Page 1

daily herald the Brown

vol. cxxii, no. 90

INSIDE

Page 3

Presidency adapts as U. transitions to global enterprise

In-betweeners

By mathias heller and alison silver

Documentary screening brings director to Cable Car

senior staff writers

Page 7

Selfless success Brundage ’15 calls for altruistic achievement Page 8

Thwarting abuse Domestic violence month seeks to spread awareness today

tomorrow

Herald File Photo

64 / 46

57 / 48

since 1891

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Former president Ruth Simmons worked largely to fundraise and network, a shift from the focus of former presidents on day-to-day management.

When Christina Paxson is formally inaugurated as the University’s Shaping the 19th president Saturday, she will Presidency join a long list of Part one of three individuals who have left their mark on Brown in unique ways. But the office Paxson will officially assume this week is not the same as the one envisioned by the University’s founders in 1764. As the University has grown in size during its almost threecentury history, presidents have had to adapt to changing social and economic environments and have faced resulting shifts in their responsibilities. A job that initially focused on managing the day-to-day aspects of the University has evolved into one that requires balancing diverse constituencies while shaping the University’s broader role

within higher education, according to longtime faculty members, administrators and others familiar with the University’s top post. Presidents increasingly have found the need to look beyond College Hill as the University continues to expand and adjust to a more competitive world. In certain respects, the office has not changed since 1765, when Princeton graduate James Manning, a Baptist minister who helped found the University, became its first president. Then as now, the president reported to the Corporation, managed the overall governance of the University and served as a member of the Corporation’s Board of Fellows. But the presidency has also undergone major changes since Manning’s days. Paxson, for instance, will not be able to act as independently of the Corporation as the presidents of the mid20th century, who enjoyed a high level of autonomy. Nor will she have to teach a capstone course in moral philosophy, which was a duty of the first few presi/ / Presidents page 4 dents,

Under Paxson, admins look toward new capital campaign U. plans to By Shefali Luthra and Eli Okun News Editor and Senior Staff Writer

The University’s next capital campaign will be contingent on priorities to be outlined by the six strategic planning committees established earlier this fall, President Christina Paxson told The Herald. The University has not yet set a fundraising goal or concrete timeline for the campaign, Paxson said, adding that both of those questions will be addressed after new Senior Vice President for Advancement Patricia Watson assumes office Dec. 1. Administrators have in the past suggested that a capital campaign — often seen as one of the defining elements of a University presidency — could be tied to the celebration of the University’s 250th anniversary, which will begin May 2014. “It makes sense to try to take ad-

vantage of the natural publicity that’ll come from something as impressive as a 250th birthday party,” said Provost Mark Schlissel P’15. At the October faculty meeting, Paxson spoke about the need to raise $500 million to fund eight priorities outlined under previous president Ruth Simmons, including brain science, the Humanities Initiative, public health, engineering, dorm renovations and financial aid. The intent is to raise as many funds as possible to address these issues before the launch of a capital campaign. But if those priorities are not fully addressed in the next two years, they will likely be folded into the capital campaign, Paxson said. After Watson arrives, administrators will have to determine how much money is available and what exactly the University needs, she said. “Who’s out there?” Paxson said.

M. Hockey

Bears hope to start strong after last season’s icy end By Caleb Miller Contributing Writer

The men’s hockey team will rely on its roster depth and the chemistry among its players to start the season off strong as it retakes the ice for the 2012-13 campaign Friday. The team started practice two weeks ago, looking to rebound after a firstround loss in last spring’s Eastern Collegiate Athletic Conference tournament put an early end to last season. Preseason polls predict Bruno will finish at the bottom of the conference, but assistant captain Richie Crowley ’13 said such talk is a motivator for the Bears. “One of the major driving forces behind us will be the fact that we got disrespected by media polls,” Crowley said. He added this year’s challenge will be

“changing the culture of Brown Hockey to a winning organization.” The Bears received a taste of the season ahead in a scrimmage last Saturday against conference foe Harvard. Bruno took the two-period exhibition match 3-1. Captain Dennis Robertson ’14 said the squad felt positive after the scrimmage, and the win gives them confidence heading into the regular season. Robertson said the team’s depth this year will be its greatest strength. “We don’t have lines that will be a liability anymore,” he said. “All four forward lines especially are going to be able to attack and be a threat to other teams.” Head Coach Brendan Whittet ’94 said these qualities — a deep Bears squad and the feeling of camaraderie the players / / Hockey page 2

“How deep and broad is the pool of alumni and friends of the University who will support us?” New presidents usually take anywhere from six months to a year and a half to announce a capital campaign, said Stephen Nelson, higher education expert and senior scholar in the Leadership Alliance at Brown. Simmons, who assumed office in 2001, launched the Campaign for Academic Enrichment the following year. That campaign, the largest in the University’s history, raised $1.6 billion by its conclusion in 2010. The University should be able to build on that, said Chancellor Thomas Tisch ’76, adding that Simmons left behind a base of alums both energized and optimistic about Brown’s potential. “The alumni and donors feel that Brown can do things and want to participate (in that),” he said. “She basical-

ly instilled the deep sense among the Brown community that we can believe in ourselves.” Though it is clear that areas like financial aid and engineering are important to Brown’s growth, how exactly to address those needs is something to be researched and discussed, Paxson said. “I have no doubt that financial aid will be a component of the next campaign. The hard question is going to be, how far can we go with that, and where to prioritize it among all the other needs, and that’s something that’s going to come out of the planning,” Paxson said. “Would I like to be able to say right now, ‘We will be need-blind for everybody within five years?’ I would love it if I could,” she added. “Will we be able to do that, given the financial realities of where we are? I don’t know, and we’ll see.”

S e l f - S ta r t e r

Courtesy of Brown University

Professor of History Robert Self spoke with The Herald about his new book, the history of family values and the current election. See page 3.

purchase Thayer St. property By caroline flanagan senior staff writer

Fairview Inc., a University subsidiary, is planning to purchase the 271 Thayer St. property that currently houses City Sports, said Mark Nickel, senior editor and writer at the Office of Public Affairs and University Relations. While the University does not pay property taxes on any building used for educational purposes, Fairview will pay taxes on the building so long as it is not used for such purposes. The University has not yet released plans for the property, Nickel said. Brown uses Fairview to control forprofit entities until it wants to buy them, said Will Touret, former president of the College Hill Neighborhood Association. The University also owns the Brook Street strip mall that includes Bagel Gourmet and the Providence Police station and can arrange for Fairview to sell its properties as needed, opening up future real estate options. Should the University acquire the property from Fairview, the city would cease to receive revenue for the property. “I can only assume that Brown is looking to control that block in the long term,” Touret said. Real estate tycoon Ed Bishop ’54 P’86 P’91, who owns many Thayer Street properties, said the purchase will not have a big effect on the College Hill neighborhood. “(City Sports) has been struggling, there’s not a lot of parking on Thayer Street and it’s not a big-time sports store,” he said, but the store should survive through the end of its lease, which ends in three years.

city & state


2 city & state c alendar Today

OCT. 23

12 P.m.

ToMORROW

oct. 24

7 p.m.

Adam Liptak Supreme Court talk

Concentration Fair Sayles Hall 7 p.m.

Nail Painting and “Will and Grace”

An Evening with Julie Bowen

LGBTQ Resource Center, Faunce

Salomon 101

menu SHARPE REFECTORY

VERNEy-WOOLLEY DINING HALL

LUNCH Sesame Chicken Wings, Pasta E Fagioli, Cajun Turkey Cutlet, Organic Red Rice with Papaya and Pineapple

Chinese Chicken Wings, Sticky Rice, Sweet and Sour Tofu, Mandarin Blend Vegetables, Raspberry Swirl Cookies

DINNER Seafood Cavatelli, Vegetable Stuffed Red Peppers, Broccoli Rabe, Baba Ghannooj, Mediterranean Orzo

Mayor’s new policy targets recidivism By Adam toobin Senior Staff Writer

Taubman Center, 67 George Street 8:30 p.m.

the brown daily herald Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Italian Beef Noodle Casserole, Artichoke and Red Pepper Frittata, Parslied Rice, Chocolate Cake

Sudoku

In response to increased reports of gun violence over the summer, Providence Mayor Angel Taveras announced that his administration will encourage the Providence Police Department to weigh in on parole decisions for inmates in Rhode Island. Though the police have always been able to object to an inmate’s parole, the new policy formalizes that power and establishes an official procedure. If the police believe an inmate who is up for parole “was involved in narcotics distribution or gang warfare on the street while in prison,” for example, they can write a letter to the parole board with information pertinent to the parole decision, said Public Safety Commissioner Steven Pare. He added that the new guidelines do not represent a failure of the Parole Board and that none of this summer’s incidents have been traced to parolees. Though the rate of violent crime as a whole did not increase over the summer, public outcry over a number of well-publicized shootings — including the city’s first triple homicide in several decades — prompted the mayor to renew his efforts to prevent gun violence, Pare said. The new initiative might make it harder for some inmates to leave prison through parole, but Pare said it is “not an attempt to block all inmates.” “We believe in parole … and programs like Open Doors that provide inmates a place to get jobs,” Pare said.

/ / Hockey page 1

Crossword

share — combine to spell success on the ice. “In my time, this is the most depth that we’ve had. It’s a good thing because it creates healthy competition,” he said. “What I see is a group of guys that is going to play together for one purpose.” Crowley also said a feeling of unity among the players will be a powerful force for the Bears. “From the seniors all the way down, the chemistry has been really good,” he said. “When you see everyone every day, it’s hard not to be best friends.” With the loss of last year’s captain and leading goal-scorer Jack Maclellan ’12 to the National Hockey League, much of the Bears’ scoring will have to come from returning forwards Chris Zaires ’13 and Matt Lorito ’15, Robertson said. He added that there are a host of players primed to break out offensively this season, including Ryan

/ / Violence page 8 bring broader awareness to this issue.”

But if an inmate’s release “is going to exacerbate the problem on the streets … the parole board should consider that information,” he added. The policy also represents an attempt to combat the high rates of recidivism that plague Rhode Island and much of the country. Within one year of release from incarceration in a Rhode Island Department of Corrections prison, 28 percent of former inmates were convicted of a new crime — around 10 percent below the national average. In Rhode Island, an additional 34 percent of inmates released in 2009 returned to jail as “awaiting trial detainees”, individuals who have been arrested but have not yet faced trial. Pare said the mayor aims to preempt crimes committed by or against recently released inmates by identifying and detaining individuals at risk of returning to crime. Steven Brown, executive director of the Rhode Island affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union, said he supports the new program in theory but is wary about its implementation. “Will there be an incentive, a knee-jerk incentive to object to more paroles than might be appropriate?” Rhode Island already has strict guidelines for its parole board, Brown said. “The statistics I’ve seen show the Rhode Island Parole Board was one of the strictest in the country in terms of individuals let out on parole,” he said. “One thing to keep in mind when one considers the ramifications of actions like this: Is the parole board being too cautious?” In 2012, 11 percent of total inmates

released received parole, while 86 percent of releases were mandatory because the individual had reached the end of his or her maximum sentence. Chairman of the Rhode Island Parole Board Kenneth Walker said a letter from the police opposing an inmate’s parole does not guarantee he or she will not be released. “No one can tell the parole board who to parole or who not to parole,” Walker said. “We receive recommendations from the Attorney General’s office all the time, but we don’t adhere to it,” he added. “We listen to it.” The problems of recidivism and high incarceration in general “cannot be solved by addressing one small aspect of larger issues,” Brown said. “The entire criminal justice system needs a lot of reform.” The new parole guidelines are one of a slew of the mayor’s initiatives to lower crime rates, including putting tougher gun laws back before the City Council in January, Pare said. The mayor said he wants Providence to resemble New York, where the residents know “if you carry a gun, you’ll face severe consequences,” he added. Taveras is also promoting the development of neighborhood crime watch groups that can work with the police to lower crime rates, the Providence Journal reported. The Providence Police have fielded over 900 reports of violent crime through September of this year — including 15 gun-related homicides, 113 rapes and more than 300 robberies.

Jacobson ’15, Massimo Lamacchia ’15, Matt Harlow ’15 and Garnet Hathaway ’14. Whittet said the Bears’ playing style emphasizes defensive strength. “I always want to concentrate on the defensive side out,” he said. “That’s what we’ve been preaching and practicing in the first few weeks on the ice.” Robertson will team up with fellow returner Matt Wahl ’14 to protect goalies Anthony Borelli ’13 and Marco De Filippo ’14. The Bears will bring five newcomers to the ice this year. Robertson said all five will be competitive right away. “They make our team a lot better,” he said. “All of them are really well-rounded players and they’re jumping into the systems we play and fit really quickly.” Mark Naclerio ’16, one of the new Bears, said his transition to collegiate hockey has been seamless thanks to the upperclassmen. “The older guys are

really helpful to the younger guys. As a freshman, the (upperclassmen) have all made me really feel welcome and help me out whenever we need it,” he said. The Bears open the season this weekend, playing host to the Ivy League Showcase at the Meehan Auditorium. Bruno will square off against Princeton Friday evening and play Saturday night against either Yale or Dartmouth. Robertson said the team’s goals for the weekend are clear. “Two wins is what we’re looking for,” he said. “We’re looking for a good start, then to keep on rolling from that.” Crowley said despite the low expectations expressed through preseason polls, the team’s goals remain the same. “Win Ivies. Win ECAC. Make the NCAA Tournament,” he said. He added that it is up to this year’s squad to change the team’s reputation and “establish ourselves as that team in the country … that teams hate to play.”

DeBare noted that the 16-24 age group is at the greatest risk for domestic violence, so the group focuses much of its

educational outreach at colleges. Data from the National Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence show that rape is the most underreported crime in America, with only 16 percent of women notifying law enforcement officials of their assaults. This percentage is even lower among college students — less than 5 percent report their rapes or attempted rapes, while 20 to 25 percent of collegeage women will be victims of rape or attempted rape during their college career. Men are also victims of sexual violence, the center reports, estimating that one in 33 men will be the victim of a completed or attempted rape during his lifetime. Information is key to preventing abuse, said Bita Shooshani, coordinator of sexual assault prevention and advocacy at Health Services.

daily herald the Brown

www.browndailyherald.com 195 Angell St., Providence, R.I.

Claire Peracchio, President Rebecca Ballhaus, Vice President

Danielle Marshak, Treasurer Siena DeLisser, Secretary

The Brown Daily Herald (USPS 067.740) is an independent newspaper serving the Brown University community daily since 1891. It is published Monday through Friday during the academic year, excluding vacations, once during Commencement and once during Orientation by The Brown Daily Herald, Inc. Single copy free for each member of the community. POSTMASTER please send corrections to P.O. Box 2538, Providence, RI 02906. Periodicals postage paid at Providence, R.I. Subscription prices: $280 one year daily, $140 one semester daily. Copyright 2012 by The Brown Daily Herald, Inc. All rights reserved. editorial

(401) 351-3372 herald@browndailyherald.com

Business

(401) 351-3260 gm@browndailyherald.com


arts & culture 3

the brown daily herald Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Film documents Chinese adoptees struggling with identity By sheza atiq contributing writer

A “banana” is how Haley Butler chooses to describe herself — “I’m yellow from the outside, but white from the inside.” Butler is one of four teenage girls who were adopted from China and featured in the award-winning documentary “Somewhere Between,” produced and directed by Linda Goldstein Knowlton ’87. Chronicling the lives and experiences of the four girls, the film opened in movie theaters this summer across the country and is currently being screened at the Cable Car Cinema and Cafe. At an evening showing at the theater Sunday, several cast and crew members, including Butler and Goldstein Knowlton, presented a brief panel discussion following the screening. Goldstein Knowlton, who concentrated in neuroscience at Brown, said she never imagined she would venture into the field of filmmaking. Though the art of storytelling had always held tremendous appeal, it was not until she became secretary of the American Film Institute in 1998 that Goldstein Knowlton said she realized she could tell stories through her films. Her daughter, Ruby, whom she adopted from China in 2006, inspired “Somewhere Between,” the first documentary she drafted on her own, she said. Goldstein Knowlton said she wanted to explore questions of

identity and what it would mean for her daughter to be a teenager, particularly since “adolescence is tricky for everyone — a time when all you want to do is fit in and all you want to do is stand out.” To choose subjects for her film, Goldstein Knowlton reached out to several organizations, including Families with Children from China, and selected four girls, including Butler, to follow for three years. The girls, who ranged in age from 13 to 15, hail from Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and California. “I wanted the girls from all across the United States” to maintain “geographical diversity,” Goldstein Knowlton said. A senior at the Nashville School of the Arts, Butler said she was eager to participate in the film because it “was something I could do for the younger generation.” Describing the film’s themes as “universal,” Butler said she hoped her story would continue to be a source of support and aid for girls in similar positions. “No matter what background you come from, everybody has felt like they don’t fit in at some point,” she said. Butler was one of the young girls in the film who set out to seek her biological family and Chinese roots. Though not all girls embarked on the quest to reach out to their biological parents, they were united in their exploration of complex issues such as race, identity, adoption and biology. Erin Baker, one of the attendees

COURTESY OF LINDA GOLDSTEIN knowlton

In her new documentary film “Somewhere Between,” Linda Goldstein Knowlton ’87 records the complex identities of four Chinese adoptees in the United States during their teenage years. at the event, said this was the second time she saw the film, first viewing it a few months earlier with her 16-yearold daughter whom she had also adopted from China. Baker, who brought her parents to the event, said it was “personal and felt like (a) near identical situation.” She said the documentary did a great job of addressing misconceptions of China’s One-Child Policy, which resulted in the influx of abandoned babies, particularly young girls. Baker said she would recommend the film to everyone, adding that it was a produc-

tion that would reverberate not just with families of Chinese adoptees, but with the international adoption community in general. “Somewhere Between” draws in people of different backgrounds — even those unfamiliar with the experiences of adoption. Though its exploration of multiple issues negates the presence of an underlying theme that ties everything together, the film is nonetheless successful in its emotional appeal. Goldstein Knowlton said she didn’t have a particular question or set of ideas when she began filming but

instead “threw out all fishing lines” in order to be open to whatever direction the documentary took. Goldstein Knowlton added that she has been thrilled by the response the film has generated from different communities and said she hopes it starts conversations about the different types of families in place today — especially since adoption is a common but yet-to-be-normalized phenomenon. “We’re all in this planet together, and the more we can do to understand and respect each other is important.”

Faculty profile: Q&A with professor Robert Self By Alexia Ramirez contributing Writer

Robert Self, an associate professor of history, recently published a new book entitled “All in the Family: The Realignment of American Democracy Since the 1960s.” Last summer, he also wrote an op-ed for the New York Times that assessed the state of the contemporary Republican party in the context of social reform movements in the 1960s. As part of a new series highlighting faculty members, The Herald sat down with him to talk about his work, the evolution of politics over the past half-century and the current election cycle.

campus news

The Herald: What drew you to the topic of your new book? Self: I was struck by how much of our contemporary politics involved questions of gender, sexuality, family and how … most of my own life, this seemed to be a principal terrain on which Americans talked about the country, what mattered and the national government. And I wanted to understand why that was the case. And second … there had emerged within American politics a distinction that I found to be artificial between culture and values on the one hand and economics on the other. All of my training as a historian convinced me that these were not separate things, and so I wanted to try to understand how they came to be talked about as separate. How would you summarize the key points of your book to a layperson? I think I would start with that point.

One of the ways, even the primary way, that Americans talked about and contended over the welfare state since the late 1960s has been through arguments about the family, arguments about gender roles, arguments about sex, sexuality and morality. One of the points of contention over the future of the national state itself has been its role in families. And so, family politics — the politics of the family are really the politics of the state, the politics of what Americans imagine and believe about the national state and the national government. So that’s kind of the main theme. But more particularly … the transformation that I examine is how in the early 1960s — and this really dated to the New Deal 1930s — the heterosexual breadwinner nuclear family was a liberal political project. By the mid-1980s, the heterosexual male breadwinner nuclear family was really a conservative political project. And I try to show how over two or three decades that transformation happens. How is the topic of your book relevant to today? It’s relevant because we live in a world, both a social world and a political world, that has largely been made by the three decades of battles over these questions. We live with the consequences of choices and decisions and fights that are deeply, deeply historical. That doesn’t mean that … history presents us with an easy set of choices for the future. But it is important to understand that the choices we face, the choices the country faces now, are constrained by decisions — decisions that have been made in the past and battles that have been under way for four decades now.

How is this “realignment” affecting the state of American politics and culture today? There’s a lot of ways to answer that question. … I use the term “American democracy” because I am trying to push our understanding of politics away from a strictly partisan battle between Republicans and Democrats. I am arguing that the shifts that take place in American politics are really about the whole. The discourse of politics has shifted. I think that one of the principle consequences of that is that it has become exceedingly difficult for liberals to defend a coherent world view. It’s not because I think liberals don’t have access to a coherent world view, but the politics of gender, sex and family have rendered it extremely difficult. Liberals have struggled with how to overcome the divisiveness of some of those fights, to land on coherent and defensible politics. The other way the realignment is relevant is that it has, I think, veiled something quite essential. That when we argue about the family, gender roles and sexuality, we are in effect arguing about how we imagine the social contract — how we imagine our obligations to one another, our obligation to the collective body politic and what collective vision we have as a society moving forward. These debates and controversies are not simply over a few moral questions; they are deeply imbedded in a much larger discussion about what the social contract is. What are your thoughts on the current election cycle? (Laughs) My thoughts are depressing. That’s a huge question. … I’m in the business of writing history and not so much in the business of calling the day to day

dynamics of political races. I think the United States is in a fairly momentous period of transformation, and whether we are at the beginning of that period of momentous transformation or we are toward the end of it, we don’t know. This is kind of a standard historian’s answer to this type of question: We won’t know for another 50 years or 100 years. I do think that the 2012 election will be seen fundamentally as part of a major transformation in how Americans relate to one another and to the national state. I can’t say whether I think we are at the very beginning of that or somewhere in the middle or toward the very end but I think historians will look back and see it as a pivotal election in that process. What do you think are the current social movements and changes that will affect political alignment in the future? You know, I have to be honest, I don’t see a social movement on the American political landscape right now that strikes me as capable of dramatic political realignment. Some of that is my own increasingly cynical view that, especially at the national level, politics is so money-driven that it is actually quite difficult for true social movements to have an enormous impact. Most of the social movements that we think about — perhaps environmentalism, Occupy Wall Street — at least on the left, they have either been relatively incorporated or institutionalized so they’re not really social movements in a true sense. Or they are very small and easily contained in the way Occupy Wall Street has been. And on the right, these days most of the social movements are actually financed and driven from the top down. They are sort of grassroots, in a certain sense, but they

courtesy of brown university

are also well financed by these enormous collections of cash that are out there. So, I guess I’m not especially optimistic at this particular moment that there is a social movement out there on the landscape that seems poised to forge any kind of realignment. What do you foresee politics evolving into five, 10 years from now? Well, look, we are in a post-Citizens United world, and I don’t know that anyone — and I would include political scientists and those who spend every day of their lives studying the current political system — would tell you that they know where things are going. This is the first major election cycle since the Citizens United decision and what we have seen is an enormous amount of relatively unaccountable cash coming into the election cycle. Where that is going to go, I think, is very, very difficult to predict. I think it is easy to say it’s probably not going to be good for any kind of small democratic process, but what it is going to look like is difficult to say. I think that decision marks a real fundamental departure for the way politics works, and we will just have to see what happens.


4 shaping the presidency / / Presidents page 1 according to Jane Lancaster PhD’98, a visiting assistant professor of history who is writing a book about the University’s history to be released for its 250th anniversary in 2014. Today, while Paxson serves as a first-year adviser to two students, her overall involvement in teaching and the particulars of daily governance will not be as intimate as in Manning’s era. Instead, Paxson faces the duties of an office defined more by its power to shape — and to finance — the University’s future goals. From Baptist ministers to PhDs At the outset of the University’s founding, presidents were responsible for every aspect of the University’s administration. In the school’s first years, Manning was the University’s only employee, Lancaster said, adding that even as the student body grew, presidents functioned as teachers for most of the 19th century. The presidency also came attached

clear. In 1926, in a sharp break with tradition, William Faunce, president from 1899-1929, persuaded the Corporation to remove the charter’s Baptist requirement. The Corporation subsequently turned to hiring trained academics who could lead Brown’s transformation into a national research university. Instead of selecting Baptist ministers, presidential search committees pursued candidates with strong academic credentials. Since 1937, every president except Gordon Gee, who served as president from 1998-2000, has held a PhD. “You want a scholar,” Joukowsky said. “You want a well-educated person.” Faunce’s fight to end the religious requirement was not the first instance of a president’s push-and-pull with the Corporation, nor would it be the last. Elisha Benjamin Andrews 1870, who served as president from 1889-98, played a key role in expanding the size of the student body and creating the Women’s College, which later became Pembroke College. But as a liberal who publicly voiced his political views, he angered the

“When I came in 1950, the president knew people better.”

George Borts Professor of Economics

with a major prerequisite, Lancaster noted. The charter originally mandated that presidents be Baptist ministers, a requirement stemming from the faith of many of the University’s founders. “It wasn’t just the administration” that presidents were charged with handling, said Artemis Joukowsky ’55 P’87, a former chancellor from 1997-98 — “it was the promulgation of Baptist beliefs.” As a result of the Baptist requirement, presidents tangled with the Corporation from the very beginning. Over time, religion became a wedge dividing clerical presidents and secular students, most of whom were not Baptists, according to Lancaster. As Brown moved into the 20th century and sought to become a national university rather than a small liberal arts college, the need to pivot away from hiring ministers became

conservative, pro-business Corporation members. The Corporation denounced Andrews for his outspokenness, and he submitted his resignation under pressure from board members. But the episode sparked a faculty and student movement at Brown for academics’ freedom of speech, and the Corporation subsequently asked Andrews to withdraw his resignation — a major turning point in the University’s balance of power, according to Lancaster. The Corporation’s submission to the campus’ requests demonstrated that presidents could draw on their personal popularity with faculty and students to be effective, she said. After Andrews won his fight with the Corporation, presidents enjoyed largely free reign over the University’s governance for much of the first half of

the brown daily herald Tuesday, October 23, 2012

the 20th century, according to Laninin asdfadsfcaster, who called this “the era of benign dictatorship.” ‘Benevolent dictators’ With an influx of federal funding for research and the University’s continued expansion, presidents in the mid-20th century exercised greater authority over a modernizing agenda, implementing curriculum changes, extensive building projects and higher education reforms. By many accounts, the president who defined this period of rapid expansion was Henry Wriston, who ran the University from 1937-55. “Wriston was good because he was both an administrator and an intellectual,” Lancaster said, adding that he led sweeping curriculum changes by urging professors to offer courses forcing students to think critically rather than just “regurgitate” information. Wriston presided over the University at a time of transition, as the student body grew in size and as federal government money poured into the University to fund scientific research projects during World War II and the Cold War. In response to unprecedented growth, Wriston pioneered far-reaching changes, including the establishment of smallsize seminar courses that emphasized discussion. The presidency retained its heightened power under Wriston’s successor, Barnaby Keeney, who occupied the position from 1955-66. “He was considered something of an autocrat,” said Thomas Banchoff, a professor of mathematics who has been at the University since 1967. “He really ran the show.” Keeney was instrumental in enlarging the campus to accommodate more students, and under his tenure the University purchased the land on which many athletic fields and buildings sit today. During his 10-year term, he was a highly effective fundraiser, doubling the University’s endowment and tripling the budget. According to George Borts, a professor of economics who came to Brown in 1950, Keeney also supported proposals to expand the biology department and establish a medical school. “It took a lot of nerve and a lot of energy to get that done,” Borts said. But while Wriston and Keeney —

Herald archives

Former president Barnaby Keeney, like predecessor Henry Wriston, expanded the scope of the University presidency in the 1950s and ’60s. dubbed “benevolent dictators” by Lancaster — exercised robust presidential power in defining the University’s expansion and creating fundraising initiatives, both still remained involved in the University’s day-to-day activities, including running faculty meetings and interviewing prospective hires. “When I came in 1950, the president

sponsibilities. Transition and turmoil The student body’s growth and a slowly burgeoning bureaucracy both constituted external pressures that lessened the president’s ability to fully participate in daily University governance. In the face of these pressures, more of

“One thing that successful presidents need to do is make alliances with powerful people.”

Jane Lancaster PhD’98 University historian

knew people better,” Borts said. As the University expanded in size over the second half of the century, administrators began to take on more and more of the president’s former re-

HERALD archives

President Ray Heffner, who served from 1966-69, announced his resignation after a number of high-profile campus conflicts surrounding the development of the New Curriculum. He stepped down the day after faculty members voted to accept the policy changes.

the president’s responsibilities shifted to the provost, the dean of the college and the vice president for student life, Joukowsky said. New pressure from students mobilizing for greater racial diversity further diverted the president’s focus from normal administrative matters. The late 1960s were ridden with student protests on issues such as the low admission level of minority students. In 1968, a group of black students walked off campus to promote increased recruitment of black students, who at the time constituted only .03 percent of the student body. Many presidents “were slow to figure out what to do with student protests,” said Luther Spoehr, senior lecturer in the education department. But, he added, the administration was ultimately receptive to students’ concerns. “There were ears that were willing to hear,” he said. A year later, the University admitted 127 black applicants into a class of 1,151 new students. Ray Heffner, who served as president from 1966-69, and his successor Donald Hornig, president from 1970-76, faced a host of crises, including fights over the New Curriculum and tensions over the integration of non-white and female students into the University, according to Banchoff. “We always had a crisis every week,” Banchoff said. In addition to social movements and the ensuing policy changes that demanded presidents’ attention, academic reform also / / Presidents page 5


the brown daily herald Tuesday, October 23, 2012

/ / Presidents page 4 characterized this transitional period with the implementation of the New Curriculum in 1969. The elimination of core requirements and introduction of the Satisfactory/No Credit grade option proved too drastic for Heffner, president at the time. He resigned the day after the faculty voted to adopt the changes, concluding what The Herald in 1987 called a “stormy presidency much affected by student protest.” By many accounts, Heffner and Hornig both struggled with this array of pressures and changes. Arnold Weinstein, professor of comparative literature who came to Brown in 1968, said that in a time of weak presidential leadership, faculty members gained greater control over University governance. “The faculty felt more empowered (then) than they do today,” Weinstein said. “Even if a president was weak, I think it led to some interesting developments at Brown.” A sharp contrast from the autocratic presidents only decades earlier, the presidency as shaped by the tumultuous times of the ’60s and ’70s had almost completely shifted away from day-today governance, instead focusing on larger-picture policies as demanded by campus protest. Financing a global university Simultaneously, a larger student body, combined with wartime economic pressures, forced presidents to prioritize fundraising over most other initiatives. After several years of student rallies, presidents faced a growing need for funding to support efforts to diversify the student body and increase financial aid. The unprecedented growth spurred the rise of an academic bureaucracy, with new deans and administrators managing specialized areas of University governance. “It’s become a large, corporate enterprise,” Borts said, noting today’s vastly increased number of new posts to aid the president in running day-to-day operations. “The president has taken on the role of being the principal fundraiser,” Joukowsky said of the current position. While financing the University has always been the president’s concern, the necessity of fundraising became more visible at a time of budgetary constraints, as federal research funds to the University were sharply cut. “The presidents who were here at the end of the Vietnam War had a very difficult time,” Borts said. So much was the financial strain in 1974 that Hornig announced a plan that would cut Brown’s budget by 15 percent over three years and get rid of 75 faculty positions. The result was “the greatest furor in Brown’s recent history and climaxed in (spring of ’75) with a four-day student strike,” The Herald reported in 1975. At this time of budgetary turmoil, Howard Swearer assumed the presidency in 1977 and earned respect for his attempt to get the University back on track. “Swearer was very successful in mending a lot of the broken fences that had happened in the early ’70s,” Lancaster said, citing Swearer’s work to build a network of wealthy donors to grow the endowment and his push to “internationalize” the University by establishing the Watson Institute for International Studies. Faculty members praised Swearer for stabilizing Brown and balancing constituencies including students, faculty and alums. “He was attuned to what

shaping the presidency 5 was happening at other universities in the country,” Banchoff said. Weinstein agreed, calling Swearer the first successful president he had seen at the University. “He was largely occupied with fundraising and financial matters. That is what a president is supposed to do,” Edward Beiser, former professor of political science, told The Herald in 1987. “Swearer made it possible for the next president to pay more attention to the details of education.” In his report to the Corporation before he resigned in 1987, Swearer emphasized the need for Brown to “stay the course” and keep its distinctive curriculum despite “external critics during this period of neo-conservative reaction.” Leading with charisma As the University increasingly looked beyond the Van Wickle gates, charisma became a valued quality in presidential candidates for the role of “fundraiserin-chief.” In their efforts to garner donations from the wealthy, presidents needed to be skilled networkers. The enhancement of the University’s global reputation continued to gain em-

herald archives

Former president Howard Swearer, who assumed office in 1977, promoted internationalization and increased fundraising initiatives. Upon resignation, he urged the University to “stay the course.” kowsky said, and few better recognized this importance than the most recent president Ruth Simmons. Among Simmons’ many accomplishments were an increase in the size of the faculty by 20 percent and the establishment of need-blind admissions. But while her ambitious agenda, officially entitled the Plan for Academic Enrichment, was a defining characteristic of her presidency, her colleagues often cite

“You need to be able to develop a vision for Brown’s future (and) find a way to implement that vision.”

Stephen Robert ’62 P’91 Former Chancellor

phasis under Swearer’s successor, Vartan Gregorian. After serving as the head of the New York Public Library, Gregorian came to Brown with an aptitude for public speaking and a vast network of wealthy contacts he tapped into as the University’s president. With his powerful persona, Gregorian became “known all over the world,” said Stephen Robert ’62 P’91, who served as chancellor from 1998 to 2007. Strongly opinionated and outspoken on a national level, Gregorian was “a force among the Ivy League presidents just because of the strength of his personality,” Banchoff said. And at a time when fundraising had become paramount, Gregorian succeeded in growing the University’s endowment. In keeping with the tendency of presidential search committees to react in a counter-push to previous administrations, Gregorian’s charisma was a marked departure from Swearer, according to Lancaster. “He was eloquent in a way that Howard Swearer was not,” Weinstein said, adding that Gregorian aimed to make Brown one of the “biggest intellectual powerhouses on the East Coast.” While Gregorian’s successor, Gordon Gee, continued the shift to aggressive fundraising, his term was too short to make a major imprint. Gee, who served as president from 1998 to 2000, came to Providence with a law degree and a background running large state universities. An unusual choice given his lack of experience with liberal arts colleges, Gee ended his term on a sour note when, after just two years on College Hill, he accepted a higher-paying offer to serve as chancellor of Vanderbilt University, Banchoff said. The importance of long-term connections has increased as the University’s expansion has accelerated. “One thing that successful presidents need to do is make alliances with powerful people,” Lancaster said. An understanding of the University’s resources and constituencies is key to making substantial change, Jou-

her personality first as one of the biggest influences on her success. “She’s been extraordinarily successful with the undergraduates in the warmth and affection they feel for her,” Weinstein said, adding that her eloquence and warmth make her “a difficult act to follow.” Simmons’ charm also allowed her to establish relationships across different interest groups of alums, faculty and students. A president has to “be able to connect the dots” between these

groups, Joukowsky said. Finding a vision From 1764 to 2012, the University has undergone a series of developments and expansions that continue to change and shape the role of the president today. University Hall’s chief executive no longer serves as a Baptist minister focusing on overseeing day-to-day events, but rather as the head of a globalized financial operation. Gregorian’s charisma and Simmons’ long-term strategic planning allowed them to thrive in this new, networking-heavy era of the Brunonian presidency. And while each president has a unique approach, those who were most effective shared a sense of innovation in shaping the University’s trajectory. As a successful president of Brown, “you need to be able to develop a vision for Brown’s future,” Robert said, and “find a way to implement that vision.” The success of this vision is specific to Brown. The rest of this series will examine the influences of approaches taken by comparable universities’ presidents to advance their own institutions’ missions, as well as explore the University’s most recent presidential transitions to offer context to Paxson’s initial months as the institution’s 19th president.

Presidents since Barnaby Keeney Ray Heffner 1966-69

Donald Hornig 1970-76

Howard Swearer 1977-88

Vartan Gregorian 1989-97

Gordon Gee 1998-2000

Ruth Simmons 2001-12

Photos courtesy of brown.edu

This series will examine the University’s top post by looking back at past presidents, outward to Brown’s peers and forward to the role President Christina Paxson has inherited.

Shaping the Presidency

A three-part series

Tomorrow: Many institutional changes in recent University history have come from collaboration with and direct influence of other universities, making Brown both a product of higher education trends and a distinctive institution in the Ivy League. Thursday: Paxson and former president Ruth Simmons inherited Brown under vastly different circumstances. This story will highlight how context shapes the timeline and content of a presidential agenda.

comics Class Notes | Philip Trammell

Fly By Night | Adam Kopp


6 editorial & letter Editorial The dubious sagacity of college rankings Last week, Brown received the dubious honor of being proclaimed “the number one college in the world” by the Best 50 Colleges list, a poorly-formatted, stencil-font website that sprang onto students’ radar via Facebook. While we do not believe this is a ranking meant to be taken seriously — though kudos to whoever made it and put Harvard second — its methodology, including points awarded for “public perception,” “famous people who attended the school” and “things that actually pertain to students,” provides a brilliant satirical slant on the absurdity of the current college ranking systems. As higher education has become more competitive, so has the struggle to be ranked higher on lists compiled every year by various news outlets including Forbes and USA Today. These rankings pit universities against each other in an attempt to compare them against a flat set of homogenous factors, like tuition, freshman retention rates and “undergraduate academic reputation,” according to the New Yorker. Applying the same baseline of judgment to every institution is deeply problematic — a small liberal arts school, for example, is going to have very different numbers and a different holistic approach to education than a large research-based institution. What might be the “best” college for one student might be a terrible experience for another. For that matter, what factors make a university “the best”? The number of accolades awarded to faculty? The number of students employed immediately after graduation? Furthermore, high-ranking status could encourage institutions to falsify numbers they provide to move higher on the list, as occurred with Claremont McKenna College this year. This is not to say that rankings are entirely devoid of meaning. For many, especially high school students with limited access to resources, the rankings provide a good starting point to find schools that might suit them best. The surfeit of choices available can often be overwhelming, and some kind of stratification can be used to help make order of the hundreds of schools vying for attention from prospective students. However, placing a ubiquitous framework on all the colleges in the country results in a list that is skewed toward a certain set of values: namely, those of the makers of the lists. None of this would matter quite as much if society didn’t imbue these arbitrary rankings with such power. Combine the pride displayed by many students last week at being proclaimed number one by someone with no legitimate authority with the dismay and intense speculation last year when Brown slipped from first to third on the Princeton Review’s “Happiest Students” list. Whenever Brown rises or falls a place on any list, it causes a certain amount of concern or jubilation. The simple fact is that these rankings don’t affect someone’s individual experience in the slightest. Does knowing that Brown is no longer considered the “happiest” university in the country make someone personally less happy here? While the happiness of students and the pressure to be happy at Brown is certainly a subject that merits discussion, this requires a thoughtful and multifaceted approach rather than looking at a number on a list. Brown’s place in the perceived hierarchy of colleges prompts interesting questions about how our educational system and values contrast with other undergraduate models. This is something that cannot be conveyed by statistics, especially within a system that differentiates between the strengths offered by different approaches to education. We encourage students to look at these rankings from a critical perspective and seriously evaluate why, if, in fact at all, they matter. We may all have a competitive streak, but it should not be allowed to blind us. Editorials are written by The Herald’s editorial page board. Send comments to editorials@browndailyherald.com.

t h e b row n da i ly h e r a l d Editor-in-Chief

Managing Editors

Senior Editors

Claire Peracchio

Rebecca Ballhaus Nicole Boucher

Tony Bakshi Natalie Villacorta

editorial Sarah Mancone Arts & Culture Editor Joseph Rosales Arts & Culture Editor Elizabeth Carr City & State Editor Amy Rasmussen City & State Editor Aparna Bansal Features Editor Jordan Hendricks Features Editor Lucy Feldman News Editor Shefali Luthra News Editor Alexandra Macfarlane News Editor Sahil Luthra Science & Research Editor Jake Comer Sports Editor Lindor Qunaj Sports Editor Sam Rubinroit Assistant Sports Editor Dan Jeon Editorial Page Editor Annika Lichtenbaum Editorial Page Editor Lucas Husted Opinions Editor Garret Johnson Opinions Editor Jared Moffat Opinions Editor Greg Jordan-Detamore Special Projects Graphics & Photos Emily Gilbert Photo Editor Sam Kase Photo Editor Tom Sullivan Photo Editor Jonathan Bateman Sports Photo Editor Production Copy Desk Chief Olivia Conetta Assistant Copy Chief Sara Palasits Design Editor Kyle McNamara Design Editor Julia Shube Assistant Design Editor Brisa Bodell Assistant Design Editor Einat Brenner Web Producer Neal Poole

Business General Managers Siena DeLisser Danielle Marshak

Office Manager Shawn Reilly

Editorial cartoon b y a n g e l i a wa n g

Follow us on Twitter! @the_herald quote of the day

“We always had a crisis every week.”

— Mathematics Professor Thomas Banchoff

Directors Julia Kuwahara Samuel Plotner Nikita Khadloya Angel Lee

the brown daily herald Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Sales Finance Alumni Relations Business Development

See presidents on page 1.

Managers Justin Lee Kaivan Shroff Gregory Chatzinoff Luka Ursic Alison Pruzan Elizabeth Gordon David Winer

Human Resources Research & Development Collections Finance Operations Alumni Engagement Fundraising Marketing

Post- magazine Clay Aldern Jenny Carr

Editor-in-Chief Editor-in-Chief

BLOG DAILY HERALD Matt Klimerman Meredith Bilski

Editor-in-Chief Managing Editor

facebook.com/browndailyherald

@the_herald

thebdh.org

C ORRE C T I ON S P o lic y The Brown Daily Herald is committed to providing the Brown University community with the most accurate information possible. Corrections may be submitted up to seven calendar days after publication. C o mm e n ta r y P O L I C Y The editorial is the majority opinion of the editorial page board of The Brown Daily Herald. The editorial viewpoint does not necessarily reflect the views of The Brown Daily Herald, Inc. Columns, letters and comics reflect the opinions of their authors only. L e t t e r s t o t h e Edi t o r P o lic y Send letters to letters@browndailyherald.com. Include a telephone number with all letters. The Herald reserves the right to edit all letters for length and clarity and cannot assure the publication of any letter. Please limit letters to 250 words. Under special circumstances writers may request anonymity, but no letter will be printed if the author’s identity is unknown to the editors. Announcements of events will not be printed. adv e r t isi n g P o lic y The Brown Daily Herald, Inc. reserves the right to accept or decline any advertisement at its discretion.


opinions 7

the brown daily herald Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Work ban for grads bad for students, U., future By Andrew Tobolowsky Guest Columnist As many of you may be aware, the Graduate School has recently proposed establishing a firm limit on outside work for graduate students, capping it at 20 hours a semester. Not 20 hours a week, though I can certainly understand how your eye would read that for you. Twenty hours a semester — which works out to around 1.5 hours a week. A little background: Peter Weber, dean of the graduate school, claims that Brown PhD students receive a generous salary. This is true in the sense that many programs in the country offer no stipend and that ours are comparable to those of our peer institutions. But it isn’t, especially for liberal arts PhD candidates, a lot of money. It is not generous in the sense that car repairs, medical bills or even buying a new pair of jeans are borne with equanimity. We are grateful, and we knew what we were signing up for. But that doesn’t magically make the amount we’re paid enough. Grad students are, like many people these days, a debt-ridden population. Many of us have families to support. All of us have incidental costs. This is hardly an uncommon story in America today. We are people typically in our mid-20s and early 30s who are trying to live our lives on a shoestring. Unlike most of the rest of America, what we are facing through this policy is a world in which we

will be expressly forbidden from doing what we have to do to make ends meet. Unfortunately, our cars will not stop breaking, nor our clothes stop fraying, because we’re not allowed to make more money. We will not be able to avoid all accidents and injuries. And our kids will need what kids need. Simply put, if we cannot afford that and stay here, we cannot stay here. We are told that the purpose of this new rule, if and when enacted, is part of Grad School’s overarching efforts to keep grad

is a part-time job in the sense that taking a shower every other day is a part-time job. We’re talking about being allowed, when we need to, to bring home a little extra money. And we’re not talking about a lot of hours. In my experience, many grad students work at the Writing Center or the Sheridan Center for Teaching and Learning, which typically employs them six to nine hours a week. Six to nine hours a week for a job that is skill- and resume-building, that contributes enormously to this community and that

We’re talking about being allowed to work more than 1.5 hours a week, which is a part-time job in the sense that taking a shower every other day is a part-time job. students on track, thereby better utilizing Brown’s resources. This is a commendable goal. But there already exists a perfectly good set of objective criteria to keep grad students on track — the failure to meet such has resulted in more than a few expulsions. “Benchmarks” are tracked and annotated every semester, and the consequences are real. What is the point of such a restrictive additional measure other than a very nonBrown paternalism? The thing is, we are not talking about fulltime jobs here. We’re not even talking parttime jobs. We’re talking about being allowed to work more than 1.5 hours a week, which

still leaves 159 out of 168 hours available for whatever else needs to get done every week. It also exceeds the proposed limit on outside work by 7.5 hours a week. Do you see what I’m getting at here? This new rule, which would not govern our experiences at the Grad School, but would dictate how we may conduct our private lives, is the most invasive measure I’ve seen proposed in my eight years at Brown, both as a undergraduate in the class of 2007 and as a PhD candidate set to graduate in 2014. It states clearly and unequivocally that grad students are not to be trusted to find a way to balance what they need at home with

what they need to do at school. More than that, this rule would erect a dramatic barrier as to who will be free to imagine themselves getting a Brown PhD, costing the University top applicants. For who, with options, would choose Brown over a school where, when life demands it, they’ll be able to make a little extra cash to survive? And who can stare down the barrel of five to six years with no additional income, other than those with independent means? Is that who we want to be? A school whose PhD programs boast one of the highest bars to entry of any comparable school? Bottom line: If we allow the Grad School to so severely constrain not only our graduate school experience, but our own private lives, our PhD programs will become places not simply reserved for those few who can afford it, but for an even rarer group, those who know they’ll be able to afford it for the next half-decade, no matter what happens. And all to achieve a goal for which structures already exists, for which punishments are already firmly in place. We are not asking for more vacation days, we’re not asking an ice cream sundae bar in the grad lounge. We’re not asking for anything we’re going to enjoy all that much. We’re asking for the right to earn extra money when we have to, and the right to occasionally add lines to our resume in advance of an overcrowded job market. Andrew Tobolowsky GS likes to while away the hours with dead Semitic languages.

Redefining success in college Matt Brundage Opinions Columnist No matter how much we may have hated or loved our respective high school experiences, there was at least one comfort we all shared: Success was easy to define. Whether you attended Phillips Exeter Academy or a public school in a poor neighborhood, there was a fairly consistent success formula. You were to earn near-perfect grades, score very well on standardized tests and thrive in sports, clubs and other extracurricular activities. To be even more successful, you might have a large group of friends, a long-term relationship with someone and a great family life. By the time we reached Brown, most of us were under the impression that we were experts at being successful members of society. I hardly think it matters whether you believe that you arrived here solely based on your own hard work and merits or that you are more likely here thanks to your fortunate position in society and the help you received from others. What matters is that you recognize the power you now have and make a conscious decision about what you will do with that power to succeed. In high school, our selfish actions aligned perfectly with what was probably best for society. It makes moral and economic sense that students should put as much time and energy as possible into

building a flawless college resume, because the better educated you are, and the better educated you can safely assume you will become at a competitive university, the better equipped you will be to make yourself and the world around you a better place. In college, however, you must ask yourself whether your high school motivations were driven by a pure desire to make an impact on the world or by more primeval desires to feel worthy and accepted. The answer to this question will only be clear to you. For me, I found I had been proud-

or career choices can define you as one or the other — selfish or focused on helping others — but the motivations behind these decisions certainly can. A businessperson hoping to create thousands of jobs back in his or her hometown has a less selfish success formula than a doctor travelling to developing countries looking for a pat on the back. I cannot say whether it makes you “good” or “bad” to decide whether you will henceforth determine your own success on the basis of how well you’ve done for yourself versus what you’ve done for others. I can only

A businessperson hoping to create thousands of jobs back in his or her hometown has a less selfish success formula than a doctor travelling to developing countries looking for a pat on the back.

ly telling others that I had worked so hard in high school to make a difference in a mean and corrupt world, while internally my motivations were more selfish. These selfish motivations are far from gone and are not even something I care to eliminate completely, but at Brown I made a conscious decision to define my own success as something larger than personal accomplishments. I do not think certain concentrations

pose this question: If not now, then when will you ever think beyond yourself? You are surrounded by more brilliant and wonderful people now than you ever will be again, and if you do not currently feel the need to define success as something beyond personal accomplishments, then you probably never will. This conflict of determining your new definition of success makes picking a concentration or career all the more difficult.

You must weigh certain variables according to your own determined formula: how much money you might make in a certain field, where you can make the biggest impact, where your head best aligns with your heart and what sort of work you might actually enjoy finishing at the SciLi when middle America is just waking up for work. You have never had this much power nor this much knowledge at your fingertips, and you therefore have never had this much responsibility. I don’t necessarily mean responsibility in terms of your social and perhaps financial independence, but rather in terms of your responsibility to the world. As former president Ruth Simmons commented, “It extends to where you are at every moment of your life. Your education benefits society only if you are a drum major for human dignity.” Having such an incredible responsibility to the world is delightful as far as problems go, so I hesitate to call it a burden at all — but that’s precisely what it is. It is important that we take this burden seriously and consider what we owe not only to ourselves, but also to our fellow man. This will determine whether we are still the clearly successful people we were when it all came together on a perfect college resume. Matt Brundage ’15 is concentrating in economics and political science so that he can sound smart at cocktail parties. He can be reached at matthew_brundage@brown.edu.


daily herald sports tuesday the Brown

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

M. Water Polo

Bears splash to five straight victories in California By Maria Acabado Sports Staff Writer

The No. 12 men’s water polo team improved to 23-2 after going 5-0 this weekend in California at Santa Clara University’s “Rodeo” Tournament. With these victories, the team extended its winning streak to 14 games. “Every opponent that we’re playing is capable of beating us, but the reason we’ve been winning consistently is that the guys believe we can win, and they are executing,” said Head Coach Felix Mercado. “We’ve kept the big picture in mind,” said Dean Serure ’13. “Everything we’ve done is building towards a championship.” Bruno faced California Baptist University (13-9) first, gaining an early lead and maintaining control throughout the match. With a lead of 7-2 at halftime, Bruno held on strong to capture the victory and tallied second-half goals from Captain Svetozar Stefanovic ’13, Henry Fox ’15 and Serure. Fox led the offense against the Lancers with five goals, two assists and two steals, helping Bruno top the Lancers 17-9. The Bears found a closer match against No. 13 Air Force (10-9) the following day. Both teams went scoreless in the first quarter, but the Bears hit the scoreboard first with goals from Stefanovic, Fox and Matty Gallas ’16.

Air Force was able to capitalize on some defensive errors late in the match, but the team hung on for a close win, 6-5. “We made a lot of defensive mistakes, but the guys rallied around each other in those tight situations,” Mercado said. “Everyone else steps up and takes a little bit of responsibility to make sure that defensively we can continue to do the right thing.” Continuing their momentum, the team went on to defeat Fresno Pacific University (10-12) with an impressive performance from Stefanovic. The captain scored a career-high nine goals to lift the Bears past the Sunbirds 14-10. Goalkeeper Walker Shockley ’14 led the defense with 10 saves. Nick Deaver ’15 scored a quick goal in the opening minute of the match against No. 16 University of California at Davis (12-13). Though the Bears had a 7-3 advantage at halftime, the Aggies were able to close the gap before the end of the match. Goals from James McNamara ’14 and Ryan Gladych ’13 kept the match in Bruno’s favor, triumphing 10-6. Shockley came through defensively for a dozen saves. Bruno faced the tournament host, No. 19 Santa Clara (9-13), for the final match of the tournament. The Broncos fell behind 4-2 and were unable to mount a comeback. Their final goal evened the score at 7-7 less than two minutes into the fourth quarter, but the

EMILY GILBERT / HERALD

The men’s water polo team extended their winning streak to 14 games after going undefeated for five games at Santa Clara University’s “Rodeo” Tournament. The team credits its success to a strong drive to win. Bears came up with two more goals to take the win. “We made a ton of mistakes,” Mercado said about the Santa Clara match. “But they rallied, and it was pretty impressive. The guys proved this weekend that they can win against really good teams when not playing their best.” “While there is definitely an extra sense of urgency in the final month of the season, we have one goal,”

Serure said. “We want to make it to the NCAAs.” The team is preparing for the end of the season, which will send the Bears to three different championship tournaments. Bruno will travel to New Haven for the Ivy Championship this coming weekend and then compete at the Northern Division Championship the following weekend. “It would be amazing to get sup-

port at the home pool at the Northerns and get some extra motivation before the (CWPA) Eastern Championship,” Stefanovic said. “We’re playing every game like a championship game — that’s our mindset,” Mercado said. “We haven’t played our best yet, which is the best part about it. We’re not peaking yet, and we’re not satisfied yet. We’re in a really good position to accomplish our goals.”

Events raise awareness At Ivy tournament, Bruno upsets rivals about domestic violence M. Golf

By Connor Grealy Sports Staff Writer

The men’s fall golf season culminated in impressive fashion this weekend with victories over Harvard and Yale en route to a third-place finish in the Ivy League Match Play Championship hosted by Princeton. It was Bruno’s highest finish in the tournament since its creation in 2009. “I know our finish shocked a lot of people, but it didn’t shock the kids,” said Head Coach Michael Hughes. “It was obviously huge for us to get third,” said co-captain JD Ardell ’13. “Last tournament, when we beat Dartmouth, Cornell and Penn, we realized we could compete with these teams.” The match play format of the tournament, which differed from the typical stroke play tournaments in which the Bears often compete, factored into the team’s success. “For me personally, I like match play because every hole is its own match,” Justin Miller ’15 said. “Every hole is a fresh start.” “When you play match play, you can get away with two or three bad holes, unlike in stroke play,” Hughes said. The team, which in recent seasons has found itself competing against Cornell to avoid last place in the Ivy League, has now beaten five of the seven other Ivy League schools this fall, including Yale, the top seed at the Ivy Match Play Championship. “We’ve beaten just about all of (the Ivy League),” Hughes said. “We’re no longer the cellar dwellers we have been.”

“We couldn’t have had a better way to end our season other than winning (the Ivy Match Play Championship),” Miller said. “We’ve proven to ourselves that we can hang with everyone in our league.” Bruno entered the tournament as the sixth seed. Miller began the team’s weekend with a convincing victory over Harvard’s Michael Lai, winning his match 6 and 5. Peter Callas ’14, playing as the two seed for Bruno, had a strong performance as well, winning his match 5 and 4. Nelson Hargrove ’13.5, playing as the top seed, carried the Bears to victory over Harvard, 3-2, with a 1 up victory. Ardell and Jack Wilson ’16 dropped close matches in the team’s two losses. The Bears did not fare as well against a strong Princeton squad, losing the match 3-0-2. The team was still in a position to finish among the top three but had to face a formidable Yale team, which placed ahead of the Bears in two of the season’s earlier tournaments. “I felt very confident going into the match,” Hughes said. “I felt that we were better than Yale one through five.” Hughes’ confidence was realized after victories from Hargrove, Miller and Wilson. In a tight match, Hargrove defeated Yale’s Bradley Kushner, considered one of the premier golfers in the Ivy League. Miller, with a touch of deja vu, won his match 6 and 5, while Wilson also pulled out a close victory, winning 1 up. “Nelson was outstanding. He had so many clutch holes that could have gone the other way,” Hughes said. “Some of Justin’s matches were routs.”

“Justin dominated in his first and third matches,” Ardell said. “He and Nelson were the big stars. (Nelson) had the ability to come back, handle the intensity and put everything on his back to get the win.” Though the team finished the fall season on a high note, the coach and the golfers said they do not expect complacency to set in during the winter layoff. “We have to look at the highs and the lows. If there’s one glaring area that jumps out at you, it is holing putts,” Hughes said. “We did it really well in the match play portion. We need to think of the match play stroke when we’re playing stroke play.” “In past years, we came back and were trying to get our game back in shape,” Ardell said, “Now we’re going to be improving upon it instead.” Hargrove echoed the captain’s sentiments. “Honestly, you have to do a lot of work during the offseason and improve so we’re ready to go in the spring,” Hargrove said. “We try to get ready as much as we can over the winter.” Having shown that the team can compete against the Ivy League’s top competitors, Bruno can focus on its main goals: a victory at the Ivy League Championship in the spring and a berth in the NCAA tournament. “This (finish) really confirmed it for us. We are — not to quote Dennis Green — who we think we are,” Ardell said. “We’re a really talented team,” Hargrove said. “We just need to get out of our own way.”

By Meher Ali Contributing WRiter

In honor of domestic violence awareness month, on-campus and local groups have organized fundraisers, education outreach and other events throughout October to educate the public and promote domestic violence awareness and prevention. Alpha Chi Omega hosted a “Love Shouldn’t Hurt” resource fair Oct. 12, when representatives from Women’s Center of Rhode Island, Sojourner House, the Sexual Assault Task Force, the LGBTQ Resource Center and Sexual Assault Peer Education group offered pamphlets and other information about their services and advocacy efforts. “Domestic violence awareness and prevention is the sorority’s main philanthropy,” said Noelle Spencer ’14, assistant vice president of philanthropy for Alpha Chi Omega, noting that the group holds events every October in honor of domestic violence awareness month. The aim of the most recent event, she said, was “all around just to help bring attention to the campus.” The sorority will also hold a luminary event on the Pembroke green Oct. 26. SAPE will host “Speak About It,” an on-campus performance about consent, boundaries and healthy relationships Oct. 30. In the show, a group of actors and peer educators shares a series of true stories from college students about a range of personal experiences, addressing issues like abstinence and consent. Fifteen members of the Rhode Island group Sisters Overcoming Abusive

city & state

Relationships, or SOAR, will perform an original play entitled “Behind Closed Doors” Oct. 29 at the Trinity Repertory Company. In the show, which is already sold out, women will share their stories of survival in hopes of inspiring action and promoting understanding about the nature of abuse, said Reza Clifton, communications coordinator at the coalition. The proceeds from the show will be donated to the Rhode Island Coalition Against Domestic Violence. SOAR is one of the member agencies of the coalition, which also includes Blackstone Valley Advocacy Center, Sojourner House and the Women’s Center of Rhode Island. The coalition has organized numerous events of its own this month and embarked on a public awareness campaign that includes bus ads, television and radio commercials, newspaper advertising, posters, pamphlets and palm cards. The coalition officially launched a Rhode Island chapter of the “No More” campaign — a national movement that aims to bring together organizations and individuals who want to end domestic violence and sexual assault — to kick off the month. In its message of unity, the campaign has adopted its own symbol: a teal-colored disk meant to demonstrate the universality of the movement. “The new symbol for the ‘No More’ campaign is designed to show the unification of the two movements — against domestic violence and sexual assault— and to be recognizable in the same way as the pink ribbon for breast cancer,” Clifton said. “We’re particularly excited about this campaign,” DeBare said. “It’s the first time there has ever been a national branding effort to / / Violence page 2


Tuesday, October 23, 2012  

The October 23, 2012 issue of the Brown Daily Herald

Advertisement
Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you