The Daily Princetonian: February 17, 2023

Larger incoming classes, dropping acceptance rates mark Street Week 2023 as campus expands

Conservative values can exist within a liberal framework

By Abigail Rabieh | Head Opinion Editor

By Ryan Konarska & Lia Opperman Assistant Data Editor & Associate

Editor

At the end of Street Week 2023, 633 students were offered spots in bicker clubs, the largest bicker class this millennium. At least three of six bicker clubs had their lowest acceptance rates since at least 2001. Ivy and Tower Clubs welcomed their largest incoming classes in twenty years of analyzed data, with 87 and 141 new members, respectively.

Based on numbers provided by emails sent to incoming members and conversations with club members, the ‘Prince’ analyzed Street Week 2023 statistics, finding the number of students placed at each club and the split between incoming sophomores and juniors. The ‘Prince’ collected data

on bicker and sign-in admissions since 2000 to analyze trends in membership and selectivity over time.

Decreasing acceptance rates for eating clubs and rising class sizes are of specific concern given the University’s commitment to increase the Princeton class size by 150 every year until Hobson College opens. Clubs are also being asked to participate in the university’s upperclass dining pilot, which may further strain the capacity of some clubs.

Based on the data available, a total of 1,149 Princeton students were placed into eating clubs during Street Week 2023. Using an estimate based on eight clubs, about 93 percent of the students placed in a club were sophomores, suggesting around 1,068, in line with the 1,070 sophomores that participated last year,

according to the Interclub Council (ICC).

The ‘Prince’ reached out to officer teams at every Eating Club, along with the ICC. With the exception of the officers at Cannon Dial Elm Club, no officer teams responded by publication time. 2022 and 2023 both saw historically large classes of students seeking to join the eating clubs. The rise in students seeking to join an eating club between 2020 and 2023 was almost entirely absorbed by bicker clubs. In 2020, 565 students were accepted to a bicker club, which is the last year for which bicker data for all clubs was available and bicker was in person. Of the 633 students accepted to a bicker club this year, about 600 were sophomores. About 516 students were offered spots in the five

Four interesting points from analysis of eating club tax returns

By Laura Robertson Staff News Writer

Last week, The Daily Princetonian analyzed more than a decade of eating club tax returns.

The ‘Prince’ found the highest-paid employee of every club, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on food and beverage costs, and the change in each club’s net assets over time.

Here are four interesting points from the analysis:

The Ivy Club pays the highest property tax. Tower doesn’t pay any.

Ten of the 11 eating clubs pay taxes based on a percentage of their property values, which this year averaged roughly $66,000. Ivy pays the most at almost $113,000, and Terrace pays the least at close to $44,000.

Tower is the only club that does not pay property taxes. The eating club qualifies for this exemption as the club has in the past loaned out a room for precepts and seminars for courses in the history and School of Public and International Affairs departments. Under New Jersey law, educational institutions qualify as non-profit organizations and there-

fore receive an exemption from paying property taxes.

In 2016, the University agreed to pay $18.2 million to the town and some of its lower-income residents who received property-tax relief, after a lawsuit challenged Princeton’s tax-exempt status.

Cottage had the highest income from its investments, but Colonial had the highest returns.

According to the ‘Prince,’ Cottage had the highest income on its investments in 2019 at over $265,000. It made more than three times that of the next highest-earning club, Colonial.

Colonial, however, has higher stock returns, at a little over 5 percent. Cloister, on the other hand, had an investment return of just 0.008 percent — only a $34 return on its $424,307 investment.

In 2020, Quadrangle’s (Quad) self-reported property value was substantially less than Mercer County’s evaluation.

Each year, the clubs can report that their property values have depreciated, lowering their net assets and potentially allowing them to pay lower taxes. Both Cloister and Quad have reported significant depreciation in their property value

in recent years — over 70 percent lower than the original price.

There have been discrepancies in county property value evaluations and Quad’s personal evaluations. While Mercer County evaluated Quad to be worth $2,185,000, the club reported its property value to be just under $600,000 in 2020.

Despite the drop in food and beverage costs during the first spring of the pandemic, Terrace spent more in the 2019–2020 school year than the year before.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the 2019–2020 school year went virtual for almost a third of the academic year, leading all of the clubs to spend less on food and beverages than the year before.

Perhaps due to this drop, all the eating clubs had lower overall spending in 2019–2020 except Terrace, which had a higher spending total.

That year, Terrace spent roughly $108,000 less than the previous year on food and beverages, but its overall spending for all expenses was about $50,000 higher.

Laura Robertson is a Staff News Writer for the ‘Prince.’

What do conservatives want? David Walter ’11 seeks to answer this question in his recent Princeton Alumni Weekly article. Walter notes a trend among controversial campus leaders and ill-at-ease alumni, who, despite “the successes of their movement — including, most recently, the overturn of Roe v. Wade” feel “embattled as never before.” He keenly identifies the biggest question for those of us seeking to understand conservatives: Why do they spend so much time decrying Princeton’s “dominant” political culture? Or, more simply put: Why do conservatives feel such extreme discontent?

To understand conservative malaise, conservative goals — and the goals of their liberal counterparts — must first be understood. So what is the debate between conservatives and liberals on campus?

Yoram Hazony ’86 explains that conservative theory begins with the question of preservation in “Where Did Conservatism Go?,” an episode of the podcast Madison’s Notes (as a student, Hazony founded the Princeton Tory). He

explains that conservatives act on the basis of ensuring that the good things of today are preserved so that they can be transmitted to future generations, thus “living a life of conservation and transmission.”

Liberalism, in Hazony’s words, says that tradition has been holding us back, and that individuals must employ enlightenment rationalism, which will eventually “all converge on a certain set of ideas.” However, Hazony believes that after World War II, liberalism was given free reign, thus failing to conserve anything, leading us to the “woke neo-marxist movement” of today, as he puts it. Applying this general principle to University life, two things are revealed. First, Princeton conservatives, in accordance with their belief system, argue that the best characteristics of the University were developed in the past, and that those characteristics are being swiftly lost. The only way these can be maintained, they claim, is if the University defines its values for itself, instead of letting each generation of students do so — as liberals

See VALUES page 11

USG treasurer promises more money spent on students in next year

By Nandini Krishnan News Contributor

According to the new University Student Government (USG) Treasurer Walker Penfield ’25, this USG administration plans to tap into its reserves and invest more in student programs and events.

Penfield explained that he plans to use this reserve and apply a different budgeting approach from previous treasurers. The USG currently has $66,000 maintained in reserves, he stated.

“Any money spent by students through their

student fees should be spent on them during the semester,” Penfield said. He added that his goal was to “really push for more large-scale projects that utilize that whole reserve so that the impact of USG can be seen.”

Penfield is a contributing Humor writer for The Daily Princetonian. His term began on Jan. 30, alongside the rest of the new USG administration.

USG “will always have at least $10,000” in reserves

Continued from page 1

The USG approved a budget of $290,000 for the semester at their weekly meeting on Sunday, Feb. 13. USG budgeted about $230,000 in Spring 2022 and $250,000 in Fall 2022, marking a more than 25 percent budget increase in the past year. In Fall 2021, the budget was more than double the current amount at $600,000, given money not spent during the pandemic.

$236,000 of the budget has already been allocated, and $2,445 has already been spent this semester.

The Lawnparties budget was also increased from $116,000 in the previous term to $118,000 this term.

Treasurer Walker Penfield ’25 clarified at the meeting that the $2,000 change “represents an increase in inflation, and a few other expenses.” Penfield explained that he is not at “liberty to share the Lawnparties’ budget that was shared with [USG] from ODUS,” but that his goal

is to ensure the “Lawnparties budget process is examined further this semester.”

Penfield clarified that he will ensure that USG “will always have at least $10,000” in reserves and that University guardrails will ensure that USG does not overspend. “There’s never a situation in which we will face drastic consequences, as we work very closely with the University, and they’re always very aware of what we’re doing and would never lead us astray.”

The budget was approved in a unanimous vote by those present.

The other item of business at the Feb. 13 meeting was the approval of Ad Hoc committees. Ad Hoc committees are not permanent parts of USG and have to be reapproved every year.

USG President Stephen Daniels ’23 proposed the renewal of the Ad Hoc Committee on Student Disciplinary Processes. Daniels co-chaired the Ad Hoc Committee in 2022 alongside Avi Attar ’25, who now serves as USG Social Committee Chair. Daniels said the group was “working to investigate reforms to student disciplinary processes on campus” with members including students from the USG Senate, the USG Academics Committee, Peer Representatives, and members of the Honor Committee and Committee on Discipline.

Attar said the USG committee creates a space for the various groups to interact and “make sure that they’re all moving in unison as they each themselves interact with administrators.” The Ad Hoc Committee on Student Disciplinary Processes was approved by all those present, with one

member abstaining.

The senate then heard a proposal for an Ad Hoc Committee on Data Analysis from Oyu Enkhbold ’26 and Yubi Mamiya ’26. They explained that the mission of their committee would be “to use experience in data analysis, qualtrics, and ability to connect with the student body to provide information and collaborate with [USG] on things that [USG] really cares about.”

Enkhbold and Mamiya detailed some results from their analysis of the Pay with Points program, with one of their central recommendations being an “increase the budget because students found that 150 points wasn’t enough, and halfway through the semester many students ran out of money.” They explained that they hoped to expand their work to other initiatives like mental health.

The committee was approved in a unanimous vote.

Nandini Krishnan is a News contributor for the ‘Prince.’

Some predict a recession ahead. Princeton professors are uncertain.

By Abby Leibowitz News Contributor

“You have to blow the dust off your economics textbook. This is going to be a classic recession,” Tom Simons said in a recent CNBC article. Simons is a money market economist at Jeffries, a multinational investment banking company. Consumers seem to agree with his assessment. According to a Pew Research Center poll, 82 percent of American adults say that economic conditions are poor or fair.

Economist William Dudley, a senior research scholar at the Griswold Center for Economic Policy Studies at Princeton and former President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, was less sure.

“[The] evidence is not very compelling that we are in a recession,” said Dudley.

Amid national discussion of an impending economic recession, multiple economics professors spoke to The Daily Princetonian about their predictions of an economic downturn — or lack thereof.

Princeton economists express uncertainty on recession

For the past six months, a number of economists have projected a looming recession, with Bloomberg News reporting that economists predicted a 70% chance for one in 2023 and an NPR survey revealing that 98% of CEOs are preparing for recession.

The Federal Reserve’s (the Fed) interest rate increases have reduced economic activity in response to inflation and high prices which are still causing many Americans hardship. On Feb. 1, the Fed raised interest rates for the eighth time this year. These interest rate hikes have had lasting impacts on many sectors, particularly housing.

In the past, the economy has typically gone into a recession after periods of relatively high inflation.

Henry Farber ’77, the Hughes-

Rogers Professor of Economics, suggested that recovering inflation may mean that a recession is less likely. In an interview with the ’Prince,’ he said the “signs are very good — the things that fed the inflation, like the pandemic and supply chain issues, seem to be easing.”

Farber went on to characterize current inflation levels, stating: “Fundamentally, in the last 6 months, inflation has been about 2% at an annual level,” which policy makers agree is an acceptable rate.

In fact, the only thing Farber believes may point to a recession is the “fairly serious policy” by the Federal Reserve Board, which would “put negative pressure on the labor market to ease wage demands.”

“It makes it expensive to borrow, companies want to invest less, and people want to buy less, which has negative effects on the demand for labor,” Farber said.

In an email to The Daily Princetonian, Princeton Professor and former Vice Chair of the Federal Reserve Alan Blinder ’67 refused to make a firm prediction. He told the ‘Prince,’ “My personal guess is that it’s about 50-50. Whether or not there is a recession depends on many things including: How much higher the Fed pushes interest rates, how much markets get jittery about the debt ceiling issue, what happens in Ukraine, and Donald Rumsfeld’s ‘unknown unknowns.’ None of these are reliably predictable.”

Blinder was referring to a theory by former Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld ’54 that the most dangerous problems are the “unknown unknowns,” the ones “we don’t know we don’t know.”

Given the uncertainty, Blinder wrote to the ‘Prince,’ “Citizens around the world should be aware of the risk of recession and prepare themselves for it—if they can—by e.g., having a little saving nest egg to tide them over if necessary.”

Risks of a looming recession weigh heavily on Princeton stu-

dents. Research shows that college graduates who start working during a recession earn less for at least the first ten years of their career.

Dudley stated that the risk of recession should not generate concern among graduating Princetonians who are entering the job market.

“The job market is very strong, and the unemployment is lowest in many years,” he said, referencing the U.S Bureau of Labor Statistics’s annual labor report. Dudley explained that, “[the] Fed will make the labor market more vibrant if necessary but that currently, there are nationally 1.9 unfilled jobs to 1 worker, this ratio being 1.2 before pandemic.”

Dudley speculated on the reasons for this sharp increase in the number of open positions. “Many people retired early, legal immigration to the US stopped during the pandemic, people got covid, among other things,” he said.

Blinder had the same 50-50 prediction for the future of the job market as for the recession. “This year’s college graduates are in an interesting position. It’s hiring season, and jobs are readily available right now. But there’s a chance, call it 50%, that the job market will look much worse later this year. So I wouldn’t wait until June,” he said.

Fitting with his prediction of a strong economy going forward, Farber told the ‘Prince,’ “There’s no sign right now that it’s going to be a tough hiring season. It is true that some tech companies have been announcing layoffs, but I don’t know what that means for their new hires.”

Dudley emphasized that in the case of the job market taking a turn for the worse, “It’s not graduates of Princeton who will be impacted. People who have less skills, less work history, and were hired more recently, will bear the brunt of the impact.”

However, he said that “ironically, most layoffs recently are in the tech sector,” a field that

Princeton students often flock to. Twenty-one percent of employed Princeton graduates from the classes of 2016- 2021 work in tech, according to data from the Center for Career Development.

A history of bad predictions

Blinder and Dudley addressed why so many predictions about the recession have been wrong or inaccurate.

“Economists around the world have never been very good at predicting recessions. There is no reason to think that today is any different, and indeed, opinions differ hugely,” Blinder wrote.

Similarly, Dudley said that “forecasting is a little bit of skill and a lot of luck.” He added that in his own predictions, “inflation turned out to be worse than what I was expecting.”

In the past, economists have erroneously predicted a healthy economy ahead. Prior to the Great Recession of 2008, those in the field largely got it wrong in predicting the future of the markets. The New York Times reported that former University professor, Princeton honorary degree recipient, and former chair of the Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke was an outlier in “warning of the risk of a severe recession as the nation entered into a presidential election year,“ but “struggled to

persuade his colleagues, and at crucial junctures [did] not push forcefully for stronger action.”

Addressing the frequent mispredictions, late longtime Princeton economics professor Uwe Reinhardt, a recipient of multiple honorary degrees from the University, opened the syllabus of a spring 2014 class titled “Introductory Korean Drama” with the following words: “After the near collapse of the world’s financial system has shown that we economists really do not know how the world works, I am much too embarrassed to teach economics anymore, which I have done for many years. I will teach Modern Korean Drama instead. Although I have never been to Korea, I have watched Korean drama on a daily basis for over six years now. Therefore I can justly consider myself an expert in that subject.”

While the pandemic created more friction such as supply disruptions that the economy is not set up to respond to, Dudley expressed that if there will be an economic downturn, it will be pretty mild.

Abby Leibowitz is a News contributor for the ‘Prince.’ News contributor Olivia Sanchez contributed reporting.

BEYOND THE BUBBLE

NANDINI KRISHNAN / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN Students attending the USG meeting attentively listen to the meeting’s proposals.

ANGEL KUO / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Students announce donation campaign for earthquake victims in Turkey and Syria

By Kayra Sener News Contributor

At least 12,000 people were killed in Turkey and Syria after a 7.8 magnitude earthquake and a 7.5 magnitude aftershock struck neighboring countries on Feb. 6. The death toll continues to surge as rescue squads search for survivors trapped under 5000 buildings reduced to rubbles.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan declared a three-month state of emergency, saying that this is the biggest disaster Turkey has experienced since another earthquake that struck the country in 1939.

Following the earthquake, Turkish Student Association (TSA) announced a donation campaign, Turkish Students for Earthquake Relief, for the survivors.

Alkin Kaz ’23, president of TSA, told The Daily Princetonian that a quick distribution of resources is necessary.

“As the unfortunate news of the earthquakes has shaken our friends, families, and the globe, we wanted to contribute to the disaster response efforts to the highest extent possible,” he said.

“Over the following days,” he added, “we will be organizing a donation drive where critically needed items to survive in the harsh winter, such as blankets and sleeping bags, would be accepted and transported to the earthquake-affected regions.”

The disaster has devastated the Turkish-Syrian community in Princeton. In an interview with the Daily Princetonian, Emre Parmaksiz ’24, whose parents and brother live in the region, said, “I can do nothing but wait. It is simply tormenting.”

Parmaksiz’s parents serve as medical doctors, and he told the ‘Prince’ that they were both “rushed to the hospital, and for the last two days, they have been attending day and night shifts.” Currently, tens of thousands are injured and in need of medical attention.

Since the first high-magnitude earthquake, the re-

Comedian and disability rights activist Pamela Schuller speaks at CJL

gion has been hit by at least 100 aftershocks.

Many countries have already pledged to provide aid. India, Israel, South Korea, and other nations are sending equipment, specialized teams, and sniffer dogs to assist in the rescue efforts.

CNN however, reported that 70% of the Syrian population is already in need of humanitarian relief before the earthquake, as Syria faces water, electricity, and fuel shortages.

“I have family in Syria, and I am worried about their well-being”, wrote Manar Talab ’23, the former president of the Princeton Arab Society, in an email to the ‘Prince’. “My father was in Syria only days ago. My mom and dad who are currently in Lebanon felt the earthquake, and I am so lucky that they are okay.”

The Balkan Society has also announced its support to the affected communities in Princeton in an email on Feb 6.

“Our hearts go out to the Turkish, Kurdish, and Arab members of our community whose families and friends the earthquake has affected,” wrote Martin Mastnak ’25, the president of the Balkan Society, in an email to the Prince.

“We likewise applaud the spirit of solidarity shown by rescue and relief workers from the Balkans volunteering in the area. We urge the Princeton community to keep the people of an oftenoverlooked region in their hearts,” Mastnak wrote.

Dean Mellisa Thompson, Associate Dean of Undergraduate Students, also sent the Turkish and Syrian students an email “checking in” and offering support and resources to students in need of help.

“The Assistant Deans for Student Life in the residential colleges are available to provide support and resources,” Thompson told the ‘Prince.’ “I encourage students impacted by the earthquake to connect with the ADSL in their residential college.”

Kayra Sener is a news contributor for the ‘Prince.’

By Gabriel Robare Senior

By Rebecca Cunningham & Charlie Roth Assistant News Editor & Head Data Editor

“My brain is really funny and inappropriate, and I don’t think that’s not connected to Tourrette’s,” said comedian, storyteller, and advocate Pamela Schuller. “I think that Tourrette’s has added to my comedy, to my weirdness, to my humor.”

In observance of Jewish Disability, Awareness, and Inclusion Month, the Center for Jewish Life (CJL) hosted Schuller on Thursday, Feb. 9, and Friday, Feb. 10.

Over the past few months, the CJL has hosted events focused on mental health, LGBTQ+ inclusion, and refugees. They also hosted Sally Frank ’80, one of the activists who fought to have the eating clubs become coed. According to the CJL’s mission statement, the center’s values are “to be welcoming and inclusive, nurturing and inspiring, vibrant and celebratory, innovative and student driven.”

Through performances and workshops, Schuller works to bridge humor with education. She speaks about disability, mental health, and inclusion, drawing from her own experiences with Tourette’s syndrome and obsessive-compulsive disorder.

“There’s nothing scary or overwhelming about [the word] disability,” Schuller said in an interview with the ‘Prince.’ “What we need to do is get people to realize that. It’s not an us-and-them situation. We will likely all be touched by disability or mental health challenges if not in ourselves, then in someone we love.”

She started her week at Coffee Club’s Prospect Avenue location with a show that mixed personal anecdotes with stand-up comedy. The event was open to all Princeton students and faculty regardless of religious affiliation.

“I love having the opportunity to perform for college students, and this campus is stunning,” Schuller said. “I think college is where a lot of self-discovery hap-

pens. We know mental health struggles are through the roof right now and it can be really hard to feel different.”

Schuller was diagnosed with Tourrette’s syndrome in first grade, a struggle she talked about throughout her set.

“As a kid, I was ashamed, nervous, and scared, but I remember more feeling like the world was suddenly putting me down,” Schuller said. “People were more condescending. Suddenly, people were not asking me what I wanted to be when I grew up … the doctor gave me a book called ‘God Made Me Special.’ I tore every page out and put it in my cat’s litter box.”

Schuller opened by explaining her early education. She was sent to a “weird kid” boarding school in Burlington, Vt. because she needed additional support. There, she received the highest number of detentions of any student and consequently wrote many apology letters for her misbehavior.

She read three of these letters aloud, telling the audience they introduced her to the world of comedy.

“I think [my teachers] realized that maybe my snarky, inappropriate wittiness would lead to something better than getting in trouble all the time,” Schuller said. “I also tell the story that the reason they had me try comedy is because I finally admitted that I had nothing about myself that I loved.”

Other topics included the years she lived in a New York City studio apartment, her work as a comedian during the pandemic, and her activism.

Naomi Frim-Abrams ’23 helped to organize the event.

“This event is just such a positive step towards fostering a more inclusive campus and raising awareness about the meaning of Jewish Disability, Awareness, and Inclusion Month,” Frim-Abrams said.

Reflecting on the event, she said, she enjoyed watching audience members engage with the show and felt she personally grew

from listening to Pam’s stories.

“I learned so much about the way Pam has embraced her own identity and disability and how that’s become such a comical tenant of something that she celebrates. I also learned about her experience within the comedy world and the challenges and tribulations that it takes to be a comedian,” she said.

“Last night I watched students laugh and cry,” Schuller said. “One student said ‘I laughed a lot, and then I felt really empowered,’ which is my goal.”

The following day, after Shabbat service and dinner at the CJL, Schuller led an improv workshop. She introduced students and faculty to improv games and explained her creative process during a Q&A.

“The improv experience was an opportunity to let loose in this climate of stress,” Fletcher Block ’25 said. “It was fun to be able to hone in on each of our individualities. There was no script and there were no writers, so everything that came out of everybody’s mouth was right from them.”

After the event, Schuller also explained that her work constantly evolves. She conducts interviews before performances to understand her audience prior to cracking jokes and changes her set based on responses. She also watches the world around her to write new material.

“I have a file in my phone called funny shit,” Schuller told the ‘Prince.’ “I am constantly taking notes and writing things down. I also have a file of moments that just need to be remembered.”

“I always make it clear that I’m not laughing at disability, I’m finding humor within my experiences with it,” Schuller said.

Rebecca Cunningham is an assistant News editor for the ‘Prince.’

Charlie Roth is a head Data editor for the ‘Prince.’

Building at 91 Prospect Avenue to be rotated, moved, and renovated

By Madeleine LeBeau Staff News Writer

Why did the building cross the road? For the building at 91 Prospect Street, the answer is more than just to get to the other side.

The University began the process of moving the building currently located at 91 Prospect Avenue to a new location the other side of that street on Feb. 8, four days earlier than originally scheduled. The move is part of the University’s agreement with the town of Princeton in connection with the new Environmental Studies and the School of Engineering and Applied Sciences (ES+SEAS) complex.

The building is being elevated in its entirety, placed on a rolling rig and transported to a new location.

Formerly the home of the Court Club eating club, which closed in 1964, the building to be moved currently houses the Office of the Dean for Research. Following the move, the building will be renovated to be made fully accessible, and to include additional office and conference spaces and a larger veranda.

Dean for Research Pablo Debenedetti has announced his resignation, effective June 30. A search for his successor is ongoing.

The 91 Prospect Avenue structure will be moved to an adjacent lot, which previously held 110 Prospect Avenue. That building was moved to the backyard of the houses located at 114 and 116 Prospect Avenue on Nov. 10 and 11 of last year.

According to University Spokesperson Michael Hotchkiss, the last known building relocation at the University took place in 1977 when residential homes were moved to Nassau Court, next to Thomas Sweet Ice Cream.

Starting Monday, the building currently located at 91 Prospect Avenue will be rotated 180 degrees for positioning on the opposite side of the street from its final resting place.

The University expects that it will take three days to rotate the building and one additional day to move it across the road. The closure of parts of Prospect Avenue to vehicular traffic and pedestrian detours are expected to remain in place until the end of February.

According to Hotchkiss, the “north end of the CBE [Chemical and Biological Engineering] building will be located on the portion of the site previously occupied by 91 Prospect.” Hotchkiss added that the building will be “referred to as the ‘Theorist Pavilion.”’ According to a report, three percent of the ES+SEAS development will occupy land currently occupied by the building at 91 Prospect Avenue.

“This part of the building will provide faculty offices and meet-

ing spaces for groups doing theory and modeling simulation research,” Hotchkiss said, adding that this “will result in better processes for the production of new materials, greater energy efficiency, tools for addressing climate change and carbon sequestration, and development of new pharmaceuticals and vaccines.”

The University originally proposed the demolition of three Victorian houses located at 110, 114, and 116 Prospect Avenue in order to make enough room to move the 91 Prospect Avenue structure into their place.

The University’s initial plan sparked significant backlash. More than 1,500 signatures were gathered by a group called the Save Prospect Coalition, comprising town residents, alumni, the Princeton Prospect Foundation (PPF), and the Graduate Interclub Council (GICC), opposing the University’s plan. The latter two organizations are affiliated with Princeton’s Eating Clubs. Town residents cited the “charm and warmth” of the street, contributed to by the three Victorians.

One argument against the plan was voiced by Princeton resident Lydia Hamilton in Town Topics in June 2021. “We moved here 11 years ago,” she said, “for the historic architecture, walkable town, good schools, and access to transit to our places of employment. Princeton University’s plans aim to take half of that away.”

“We believe [the University] can rework just three percent of their project to help with the historic preservation of the district,” Sandy Harrison ’74, Board Chair of the PPF, said in an interview with the ‘Prince’ in 2021. At the time, he suggested that instead of moving the Court Clubhouse, the new entrance could be built in an open plot of land due east of the current location of the clubhouse, which is outside of the current historic district.

However, in response to feedback from the Princeton Planning Board, PPF, and the local community, the University agreed to preserve all four buildings in a memorandum of understanding (MOU) issued by the University’s Office of the Vice President for Facilities to PPF on Oct. 20, 2021. The Princeton Planning Board accepted the relocation proposal during its Oct. 21, 2021 meeting and unanimously approved that relocation as part of its Jan. 20, 2022 meeting.

The MOU also agreed to support the creation of a historic district along Prospect Avenue between Washington Street and Murray Place. The proposal for a historic district was officially approved by the Princeton Town Council on July 11, 2022.

Madeleine LeBeau is a staff news writer for the ‘Prince.’

“E asy as a BC”

By Dylan Epstein-Gross

Constructor

By Gabriel Robare Senior

Sophomore: “I wish the process could have been more transparent or guaranteed”

Continued from page 1

sign-in clubs, similar to the 521 extended admission in 2020, the last year for which data is available for all sign-in clubs.

Street Week took place between Feb. 5–7, as hundreds of undergraduates flocked to the eating clubs along Prospect Avenue for multiple nights of group conversations, games, and one-on-ones.

Students had until Thursday, Feb. 9 at 8 p.m. to rank their club preferences. Mysteriously, the portal reopened after the deadline to allow students to change their preferences. The ranking window then closed again at midnight. No communication was sent to bickerees concerning the reopening and there’s no indication of how many students changed their preferences.

“It was good to meet a lot of new people, that was probably the positive of it,” James Kontulis ’25, who bickered TI and Cottage, said in an interview with the ‘Prince.’ “But I was pretty stressed out the whole week. It’s hard to try and sell yourself.”

Among bicker clubs, Tower accepted the most new members, with 141 new members, including ten juniors and one senior. Tower has had the largest incoming class of the bicker clubs every year since 2003, with the exception of 2012, Cannon Dial Elm’s inaugural bicker cycle. Tower members shared with the ‘Prince’ that 232 bickerees signed up on the ICC website, compared to 273 students who bickered Tower in 2022. While 232 signed up to bicker Tower, members shared that only about 170 bickerees were voted on during discussions. This yields an acceptance rate this year of 60.8 percent, significantly higher than the 2022 rate of 48.7 percent. Tower had its highest acceptance rate since 2018 and its largest incoming class since at least 2001.

Tiger Inn (TI) had 296 bickerees and accepted 87, yielding an acceptance rate of 29.4 percent. This represents a marked increase in TI’s bicker class, up from 240 bickerees in 2022 and a decrease in acceptance rate, down from 35.8 percent in 2022.

According to Joshua Coan ’24, president of Cannon Dial Elm Club, Cannon had 193 bickerees and accepted 123 new members, up from 81 in 2022. This yields an acceptance rate of 63.7%, much higher than the 50.6% they accepted last year and their highest acceptance rate since 2014.

358 sophomores bickered Cap and Gown, and 105 were accepted. Both the number of bickerees and admits were down from 2022, when Cap had 372 bickerees and accepted 113. The slight drop in bickerees may be explained by Cap choosing to not allow juniors to bicker this spring, a change since 2022. Cap’s acceptance rate this year was 29.3 percent, similar to the 2022 rate of 30.4 percent; nonetheless, it was Cap’s lowest acceptance rate since at least 2001.

Cottage accepted 90 students, 87 of whom were sophomores. This is down from 2020, the last year in which data was available and bicker was in person, when they accepted 95. While Cottage did not officially release the number of people who bickered the club, according to multiple club members, Cottage saw about 270 bickerees this year. This would represent Cottage’s largest bicker class and result in a 33.3 percent acceptance rate, the lowest since 2001.

Ivy accepted 87 students, its largest class since at least 2001. In the last 22 years, Ivy has never accepted more than 74 new members. In 2022, Ivy ac-

cepted 73 students. Out of Ivy’s 87 admits this year, 81 were sophomores.

This increased class size is a departure from Ivy’s previous practice of keeping its intake small to foster a close-knit community. In 2016, former Ivy Bicker Chair Michael Moorin ’16 told the ‘Prince’ “We believe Ivy’s small membership is core to its identity.”

The ‘Prince’ was unable to obtain the number of students who bickered Ivy. Students with knowledge of the process speculated that the number exceeded 300.

The ‘Prince’ also obtained data on how many people were placed into each sign-in club.

Charter welcomed 102 new members to the club, in line with the 110 it accepted in 2022. Charter is the only eating club to use a selective sign-in process that awards points to prospective members for demonstrating interest in the club, such as attending events and having coffee chats with current members.

Charter’s admissions process was markedly more competitive than in previous years. Based on the point values and eating club placements of several members who ranked Charter first, the ‘Prince’ estimated that the cutoff for admission to Charter was about seven points. Using this estimate, anyone with fewer than seven points, or who ranked Charter second or below, was not offered membership in the club.

“I wish the process could have been more transparent or guaranteed because I just thought I had the process secured and not getting in has made me choose to be independent,” a sophomore who ranked Charter first and received six points wrote to the ‘Prince.’

“I didn’t think it was possible for me to not get in given the amount of points I had,” they added.

Charter’s competitive sign-in process in 2023 continues a trend of increasing popularity for the club. In light of declining membership, Charter opted to switch from signin to bicker in 2021, a plan that was eventually dropped. Charter’s membership has since expanded while retaining its selective sign-in system.

In 2020, Charter had only 28 total members when spring recruitment came around. That year, 127 students joined Charter, quintupling its membership.

Terrace welcomed 149 new members into the club, its largest incoming class since 2017, 130 of whom are sophomores. Terrace has admitted the largest class out of the sign-in clubs every year since 2009, with the exception of 2020, when Charter and Quadrangle were more popular. Cloister offered spots to 86 new members, the most since 2014, 71 of whom are sophomores. Conversely, Colonial offered spots to about 70 new members, according to members with knowledge of the process, the lowest of any year analyzed since 2010. Quadrangle offered spots to 109 new members, similar to the 121 it welcomed in 2020, the last year for which data is available.

Students can still join sign-in clubs that have not yet reached capacity until 9:00 a.m. on Feb. 28 through the ICC website. At the time of publication, Cloister Inn, Colonial, Quadrangle, and Terrace Clubs are still accepting applications for rolling admission.

Ryan Konarska is an Assistant Data Editor for the ‘Prince.’

Lia Opperman is the Investigations Editor and an Associate News Editor for the ‘Prince.’

We dug through over a decade of eating club tax returns. Here’s what we found.

By Grace Zhao & David Yan Data Contributors

With Street Week 2023 currently in progress for the Class of 2025 and some members of the Class of 2024, Princeton’s eating clubs have been the main topic of interest. In addition to questions such as “What is bicker?” and “Which clubs are sign-in?” many students may wonder how the eating clubs generate income, manage their budgets, and fund operations.

To answer those questions, The Daily Princetonian analyzed each eating club’s publicly available Form 990 filings over the past 16 years. Form 990s — required for all income tax-exempt

Investment Income

The ‘Prince’ analyzed a select set of stocks that the eating clubs invested in, mostly from the period between 2008 and 2010. Eating clubs invest their endowments to provide an additional revenue stream. In 2019, Colonial had the best stock returns with $81,995 on its $1,632,766 investment,

or 5.02 percent. Meanwhile, Cloister had just a $34 return on its $424,307 investment, or 0.008 percent. Some of the reported stocks may not be stocks chosen by the clubs themselves, but rather stocks received in donations.

organizations — detail everything about an eating club’s finances, from stock investments to expenditures for food and beverages.

The ‘Prince’ reached out to every club and the Interclub Council (ICC), and received a response from Cloister’s general manager. Every other club and the ICC either did not reply or declined requests for comment.

Gain or (loss) from sale of assets other than inventory

foundations.

Of the disclosed securities, Vanguard’s collection of securities is a popular option with over $13 million invested by multiple different clubs and

Total revenue

The eating clubs earn money in a variety of ways. The biggest component is program revenue, which includes money received by providing a good or service directly related to the social function of the club, such as undergraduate student dues, lodging, and events. Across all clubs, an average of 85 percent of all revenue comes from program revenue. Non-program revenue may include investments, donations, and occasional sales of property. Colonial had the smallest percentage of total revenue with program revenue at an average of 75 percent — their slightly more successful investments demonstrate that the club relies less on program revenue. Another component of total income is “Contribution and Grants” which are mainly alumni dues and donations.

According to Cloister’s general manager Jason Miller, “Alumni contributions are important not

From 2004 to 2019, each club on average spent 1.3 million per year. The largest component is employee salary averaging 450,000 dollars per year per club, accounting for 34 percent of total expenses. Next up is food and beverages: across the clubs, it averages out to 288,000 dollars annually. The Club Manager, who is responsible for the day to day operations of the entire club and an important point of contact for students, is usually the highest earning individual within the club. The notable exception being the kitchen manager of Tiger Inn who experienced a much higher pay raise compared to the club manager.

Among club employees, the club manager, usually responsible for day-to-day operations of the entire club, is the highest earning employee of 10 of the 11 clubs. The exception is Tiger Inn, where the kitchen manager draws a higher salary than the club manager.

The ‘Prince’ broke down club dues by club, focusing on 2017 specifically. Ivy was the most expensive, with dues of $9,680 while Cottage had the lowest dues, at $8,675. The difference in dues between clubs varied only by about a thousand dollars. On the other hand, spending per capita, or the amount that the clubs spend per member, varies widely, with Terrace averaging $5,442 per member to Cloister averaging $13,767 per member. Seven clubs charged

only financially, they also show how engaged your alumni members are in the club. We typically receive 10 to 15 percent of our revenue from Alumni contributions.”

Donations typically make up about 10 to 15 percent of club revenues, but the number varies year to year. In years when Tiger Inn and Cap & Gown were renovating, there were sharp increases in donations, likely due to expansion and renovation fundraising. Out of all the clubs, Ivy had the highest percentage of revenue that came from contributions and grants, at 21 percent.

Actual worth of donations sometimes fluctuate. For example, in 2010-2011, Ivy received $1,131,603 in securities contributions, which are tradable financial assets such as stocks. Clubs also sometimes get revenue in the form of loans — such as when Quad received a $50,000 loan from the chairperson of its board in 2011 and a

$200,000 loan from one of its trustees in 20122013. The trustee does not appear to be charging significant interest on loans, with no repayment totalling more than one percent interest.

This amount may be an underestimate of how much some clubs receive in donations, as almost all the clubs at some point received grants through the Princeton Prospect Foundation (PPF). The PPF is a nonprofit that is associated with all of the clubs except Cottage. The PPF is responsible for the historic preservation and support of the Princeton Eating Clubs. They also host open houses to the general public and have published a book on the history of the eating clubs.

Many eating club alumni prefer to donate through the Princeton Prospect Foundation, as opposed to directly to the club, because the foundation’s contributions are tax deductible,

Total expenses

members more than their spending per student, whereas Cap & Gown, Colonial, Ivy, and Cloister charged less. These numbers might have also been influenced by the number of events each club hosts — for example, Ivy spent $131,260 on entertainment, more than three times the $34,400 that Cottage spent on the same.

The club with the highest total spending is not the highest spender per student. Tower was the club that spent the most for total spending, but Tower also had the second most number of members, at 231 in 2017. Club membership varied widely, with the smallest club, Cloister, having 96 members in 2017. Therefore, in spending per capita, Tower comes in seventh. Tiger Inn, which was fourth in spending, was tenth in spending per capita. On the other hand, Cloister is ranked eighth for total spending, but due to its small membership, it spent the most per member.

Pandemic impact

The 2018-2019 academic year was the last uninterrupted school year before students were sent home due to the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020. The forms from the 2019-2020 school year in which the last two and a half months were when Princeton was primarily virtual show a clear decrease in spending.

On average the clubs spent $93,000 less on

Net assets or fund balances at end of year

Ivy Club has kept its historical place as the most affluent club across the analyzed period, with their most recent net valuation — the sum of how much cash, stock, and property the club has minus all debts — at $9,089,607. Cap & Gown Club and Tiger Inn are a close second and third with net valuations of $8,058,989 and $6,979,512, respectively. Two clubs that have seen substantial increases in their net valuation over the period are Cap & Gown and Tiger Inn. Both clubs went through substantial renovations in the early 2010s. Charter Club, which also underwent renovations, did not see a similar increase in net valuation. Quadrangle Club and Cloister Inn are the clubs with the lowest net valuations, with net valuations of $752,720 and $602,212, respectively.

The largest assets that clubs tend to own are their building and land. Ivy reported their building and land to be worth almost $7.5 million, more than 20 times what Cloister reported for its building and land. Every year, clubs can claim on their tax form that their

property has depreciated, up to a certain level. Quadrangle and Cloister reported substantial depreciation of their properties, reporting the depreciated value of their property as over 70 percent less than the original price. In mid2020, Quad reported its property, comprising the building and 1.2 acres of land, to be worth just below $600,000, drastically different from the official assessment of the property from the county at about $2.2 million, indicating that the market value of the property may be even higher.

Grace Zhao is a contributing writer for the Data section of the ‘Prince.’

David Yan is a contributing writer for the Data section of the ‘Prince.’

Head Data Editor Elaine Huang contributed data collection.

food and beverages in the 2019-2020 school year than the 2018-2019 school year, a roughly 30 percent decrease. Total expenses dropped by $173,000 for each club, an 11.5 percent decrease from previous year. During the same period revenue from campus income streams dropped on average $134,000, likely due to loss of funds from room and board and hosted events. For many clubs, fundraising spiked during the 2019-2020 school year, possibly due to club fundraising drives after students were sent home.

Approximately nine weeks of the 2019-2020 school year were virtual, about a third of the academic year.

At the time of publication, only three clubs had data for 2020-2021, with an average of $1,000 in program revenue — a 99.93 percent decrease. Despite all the clubs being shut down beginning in mid-March, the clubs still had significant expenses such as salaries, which were about half of the usual expense, insurances, and tax. Each club was kept afloat by $500,000 donations or grants each. The sources of these grants cannot be confirmed.

whereas donations to the eating clubs usually are not — which is a difference many clubs warn about on their respective websites. A few clubs also have their own charitable or educational foundations that allow its members to donate tax deducted, such as the Ivy 1879 Foundation, the Cottage 1886 Foundation, the Princeton Charter Foundation, and the Princeton Cannon Dial Elm Foundation. While all donations are theoretically transferred to the club, they are not always reported for larger projects such as construction. Over the past 15 years, the percent of tax-deductible donations vary between clubs, from 45 percent at Cannon to 94 percent at Tiger Inn, which comes out to an average of 80 percent across all of the eating clubs.

Food and Beverage

In 2014, Tower had spent the most on food and beverages out of any club for any single year in the period analyzed, at $482,615. Tower prepares many meals to order, possibly leading to higher expenses. In 2014, the total spent on food and beverage for all clubs was $3,620,765, the highest across the decade. In 2009, Cottage spent $42,931 on beverages alone.

Property Tax

Another significant cost for eating clubs is property tax. The current tax rate is about 2.4 percent of the property value. Ivy leads the pack, paying $112,881 per year in property taxes, while Terrace pays only $43,776. In 2010, Cottage Club took the Princeton Borough to court over property taxes and demanded $550,000 in back taxes, a case the club lost. Tower also did not pay any property tax for the past few decades by hosting precepts and seminars in their rooms, according to their 2022 report to the Princeton Prospect Foundation.

Nassau Hall to be picked up, walked around campus, and dropped back off

By Walker Penfield Contributing Humor Writer

The following content is purely satirical and entirely fictional.

This coming week, construction efforts will begin to raise the iconic Nassau Hall from its foundation so that it may be transported around the perimeter of campus and dropped back

off after an hour-long jaunt. Administrators will remain inside their offices throughout the journey.

President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 told the Daily PrintsAnything that he is “excited to wave out at onlookers from his office window and reconnect with the charm of the Princeton campus.”

The very slow-moving pro-

cession will allow administrators to peek up from their screens to acknowledge various campus cultural landmarks such as Wawa, Fine Hall, and a high school skateboarder or two.

When asked why the countless administrators of Nassau Hall were not willing to walk around campus on foot, Dean of the College Jill Dolan said,

“COVID?”

The project is projected to cost the University $20 million dollars, which otherwise would have gone to hiring more CPS counselors.

Walker Penfield was an economics concentrator from Mendon, Massachusetts before withdrawing after getting struck by a moving building.

‘I’m pretty sure he’s a camp counselor’: New CPS employees clearly not qualified counselors students requested

By Sophia Varughese Associate Humor Editor

The following content is purely satirical and entirely fictional.

Recent discussion among members of the Princeton community has centered around the University’s Community and Psychological Services (CPS) and their collective need to hire more counselors to help students fight mental health problems. This past Wednesday, the University announced they have addressed the requests of the community in full.

“We heard you, loud and clear,” a University spokesperson said. She fervently denies rolling her eyes while giving her statement.

However, the new CPS hires have been met with severe backlash.

“Last Monday, a new counselor forced me to sit criss-cross applesauce on the floor next to ten other students. In order to ‘encourage bonding,’ he made us share our most traumatic childhood experiences,” Thera Pist ’26 said. “I tried to leave after that, but he made us play patty-cake to ‘promote physical intimacy.’ I’m pretty sure he’s a camp counselor. For, like, children.”

Lone Liness ’25, told The Daily PrintsAnything that a discus-

sion of his anxiety ended with his assigned counselor telling him to “get a girlfriend.” He recounted her trying to hand him a business card with the words “marriage counselor” crossed out.

“Yeah, I used her with my first wife,” Associate Dean of Student Life Ruth Less told the ‘Prints.’ “She fit our hiring criteria very well, given how cheap her hourly rate is. Probably because she sucks at her job. I blame her for my divorce.”

One student said that they recognized their counselor as a student who works behind the desk at Dillon Gym. “I told him I had been struggling with seasonal depression since the end of November. He told me to ‘get the f*** up’ and ‘go get ripped.’”

When asked why the University didn’t hire properly trained counselors, the University spokesperson responded, “You said you wanted more staff. We gave it to you. Why are we still talking about this?”

“Yeah, we listed the job on the Student Employment website. Yeah, I hired my deadbeat stepson to offer psychiatric consultation. Big f***ing deal,” said Ruth Less. “It’s all the f***ing same, anyway.”

Sophia Varughese is an associate Humor editor. Thanks to new CPS therapy, her childhood trauma is now public information. Her depression remains untreated.

NATE BEGGS / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Construction teams prepare to lift Nassau Hall from it’s foundation, take it for a spin around campus, and return it to where it began.

ABBY DEL RIEL / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN The McCosh Health Center entrance during day time.

This Black History Month, let’s push for symbolic and structural change

Ndeye Thioubou Columnist

For myself and much of the rest of the Black diaspora, February is one of the most special months of the year because it marks the start of Black History Month. Although the Black community is often marginalized in the United States, this is the one time of year that we can count on Black success and excellence being amplified (even if it is sometimes reduced to talking about the accomplishments of a few leaders such as Martin Luther King Jr., Ida B. Wells, Malcolm X, and Rosa Parks). At Princeton, the same holds true. Last February, the University, and the town hosted numerous events to amplify Black voices, including an event at the public library and workshops at the School of Public and International Affairs. February is an important opportunity for everyone, Black or not, to not only learn more about Black history and how to foster an inclusive space for Black people. Although I’m highly looking forward to the programming that the University and other organizations will hold in honor of the month, this time offers the opportunity to critically reflect on how the University has failed to create a safe space for members of the Black diaspora on campus.

One example of this failure is the John Witherspoon statue that remains stand -

ing in the middle of campus. Witherspoon, a former slave owner, was the sixth president of the University. Its existence is particularly painful to Black Princetonians. As Opinion Columnist Windsor Nguyen ’25 powerfully articulated in a 2021 piece, “Princeton rejects the idea of oppression yet continues to venerate the accomplices to that very oppression on campus.” Princeton cannot claim to protect and support Black students when we must walk past the statue of a former slave owner every single day.

We should not be debating Witherspoon’s statue in 2023. If Princeton Middle School changed its name from John Witherspoon Middle School in 2020, why can’t the University remove the statue? In a recent column, Princeton alumnus Bill Hewitt ’74 argues that we should “remember Witherspoon, not erase him.” Removing the Witherspoon statue, however, does not represent his erasure, but rather a stand of solidarity with Black students. It represents Princeton acknowledging that in 2023, Black Princetonians, and frankly all of us, should not have to see the glorification of a former slave owner.

Hewitt also compared Witherspoon owning slaves to the fact that “the ancient Greeks and Romans practiced slavery; Christianity’s Apostle Paul called on slaves to obey their masters (Ephesians 6:5).” What Hewitt missed in this comparison is that these previ-

ous forms of slavery were not based on race, whereas the Transatlantic Slave Trade exclusively enslaved Black Africans. Additionally, the dehumanization and brutality of the Transatlantic Slave Trade were unmatched — millions of Africans were forcefully removed from their homes and families, and then brought to different holding ports on the coast, like Goree Island in Senegal. For many, the torture that they would endure once they arrived in the Americas was so horrific that they decided jumping into the sea beforehand was the best option. I visited Goree only a few months ago. I saw the weights and shackles that were used on enslaved Africans. I crouched inside the cells in which men, women, and children were packed inside like sardines. I looked out the Door of No Return, a museum and memorial to the victims of the slave trade, that faces the Atlantic Ocean.

However, creating a safe and inclusive environment for Black Princetonians goes far beyond removing the Witherspoon statue. Importantly, the Carl A. Fields Center for Equality and Cultural Understanding (CAF) is not in a central location on campus, being located past all of the eating clubs on Prospect Avenue. For a building that used to be named the “Third World Center,” I find it hard to ignore the message that the CAF’s location sends: you may be here at Princeton, but you are still in the mar -

gins. If the CAF were more centrally located, I believe many more Black and students of color generally would take advantage of the space and the opportunities it provides for building community. Only a few months ago, we had an incident of a white professor saying the n-word in a class that included multiple Black students. Black Princetonians had to stand by and watch the most hurtful racial slur be protected by academic freedom. We saw that the professor involved, Joe Scanlan, was allowed to continue teaching at Princeton. The University must begin taking concrete actions to address these realities that contribute to a hostile environment for Black students.

This Black History Month, I also want to renew my call for previous initiatives I have advocated for, including making African Studies a major and hosting more study abroad opportunities on the Af-

rican continent. How can we properly celebrate and honor Black History Month without sufficient opportunities to study the diaspora’s history?

A century ago, there were no Black students at Princeton. Fast forward to today, there are hundreds of Black Princeton alumni and we currently compose about a tenth of the University population. Yet, merely attracting and accepting Black students is not enough. We deserve to feel safe, included, and respected on campus. This is what the great Black leaders of our past would have wanted.

For me, the University still has several steps to take before I can believe that its commitment to Black students is genuine and not simply lip service.

Ndeye Thioubou is a sophomore from the Bronx, N.Y. She can be reached at nthioubou@ princeton.edu.

The price of greatness: we should preserve academic rigor at Princeton

The following is a guest contribution and reflects the author’s views alone. For information on how to submit an article to the Opinion Section, click here.

Princeton is an institution known for its academic excellence. For the 12th consecutive year, Princeton has been ranked the best national university in the country per the U.S. News and World Report.

Whether we care to admit it or not, it seems to me that most Princeton students and faculty are proud of that statistic. While I personally believe that Princeton is the greatest university on the planet, I also believe that greatness comes at a price.

There is no doubt that

Princeton is academically rigorous. With a history of grade deflation and a last report average undergraduate GPA of 3.49, Princeton has some of the most stringent grading in the Ivy League. Princeton is also one of the only Universities in the country that requires a senior thesis of every student (or in the case of some engineering concentrations, a substantial independent project). Yet it is this academic rigor that shapes students into the thoughtful, resilient, and intelligent leaders that Princeton is known for producing.

Unfortunately, academic rigor is under attack as many Princeton students call for the University to ease its high academic standards in the name of mental health.

I find this particularly disturbing because many of Princeton’s peers have already lowered their academic

standards. Elsewhere in the Ivy League, academic standards are lower and grade inflation is rampant. While other institutions are yielding on their commitment to excellence, Princeton is staying strong.

In light of significant pressure, President Eisgruber has taken a noble stand to preserve what makes Princeton great: academic rigor. As Eisgruber eloquently expressed in his recent op-ed, this academic challenge is a fundamental part of the Princeton experience and need not conflict with student mental health.

While many students claim that Princeton’s commitment to excellence is detrimental to their mental health, I agree with Eisgruber. We need to think deeply and critically about whether it is our academics or our self-destructive choices that are leading to our internal struggles. Can we realistically hope to maintain a high GPA when we are enrolled in six courses, hold several demanding student group leadership positions, and find ourselves on Prospect Avenue past midnight multiple times a week?

Academic challenges — and the discomforts that arise from those challenges — are part of the Princeton experience. Two of the most frequently dreaded elements of the Princeton experience are the first-year writing seminar and the senior thesis. While students

frequently complain about these requirements, they are vital components of the rigorous – and therefore worthwhile – education that Princeton provides.

While writing seminars can be frustratingly challenging (trust me, I am in one right now), it is a common struggle that unites all Princeton students and enables us to engage in proper scholarly discourse. By providing all Princeton students with the skills necessary to engage in scholarly discussion, the writing seminar enables Princeton students to interact with each other and the greater academic community in a critical and engaging way that leads to deeper insights and the capacity to conduct individual research.

Likewise, the senior thesis is another universal Princeton challenge, and it can cause significant anxiety for anyone who is writing one. While writing the senior thesis is certainly stressful, many alumni also claim writing their thesis was the most rewarding experience of their time at Princeton.

Just like writing seminars, the senior thesis prompts students to think deeply and critically, pushing them to their academic limit. It is a critical component of the rigorous Princeton academic experience that equips students for success later in life. Without this challenge to produce original research and insight, the Princeton

experience would lose much of its value.

It is out of this adversity that the value of a Princeton education is born. Employers, graduate schools, and most of the educated world understand that Princeton academics are challenging. More importantly, former Princeton students are able to recognize the significant obstacles they faced during their undergraduate years and can draw from the skills learned and confidence built by their academic struggles when they face greater challenges later in life.

Princeton is committed to preparing students to be leaders who answer difficult questions “in the nation’s service and the service of humanity.” As such, I believe that when we walked through those gates in front of Nassau Hall, we made a commitment to ourselves and this community to excellence in academics; if we wanted an easy way out, we should have chosen to attend an institution with lower academic standards … like Harvard.

Ethan Hicks is a guest contributor to the Prince who, despite his ability to write this article, remains uncertain about his ability to pass his first-year writing seminar. He can be reached at ethanhicks@ princeton.edu.

Ethan Hicks

Guest Contributor

JON ORT / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Reactions: Princeton faculty discuss ChatGPT in the classroom

In November 2022, OpenAI released a chatbot called ChatGPT — and immediately sparked a heated debate about the ethical use of artificial intelligence, especially in education. Trained on years of data obtained from the internet, ChatGPT garnered attention for its ability to potentially generate quirky sonnets and multi-paragraph essays, write code, and even compose music. The full implications of ChatGPT’s use are yet to be revealed, given its recent development.

A tool like any other

The biggest impact of ChatGPT in the classroom has been on tedious, ineffectual writing exercises, such as: “What are five good things and five bad things about biotech?” The fact that chatbots have gotten good at this is great news. Fortunately, that’s not how most of us teach at Princeton, so the impact so far has been relatively mild.

In general, though, how should we respond when a skill that we teach students becomes automatable? This happens all the time. The calculator is a good example. In some learning contexts, the calculator is prohibited, because learning arithmetic is the point. In other contexts, say a physics course, computing tools are embraced, because the point of the lesson is something else. We should use the same approach for AI. In addition to using AI as a tool in the classroom when appropriate, we should also incorporate it as an object of study and critique. Large language models (LLMs) are ac-

companied by heaps of hype and myth while so much about them is shrouded from view, such as the labor exploitation that makes them possible. Class discussions are an opportunity to peel back this curtain.

Students should also keep in mind that ChatGPT is a bullshit generator. I mean the term bullshit in the sense defined by philosopher Harry Frankfurt: speech that is intended to persuade without regard for the truth. LLMs are trained to produce plausible text, not true statements. They are still interesting and useful, but it’s important to know their limits. ChatGPT is shockingly good at sounding convincing on any conceivable topic. If you use it as a source for learning, the danger is that you can’t tell when it’s wrong unless you already know the answer.

Arvind Narayanan is a professor of computer science, affiliated with the Center for Information Technology Policy. He can be reached at arvindn@cs.princeton.edu.

ChatGPT will tank your GPA

I don’t believe any Princetonian — or college student in general — will be tempted to cheat with ChatGPT once they get to know it. You only need to spend a little time reading Twitter posts from users who’ve road-tested it to see what it’s likely to do to your GPA. It’s built on GPT 3.5, but you’ll have a 2.0.

ChatGPT makes errors of fact, errors of analysis, and errors of organization. At the least significant level, it can’t really discern fact from fiction. More importantly, it has no standards of logic to double-check its own analysis. For instance, one user got it to explain (in its characteristic earnest legalese) the meaning of an utterly impossible genetic theory, just by giving it a madeup scientific name.

The software organizes thoughts like a nervous high schooler who hasn’t prepared much for the AP English Language and Composition exam. It spits out one statement after another — all on topic, for sure, but in the same way that a shopping list is all on topic.

If you happened to get ChatGPT to write an A-level essay for you once, it would write a C-level the next time — each of them in the same self-assured voice. The software also has the voice of a middle-aged compliance lawyer, so if you happen not to be middleaged, or particularly officious in your prose, your professor with their fleshand-blood brain will be able to tell within two lines that this was written by artificial neurons. I teach SPI 365: Tech/Ethics, and there are theories of machine learning that will tell you this type of model will never truly understand, and therefore never be able to analyze. And there are ethics of academic honesty too, which compel you not to try it. But I think it’ll come down to your self-interest: you won’t risk your grade to use a tool that will almost certainly fail.

Steven Kelts is a lecturer in SPIA and often the Center for Human Values. He also leads the GradFutures initiative on Ethics of AI. He teaches SPI 365: Tech/Ethics. Find him online or at kelts@princeton.edu.

However, in academic circles, some have noted that students may rely on ChatGPT to cheat and plagiarize, while others point out that ChatGPT is a helpful tool for generating ideas and modeling responsible use of technology.

With this in mind, we asked a few Princeton faculty members for their opinions on ChatGPT’s role and uses, if any, in the classroom.

ChatGPT isn’t at our level

Rather than representing the end of the college essay, ChatGPT offers an opportunity to reflect on exactly what is valuable about a liberal arts education.

ChatGPT is a fascinating tool, and I’ve been playing around with it in relation to the assignments for my Writing Seminar (WRI 106/7: Seeking Nature).

For some tasks, it’s potentially useful — it seems to be okay at generating summaries of sources, which could eventually help more advanced students speed up the research process, akin to reading abstracts before diving into a full article. But because Writing Seminar is about building skills, including how to understand sources and how to craft arguments, asking ChatGPT to summarize a source is only a useful shortcut for students who can summarize sources themselves. Without that skill, they won’t be able to take the next step. Being able to read a source and extract its main claim is the kind of analytical task that requires practice, a task that stands to

benefit critical and creative thinking and problem-solving. This is the work of the Writing Seminar.

Beyond summarizing scholarly sources, it seems like the technology is still fairly limited — let’s rein in the idea that all human writing is in danger of being made obsolete! After all, good writing reflects original thinking, and by its own admission, ChatGPT can only “generate text based on patterns in the data.” While noticing patterns is often the first step in producing interesting, important writing, it is only the first step. ChatGPT can’t produce original interpretations based on those patterns. So, once students have a handle on understanding sources, my goal is to introduce them to ChatGPT as a tool to help them track patterns on the road to insightful analysis and original argument — the kind of thinking that, at least for now, AI Chatbots can’t manage.

Sarah Case is a lecturer for Princeton’s Writing Program. She can be reached at secase@princeton.edu.

A ChatGPT-agnostic approach

Before teaching a large undergraduate course in Computer Science theory, my co-instructor Dr. Pedro Paredes and I played around with ChatGPT to get a sense of how students might use it. We were most concerned about ChatGPT solving problem set questions from scratch, so we gave that a shot first. Every time Dr. Paredes or I queried ChatGPT and skimmed its response, I broke into a huge panic: “*&!%, it actually solved it, what are we going to do!?” (And what’s my role in society now!?) Yet when I read the responses a second time, I realized the solution was actually nonsense. ChatGPT seems to be phenomenal at producing answers that match the language structure of correct solutions (e.g. it makes good use of “Therefore,” “To see this, observe,” and “pigeonhole principle”), but the logical content is largely nonsense (e.g. it claims two is an irrational number, and 10 plus 10 is 10). Of course, detecting language structure is easy while skimming, but evaluating the underlying logic takes active thought.

Fortunately, we couldn’t find a way for ChatGPT to undermine the pedagogy of the course (I again initially panicked when we first queried ChatGPT after its “improved math capabilities,” but fortunately the answers are still nonsense). So, we ultimately decided to have a ChatGPT-agnostic policy. We put in effort explaining to students that ChatGPT solutions will be frustrating for graders to evaluate, and they’d ultimately receive lowerthan-blank scores (see here and here — we also tried to share thoughts on other potential uses). Of course, large language models may get better at logic in the future, and we’ll have to adapt.

On a positive note, dissecting ChatGPT-generated solutions helps us teach the valuable skill of distinguishing between logically sound text and text that initially seems convincing but is ultimately BS — we’ve lightly incorporated this into the curriculum.

Matt Weinberg is an assistant professor in computer science. He can be reached by email at smweinberg@princeton.edu.

Consistency matters in campus free speech debates

Last week, the Department of English hosted Mohammed El-Kurd, a left-wing writer and anti-Israel activist, for its annual Edward W. Said ’57 Memorial Lecture. El-Kurd, a 24-year-old columnist for The Nation, has a long history of making incendiary anti-Israel statements. His past comparisons of Jewish Israelis to “Nazis,” his praise for the Second Intifada, and his defense of a University of Southern California student who said she wanted to “kill” Zionists are just a few examples. El-Kurd’s past statements are obscene and depraved, and his searing antiIsrael views, as shown, obviously verge into blatant antisemitism. In addition, both El-Kurd’s contemptible past commentary and his raucous campus appearance on Feb. 8 clearly demonstrate his preference for brazen prejudice and circus-like provocation over serious intellectual engagement. Much of the campus’s response to El-Kurd’s appearance was jus-

tified and reasonable. El-Kurd’s views were harshly condemned by many Jewish students and the leaders of both of the University’s Jewish chaplaincies. But in their understandable frustration with the English department’s decision to give El-Kurd a platform, some students appeared to urge that important aspects of institutional neutrality to be set aside in order to elicit official condemnations of El-Kurd and his appearance on campus. A letter, authored by Alexandra Orbuch ’25 and reportedly signed by over 40 students, called on the English department to “openly denounce” El-Kurd and “condemn” its own event.

While the letter’s signatories professed “full support” for the robust freedom of speech and freedom of inquiry protections contained within Section 1.1.3. of Rights, Rules, and Responsibilities, they overlooked the part of Section 1.1.3. that affirms that “it is for the individual members of the University community” and “not for the University as an institution” to judge whether speech is “offensive, unwise, immoral, or wrong-headed.” The English

department, as a constituent institution of the University, has no business issuing statements or taking official positions on speech-related issues.

Of course, the English department’s actual commitment to institutional neutrality is nonexistent. The acting department chair’s claim that “the Department as a whole does not issue statements,” offered in advance of El-Kurd’s appearance, is laughable and easily proven untrue, given that its website features a highly contestable statement taking ideological positions on racism and colonialism in literature. Even so, the English department’s obvious hypocrisy is not an excuse for community members — who are ostensibly committed to a free and open campus environment — to themselves advocate for further breaches of institutional neutrality. As others have eloquently expressed in this publication’s pages before, a steadfast dedication to upholding institutional neutrality is an essential and inextricable aspect of the University’s stated commitment to freedom of thought, inquiry, and expression. In short,

without consistent faithfulness to principles of institutional neutrality, Princeton compromises its ability to fulfill its truth-seeking mission.

It would have been wrong for the English department to denounce and condemn its own event, just as it was wrong for the dean of the School of Public and International Affairs to send an institution-wide memo decrying Kyle Rittenhouse’s acquittal as “dangerous,” and wrong for the classics department to issue an official statement denouncing a professor’s protected speech as “fundamentally incompatible with our mission and values as educators.” The deplorable nature of El-Kurd’s past statements and the widespread violations of institutional neutrality elsewhere at Princeton do not justify attempts by those who profess a commitment to free speech and open inquiry to abandon those principles when they feel it suits them.

Rather, as the University of Chicago’s renowned Kalven Report notes, abridgments of institutional neutrality must be carefully limited to “exceptional”

situations where a university’s mission is at risk or academic freedom is itself under threat. ElKurd’s appearance, while highly inflammatory and understandably offensive to many, does not meet those exceedingly high standards.

Instead of clamoring for institution-wide censures and official condemnations, we as students are called to vigorously debate and critically engage with those whose opinions we find abhorrent or objectionable. Indeed, this is what several attendees at the El-Kurd event sought to do. For those of us who are truly committed to building a university that consistently upholds freedom of thought, inquiry, and expression, such a method of serious and critical engagement represents the only principled approach to challenging anti-intellectual provocateurs like El-Kurd.

Matthew Wilson is a junior in the Department of Politics from Ashburn, Va. He can be reached at mxwilson@princeton.edu.

Matthew Wilson

Contributing Columnist

Sarah Case GS ’18 Writing Program

Professor Arvind Narayanan Department of Computer Science

Steven Kelts School of Public and International Affairs

Assistant Professor Matt Weinberg Department of Computer Science

vol. cxlvii

editor-in-chief

Rohit Narayanan '24

business manager

Shirley Ren ’24

BOARD OF TRUSTEES

president Thomas E. Weber ’89

vice president

David Baumgarten ’06

secretary

Chanakya A. Sethi ’07

treasurer Douglas Widmann ’90

assistant treasurer

Kavita Saini ’09

trustees

Francesca Barber

Craig Bloom ’88

Kathleen Crown

Suzanne Dance ’96

Gabriel Debenedetti ’12

Stephen Fuzesi ’00

Zachary A. Goldfarb ’05

Michael Grabell ’03

John G. Horan ’74

Danielle Ivory ’ 05

Rick Klein ’98

James T. MacGregor ’66

Julianne Escobedo Shepherd

Abigail Williams ’14

Tyler Woulfe ’07

trustees ex officio

Rohit Narayanan ’24

Shirley Ren ’24

147TH MANAGING BOARD

upper management

Kalena Blake ’24

Katherine Dailey ’ 24

Julia Nguyen 24

Angel Kuo ’ 24

Hope Perry ’ 24

Strategic initiative directors

Archivist

Gabriel Robare ’24

Education

Kareena Bhakta ’ 24

Amy Ciceu 24

Financial Stipend Program

Genrietta Churbanova 24

Mobile Reach

Rowen Gesue ’24

DEIB Chair

Christofer Robles ’25

Sections listed in alphabetical order.

head audience editor

Rowen Gesue ’24

associate audience editors

Laura Robertson ’24

Paige Walworth ’26

head copy editors

Jason Luo ’25

Nathalie Verlinde ’24

associate head copy editors

Tiffany Cao ’24

Naisha Sylvestre ’25

head data editor

Elaine Huang ’25

Charlie Roth ’25

head features editors

Paige Cromley ’24

Tori Tinsley ’24

associate features editor

Sejal Goud ’25

head graphics editors

Noreen Hosny ’25

Katelyn Ryu ’25

head humor editors

Spencer Bauman ’25

Liana Slomka ’23

associate humor editors

Sam McComb ’25

Sophia Varughese ’26

head news editors

Sandeep Mangat ’24

Isabel Yip ’25

associate news editors

Lia Opperman ’25

Annie Rupertus ’25

Tess Weinreich ’25

head newsletter editors

Olivia Chen ’26

Sidney Singer ’25

associate newsletter editor

Aly Rashid ’26

head opinion editor

Abigail Rabieh ’25

community opinion editor

Lucia Wetherill ’25

associate opinion editors

Eleanor Clemans-Cope ’26

Ashley Olenkiewicz ’25

head photo editor

Jean Shin ’26

head podcast editor

Eden Teshome ’25

associate podcast editors

Senna Aldoubosh ’25

Kavya Kamath ’26

head print design editors

Avi Chesler ’25

Malia Gaviola ’26

head prospect editors

Kerrie Liang ’25

Claire Shin ’25

associate prospect editors

Isabella Dail ’26

Joshua Yang ’25

head puzzles editors

Joah Macosko ’25

Simon Marotte ’26

associate puzzles editors

Juliet Corless ’24

Sarah Gemmell ’24

Jaeda Woodruff ’25

head sports editors

Nishka Bahl ’26

Wilson Conn ’25

associate sports editors

Cole Keller ’26

Brian Mhando ’26

head web design and development editors

Ananya Grovr ’24

Brett Zeligson ’24

associate web design and development editor

Vasila Mirshamsova ’26

147TH BUSINESS BOARD

assistant business manager

Aidan Phillips ’25

business directors

Benjamin Cai ’24

Juliana Li ’24

Samantha Lee ’24

Gabriel Gullett ’25

Amanda Cai ’25

Jonathan Lee ’24

project managers

Brian Zhou ’26

Sophia Shepherd ’26

Andrew He ’26

Diya Dalia ’24

Tejas Iyer ’26

Laura Zhang ’26

Dauen Kim ’26

Julia Cabri ’24

Jessica Funk ’26

Tony Ye ’23

Anika Agarwal ’25

147TH TECHNOLOGY BOARD

chief technology officer

Joanna Tang ’24

lead software engineer

Roma Bhattacharjee ’25

software engineers

Eugenie Choi ’24

Carter Costic ’26

Dylan Esptein-Gross ’26

Avi Chesler ’25

Malia Gaviola ’26

Ishaan Javali ’26

Adam Kelch ’26

Tai Sanh Nguyen ’26

John Ramirez ’26

Aidan Phillips ’25

Jessie Wang ’25

Shannon Yeow ’26

Brett Zeligson ’24

Annabel Green ’26

BY

Lindsay Pagaduan ’26

VALUES

Continued from page 1

might.

Conservatives such as Hazony argue that the University should define its own purpose for students, whereas liberals push for students to define the purpose of the University on their own. But now that the University has a greater liberal influence than before, conservatives are caught in a pickle. Hazony disagrees with the direction of the University, but conservative ideological commitments prevent conservatives from changing it on their own.

For conservatives to win, the Princeton administration must recognize their ideological perspective — which doesn’t seem to be happening anytime soon. And so they sink into despair.

Based on his interviews with alumni, including Hazony, Walter notes that conservatives are “apt to speak in pessimistic — or even apocalyptic — tones about the future of the place they once loved.”

He notes several specific complaints that depict a severe unhappiness with the direction of the University. McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence Robert George notes that “the kids come in pre-indoctrinated.” Sev Onyshkevych ’83 wrote that conservatives are “excluded, explicitly, and with malice.” And Matt Schmitz ’08 says that elite universities like Princeton preach “a new creed — called ‘social justice,’ ‘wokeism,’ or ‘the successor ideology.’”

If we bought this theory, we might say that Princeton has a terrible habit of political profiling: that it has a vitriolic agenda that pre-selects students with the right ideas, purposely oppresses those who engage in “wrongthink,” and

pushes the new American religion of wokeness upon everybody. Conservatives attempt to justify their inability to win battles on campus by suggesting the dominant ideology is oppressive to any debate at all — “woke neo-Marxism,” to be exact.

But this misunderstands what the dominant forces on campus are. Let’s take one of the most criticized apostles of the modern University: Professor Dan-el Padilla Peralta ’06, who states that students need “the tools to tear down this place and make it a better one.” Though my grasp on neo-marxism is tenuous at best, I feel confident that this sentiment is very much not in that category. It is a liberalist view of education: Students should use what they learn here to work towards creating a new, informed-by-reason-andnot-by-tradition, vision of Ivory Tower. Padilla Peralta’s argument encourages us to think entirely for ourselves, and build a brand new institution with a brand new purpose.

Unfortunately for conservatives who like to complain, their values can fit within the liberal theory. If each generation of students chooses their values, we could choose values of free speech, of historical preservation, and of a values-focused curriculum. Yet even still, this will not be enough for the conservative movement, which can only win when the University itself, not just the student body, prioritizes these principles. If conservatives wanted to wage a war of persuasion within the liberal conception of the university, they would face a difficult battle. But a debate can be unequal and still be fair. Instead of heralding the doom of conservatism on campus or succumbing to the depression of losing

the home-turf advantage in the debate over the fate of Princeton education, conservatives need to stay and engage with the discourse they have. I am not blind to the problems within the University: I think we could do a much better job of listening to diverse viewpoints and welcoming and creating intelligent discourse, both improvements that conservatives tend to associate with their mission. Though I’m not sure Princeton did such a laudable job at either of those pursuits 50 years ago, I recognize how they could help restore Princeton to an ideal of the past — a place where one can develop the “common sense philosophy” for which John Witherspoon strived, to help “guide a life of virtue.” So what can conservatives do to make sure their mission lives on? For one, they can continue to center their disputes with the University as academic disagreements rather than cries of unfairness and maltreatment. The debates over key University policies are too central to our development to ignore, and conservatives have a responsibility to openly discuss this question with the “other side.” Otherwise, Princeton risks becoming a safe haven for only one type of thought, while it should be a beacon of opportunity for people of disparate opinions to have the opportunity to engage in verbal combat with each other.

Abigail Rabieh is a prospective history concentrator and sophomore from Cambridge, MA. She is the Head Opinion Editor at the ‘Prince’ and can be reached by email at arabieh@princeton.edu or on Twitter at @AbigailRabieh.

“Unfortunately for conservatives who like to complain, their values can fit within the liberal theory.”

the PROSPECT.

By José Pablo Fernández García Head Prospect Editor Emeritus

Day One

We gathered in front of McCarter to get on our bus when it was still dark and early — not bright and early, for the sun only rose over the LCA moments before our departure and after I’d had my breakfast muffin. At last, after three years, two junior papers, and one supposedly-but-not-yet-actually drafted thesis chapter, the Princeton Triangle Club and I were back on the road for a national tour. TriTour 2023 had begun.

First stop: Bryn Mawr, Penn. We’re usually met by lots of theater staff, but our welcome party here consisted of one door left propped open by security. As the Master Electrician who ensures that the lights turn on without falling onto the stage, I was one of the first ones off the bus. I was joined by the rest of the “away team”, consisting of other principal technicians and tour managers. As we crossed through the propped open door, we realized it was the perfect first venue.

Perfection is a funny concept. This venue wasn’t perfect by being as large and wellequipped as our familiar McCarter haunts; rather, it was perfect because it offered nearly every problem one can have on tour in a manageable dose. The stage and wings were so small that only half of our set fit. The pit orchestra was relegated to a classroom on a different floor of the building and piped in through the sound system.

And the lighting system was so limited that we had only three options: on, off, and blue. It was the perfect way to initiate a tour company in which only a fraction of the club had prior TriTour experience. Everyone quickly learned how to adapt our show for whatever a venue may throw at us as showtime swiftly arrived.

It was all running smoothly. The lights went down on the first act, intermission passed, and the second act began with three cast members singing in front of the main curtain. The act two opening number built up to its big reveal where the main curtain opens. But it was only part way open when it decided to add to the percussion of our song. With a ruckus, the curtain refused to open further, so the cast had to finish the song while others manually pulled the curtain fabric back.

To save the rest of the show, Aliha Mughal ’23, our technical director, announced to the audience a brief pause while the rest of TriTech scurried to set up a ladder. While technician Mason El-Habr ’23 worked on the curtain, our British monster, Irving, entertained the patient crowd, thanks to puppeteers Asher Muldoon ’23, Kate Short ’23, and Gabby Veciana ’24.

Then, we all raced to pack it all up before heading back to Princeton for one more night. My past self was smart enough to have already done laundry but not kind enough to have packed my suitcase. Only after stuffing my carry-on bag did

I get to enjoy my bed one last time before a week on the road.

Day Two

With another early morning start, we departed again from McCarter, this time for D.C. Well, really, for Silver Spring, Md. — the first stop on the 2020 tour and a stop on many tours before. Since some of us already knew this venue, it wasn’t too hard a day, though it was short — another matinée.

It was simultaneously odd and comforting to be back: That 2020 tour was a highlight of my freshman year, and one of the last things I did before the pandemic hit. My chronicle of that tour was one of my earliest pieces for this paper; I had once planned to write four of these. The day felt very much like a bookend.

The show went on without a hitch, and we cut down the time it took us to strike and pack the truck by 20 minutes. After a dinner of Chinese food in honor of Lunar New Year, we hopped on the bus to Breezewood, Penn., where we spent the night in a hotel.

Day Three Minutes after 7 A.M., I’m the first one to arrive at the hotel’s complimentary breakfast, where I found a waffle maker. I started making waffles for the mob I knew would inevitably show up when we would be only six waffles away from our departure time.

Overnight, it had snowed. From my window seat on the bus, I saw a world in white and browns sweep by. There was no

dimension to the sky or snow

— just the occasional swatch of once-dried grasses or legion of barren trees revealed any form of the Pennsylvanian mountains that rose from each side of the highway.

It was lunchtime when we arrived at the suburban Ohio private all-boys high school that was hosting us, and I was served a large portion of déjà vu. While I stole some moments to work on my thesis at a hallway table, the passing parade of collared shirts, khakis, and Sperrys reminded me of my own high school years in the opposite corner of the state.

After the show ended, it was finally time for our first night of alumni homestays. The high school lobby felt like an airport baggage claim, where alumni waited to receive their assigned students. Students waited for their assigned hospitality, nostalgia, and small talk dressed loyally in orange and black.

Day Four

Waking up on a magnificently hard bed and soft pillow, I was fairly well rested and ready for our first day with no show — and the first without any time in a theater since Jan. 14. Unfortunately, we were in Cleveland, which I was obligated to knock down a peg or two as a proud Cincinnatian. But it could’ve been worse: I could’ve been an Ohioan stuck in Michigan.

After a morning at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, I found myself sitting alone at the dark wooden bar of a largely empty restaurant in Little Italy. As I ate my lunch of chicken picca-

First day to fraying: On Triangle Tour 2023, Part One What you’ll say about me

By Claire Shin | Head Prospect Editor

When your friends ask what happened to me, I know what you’ll say. You will shrug and say that you could never date an American girl. You will shrug and say we were just never a good match, that an American girl could never understand you the way a Japanese girl could. It’s where you spent 18 years of your life, anyway. It’s what you’re used to.

But I don’t think that’s true.

You’re not used to Japanese girls. You’re used to girls who don’t take up space in your life. Quiet girls who disappear into the turbulence of your schedule, who rarely ask you to spend time with them because you’re so goddamn busy all the time. Girls who can read your mind. Girls who know exactly when to leave you alone and when to text you to hang out. Girls who greet you with a smile on their lips when you finally meet them after canceling on them three times. Girls who never express their needs because they have none.

Maybe such women exist — most likely, they don’t. Regardless, I am not one of them. Me? I am fire and frost. I am the first thing you notice when you walk into a room and the last thing you wave goodbye to when you leave. I am the antithesis of invisible. I am the center of worlds. I am thorns and the roses that produce them. I am a tempest, yet I quelled the intensity of my emotions into a calm blue sky just to keep you comfortable. I am a giant, yet I loved you so much that I shrunk myself to fit into your endless list of priorities, of which I was the last. I was the first thing you crossed off once you realized you were running out of time.

I am a giant, and I would have turned myself into a mouse because I loved you.

If you had given me the opportunity, I would have learned to shape-shift — learned to be content with being relegated to a tiny semi-elliptical residence next to your bedroom door. I probably would have found it cozy in there; I would have built myself a fireplace and adorable miniature chairs and china sets in which we could drink honey lemon ginger tea, like we did back

when you had the flu and your love was still a certainty. I would have squeaked with joy like a little kid when you came to check on me every once in a while.

I am a giant, and I would have turned myself into a mouse because I loved you.

Sometimes I wonder who I’d be if you had stayed. I don’t know if I could have kept up my second form, kept my colossal spirit sandwiched like a caged bird between my abysmal self-esteem and my love for you. But I like to think that, eventually, I really would’ve become a mouse. I like to think that, over time, I would have come to terms with my reduced existence. I would have loved it because I loved you. Others will tell me that’s toxic, but I see it as a compromise. All relationships require compromise, don’t they? And I would’ve compromised damn near everything to keep you.

I am a giant, and I would have turned myself into a mouse because I loved you.

Everybody says that people won’t remember what you say, but they will never forget how you made them feel. I will never forget either. Your words are etched into the folds of my gray matter like the scars of a gunshot wound. Words like “I guess so” and “I’ll think about it,” — words defined differently written across your lips than in a dictionary. I am a shapeshifter, not a telepath, but you and I are close enough for me to know that “I’ll think about it” is a poorly veiled “I gave up already and I don’t know how to tell you.” When I hung my head in defeat at Lan Ramen, where you told me those words, you were witnessing my heart fracture in real time.

And so, your friends will ask you what happened to me and you will shrug and say we just weren’t a good match, but I would have loved you forever in all your kaleidoscopic glory if you just stuck around. You will say you can’t date American girls, but you’re wrong. My superpower has nothing to do with being American or Japanese or Korean American and everything to do with how freely I give my love to those who misplace it. My mistake. You might read this with a slightly furrowed brow,

ta, I thought of how every Triangle-related endeavor always had its point of social exhaustion. Among a busload of so many who bask in the spotlight on or off stage, there comes a moment when all I wanted was to turn off the spotlight. To stop giving so much while left in the dark myself. So, I took to the sunny sidewalk to find that quiet meal, to find a warm coffee and dessert, to find my way back to my reliable oasis: a peaceful art museum.

Conveniently enough, the bus is set to pick us up just steps away from the entrance to the Cleveland Museum of Art. I had just under an hour to wander inside. I started with the temporary exhibition on 19th-century French drawing and then wound my way past frame after frame until I arrived before an apparently iconic George Bellows oil painting of a boxing match. What could have been a smooth glossy work was instead left more raw, less worked. The visible brushstrokes oscillated between an evocation of movement so fast it blurs, and bodies so strained their tension was palpable — flesh on the verge of fraying.

Halfway through the tour, this sense of fraying — physically and emotionally — resonated deeply, still four days away from a return to Princeton.

José Pablo Fernández García is a senior from Ohio and Head Editor Emeritus for The Prospect at the ‘Prince.’ He can be reached at jpgarcia@princeton.edu.

and you will think, “I don’t know why she’s making such a big deal about this when we only dated for a month.” And to be honest, I don’t know either; maybe it was the hearts I broke so we could be together, or the little things you remembered about me like that my favorite starter Pokémon is Piplup, or that you had “Late Night Talking” by Harry Styles on repeat for a week after I showed it to you. I can’t expect you to know all the answers when I’m just as clueless. But you do know that when I fall, I plummet. It’s one of my biggest vices. You knew.

You knew that I am a giant, and I would have turned myself into a mouse because I loved you.

So don’t you dare forget that when your friends ask you what happened to me.

Claire Shin is a head editor for The Prospect at the ‘Prince.’ She can be reached at claireshin@princeton.edu, on Instagram at @claireshin86, or on TikTok also at @ claireshin86.

The Prospect 11 Weekly Event Roundup

By Megan Specht, contributor

Resonance

Princeton Roaring 20 Richardson Auditorium

Feb. 18, 2023, 8 p.m.

Roaring 20 celebrates 40 years! Enjoy a packed night of entertainment featuring Roaring 20, Princeton’s premier co-ed a cappella group, and special performances by BodyHype, the Mixtapes of NYU, and Fuzzy Dice.

Shaandaar: A Royal Affair

Naacho Dance Company

Frist Theatre

Feb. 18, 2023, 6 p.m. and 9 p.m.

Get ready for a night of excitement! Princeton’s premier South Asian dance company presents their annual dance show themed around South Asian royalty, featuring both traditional and contemporary dance styles. Tickets are available online via University Ticketing or in person on the 200 level at Frist Campus Center.

Black Panther 2: Wakanda Forever A Screening and a Conversation

Aisha Beliso De-Jesús, Rhaisa Williams, & Keishla Rivera-Lopez

Princeton Garden Theatre

Feb. 22, 2023, 5 p.m.

Join assistant professor of theater Rhaisa Williams, professor and Effron Center director Aisha Beliso De-Jesús, and Effron Center lecturer Keishla Rivera-Lopez at the Princeton Garden Theatre to watch and discuss “Black Panther 2: Wakanda Forever.” This event is free admission for students, and boxed meals will be provided.

Program in Visual Arts Film/ Video Classes Screening

Program in Visual Arts

185 Nassau Street

Feb. 22, 2023, 7:30 p.m.

Students in VIS 263: Documentary Filmmaking

I, VIS 220: Digital Animation, VIS 265: Narrative Filmmaking I, and VIS 365: Narrative Filmmaking II are screening their short films. There will be refreshments. Come see the wonderful works of your peers!

Carnival

Princeton University Sinfonia

Richardson Auditorium

Feb. 23, 7:30 p.m.

Mitsuko Uchida Piano Concert

Mitsuko Uchida

Richardson Auditorium Feb. 15–16, 2023, 7 p.m.

Mitsuko Uchida will perform Beethoven’s last three piano sonatas in a concert described by organizers as “an exquisite combination of monumental music performed by one of the most revered artists of our time.” Tickets are available via University Ticketing.

Thomas Edison Film Festival Discussion

Thomas A. Edison Media Arts Consortium & Princeton’s Program in Visual Arts

Virtual Feb. 18, 2023, 6 p.m. over Zoom

Meet the festival director and filmmakers over Zoom to discuss the films screened the day prior, Feb. 17, and which are available on-demand the whole week. This event is hosted by Festival Director Jane Steuerwald, Festival Associate and juror Henry Baker, and Curator Emerita of the National Gallery of Art Margaret Parsons. freezes all around campus.

Autumn Rewind Show

Theatre Intime

Hamilton Murray Theater

Feb. 24–26, 2023, 8 p.m.

Come see a student production on time travel, love, and assassinations, directed by Le’Naya Wilkerson ’25. Romantic, regal, and riveting — what more could you want? Tickets are available online through University Ticketing or in person at the Theatre Intime box office.

Join Sinfonia in their first concert of 2023 focused on the carnival season with playful, fantastical pieces. The concert will also include a tribute to the one-year anniversary of the war in Ukraine. Tickets are available via University Ticketing. This concert will also be livestreamed.

Bach and Shaw: The Princeton University Glee Club Concert

Princeton University Glee Club

Richardson Auditorium

Feb. 25, 2023, 7:30 p.m.

Princeton’s Glee Club is performing their annual Walter L. Nollner Memorial Concert, featuring choral works by Baroque and contemporary composers. On the program is Bach’s “Magnificat” and select works by Caroline Shaw.

Westminster Conservatory Showcase

Westminster Conservatory

Richardson Auditorium

Feb. 19, 2023, 3 p.m.

In their annual showcase, Westminster ensembles and students will perform with features from the Westminster Conservatory chorus, winners of the Westminster Conservatory Piano Concerto Competition, and students of the Westminster Honors Music Program. The concert also includes the world premiere of “The Tundra” by Westminster Choir College of Rider University senior Kyle St. Sauveur.

Hip-Hop Techniques and Foundations Class with Sekou Heru

Lauren Auyeung

Ellie’s Studio, Lewis Arts Complex

Feb. 18, 2023, 1:30 p.m.

Drop in to this class to learn about the many dance forms that exist under the umbrella of hip-hop. In the session, expect to learn physical techniques and how to synthesize elements of groove, musicality, texture, footwork, and personal expression in your own individual improvisation.

This Week in Photos

Springtime Glow: This week, students captured sunsets and shows as the spring rolls in.

By Jean Shin, Nathan Gage, Kaylee Kasper, Louisa Gheorghita & Aarushi Adlakha Head Photo Editor & Contributing Photographers

Jesse Marsch ’96 deal with Southampton falls apart

ALUMNI By Hayk Yengibaryan Assistant Sports Editor

As of Wednesday morning, talks between Southampton and former Leeds United manager Jesse Marsch ’96 had broken down due to disagreements on the length of his contract. The club was only willing to offer him a short-term contract — Marsch was hoping for a longer one.

Marsch, who was sacked by Leeds United last Monday, was set to take over the West Yorkshire club Tuesday morning when CBS Sports and the Athletic reported that he would be the successor to Nathan Jones at Southampton.

The Princeton alum helped Leeds United avoid relegation from the Premier League last season, and would have faced a massive uphill battle with Southampton this sea-

son as their third manager of the 2022–23 campaign. Southampton currently sits at the bottom of the Premier League with 15 points out of 66 possible. Their former manager, Nathan Jones, lasted only 14 games with the club, and did not secure a single home point.

Rubén Sellés, assistant manager for Southampton, will continue as caretaker manager for the club on Saturday when the team takes on Chelsea.

According to The Guardian, Southampton is interested in former Manchester United legend and current D.C. United coach Wayne Rooney, as well as former Everton manager Frank Lampard, to lead the club for the rest of the season.

Hayk Yengibaryan is an assistant editor for the Sports section at the ‘Prince.’

Women’s Fencing repeats as Ivy Champs; All-Ivy Honors announced

By Cole Keller & Ava Seigel Associate Sports Editor & Sports Contributor

“They kinda creamed them.”

These are the words of men’s sophomore epée Ryan Lee in reference to the women’s team’s victories this past weekend.

No. 2 ranked Princeton women’s fencing swept their competition at the annual Ivy League Fencing Round-Robins in Ithaca, N.Y. The women’s team went a perfect 6–0 in the tournament by winning an impressive 23 of 27 bouts against Brown, then securing the Ivy League Championship title with 20 of 27 bouts against the Columbia Lions.

The men’s team, also ranked No. 2 in the nation, ended the tournament in third place with a 2–2 record.

Fencing is divided into three different weapons: foil, saber, and epée. In a

given match, there are 27 total bouts up for grabs.

Despite the sport being equally a team and an individual effort, there were many notable individual achievements this weekend for the Tigers, such as first-year epée Hadley Husisian securing a First Team Epée All-Ivy League honor by placing first place in her weapon (14–2).

“Each person’s performance on the strip was in the service of securing the team its overall victory,” Husisian said to the ‘Prince.’ “After spending the whole year training together, it was really special to be able to celebrate each win as a group of people who wholeheartedly supported one another.”

Along with Husisian’s performance, sophomore epée Jessica Lin placed third (11–5), sophomore foil Maia Weintraub secured first place (14–3), senior foil May Tieu followed Wein -

traub in second (14–4), and senior saber Chloe Fox-Gitomer finished in second (16–2).

Each Tiger earned their own All-Ivy League Honoree position in their weapons.

“I feel very happy about successfully defending our team title as well as my own individual title,” Weintraub wrote to the ‘Prince.’ “I’ve really come to love fencing and competing alongside my teammates, and I think it shows in our results.”

Lin won the dramatic final bout versus Columbia, which ended 20–7 and gave Princeton the Ivy League championship.

“Our team is incredibly close-knit, and I think we’re unlike most sports teams on campus,” Husisian said. “The men and women train together every day, which adds an extra layer of support … even before practices officially began, the upperclass -

men [cultivated] a fun, hard-working, inclusive team atmosphere.”

“I’m incredibly proud of the women’s team for fighting their hearts out,” junior epée Tristan Szapary wrote to the Daily Princetonian. “It was one of the most dominant performances I’ve ever seen.”

On the men’s side, Szapary improved upon his 7–5 performance from last year to a 9–3 match record, earning his own first-place ranking and First Team Epée All-Ivy League Honoree status. Lee (6–3) took All-Ivy First Team epée. Junior Jasper Levy (6–6) earned Second Team All-Ivy Honoree in foil. Firstyear Matthew Limb (6–4) took Second Team saber All-Ivy, and sophomore Ronald Anglade (6–6) also earned a Second Team saber All-Ivy Honoree. With an eye toward the NCAA regionals on Mar. 11, the women’s and

men’s teams hope to secure the national title for the first time since 2013.

“At the end of the day, the teams [are] the sharpest I’ve ever seen and I feel confident going into regionals and NCAAs,” Szapary said.

“This strong performance at Ivies for a second time in a row shows what we’re capable of doing,” Weintraub added. “I believe all that’s left for us to do is fence our hearts out at [the NCAA tournament] and show everyone exactly what kind of team we are. A winning team.”

Cole Keller is an associate editor for the Sports section at the ‘Prince.’

Ava Seigel is a contributor to the Sports section at the ‘Prince.’

Women’s fencing poses with the Ivy League championship trophy.

“FC RB SALZBURG VERSUS CSKA SOFIA (TESTSPIEL 3. JULI 2019) 06“ BY WERNER100359/ CC BY-SA 3.0

Marsch pictured during his time with the Austrian side Red Bull Salzburg.

Women’s basketball downs Dartmouth, 64–47

By Tony Owens & Isabel Rodrigues Sports Contributor & Staff Sports Writer

On Saturday, Feb. 11, the women’s basketball team (17–5 overall, 8–2 Ivy League) extended their winning streak to nine games by defeating a struggling Dartmouth (2–22, 0–10), 64–47.

The Tigers got off to a hot start, beginning the game on a 12–2 run fueled by five early points from senior guard Julia Cunningham. The game remained fairly even for the rest of the first, though, as Princeton ended the quarter with the same 10-point advantage, at 20–10. The Tigers were strong on both ends of the court, shooting 60 percent from the field while simultaneously holding the Big Green to 28.6 percent. The Tigers also forced Dartmouth into three turnovers and three fouls while outscoring them in the paint by a margin of 14 to four.

The second quarter was much more balanced as the Big Green outscored the Tigers, 13–11. Two key factors were Dartmouth’s nine-tosix rebound advantage in the quarter, and Princeton being held to 38.5 percent from the field while the Big Green shot at 46.2 percent.

A layup by Dartmouth guard Victoria Page cut the Tigers’ advantage to as low as six, but a three-point dagger by first-year guard Madison St. Rose and layups by Cunningham and sophomore center Paige Morton extended the Tiger lead to 29–16. A 5–0 Big Green run to end the quarter resulted in an eight-point advantage for the Tigers as the first half came to a close.

“There were parts of the first half that went well, and then I thought we got a little tired,” head coach Carla Berube said.

“I mean, there was a stretch where there wasn’t a dead ball for, I don’t even know, several minutes, I think.”

“It just hit us a little bit, and then we threw the ball away a couple of times and forced a couple of shots when we shouldn’t,“ Berube continued.

“So [we] got back to us defending better and getting out in transition and getting some easing scoring opportunities.”

Both teams began the second half trading baskets. With just over six minutes remaining in the third, the Tigers were in front, 36–27. Junior guard Kaitlyn Chen began to take over in the third quarter, first earning and converting two free throws, and then tossing in a layup off of junior forward Ellie Mitchell’s sixth rebound. Later, Chen found Morton for a layup, raising her assist total to four and the Tiger lead to 19. Two free throws from St. Rose would extend the advantage to 21, going into the fourth quarter at 54–33.

Chen spoke directly about this aggressiveness after the game and compared her approach offensively to that of last season.

“[I have] a more aggressive mentality,” Chen told The Daily Princetonian. “I feel like last year was more facilitating, but [I’m] just being more aggressive this year.”

“[Chen] plays hard all the time, and she plays with a lot of joy,” Berube said. “I think that rubs off on other people too, and gets them playing at a really high level.”

Both teams had slow starts to the final quarter — after almost four minutes, only four combined points had been

THE WEEK IN NUMBERS: TIGERS STANDINGS AND

MEN’S BASKETBALL: IVY LEAGUE STANDINGS

scored, with the score sitting at 58–37. It was sophomore center Parker Hill who began to heat up at the midway point of the quarter. Hill was efficient in the paint, showing off a variety of hook shots as well as a midrange jumpshot.

Hill finished with eight points on 80 percent shooting in only seven minutes of play, an excellent outing for the 6’4” center. After Hill put the Tigers up 64–42, Berube brought in the bench unit to play out the just under three minutes remaining, and the game finished with the Tigers comfortably winning 64–47.

Improving to 8–2 in Ivy League play, the Tigers now sit tied for first place with Columbia, who defeated Yale on Saturday to maintain their 8–2 record. Penn defeated Harvard, effectively removing the Crimson from the fight for first place in the league standings.

“We’re just trying to get better day by day, and then see where that takes us,” Chen said.

Next weekend will be yet another test for the Tigers, as they play back-to-back road games at Brown (10–12, 3–7) on Friday, Feb. 17, and Yale (11–12, 5–5) on Saturday, Feb. 18. The Tigers will look to take their excellent form on the road where they have suffered three of their five losses of the year. Princeton will tip off at 7 p.m. on Friday and 5 p.m. on Saturday.

Tony Owens is a contributor to the Sports section at the ‘Prince’ who typically covers women’s basketball.

Isabel Rodrigues is a staff writer for the Sports section at the ‘Prince’ who typically covers women’s basketball.

WOMEN’S BASKETBALL: IVY LEAGUE

Junior guard Kaitlyn Chen (20) had her third consecutive game with at least 15 points, with 16 points and four assists in

WOMEN’S BASKETBALL