with a grumbling stomach and a craving for salt. Sadly, upon looking at your watch, you realize that it is 2:01 a.m. Though delicious fries and a shake are no longer in the cards, have no fear! To assist students in their late night snacking endeavors, I compiled Amherst’s top 10 vending machine locations and ranked them. The locations were rated on a scale of one to ten in terms of drink selection, snack selection and overall caliber.

Rosa Gomes, the manager of Vending and Cash Operations runs operations vending machine operations. She has hired Steve’s Snacks to provide and stock the vending machines.

1. The Science Center (The Premier Choice) Overall Rating : 8/10 Snack Selection : 7/10 Drink Selection : 9/10 Noteworthy snacks and drinks: Godiva chocolate, Reese’s, energy shots, seltzers, ginger ale The science center is notorious for its A grade vending machines.

It is safe to say that they live up to the hype. In addition to the typical snacks (Pop-Tarts, chips, and granola bars), students can also find specialty items such as five-hour energy drinks, iced honey buns and Reese’s peanut butter cups.

In terms of beverages, the science center vending machine is literally stacked. Not only does the machine have the essentials, it also has seltzers, chocolate milk and coffee beverages — fitting for a 24-hour study space.

There are also options for the health nuts on campus, including diet sodas and lower calorie snacks. Moreover, these vending machines are highly accessible, located in the lowest level of the science center. They have a range of reasonable prices ($1 to $3) and take cash, AC dollars and credit.

2. Wolff Fitness Center (Best Drinks) Overall rating: 7.5/10 Snack selection: 7/10 Drink selection: 9/10

Noteworthy snacks: Godiva chocolate, Gushers, peanut butter M&M’s, Vitamin Water, cranberry seltzer, Fanta The vending machines at Wolff Fitness Center come in a close second to the science center’s offerings.

Though the machines have plentiful options, their location and inaccessibility knocked them down a few points.

The key perk of the fitness center’s vending machines are their diversity in drink selection. There are two beverage machines that have every soda type imaginable, numerous seltzer flavors, Powerades and coffee drinks. The snack machines have all the vending machine essentials (Cheetos, Fritos, Pop-Tarts) but also have more nutritious items such as Clif Bars and PopCorners.

Though the machines’ pricing is fairly reasonable (everything is $13), the snack machine only takes cash. This drawback, in combination with the non-central location of the fitness center basement, makes these vending machines less than ideal.

It’s also worth noting that most of the snacks are characteristically unhealthy (which is a bit shameful for a building dedicated to fitness and heath).

3. Valentine Hall (Best Location) Overall Rating : 7/10 Snack Selection : 6/10 Drink Selection : 8/10 Noteworthy snacks and drinks: caramel M&M’s, Nature Valley oatmeal bars, sea salt and vinegar potato chips Val ranks a strong third place on this list. Though its drink and snack diversity is not as impressive as the machines at the science and fitness centers, its solid stocking of basic snacks and strong location kept it in the top three.

To find these vending machines, turn left into the small coat room before the check-in counter. You will see them right away — they glow like jewels in a dark cave. These snack machines have plentiful food options and drinks ranging from $1 to $3.

4. Keefe Campus Center (For When You Need Something Other

Than Food) Overall Rating : 6.5/10 Snack Selection : 6/10 Drink Selection : 5/10 Noteworthy items: coconut water and toiletries Keefe’s vending machines are not the most popular, but are certainly useful when in a pinch — like that 2:01 a.m. Schwemm’s arrival. The drink and snack options are nothing to write home about, but they will do the trick.

What really boosted Keefe’s score was its third machine — the only vending machine on campus with non-food or beverage items. It was installed by the college with help from the Student Health Educators (SHEs). The SHEs made sure to stock this machine with contraceptives, feminine hygiene products and a range of toiletries, subsidizing the products to make them accessible to students.

5. Frost Library (Great for Late Night Study Breaks) Overall Rating : 6/10 Snack Selection : 8/10 Drink Selection : 4/10 Noteworthy snacks and drinks: fruit snacks, 5-hour Energy, fruit and nut trail mix, Godiva chocolate The vending machines at Frost are hidden in the corner of A-Level.

In terms of snacks, these machines meet all late night snacking needs.

Unfortunately, the drink machine falls short and is disappointingly often half full. Additionally, it is located behind the library work desk which limits its accessibility. Despite these disadvantages, Frost machines are still the go-to for study snacks.

6. Greenway B (The Unexpected Gem) Overall Rating : 6.5/10 Snack Selection : 9/10 Drink Selection : 4/10 Noteworthy snacks and drinks: Bare Apple Chips, croissants, Reese’s pieces, Hershey’s, Milk Duds, popcorn The drink options at Greenway B are limited, but its bombshell snacks make up for it. There are Bare Apple Chips, croissants (yes you read that right!), Reese’s Pieces and Milk Duds. The prices are also unbeatable. For example, you can get an

extra large Kit Kat for only $1.50, which cheaper than other locations on campus. However, these machines are difficult to find and are isolated from central campus. Plus, they are the only vending machines for all the Greenway residences.

7. Stearns and James (The Best First-Year Dorm Machines) Overall Rating : 6/10 Snack Selection : 8/10 Drink Selection : 4/10 Noteworthy snacks and drinks: Barbeque Cape Cod Chips, almonds, almond Snickers, Fanta, Fresca These dorms blow away their counterparts on the first-year quad in vending machine quality. Though they fall short in comparison to Greenway B’s, they have good options and are conveniently located in the basements of both dorms near the laundry rooms.

8. Beneski Museum of Natural History (If You Are Looking to Try Something New) Overall Rating : 6/10 Snack Selection : 8/10 Drink Selection : 4/10 Noteworthy snacks and drinks: Hot Fries, potato skins and Jalapeno Kettle Cooked Chips Artifacts aren’t the only rare objects in Beneski! Turns out there are quite a selection of unusual snack options located in the basement.

The snack machines boast Hot Fries, potato skins and Jalapeno Kettle Cooked Chips. The drink selections, on the other hand, are mediocre at best.

9. Morrow Dormitory (For All Your Candy Needs) Overall Rating : 6.5/10 Snack Selection : 7/10 Drink Selection : 6/10 Noteworthy snacks and drinks: Mini M&M’s, Twix, Minute Maid lemonade The vending machine at Morrow Dormitory is the ultimate location for candy. Not only does it have mini M&M’s, but it also has Gushers, Three Musketeers, Twix, Milky Way and Snickers. These treats, in addition to Minute Maid lemonade, means that this machine easily makes the top ten.

10. Charles Pratt (The Granola Bar Spot) Overall Rating : 5/10 Snack Selection : 5/10 Drink Selection : 5/10 Noteworthy snacks and drinks: Kind Whole Fruit Bar, Peanut Butter Kind Bars, Fiber One, Cliff Bars, Nature Valley Bars, Mike and Ikes Charles Pratt just makes the cut.

Its snacks and drinks have worthwhile options but are not particularly special in any way. However, this vending machine has ample granola bar options — and therefore deserved a spot in the top ten list.

BONUS — WORST VENDING ON CAMPUS: Seeley Mudd The worst vending machine on campus is definitely the one in Seeley Mudd. It is located in the building’s old musty basement, and has about 10 drinks. This is by far the worst vending machine on campus.

Photo courtesy of Sophie Wolmer ’23

The science center’s vending machine (pictured) ranks at the top of the list, according to Sophie Wolmer ’23.

Sports Will Capitalism Doom Professional Soccer’s Competition?

Ben Gilsdorf ’21 Staff Writer For the first time in years, this season’s January transfer window for European soccer clubs seemed to slip by without any big-name transfers or outrageous fees.

The result of this relatively inactive January period is that the upcoming summer transfer window will likely break spending records. If Paris Saint-Germain’s star forwards Kylian Mbappé and Neymar choose to leave the French, both could command fees around of £200 million.

Similarly, Italian hegemon Juventus is rumored to be plotting a bid for Liverpool’s marquee center back Virgil van Dijk — who cost the Reds £75 million a few years ago. It’s a trade that could reach £150 million.

These astronomically high transfer fees are causing many soccer fans to call for increased financial regulation of clubs from groups like the Fédération International de Football Association (FIFA) and the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA).

UEFA’s existing system, called Financial Fair Play, was introduced in the 2012-2013 season and set rules on European clubs barring them from spending more money than they took in in a season.

While this briefly curtailed spending and helped many clubs keep balanced budgets, revenue from sponsors and broadcasting companies has skyrocketed, increasing the amount of money going into clubs, and therefore increasing the amount of money they can spend on players. Ironically, the President of UEFA at the time, Michel Platini, has since been arrested on corruption charges and banned from soccer-related activities for life.

According to Forbes, European soccer clubs spent over $6 billion on players last summer, almost a billion dollars more than the previous year’s spending — roughly equal to the annual budget for the entire state of Vermont.

The exorbitant amounts of money spent in European soccer should sound familiar to American sports fans, who have watched as recent US

sports contracts have gotten increasingly out of hand.

Just last year, Los Angeles Angels outfielder Mike Trout signed a 12-year contract worth $430 million, which became the richest contract in North American sports history, beating out Philadelphia Phillies outfielder Bryce Harper’s 13year/$330 million contract signed a few months earlier. Small-market baseball teams face consistent player economics dilemmas; as player-team loyalty decreases in the Moneyball age, they must trade away their star players or risk losing them to richer teams with no returns.

Both baseball and the European soccer leagues lack a salary cap, which has helped the National Football League, the National Hockey League and the National Basketball Association limit spending on individual contracts. Beyond curbing spending, proponents also claim that salary caps create parity, preventing teams with richer owners from outspending their less wealthy counterparts.

But while American sports

leagues are contained in the U.S. and Canada, European soccer takes place in so many countries that setting one salary cap across all leagues would be impossible. Creating different tiers of a salary cap based on the country of the league would then make it undesirable to play at top clubs in countries like Portugal, when a player could make more money at a bad club in England or Germany.

Similarly, while a salary cap would certainly help to prevent European clubs from operating at extreme deficits, the money problem in soccer has less to do with wages paid to players by clubs and more with transfer fees between clubs themselves.

To put it in economic terms, the European soccer transfer market is a laissez-faire capitalist system that Milton Freedman could have only dreamed of. No price controls, no spending limits and barely any legitimate regulation.

Although the term “trickle-down” isn’t used, large clubs defend their profligate spending by arguing that it benefits the smaller

clubs from whom they buy their players. If Manchester United wants to pay Leicester an unseemly £80 million for center back Harry Maguire, then Leicester can make an enormous profit and use that money to buy itself new players from other clubs.

Yet much like actual trickle-down economics, this system is doomed to fail. With every passing transfer market the inequality between small clubs and big clubs grows, and now the only real way for small teams to make it big is for a Chinese or Russian oligarch to decide to invest billions in them.

With the spectre of the 2022 World Cup in Qatar — whose bid was mired in credible and claims of corruption and bribery — looming over the sport, soccer needs to find a fix to the madness of the transfer market. UEFA and FIFA need to figure out how to cap transfer fees and reduce the inequality between large clubs and small ones, otherwise the oil-money-soaked cracks in the beautiful game might ruin it forever.

Men’s Squash Faces Trio of Conference Opponents in Little Threes Tyler Marshall ’21 Staff Writer The men’s squash team hosted a trio of NESCAC opponents this past weekend, including a doubleheader with Little Three rivals Williams and Wesleyan on Sunday Feb. 2.

The weekend began with a Tufts visit to Amherst for a Friday night matchup. The Mammoths were able to handle the Jumbos winning by a final score of 6-3.

The team followed this up with a victory against Wesleyan on Sunday morning. However, the Mammoths were not able to defeat the Ephs on Sunday afternoon, finishing the week with a 2-1 record against NESCAC opponents.

On Friday, Amherst was able to win on six of the possible nine courts against Tufts. Amherst took

victories on the #1, #2, #4, #5, #6 and #8 courts against the NESCAC foe. Robinson Armour ’22, Charlie Sutherby ’22, Robert Parker ’21, Terrence Wang ’21, Nathaniel Mosse ’23 and Pavan Nagaraj ’21 all claimed victories against the Jumbos. Parker had an impressive performance as he defeated his opponent 3-0 in just 20 minutes.

In the first match on Sunday, the Mammoths trumped the Cardinals by of 9-0. It was a dominant performance against a Little Three rival, with Amherst dropping only three total sets across the nine matches.

Amherst did not give Wesleyan much hope as all but two matches ended in under thirty minutes.

It was a very quick match, which was very important since Amherst took on Williams in the afternoon.

Williams proves a tougher oppo-

nent than Wesleyan, so preserving energy for the second match of the day was essential to the Mammoths.

Amherst was unable to sweep its Little Three rivals as the team fell by a score of 7-2 against Williams. The lone winners against Williams were Armour and Sutherby on the #1 and #2 courts, respectively.

Armour and Sutherby both had an outstanding weekend as they both won all three of their matches. Amherst battled the entire match but was unable to come away with a victory against a very strong opponent.

This was the final match of the regular season leaving Amherst with an 8-5 record on the year.

Amherst will be back in action on Feb. 7 when the team competes in the NESCAC championships.

Photo courtesy of Clarus Studios

Charles Sutherby ’22 won his Tufts, Wesleyan and Williams matches playing in the 2nd position on the ladder.

The Amherst Student • February 5, 2020

Sports 14

Women’s Squash Finishes Second at Little Three Championships Jack Dove ’23 Managing Sports Editor As women’s squash approaches the home stretch of a remarkably successful season, the Mammoths are poised for a strong postseason run.

Last year’s NESCAC semifinalists have dramatically improved over the course of a season; with nine wins, the team has already surpassed 2019’s win total of eight.

Opponents have not fared well when they’ve traveled to Amherst’s Davenport Squash Courts; the No. 15 Mammoths are 8-1 at home (9-4 overall), with the only loss to rival No. 12 Williams.

Amherst’s .692 winning percentage has vaulted the team to the top 15 teams in the nation; the Mammoths are tied for the third-highest in the national ranking of NESCAC teams.

Women’s squash doesn’t just dominate weaker teams; all nine Mammoth wins have come against top-30 teams in the country.

The Amherst women’s squash roster boasts several highly-rated athletes. Daksha Pathak ’23 and Lauren Weil ’23 have made immediate impacts as first-years, sporting 4.69 and 4.67 ratings respectively. Lilly Soroko ’22 has achieved a team-high 8-4 season record and has earned a 4.47 rating. Ten of the 13 Mammoths have ratings above 4.00, which is outstanding considering that only nine individual matches contribute to the team’s total match results.

Last weekend, the Mammoths faced off in the Little Three championships, which also served as the team’s senior day.

Sunday began well for Amherst, with the squad winning the first match of the championship

8-1 against Wesleyan.

However, Williams would prove to be a stiff challenge for the home squad. Playing at the top of the later, Pathak was the only Mammoth to win their match on the day, as she battled through a five game thriller, winning the last two games to take the 3-2 victory. Unfortunately, the rest of the squad fell in their matches against the Ephs, and Amherst finished the Little Three Championships in second place.

The Mammoths, likely the third seed in the NESCAC tournament, head to Wesleyan Feb. 7-9 to compete for a NESCAC Championship. Amherst will look to dethrone Trinity, who took home its 13th straight NESCAC title in 2019.

On Feb. 21-23, Yale hosts the 2020 Women’s National Team Championships, followed by the Individual National Championships on Mar. 6-8 at UPenn.

Photo courtesy of Amherst Athletics

Pierson Klein ’20 played in her final two home matches at Amherst, winning one against Wesleyan and falling against Williams.

The Recap: All The Sports You Missed This Week Jack Dove ’23, Henry Newton ’21 and Camilo Toruno ’21 Managing Sport Editors Men’s Basketball The men’s basketball team continued its run of solid form on Saturday, besting Little Three rival Wesleyan by the score of 75-54 in a matchup of the NESCAC’s two top scoring defenses. Garrett Day ’21 was the standout performer for the Mammoths, scoring a career-high 29 points to lead the Mammoths’ offense and all players. Day was a stellar 7-12 from three point range, to going along with four assists and two rebounds on the night. With the victory, the Mammoths moved to 14-6 on the season and 4-2 in conference play. The Mammoths have yet another conference matchup on tap next week when they travel to Bowdoin for an away contest.

Women’s Basketball In what was the game of the season thus far for the Amherst women’s basketball team, the Mammoths barely managed to squeak past Little Three rivals Wesleyan in a 53-49 victory last Saturday evening. After an offensive explosion in the first quarter that saw the Mammoths trailing 19-18, the game settled into a hard-fought defensive battle. Despite this playing to Amherst’s strengths on defense and efficiency, the Cardinals were able to take a three point lead into the final quarter of play.

With 25 seconds remaining in this crucial conference matchup, the Mammoths were down 49-48. However, Hannah Fox ’20 took control of the game in those final seconds.

Wesleyan fouled Fox twice, and she sunk four free throws to put the Mammoths up 52-49. Wesleyan then turned the ball over, and fouled Madeline Eck ’20, who sunk an additional free throw and gave the Mammoths a stunning 53-49 victory.

With the win, the Mammoths move to 17-3 on the season.

Men’s Hockey The men’s hockey team fought Wesleyan to a close 1-1 tie last Saturday. Less than 15 seconds into the game, the Mammoths snuck a goal past the Cardinals’ goalkeeper. Joey Lupo ’20 scored his fifth goal of the season to put the Mammoths up 1-1 off of assists from fellow senior Noah Gilreath and Sean Wrenn ’22. Lupo redirected a shot from Gilreath into the back of the net to give the Mammoths’ one of their fastest goals ever.

Wesleyan responded soon thereafter, scoring in the first period to even the score at one apiece. From there, the goalies took over, with Amherst’s Giancarlo Ventre ’20 registering 28 saves on the night. His Wesleyan counterpart racked up 46 stops for the Mammoths on the night.

Women’s Hockey For the second week in a row, the NESCAC women’s hockey player of the week was Amherst first year forward Carley Daly. With the achievement, Daly becomes the first Mammoth to clinch back to back player of the week nods since the award was started in 2001-2002. Daly contributed to two of the three goals the team scored on the weekend, assisting on the game-winner against Wesleyan. The next day, Daly con-

tinued her scoring streak, scoring the game’s only goal in a 1-0 shut out win against Wesleyan. Daly currently leads the Mammoths with nine goals on the season, and ranks first on the team with 16 points.

Men’s Swim and Dive Sean Mebust ’20 swam in his final home meet at Pratt Pool last Sunday, but he will leave having left his mark; the Senior, in the season’s final dual meet of the year against Springfield College, set two pool records and took home NESCAC men’s swimmer of the week honors.

Mebust began the weekend with a meet against MIT, wherein he was victorious in both the 100 and 200 yard breastroke events, finishing with times of 56.90 and 2:04.62, repsectively.

Swimming the very next day against Springfield, Mebust would better those times and set his pool records. Before his individual events, Mebust swam in the winning 200 yard medley relay. In his individual events, Mebust would again leave the meet with numerous victories. In the 50 yard breaststroke, he finished first with a time of 26.71. He knocked off his first record of the weekend in his next race, the 100 yard butterfly, finishing with a time of 56.35, beating the record that had stood since 2018. He finished with his second record as a part of the 200 freestyle relay in his final Pratt Pool swim.

As a team, the Mammoths fell to MIT 156.5-139.5, but finished the dual meet season on a high note with a 166-110 victory over Springfield. The men won every event except the one meter diving and the 500 yard freestyle.

The Amherst Student • February 5, 2020

Sports 15

Women’s Track and Field Finishes Third in Deep Field Henry Newton ’21 Managing Sports Editor Last weekend, the Amherst women’s track and field team finished third in a competitive field of 22 teams at the Branwen SmithKing invitational, held at Tufts on Saturday.

The event, while important to the Mammoths’ season, was perhaps most notable for the impressive individual performances, including multiple Amherst athletes who clinched their spots at the DIII New England regional indoor championship meet.

Three Mammoths qualified for the championships in the 400 meter race, led by Juanita Jaramillo ’22, who paced the majority of the field with a time of exactly 1:00.00, more than enough to ensure her sport at the regional championships. Anna Madden ’22 and Sophia Friedman ’21 also qualified, finishing third

and fifth respectively.

Additional qualifiers included Katie Lingen ’22, Jordan Bailey-Rhodeman ’21 and Ava Tillman ’23 in the 600 meters, Grace Haase ’21 in the 800 meters and Sarah Gayer ’21 and Sophia Wolmer ’23 in the 3000 meters. Gayer and Wolmer finished second and third in the event, respectively.

Amherst had its greatest success in the 1000 meters, with Jenny Mazzella ’20 and Isabella Landry ’23 finishing in first and fourth.

In the field events, Caroline Ferguson-Dryden ’20 registered new collegiate bests, hitting distances of 10.25 meters in the shot put and 13.38 meters in the weight throw.

The Mammoths return to action next Saturday, when they head back to Tufts to compete in the Cupid Challenge and to give their runners yet another chance to book their spots at the regional championships.

Men’s Track and Field Season Off to Running Start Jack Dove ’23 Managing Sports Editor While most teams cram a season into a two-month whirlwind, men’s track and field is in it for the long haul. With 23 meets spanning from early January to late May, it takes both patience and dedication to perform at a high level over the course of the long season.

The Mammoths kicked off the 2020 campaign at Wesleyan, competing in the famous Little III Championships with Williams and Wesleyan. While Williams entered the meet with a 31-year winning-streak, the team left Middletown empty-handed. Amherst squeaked by the Ephs by 2 points, icing the victory with a dominant performance in the 4x400 relay.

After Henry Buren ’22 set a school record with a 6.97 second 60 meter dash at the Mary Grinaker Invitational, the Mammoths broke two more records at the Update Challenge hosted by Cornell. Kele-

chi Eziri ’23 smashed a 26-year old mark in the triple jump, posting a distance of 14.09 meters; additionally, Troy Colleran ’22 broke his own school record in the heptathlon, scoring a whopping 4962 points. In the most recent meet, the Branwen Smith-King Invitational at Tufts, the Mammoths finished seventh out of 22 teams, with several athletes clinching qualifying times for DIII New England regionals.

In the coming weeks, the team will be prepping for the challenges in the months ahead, including the regional championship and, potentailly, the national championship meets. Other teams and athletes cannot help but watch as the runners bound over hurdles, the throwers launch weighted training devices for the shot put, and jumpers propel themselves into a pit of sand.

Jack Trent ’23, a first year heptathlon runner from Texas, puts it best when asked why men’s track and field is performing at an elite level: “It’s all just run, rest, recover, repeat.”

Camilo’s Corner Camilo Toruño ’21

Managing Sports Editor Camilo Toruño writes on the new era of quarterbacks entering their prime in the NFL, and how the league is set up for a new period of sustained success as older players retire.

This year’s Super Bowl matchup between the Kansas City Chiefs and the San Francisco 49ers was undeniably more engaging than last year’s low scoring dud between the New England Patriots and Los Angeles Rams. Both teams were likeable enough, with charismatic, young quarterbacks and engaging storylines behind them.

Head coach Andy Reid led the Kansas City Chiefs; until Sunday night, Reid had found consistent success in the NFL for 21 years but never won a Super Bowl title.

The San Francisco 49ers were a young team who had a remarkable turn-around this year, winning 13 games after going 4-12 in 2018.

The two quarterbacks, Patrick Mahomes for the Chiefs and Jimmy Garoppolo for the 49ers, were another draw, for they truly marked the beginning of a new era for quarterbacks in the NFL. This is an era of youth; an era where versatility and mobility replace the status quo of tall, immobile, strong-armed quarterbacks; an era where Tom Brady’s only appearance in the Super Bowl is in an advertisement (although it declared his intent to keep playing).

This new generation of quarterbacks has been developing for at least the past five to six years.

Almost every Super Bowl in this

time span has featured a matchup between a young and old quarterback. First, with Russell Wilson against (now retired) Peyton Manning in 2014, and against Tom Brady again in 2015. Then, we saw it again in 2016 with 27 yearold Cam Newton against Peyton Manning. There was a slight break in this pattern in 2017 and 2018 when veterans Matt Ryan and Nick Foles faced off against Brady. However, last year, fourthyear player Jared Goff matched up (once again) against Brady.

The members of the younger generation can be characterized by greater athleticism, an ability to prolong plays with their feet and bringing a rushing threat to the game. The older generation can be characterized by its height, by being less athletic pocket passers and relying on great precision on throws. Time and again we’ve seen a Super Bowl featuring a matchup of the new against the old. The Super Bowl on Sunday night, however, marked the end of that. Youth was marked all over that game.

This transition to dual threat quarterbacks can be seen all over the NFL. Lamar Jackson of the Baltimore Ravens who won the MVP for the 2019 season epitomizes this. Jackson is a quarterback who can threaten a team with his blazing speed as well as power-

fulthrows. He rushed for an NFL quarterback record of 1,206 yards and threw for 3,127 yards. All this goes to show that the quarterback position has changed. Both quarterbacks of the Super Bowl reflected this for the first time ever.

The quarterback that shone brightest Sunday night was 23 year-old Mahomes. He won MVP in 2018 and is generally regarded as the face of the new generation of quarterbacks, perhaps the whole NFL now. The Chiefs were losing going into the fourth quarter on Sunday night when Mahomes did what he’s done his whole (short) career: he extended plays with his legs and made daring throws with his uncannily strong arm. In short, Mahomes willed his team to victory.

Of course, Manning and Brady have done this throughout their careers, but there’s a different element of excitement to the league now. There is a thrill both in the way the game is played — ankle breaking jukes and bold throws — but also in the future. Maybe the Chiefs’ Super Bowl win is the start of another long-standing, limited dynasty, but I really don’t think so. There are so many young, exciting quarterbacks in today’s NFL that will lead to new rivalries and more dynamic competition across the board.

Photo courtesy of Wikimedia

San Francisco 49ers quarterback Jimmy Garoppolo led his team to the Super Bowl this year, and is one of the next generation of NFL stars.

The Amherst Student • February 5, 2020

Sports 16

Women’s Swim Splits Season’s Final Dual Meets

Photo courtesy of Amherst Athletics

Natalie Rumpelt ’20 was selected as NESCAC swimmer of the week for her performance last weekend following her multiple wins at dual meets against MIT and Springfield.

Kasia Krosniak ’21 Associate Sports Editor The women’s swim team had a busy weekend with meets against both MIT and Springfield on Saturday and Sunday, respectively. The Mammoths walked away with a win and a loss, moving to a 6-2 record overall.

On Saturday, the Mammoths faced No. 8 MIT, losing by a score of 165-135. However, the Mammoths

took first place in six of the events.

This included Julia Ruggiero ’21 in the 1000m freestyle, where she won with a time of 10:46.23, as well as Natalie Rumpelt ’20 who finished with a time of 1:52.76 in the 200m freestyle. Rumpelt also took home the 100m freestyle with a time of 52.61, winning by 0.28 seconds.

Marie Fagan ’22 finished first in the 200 butterfly with a time of 2:07.57 and Jessica Gordon ’23 won the 500m freestyle by an impressive 14

seconds with a time of 5:03.56.

On the diving side, Lindsey Ruderman ’21 swept both the 1-meter board and 3-meter board with scores of 538.05 and 526.65, respectively.

The following day, the Mammoths celebrated Senior Day in their home meet against Springfield. Amherst got things started with the 200 medley relay, where Dani Gonzalez Pinero ’23, Nina Fitzgerald ’21, Ingrid Shu ’20 and

FRI

SAT

Men’s Basketball @ Bowdoin, 7 p.m.

Men’s Track and Field Cupid Challenge @ Tufts

Women’s Basketball vs. Bowdoin, 7 p.m.

Women’s Track and Field Cupid Challenge @ Tufts

Men’s Hockey vs. Colby, 7 p.m.

Women’s Hockey @ Bowdoin, 7 p.m.

GAME SCHE DULE

Men’s Basketball @ Colby, 3 p.m.

Women’s Basketball vs. Colby, 3 p.m.

Men’s Hockey vs. Bowdoin, 3 p.m.

Women’s Hockey @ Bowdoin, 3 p.m.

Rumpelt placed first with a time of 1:48.30. Next, Heather Grotzinger ’20 won the 400 IM by seven seconds with a time of 4:34.23. In the 50 backstroke Rumpelt won with a time of 27.7. Fitzgerald racked in another win in the 50 breaststroke with a time of 30.30. Fagan won the 100 butterfly with a time of 58.85, and Shu took home the 50 freestyle in 24.82.

Ruderman once again took home the 1-meter board with a score of

311.10, and Hannah Karlin ’22 took second with 240.75. Rumpelt and Gordon took first and second in the 100 freestyle.

Due to her successes this weekend against MIT and Springfield, Rumpelt was named NESCAC performer of the week. This is the third time Rumpelt has landed this honor.

Amherst returns next to the pool on Feb. 13 at Middlebury for the NESCAC Championship.