Hillsdale Students Argue About the Bible • Pages 4-7 Inaction is Good Action • Page 8 Dinosaurs! • Page 18 The Forum Promotes Gun Control? • Page 22
THE FORUM M U R O F E H T M U R O F THE FORUM 013 2 y a M
Volume XIII, Issue IV, May 2013
Conservative Features 4 A Biblical Critique of Liberal Arts Rachael Wierenga
As her time at Hillsdale comes to a close, a former editor-inchief reflects on faith, philosophy, and the liberal arts. 6 Artes Liberales: Compatible with Christ Joshua Taccolini In a one-part response to the above article, Taccolini argues that there is no inherent contradiction between Christianity and the liberal arts. 8 Huzzah for Gridlock! James Inwood Is congressional gridlock a good thing for the nation? Inwood weighs in on the legislature. 10 IRAs and Social Security Devin Creed Creed writes about the Troubles in Northern Ireland and reminds us that civility in religious debates is always a good thing. 12 What is Art? Lauren Wierenga The Head Designer offers her take on modern art. Are hyperrealism and abstract expressionism truly art?
Campus Features 14 Where Are They Now? Chris McCaffery
The Forum catches up with Betsy Woodruff and talks about where journalism has taken her, what she misses about Hillsdale, and nights at the Donnybrook. 15 Professor’s iPod Chris McCaffery Professor of History Brad Birzer gives The Forum a few of the tracks from his iPod. 16 Campus Smackdown: Study Abroad vs. WHIP If you need to get out of Hillsdale for a semester, where should you go? Reuss and Lucas go head-to-head for WHIP and study abroad. 19 Matrimony: the Great Escape Giana Schena Those looking to escape SAGA food might want to look into gettin’ hitched. 22 A Logical Arguement for Gun Control Andy Reuss War correspondent Reuss scoffs at liberal arguements for gun control. 23 Campus Spotlight: Black Belts Chris McCaffery The Forum talks to three campus martial artists about their black belts, coming into martial arts, and competitons.
Staff Editor-in-Chief Wes Wright
Staff Writers
Sam Ryskamp Corrie Beth Hendon James Inwood Rachael Wierenga Savannah Tibbetts Chris McCaffery
Editors
Chelsey Schmid Matt O’Sullivan
Photographers Laurie Barnes Jacob Shalkhauser Shaun Lichti Caroline Green
Head Designer Lauren Wierenga
Layout Design Aide Valerie Copan
Business Manager
Ryne Bessemer
Advertisement Manager Nate McBride
Photo Editor Lauren Wierenga
Letter from the Editor: Wes Wright This will be my final Letter from the Editor, at least for The Hillsdale Forum. While I will stay in the organization, I will no longer be Editor-in-Chief. Chris McCaffery will take up that occupation, and I think The Forum will do well with him at the helm. My predecessor as Editor-in-Chief was Rachael Wierenga (check out her article on page four). When she wrote her final Letter, she had not yet chosen a successor, so she wrote about the character and personality of the person she would choose. Ironically, “He’ll be really punny” was not on the list. What she described was a white knight of conservatism, a constant champion of individual liberty, limited government, and family values. He would be steeped in the writings of Lewis, Chesterton, and Luther. He would be passionate about politics, promoting conservatism and Christianity in all he did. Instead, she chose me. I am no white knight of conservatism: I lean a little libertarian on some issues, I prefer Bastiat to Lewis, I am not enchanted with politics. I had not even written for The Forum before I became Editor-in-Chief. Now that I have a year’s experience I will weigh in on what the Editor-in-Chief does and what he should be. A primary duty of the Editor-in-Chief is to plan everything, from when the magazine will be released to the possible focus of each article. As such, he
Mission Statement The Hillsdale Forum is an independent, student-run Conservative magazine at Hillsdale College. The Forum, in support of the mission statement of Hillsdale College, exists to promote a return to limited government as outlined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. We publish Conservative opinion, editorials, and campus news. The Forum is a vehicle to bring the discussion and thought of the intelligent students and professors at the heart of the Conservative movement beyond the classroom and beyond Hillsdale’s campus.
must be assertive and follow deadlines of his own making. A journalist for both The Forum and the Collegian, Chris McCaffery knows how deadlines work; he is good at getting things done on time. The title ‘Editorin-Chief’ suggests the next quality of a good EiC: he must understand English composition and have a knack for good phraseology. To steal from Lauren’s article on page 12, he must be able to choose beautiful topics inspired by beautiful ideas, then write about them beautifully. An Editor-in-Chief is involved with each of those aspects throughout the magazine, working with writers and editors to craft the best publication possible. Hence the third trait of a good EiC, the ability to work with people. Not only must the Editor-in-Chief deal with his employees, he is also responsible for recruiting new workers. This interaction occurs in person; it is not limited to the obligatory “Hey, you should work for The Hillsdale Forum!” that pops up at the end of each Letter from the Editor. As such, the EiC should not be a homeschooler; he has to have social skills and the power to talk to people who aren’t immediate family members. The preceding sentence alludes to the fourth quality of a good Editor-in-Chief, a good sense of humor. This requirement is crucial: if the EiC can’t laugh at his own misery, he won’t last long. Wit is also required for titles and copy, to draw readers in and get them to read articles they otherwise wouldn’t. A good sense of humor makes people complain less. Chris is quite witty, if a little caustic at times. Regardless, I will value his humor as I work with him next year. He will have plenty of opportunities to complain; it is many hours of work for no pay and little reward. One might call the EiC of The Hillsdale Forum the “Editor-in-Cheap”. I wish him luck and a great readership – you’ll have to supply the latter.
Religion & Education
By Rachael Wierenga
I
n this, the final installment of my threepart article series, I will continue to argue that the Bible should correct the habits of thinking that Hillsdale’s liberal arts education inculcates in its students. In part two, I argued that the liberal arts principle that human action can limit sin contradicts the Bible’s teaching on this matter. In part three, I will argue that the liberal arts instill a problematic assumption about the nature of man and the ends for which he was created that affects how students view their relationship with God. The liberal arts teach that the nature of man is primarily rational; the student who accepts this idea will believe that he is most pleasing to God when he lives rationally. The liberal arts assume that man’s defining characteristic is his reason, that he is primarily rational. In The Republic, for example, Plato holds that the goal of life is to order the soul so that the rational part rules over the spirited and erotic parts. Some Christians assert that before the Fall in Genesis, man’s soul was perfectly ordered and working in harmony, but after the Fall the soul became disordered so that reason no longer ruled over passion. A primary goal of Hillsdale is to develop and train the soul so reason can rule over passion for the good of society. The biblical account holds that man relates to God through spirit, not the intellect. God did not create man to be strong, powerful, and independent. Man was made to be in a relationship with Him – dependent, faithful, and obedient. According to the Bible, man is a spiritual being. The spirit is so important, in fact, that without it man cannot understand or relate to God. Jesus insists that man must be reborn of the spirit: “Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom
of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, ‘Ye must be born again’” (John 3:5-6). He says in John 6:63 that his words are spirit and life: “It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.” Romans 8:16 says, “The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are sons of God”; humans have a spirit and, through faith, receive the Holy Spirit, which is “the mind of Christ” (2 Cor. 2:16)—the Holy Spirit is Christ’s very thoughts and self within us. Further, in John 16:13-14, Jesus describes the Holy Spirit as a counselor who leads people to truth and reveals the Word: “However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you.” Christ is “the Word made flesh,” which means that the Spirit will guide Christians into the truth of the Word “with unveiled eyes”. Similarly, Isaiah 30:20-21 anticipate the new covenant, which will allow faithful believers to receive the Holy Spirit as their ultimate teacher: “Yet your teachers will not be moved into a corner anymore, but your eyes shall see your teachers. Your ears shall hear a word behind you, saying ‘This is the way, walk in it,’ whenever you turn to the right hand or whenever you turn to the left.” The Holy Spirit is the only way to “prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God”. This power comes not by our powers of discernment and reason but by the Spirit’s work to “transform us through the renewing of our minds,” freely and directly revealing God’s will. These passages reveal the spirit as the critical, intimate connection between man and God; it is man’s defining characteristic.
“The biblical account holds that man relates to God through spirit, not the intellect.”
4
The liberal arts tell students to exercise their intellect because the Creator gave man reason to use intelligently. God did not give humans reason only to turn them loose to strive after their own ideas, hoping to compile a big, old truth compendium. The idea that one can study hard, improve one’s mind, and then quest after truth is pretentious and self-aggrandizing. The biblical account grounds the liberal arts in a manner disagreeable to the pride and narcissism lodged in the human heart. In Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, there are multiple cases in which those who “prophecy out of their own heart,” who say God has spoken where he has not, and “who follow their own spirit” are reprimanded for committing a grave offence that leads others astray (e.g., see Ezekiel 13). When man relies on his intellect to find truth instead of conforming to the truth God has revealed, he ends up with an utterly backward, false account. To truly strive after truth, one must read the Bible. God does not want man to set out on a lifelong quest to find all sources of truth. Philosophers write that wisdom begins with a sense of wonder that spurs one on to learn. The Bible, however, says that wisdom begins with the fear of God and leads one to conform to His Word, the account he has given of the Truth that we may know it. The Holy Spirit does not empower man to reason out new truths about the will of God, it guides the believer into the Word that is already there. The “obedience of faith” discussed in Romans is not a man-glorifying endeavor. Philippians chapter two points to Christ as the one who exercised the ultimate obedience of faith, which lead to an agonizing and humiliating death on a cross, not personal glory before men. The traditional respect for reason and intellect in the liberal arts causes students to believe that pursuing truth is the best way to live one’s life.
In reality, this view is spiritual narcissism: it is sin working in the flesh to inflame a pride that makes one desire to win self-glory through actions; this way of living is pleasing to man’s pride and the sin within him. The quest for truth begins and ends at the Bible, with Jesus the Word of God. The Biblical account should counterbalance the liberal arts education’s view of the ends for which man was created. The liberal arts lauds rationality, strength, independence, and virtue through action, but the Bible values weakness, imperfection, dependence, and virtue through faith in Christ. A liberal arts education fans the flames of one’s desire for self-aggrandizement, and it is easy to twist Christianity into compatibility with such a pretense. In truth, it works the other way around: one must conform to God’s word, even as He cuts down man’s glory. One must realize one’s sin and weakness, submit to it, and ask Christ to be strong and work in one – instead of trying to continue to achieve and strive and overcome of one’s own effort. I close with an admonition from William Newell, to beware of fallenflesh-remedying messages. At its base, the liberal arts is this kind of message, and the person trained to accept its premises about human wisdom, human effort, and the ends for which man was created without criticism is likely to miss the true Gospel for a watered-down moralism that promises to fix fallen flesh and make one more godlike. I challenge students to come to the God of the Bible in humility. He will start you on the true lifelong quest for truth in his Word, which has the riches of truth in the knowledge of Jesus Christ that will take you a lifetime to discover in deeper ways and will continue to expand your understanding of truth.
Religion & Education
By Joshua Taccolini
B
6
efore addressing the inherent compatibility – or even co-operation – of Christianity and the Liberal Arts, let us establish an underlying assumption. This assumption has been self-evident to men of repute for most of human history, barring our present, mistaken age. The assumption is this: that mankind is endowed by his Creator with a rational soul and an intellect capable of understanding the nature of things. As such we are blessed an indispensible thirst for the Truth, only satisfied by knowledge of Truth itself. Further, the assumption is that Knowledge, wherever it may be found, is noble in and of itself. It has intrinsic, God-given value and is worth pursuing, even and especially in the Science of Theology. The idea of Knowledge as inherently valuable is, as John Henry Newman argues, “in the world now, it was in the world then; and, as in the case of the dogmas of faith, it is illustrated by a continuous historical tradition, and never was out of the world, from the time it came into it.” It is self-evident that the created order is reasonable; it was designed by an Intelligent Designer who has marvelously established Faith and Reason in the created order as two wings required for one to fly. With this assumption, let
us see how, to propel her children towards their Maker, Christianity espouses the Liberal Arts. True education has nothing to do with the mere accumulation of facts, production of servile goods useful to society, or any other menial, subservient end. Instead, it is solely the pursuit of Wisdom considered noble in itself with which the soul grows in love of the good and so acquires virtue. In fact, the word ‘education’ comes from the Latin ‘educo’, meaning ‘I raise up’, and ‘educatio’, which is ‘to rear’. Education understood as the love and pursuit of Wisdom cannot be dismissed as a tolerable luxury of the privileged. No, education is truly necessary for the perfection of the soul, hence Aristotle’s assertion that “the educated differ from the uneducated as much as the living from the dead.” In His infinite Wisdom, God deigns to let man participate in that very Wisdom. He made man an intellectual being, as no other earthly creature. Man is to see God in beatitude through his intellectual nature, super-elevated to visualize the invisible. For this reason, it is a grievous and deadly error to divorce grace – necessary for the perfection of the soul – from the substance of the soul, man’s intellectual nature. Further, it is a fatal misstep to divorce Faith – necessary for
“Education does not undermine Christianity; Christianity fulfills education.” redemption – from that which is redeemed: Reason. Grace perfects Nature and ‘raises’ it to participation in the divine. Education does not undermine Christianity; Christianity fulfills education. On closer examination, the scripture will attests to this fulfillment. Solomon states that “It is not good for a man to be without knowledge” (Proverbs 19:2). On the subject of wisdom, he writes, “For she is a reflection of eternal light, a spotless mirror of the working of God, and an image of his goodness” (Wisdom 7:26). Scripture is the divinely-revealed Word of God, the center of Christianity; to defend our noble understanding of the Liberal Arts and the Christian message, we must examine the truths therein. One might object to this argument by citing those verses in St. Paul’s epistles that seem to disparage the pursuit of Wisdom. In his first letter to the Corinthians, St. Paul quotes Isaiah: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness of the clever I will thwart.” He continues, “Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?” (1 Corinthians 1:19-20). Indeed, God has made foolish the wisdom of the world, turning it on its head as only He can do (Acts 17:6); nevertheless, it is naïve to think that St. Paul would have man uneducated and foolish that God’s Wisdom might triumph despite human intelligence. Are we not also to judge matters pertaining to this life (1 Corinthians 6:3)? It is true that the foolishness of man is to think
himself wise apart from his Creator – without His grace the truth remains hidden – yet Paul urgently entreats us “not to accept the grace of God in vain” (2 Corinthians 6:1)! Do we not accept God’s Wisdom in vain when, in our pride, we abuse the mind He gave us to receive it? As the honey bee extracts nectar only from the flower so disposed to it, so grace perfects only that nature ready and able to receive it. Far from disparaging the nobility of Reason, the Scriptures exhort us to employ the mind to further the kingdom of God (Romans 12:2). They proclaim the grandeur of God’s design for man’s purification: “Not that we would be unclothed, but that we would be further clothed, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life” (2Cor 5:4). This glorification of the Liberal Arts is not an affront to the Christian message of salvation, for Christianity alone testifies to man’s dependence on the natural to ascend to the supernatural (Romans 1:20). The Christian message is of redemption, not replacement. Indeed, St. Athanasius of Alexandria describes redemption as a deification of the human person, “The Son of God became man that we might become God.” While the Liberal Arts sans Christ have no power to redeem man, with Christ they empower him, strengthening his faith. Far from diminishing Knowledge gained through Liberal Arts, Christianity assumes and elevates the intellectual nature of the human person, dignifying the vocation of the student.
7
Politics
By James Inwood
T
8
he United States has a crisis of government. 2013 is the third consecutive year of divided government in Washington. Shouting matches and filibusters have replaced compromise, and legislative productivity is at historical lows. When the 2012 elections returned power to the very same divided government, pundits began to fear a perpetual standstill. This, however, is not the crisis. Aristotle teaches that all things aim at certain ends, and they only good insofar as they serve their purpose. This principle applies to everything, governments included. Typically, regimes safeguard rights, execute justice, and foster man’s pursuit of happiness in order to promote the common good of society. The American republic is failing that test. This is most certainly is a crisis. Regimes often oppose the common good by neglecting their duties; they ignore necessity and accept injustice. The United States, on the other hand, actively subverts its ends. Washington D.C. taps our phone lines, taxes our earnings, restricts what companies can produce – pervasive intervention that limits prosperity and undermines civil liberties. Preventing these active sins of commission is deceptively simple: stop passing such laws. One important aspect of the Western tradition is the Hippocratic precept “First, do no harm.” One cannot achieve good before one turns against evil. For states, however, this is a tricky
assignment. One option, according to Persian poet Sa’di, is for tyrannical kings to take up napping. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to get all three branches of the federal government to nap at once. In a republic, the better solution is. . . exactly what is happening today. With control of Congress split between Republicans and Democrats, legislation is grinding to a halt. The Supreme Court swing from right to left according to its whimsy, undermining the few laws that are passed. And the President? The stress of steering this sinking ship has understandably driven him to the golf course. Though most would call this gridlock an evil, conservatives should rejoice in this government inaction. One can already see healing in America’s annual budget deficit, which has been shrinking and recently fell under a trillion dollars. How? America’s legislators are so busy fighting each other that they have neglected to pass regular budgets. When this happens, the Treasury defaults to “baseline budgeting,” the previous year’s budget with corrections for inflation and population growth. Most budgets Congress passes expand far beyond the baseline budget, so this legislative impass has slowed spending growth significantly and allowed revenues to catch up. Further, while population growth affects revenue and expenditure equally, inflation does not. The federal government measures inflation
with the Consumer Price Index, which tracks price changes in a bundle of consumer goods. Expansionary policies inflate producer goods far more than consumer goods, however, so CPI understates overall inflation and how much nominal spending should grow to keep up. In fact, inflationadjusted spending actually falls. Since revenue responds to inflationary changes across the whole economy, it grows faster than spending and the budget becomes more balanced. Real spending is also falling because Washington is aware of its dysfunction. To force themselves into action, legislators keep crafting doomsday deals like the sequester that threaten to impose draconian cuts if Congress does not act. This tactic often fails, forcing cuts that no sane legislator would support. As a result, federal spending in 2013 is projected to be 0.2% higher than in 2012 – a paltry increase, just $8 billion. In addition, regulatory growth has dropped dramatically since the Republicans took the House. According to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, the present year will probably yield about 400 new rules, about 100 of which will have significant costs. In contrast, the last year of unified government (2010) saw 690 new rules, 138 of which were economically significant. This is 42% decrease in total rules and a 28% drop in major ones. Notably, many of the new rules establish the details of the Affordable Care Act and Dodd-Frank, so these numbers are likely to fall even lower if gridlock persists. In terms of legislation passed, the 112th Congress (2011-2) was the least productive since World War II. According to a study by Rosanna Kim of Swarthmore College, Congress failed to pass 90% of its agenda last year. The next worst, the 80th and 104th Congresses (1947-48, 1995-96), are considered textbook examples “do-nothing Congresses,” but even they passed 30% of their legislation. This astronomical rate of failure is disturbing until one considers Obama’s agenda. Given the bills that would pass otherwise, that’s a 90% failure rate for predations on liberty and prosperity. Those other “failed” Congresses offer an
interesting perspective. For instance, just as 2010 marked the nadir of this depression, the 80th Congress met while the United States was recovering from the Depression and the Second World War, and the 104th Congress met in the aftermath of a 1990 downturn that still lingered in much of the world. Just as Boehner won after Obama’s overreaches, Gingrich won on Clinton’s power grabs and Martin after Truman’s “Fair Deal” and price controls. 2012 was just 1948 and 1996 all over again. If these parallels hold, the future is bright for America. Both “textbook” periods of gridlock preceded years of economic growth and governmental restraint. The 80th Congress killed the Fair Deal and stripped economic controls with abandon. As a result, the 1950s were enormously prosperous. The 104th Congress forced Clinton to abandoning his agenda, which led to¬ the first balanced budgets since 1969. Meanwhile, the Dow broke 10000, unemployment dropped near 4%, and pundits touted the “New Economy.” If experience is any indicator, America can look forward to the return of prosperity. In the end, gridlock is a matter of simple logic. If one agrees that the government’s goals are clumsy at best and unjust at worst, it follows that stopping its action is a good first step. While there are times when the state needs to act and obstructions like gridlock threaten the common good, the state creates its own crises all too often. Releasing the beast of government for the sake of the occasional good law would only ensure the triumph of big government. Gridlock is a double blessing. It halts spending growth and gets the dysfunction out of everyone’s system. Eventually, the partisan stalemate will disgust Americans into acting like citizens and politicians into acting like statesmen. When this time of gridlock passes into hindsight, society can reset politics so partisanship yields to principle, vitriol to dignity, power-hunger to pursuit of prosperity. That ideal may hold for a generation or fade in a few years, but it will be the sweet fruit of today’s “crisis”. It has happened before; God willing, it can happen 9 again.
“One cannot achieve good before one turns against evil. ”
Economics
A
By Devin Creed
t Hillsdale we have a healthy dialogue between Catholics and Protestants. The Catholic Society and Hillsdale Christian Fellowship encourage people of every faith to participate in their events, and both sides strive for clarity and mutual understanding in religious debate. Outside Hillsdale, however, relations between Catholics and Protestants are not always harmonious, as nineteenth-century periods of mass migration indicate. While these conflicts have largely vanished in America, they have had disastrous social and political consequences across the pond, ravaging the province of Northern Ireland. Ireland has endured centuries of armed conflict. Their struggles culminated in the Irish War for Independence, which ended in 1921. The next year, the British Parliament partitioned the territory into the sovereign state of Ireland and a six-county province of the United Kingdom: Northern Ireland. This partition was incredibly divisive, creating the nationalist and unionist factions in that new province. The nationalists wish to re-join with Ireland, the whole island a sovereign nation, and the unionists want to remain a part of the United Kingdom. This debate is violent, controversial, and destructive, even in the present day. In a 1984 study, Ronald Tercheck states that “the conflict in Northern Ireland is best understood as an ethnically divided society with religion supplying the identity basis for each ethnic community.” Religious affiliation in Northern Ireland is deeply entwined with cultural identity. To be Irish is to be Catholic and a nationalist, to be Protestant is to be British and unionist, with few exceptions. Catholics self-identify with the traditional Gaelic peoples of Ireland, whereas Protestants identify
with British and Scottish settlers of the 16th and 17th centuries. Historian Henry Grant explains the division between Catholic and Protestant in Northern Ireland with the idea of the “historicomythic consciousness”. A group forms a historicomythic consciousness by examining its history and infusing certain turning points with mythic significance. These turning points often deal with the group’s successes or the defeat of its enemies. Catholics and Protestants viewed events through the lens of past strife, seeing atrocity only in the actions of their enemies. Grant writes that the “distinctive mentality or consciousness which led each group to perceive and note only certain features of current events, to interpret what they had noted in divergent ways and to adopt certain characteristic courses of action against other groups, were all firmly rooted in the groups’ versions of their histories.” Catholics consider British Protestants oppressors who used extraordinary violence to “solve” the Irish problem. Northern Irish Protestants think of Catholics as bitter, malicious, and always conniving to forcibly remove Protestants from Ireland. This conflict peaked in the Troubles, which lasted from 1968 to 1998. The Troubles were three decades of sectarian violence driven by two paramilitary groups, the Provisional Irish Republican Army (Catholic) and the Ulster Defense Association (Protestant). These two forces were responsible for the vast majority of the over 3,000 deaths and 50,000 casualties during the period. Violence took the form of riots, assassinations, and vigilante justice. The Provisional IRA, or “provos” as they came to be known, were responsible for the murder of off-duty police officers, the attempted assassination of Margaret Thatcher, and multiple
“...people would choose kneecapping so they could collect disability...”
10
bombings of London – among other things. Both forces took part in neighborhood violence in Belfast, Northern Ireland’s capital. John Conroy, an American journalist, decided to live in Belfast during the early 1980s. He lived in the Catholic district of Clonard, a community surrounded by both a high wall and a Protestant neighborhood known as the Shankill. He describes his neighbors, who had become accustomed to constant violence and lawlessness. Some shop owners were robbed so many times that they planned it into their budgets. Parades would turn into riots with stone throwing, petrol bombs, and gunfights. The Catholics of Clonard would stay in their neighborhood as much as possible because the Shankill was not a safe place for them. British law enforcement had no power in Belfast, so paramilitary groups would mete out justice on the streets. The provos would kneecap Protestant individuals for their wrongdoings, and the UDA would do the same to Catholics. Unemployment and poverty were very real problems as well: given the choice between sweeping the streets or being shot in the knee, people would choose kneecapping so they could collect disability payments from the government. Now those are perverse incentives. In 1998, the Good Friday Agreement formally
ended the Troubles, but its deleterious effects live on. Recent studies show that the Troubles stunted the moral development of children who grew up in that era. Because illegal paramilitary groups were the ones keeping order, people did not have a clear sense of authority. As a result, many adolescents did not develop a sense of right and wrong, falling into degenerate lifestyles of theft and vandalism. Children raised in a such a sectarian culture came to hate the other side in the religious conflict. This continued hatred makes reconciliation difficult, if not impossible. Further, these issues have harmed the mental health of the Northern Irish. Just three months ago, North Belfast MP Nigel Dodds reported to the British House of Commons that the suicide rate in Northern Ireland has doubled in the 15 years since the Good Friday Agreement. The Department of Health has linked this phenomenon directly to the Troubles. Centuries of religious/ ethnic conflict will take time to heal, physically, mentally, and spiritually. As we continue Catholic-Protestant dialogue at Hillsdale, we should reflect on the chilling example of Northern Ireland. Christianity is a religion of peace; we are all members of the body of Christ. A house divided against itself cannot stand. Let us be witnesses to the essential tenets of our faith as we seek to sort out differences within the church.
11
Art and Culture
By Lauren Wierenga
Wassily Kandinsky “Black Grid” (1922) Oil on canvas
illsdalians encounter art every day, in music, literature, self-adornment, and more. Though most students are equipped to refute progressive politics and relativist philosophy, the average Hillsdalian is hopelessly ill-prepared to refute bad art and defend good art. So, what is art? Is art simply “in the eye of the beholder,” or can one judge a masterpiece against an external set of objective truths? Like every subject, art has a purpose. At most art colleges (and collages), that purpose is “expression” – but in truth it is much more than that. Art, math, and language are expressive in nature, but art’s purpose is more than expression alone. Defining it as such lacks insight and reflection. Art has many purposes, the most important of which is communication. To clarify, art is more than just painting, drawing, and sculpture. It also includes the playing and writing of music, the making of masterpieces with words, cooking and artful presentation of food, oration, and so on. All of these fields are media for art; each has the potential to communicate a message from the artist to the viewer, listener, taster, etc. What a work communicates to us (if the artist is attempting to communicate a message) is how one can classify it as art or not. How a work expresses that communicated message to its audience – nobly, beautifully, or grotesquely – is how one can classify it as good art or bad. Running one’s hand at random across a piano communicates nothing to anyone. The same is true of speaking gibberish: the babbling speaker could certainly have emotion
12
Jackson Pollock and Abstract Expressionism Jackson Pollock “Greyed Rainbow” (1953) Oil on linen
H
and expression, but no group or individual can understand what he attempts to communicate. Such a random amalgam of sounds can hardly be considered art. This rule also applies to the “art” of Abstract Expressionists like Jackson Pollock, Hans Hofmann, and Wassily Kandinsky. One might see Pollock’s paint-splattered canvasses and be drawn to his “freedom of expression” or the energy and movement of the work, but whatever his goal was in creating the piece, it is completely lost to the viewer. It is visual gibberish that communicates no objective truth to the viewer, though it may or may not have subjective beauty. Art that does not touch (or at least point to) some sort of external, unchanging truth is merely a waste of effort and paint. Pollock’s “art” is not art any more than banging your guitar against the floor is music. Neither communicates a message a rational person can understand; neither transcends the realm of auditory or visual noise. So, if emotion without technique is not art, what about technique without emotion? Hyperrealistic art, that is, drawings or paintings with photographic clarity, or sculptures of humans made to look exactly – often grotesquely – like the artist’s model using silicone, plastic, and human hair, has gained traction in the past decade. Consumers compare its mastery of technique to abstract expressionism and say that hyperrealism must be art because the subject is portrayed precision to the very last atom. While hyperrealism is art,
Hyperrealism
Sam Jinks “The Hanging Man” (2007) Silicon, paint, & human hair
it is not good art. In the classical conception, art captures the ideal. Anatomy, realism, and trueness to form were of great importance to Greek and Roman sculptors, but their busts are higher art than hyperrealistic ones because they do not focus solely on producing a photographic copy of the subject. Their goal was to capture the higher ideal of the subject—its essence. Hyperrealistic art does not do that in the least. Further, true art must have a beautiful subject. Hyperrealistic paintings of plastic bags depicted with stunning technique and mastery of medium are technically art because they communicate a clear message. Unfortunately,
their message is neither noble nor beautiful. In such a painting or sculpture there is nothing in the tangible form that points to the intangible, the eternal. So, hyperrealism is art because it features clear communication, but it communicates a trite, sterile image of its subject with computer-like precision that brings nothing else to the table. At the end of the day it is just a very realistic portrayal of a plastic bag and a lot of squandered talent. Victorian art critic John Ruskin describes two types of art: high art and low art. High art has a beautiful subject, a beautiful idea, and is portrayed beautifully. Some hyperrealists have beautiful subjects, but since they do not have any beautiful ideas behind them the finished piece is inelegantly portrayed. The artist prefers shocking the viewer to limning beautiful thoughts that reach towards unchanging ideals. Ruskin said that art “seeks always to reform men’s hearts and to revive [or at least to capture] what is noble in human nature.” High art should depict nobility of human nature or human form. Hyperrealistic art only degrades the human form, reducing it to a simple, soulless mass that takes up space. Such art has no spirit, because no soul can be captured when the artist is reduced to a machine that merely copies nature. Art is not replication.
Pedro Campos- oil on canvas (2000’s)
13
By: Corrie Beth Hendon What was your major/minor?
What have you missed the most about Hillsdale since graduation?
English, and I was in the journalism program.
Oh for goodness’ sake. Sitting up til 4 a.m. drinking malt liquor and arguing about the filioque? Beer nights at the Treehouse? Parties at the Stairway/Stairwall/Wall and bonfires at the Donnybrook? Sunbathing on the roof and reading about Heidegger (“about” being the operative word)? The comfort and security that comes from knowing that no matter what your day’s been like, there’s always two or three people within a square mile of you that are totally down for picking up a six-pack at Broadstreet and going to Baw Beese? The fact that you have access to tons of fantastic and cheap Michigan beer? The fact that you have access to an absurdly delightful cadre of professors? I don’t know, take your pick.
You write for the National Review; could you tell us a little bit more about how you got there and what you’ve been doing since you got there? I interned for NR for the fall semester of my senior year through WHIP, and then they offered me a year-long fellowship. I moved to New York after I graduated and worked there for seven months, and then I moved to DC, where I live now. I write a pretty broad variety of pieces (investigative reporting, cultural criticism, breaking news, lots of Capitol Hill coverage, etc.). How has your education from Hillsdale been helpful or hurtful in life after graduation? Helpful: The Hillsdale network in DC is fantastic, and I wouldn’t be at NR if I hadn’t done WHIP. Plus – and I’m sure you know this by now – having a solid liberal arts education makes your life better no matter what you end up doing. I try to use what I learned in Jackson’s classes every day; never let anyone tell you English courses aren’t practical. Hillsdale’s journalism program is great, too. Writing for the Collegian was one of the highlights of my college career, and it gave me invaluable reporting, editing, and design experience. Being comatose on Thursday mornings was a small price to pay for getting to work alongside some of the smartest and most hilarious people at school.
What’s one thing you learned at Hillsdale that has stuck with you post-graduation? Probably that not choosing is a choice and that we are responsible forever for the things we tame. If you could change anything about your time at Hillsdale, what would you change and why? I would have taken harder classes and started writing papers earlier.
Professors’
iPod By: Chris McCaffery
Old-school Prog Rock: Peter Gabriel-era Genesis Rush Talk Talk
Brad Birzer started collecting music at the age of nine (in 1977) and never stopped. Besides teaching History and blogging at The Imaginative Conservative, Birzer has writen books on Charles Carroll, Christopher Dawson, and Catholic themes in Tolkien’s writing. He founded a website in 2012 devoted to the discussion of music, mainly progressive rock but welcome to any music that is good, true, and beautiful. His thoughts and those of his fellow prog-lovers can be found at www.progarchy.com. Birzer told The Forum a bit about what is on his iPod.
Contemporary Prog: Big Big Train Tin Spirits Neal Morse Gazpacho Glass Hammer Ayreon Spock’s Beard Leah The Fierce and the Pineapple Thief Dead The Tangent
Other: Exprimental Jazz Audio books: Everything from The Aeneid to the latest Tom Clancy.
“I keep my iPod (160GB) with me at most times. I have 879 albums on it--mostly progressive rock dating back to around 1968. I listen mostly when I’m traveling or on my daily walks (about 4 miles/day).”
STUDYING ABROAD Compiled by: Chris McCaffery Photos by: Shaun Lichti
Why did you choose to study abroad as opposed to studying in DC?
I have wanted to study abroad since before I came to college. Going to Washington would have been a great experience as well, but there are certain things one learns being in another country, living there and meeting the people, that you can’t learn while staying in the states.
How does studying abroad complement your major?
I am a Christian Studies Major, and since studying in Oxford I now feel like I have greater connections with history, and my favourite authors. There is nothing quite like studying the Reformation and reading about a certain martyr then walking down the street and reading about how that person was burned at the stake on that very road.
What do you see as the benefits of study abroad as opposed to studying in DC?
First of all you have to learn to live in another country and learn how to interact with the people. Going to Oxford I got to take classes at one of the best schools in the world. I was also able to travel and see castles and archives that were over a thousand years old. There is nothing in this country that old.
Do you have any regrets about not going somewhere else?
I think my only regret is that I was not there longer. I cannot wait to go back to England because I just loved everything about life there. I can’t wait to go back, and I would encourage people to go because there is nothing like experiencing life across the pond.
Joelle Lucas 16
well, e stay-
vourite and
classes s old.
else?
ack to o back, encing
as
WHIP
VS
Why did you choose to study in DC as opposed to studying abroad?
I wanted to live and work here in order to gain real-world experience in a field relevant to that I am studying at Hillsdale. During my time in Washington, I’ve gained discernment for my future career path, experience with answering angry constituent phone calls, and incredible skill at metro-surfing.
How does studying in DC complement your major?
As a Politics-English double major, I have worked in what is arguably the most political environment in the world: the United States Congress.
What do you see as the benefits of studying in DC as opposed to abroad?
Living and working in DC has given me a realistic understanding of the working world. I’ve been able to live in a vibrant city for several months and work at a job that has given myself and my resume legitimacy through relevant experience.
Do you have any regrets about not going somewhere else?
In a word: no. My experience has not been what many would consider exotic; however, from the countless friends that I have made here, to the interesting and engaging work I do on a daily basis, to finally the beautiful and historical charm of Washington, I believe that I will look back on my time here with satisfaction forever.
Andy Reuss
Review
Making Monsters:
Jim Shepard’s “In Cretaceous Seas”
W
hen you read Jim Shepard, the first thing that strikes you is the incredible amount of research that has gone into a particular story. The scenes are carefully crafted and authentic. His research is immersive, precise details giving each piece a unique texture. “In Cretaceous Seas”, a story from his 2011 collection You Think That’s Bad, is a perfect example: a brief but potent glimpse into the chaotic inner life of an insomniac pharmaceutical executive. In an abrasive voice, Shepard tells us his name is Conroy. The story—more of a character sketch, really—begins with a description of aquatic life in the prehistoric Tethys Ocean during the Cretaceous Period: needle-toothed Xiphactinus, tylosaurs that are “U-Boats with crocodile’s heads,” and fifty-foot-long sharks. Shepard did not make this stuff up; his research and writing presents us with some of the most horrifying yet real creatures ever to lurk in our oceans. The Tethys, a shallow Cretaceous sea between the supercontinents of Gondwana and Laurasia, teemed with sea monsters that make the beasts of sailors’ nightmares look like trembling cartoon characters. In Shepard’s words, “This is the place where the prey could kill a sperm whale.” Had the story ended with this environmental
18
By Forester McClatchey
description, I would have been happy. It is truly lush. All of the creatures he mentions—most of whom are marine reptiles, not dinosaurs— are well worth a Google search. If you ever made your parents read you dinosaur books as a child, you owe it to yourself look these monsters up. But before you can say “Cretoxyrhina,” the story becomes a metaphor for the haunted subconscious of a sweaty suburban man. Conroy is an ungrateful son, an indolent brother, a neurotic husband, and a lazy father. His daughter “writes stories in which family members are eviscerated as the narrator laughs,” but he just wants to ignore the problem. His company has just released a new drug that might cause miscarriages, but he shies away from culpability by telling himself that he meant well. He analyzes everything his wife says to him and winds up in a fetal curl, swaddled in a nest of insecure delusions. Shepard tells us “he’s the kind of guy given to building tall towers of self-pity and then watching them sway.” He sees himself as prey, even though he is really the “apologetic predator.” He dwells on imagined monsters while the real danger lurks inside himself. The piece does feel a little unfinished. Conroy is a compelling character, but he has no narrative arc. I felt a little cheated. On the other hand, that might be Shepard’s game: as soon as you get to know Conroy, he withdraws and leaves you unsatisfied. The story takes up just four pages, but Shepard makes the most of it. He examines themes of apathy, reconciliation, indecision, and manhood – all in a paleontological allegory. Therein lies his brilliance: what better way to explore human psychology than comparing it to a primeval world of haunting darkness, strange beauty, and lurking violence? The juxtaposition of the exotic and the mundane opens the reader’s eyes to the vast environment between Conroy’s ears. What a world it is.
Satire
By Giana Schena
W
e’ve all been there. You walk into the Union and the air slaps you in the face with the thick smell of grease. Your stomach rolls, your teeth clench, and your face breaks out in an anticipatory sweat. Tuesday is an especially horrid offender. There’s no escaping from the mystery meat or the obligatory leftovers from last week’s “Holiday Feast.” Most of the student body is chained to the lunchroom by the mandatory meal plans. Unbeknownst to the majority of students, a tiny section of campus is free of this digestive burden. Who are they? They are the few, the proud, the blissfully wedded. Marriage, my dear Hillsdale student, is the answer. The college grants exemption from the meal plan only to those who have transcended the typical Hillsdale student’s dreadfully single status. Perhaps it is their way of rewarding those students who fully realize the Good. Or more likely, they truly believe the quality of food provided by the new homemaking wife will easily surpass the nutritional abilities of SAGA Incorporated. Here’s a reason to follow in these trailblazing students’ footsteps: the typical cost of a yearlong meal plan is in the thousands. The cost of a marriage license from the Hillsdale County Courthouse is a measly thirty dollars! Don’t fear, you need not bind yourself in ungreasy matrimony to a fellow Saga sufferer forever. For just the (relatively) low price of three hundred dollars, your marriage can
be annulled the moment you step out of these hallowed halls. In exchange for this earthly certificate of fidelity, you will escape the bonds of SAGA for all eternity. Comfort your concerned parents with thoughts of the thousands of dollars they will be saving, both in food costs and in post-college digestive health care bills. So, invite your friends! Coordinate crossdorm marriages for your entire hallway. Ladies, practice your culinary arts and throw a few icebreaking parties to attract yourselves a man to tie the knot with. Gentlemen, get ready to bring home the bacon, or the lettuce if that’s what your target co-signer prefers. If you’re feeling particularly daring, go the whole nine yards and shack up off campus. Remember, it’s not scandalous if you’ve got a ring on it and don’t hold hands in public.
19
DEREK FIELDS Year: Junior Major: Economics Minor: Latin
Hunk
Hillsdale’s
If you had to live on another planet, what planet would you choose and why? I’m a people person and would be pretty miserable anywhere if I were alone. Saturn’s pretty cool, I mean, it’s got rings. If that doesn’t blow your mind then we can’t be friends. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• What are you most excited about for summer break? What’s not exciting about summer break? I’ll be in California working for CrossFit headquarters, which in my mind is basically like getting to work for Rand Paul or Jesus for most Hillsdale kids. •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• If you had to choose between becoming a professional bird watcher or becoming Amish, which would you choose and why? Definitely Amish. It’d be lots of work, whereas bird watching is a bunch of sitting still and waiting, which I’m terrible at. I’m assuming I’d gain some kind of beard growing abilities too, which I currently lack. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Favorite Disney princess? Is Meg from Hercules an acceptable answer? She’s not a princess, but she’s got a lot more of a personality than the other ones and she’s a little more edgy. She’s like the Ke$ha of Disney princesses. I’m all about that. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• If your life were a musical, what would be the title of the main song? “Aspiring Genius-Millionaire-Entrepreneur-Philanthropist”. Yeah, you can hear it in your head now. With a title like that, it has to be catchy and flow well. •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Name 3 reasons why you think that you deserve the title as hunk of the month. 1. I’m really, really, ridiculously good-looking with all types of hair, as evidenced by my hair’s evolution this year. 2. I have a very sensitive, fragile ego and desperately need this boost. 3. I wanted to use this to ask Rachel Blaauw, who I don’t know, to Delt formal. This comes out after our formal though, so she’ll have most likely turned down my incredibly random and creepy formal invite by the time this is in print. Third time’s a charm though, right? •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Which TV personality do you relate to the most: Tyra, Oprah, Kate Gosselin, Dr. Phil, Joel Osteen, or Bill O’Reilly? I’d have to say Bill O’Reilly. I’m not an African American woman or a crappy mom, and I definitely hate touchy-feely stuff. O’Reilly’s famous for that “[Eff] it, we’ll do it live” freak out, and I like doing stuff on the fly. •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• If you were “The Bachelor,” what would be your strategy for weeding out unworthy girls? I’d take over the show and have some kind of Hunger Games type tournament where I could kill off contestants at will and send supplies to the best ones. Using logic and observing general patterns in my past ability to select women, we can determine that any strategy I employ will fail horrendously, and I’ll be stuck with some kind of decent looking version of Lindsay Lohan.
Hottie
and
Compiled by Savanah Tibbetts
of the month
Olivia File Year: ... it’s complicated Major: Bio-Chem
If you had to live on another planet, what planet would you choose and why? Vulcan, cause it’s logical. •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• What is your favorite day of the year? “Maundayyy, Tuesday, Thursday, Wednesday.” ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• What are you most excited about for summer break? Teaching my 10-month-old niece how to ride the waves in Hawaii. •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• If you had to choose between becoming a professional bird watcher or becoming Amish, which would you choose and why? Amish, because those chin straps are clearly sexy. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Favorite Disney prince? Does it have to be a prince? Because Emperor Kuzco has some mad moves and luscious locks, I’d definitely choose him. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• If your life were a musical, what would be the title of the main song? “Don’t touch my Red Hot” or “Organization! Olivia and the Technicolor Arranged Closet” •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Name 3 reasons why you think that you deserve the title as hottie of the month. Well first, my spice rack is alphabetically organized. If that is not enough my colorcoded closet would probably push me up on the thermometer. The final kicker is the fact that my toes could easily be the double for Fred Flintstone in the next Flintstone’s sequel. Pretty sure my pinky toe doesn’t even touch the ground. •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Which TV personality do you relate to the most: Tyra, Oprah, Kate Gosselin, Dr. Phil, Joel Osteen, or Bill O’Reilly? Dr. Hart told me I reminded him of Dr. Phil so, I guess I have to go with that. Clearly, his comment was based on the fact that we both have sweet hair. •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• If you were the bachelorette on “The Bachelorette,” what would be your strategy for weeding out the inferior boyfriends? It would be a contest in the form of The Hunger Games where all the contestants are thrown into the arb and must fight to the death with stale loaves of French bread and the 1945 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica. The survivors will then continue on to recreate Sesame Street songs in the style of Mumford and Sons. •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• What would be your dream proposal? My dream proposal would be an offer to be a news reporter for the Chicago Cubs. You meant a job proposal, right?
Satire
A Logical Argument for Gun Control By Andy Reuss
22
I know what you’re thinking: what? A logical argument for gun control? Impossible. And in The Forum, of all places! Please, bear with me (see what I did there?). Just watch as I show you that not only is there a logical basis for gun control, but that gun control is the only logical solution to the problem of violence. We will start with universal background checks. The intent behind this idea is simple: to prevent the wrong people from acquiring weapons with which they can do harm. The implementation of this idea is even simpler: the national government regulates every transaction involving a firearm, requiring a background check in order to complete such transactions. This policy will also allow the most responsible body – Congress – to choose who the “wrong people” are, which will protect the rule of law for years to come. By maintaining a centralized record of mental health and criminal histories, the United States will be much safer and less prone to individuals bent on destruction gaining access to lethal weapons. Some might argue that the system of background checks already in place has proven ineffective. To those individuals, I respond with this: when did redundancy ever hurt? Additionally, these background checks will be truly universal, preventing undesirables from getting weapons from any source, including gun shows and family members. The next step is a ban on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines. Everyone can agree on this basic idea: no one needs a gun that is used on a battlefield, let alone one with the capability to shoot dozens of bullets in a matter of seconds. You might be asking yourself, “Why should we prevent individuals from possessing weapons for their own reasons?” I’ll tell you why: public safety. At the time the Second Amendment was ratified, it could take nearly a minute to load and fire an inaccurate musket. Today, the American people cower in their homes, deathly afraid of the deranged hunters emerging from the woods to murder them. Why
do hunters need high-powered rifles? When did anyone need more than six bullets to defend their family from harm? Read my lips: no new assault weapons. I’m sure that some of you are reading this and thinking, “What about the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994?” I will concede that that particular ban was ineffective; studies conducted by the Department of Justice showed no conclusive proof that the ban reduced violent gun crime. In fact, for several years after the ban expired, the number of violent gun crimes decreased each year. But just because it didn’t seem to be effective, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t continue to outlaw assault weapons! Rather than simply banning a few guns on the basis of cosmetic features, a nonpartisan, unelected bureaucracy should instead compile an exhaustive list of guns that are unfit for the public. We could use the no-fly list as a model, as it has effectively prevented acts of terrorism in the American skies without any drawbacks. Regardless of experience, we should still implement an assault weapons ban in order to bring the number of deaths in America down to zero. In conclusion, the logic of the argument for gun control is clear. Legislation regarding gun violence in the past has proven ineffective. The reason for this is simple: before now, it hasn’t been the correct legislation! Rather than requiring background checks in a fraction of gun purchases, we should require them in all cases. Rather than allowing criminals to terrorize our streets with fully automatic weapons that hold thousands of rounds, we should limit the type of gun available to the public through exhaustive lists based on appearance and name. People will follow the laws if they are reasonable. We will cut down on the number of crimes and criminals by passing more laws. If we fail, however, there will be rioting in the streets. Support gun control or watch America burn.
Sincerely, #NoLogicalPersonEver
Spotlight on...
Black Belts Compiled by: Chris McCaffery Photos by: Shaun Lichti & Jacob Shalkhauser
Colin Wilson
Kellie Fairbanks
Kittie Helmick
I’m registered with the WTF (World Taekwondo Federation) as a thirddegree black belt. How did you get into martial arts? I started in TKD when I was 10 years old with my brother and sister Our teacher was a world-ranked 7th degree black belt. At one point she was world champion in point-sparring. I earned my black belt after 2 years, 2nd degree took 2 years and 3rd degree was 2 years after that. I’ve been an instructor for quite a while, teaching adults as a 14 year old in order to meet the 50-hour teaching requirement, which was pretty neat. I competed at the USNTF International Tournament in Illinois, in traditional forms at the second degree level, and I am international grand champion in traditional forms. Which is damn sexy. Would you recommend martial arts to others? Only if you want to be a bad-ass. I’ve become more interested in MMA now, I plan to get into it over the summer because my TKD school has produced several great fighters.
I’m a certified WTF second degree black belt in Taekwondo. For the past 3 years I’ve focused on Olympic sport Taekwondo. How did you get into martial arts? I got into TKD when I was 9 years old as an extracurricular activity. What did you have to do to get your black belt? My first degree black belt test was 8 1/2 hours long, there was a written test, a skills test, two hours of sparring, and I broke 44 boards. Second degree test was mostly a skills test. Would you recommend martial arts to others? I would recommend martial arts as a great way to develop discipline and physical fitness; however, there are risks involved with Olympic sport taekwondo as it is a full contact sport, just as there are risks with boxing. How much have you done martial arts competitively? I’ve been competing internationally for the past three years and was on the 2012 US Collegiate National team and 2012 US National team. I tore my ACL and meniscus last spring 2012 at a tournament in South Korea, and have post-concussion syndrome from a mild traumatic brain injury (concussion) I got at 2013 team trials at the OTC in CO Springs, so am currently not competing.
How did you get into martial arts? My family lived in Seoul, Korea when I was in 4th and 5th grade, because my father was serving in the army. He thought it was a great opportunity for my siblings and me to study the Korean martial art in its homeland, so he enrolled us. I’ve practiced Tae Kwon Do for 11 years now. What did you have to do to get your black belt? I tested for my 1st Poom black belt at age 10 -- I remember that breaking a board with my fist hurt so much that I cried. By the time I tested for 2nd Dan black belt two years later, I could break three boards with a straight punch. Six years later, I earned my 3rd Dan from Grandmaster Lee. These testings have all required me to demonstrate proficiency in forms, techniques, sparring, and breaking, but the real challenge is the mental readiness required to perform in front of judges. Would you recommend martial arts to others? I would recommend martial arts as a multi-faceted pursuit that almost any type of person can enjoy lifelong. There are elements of sport, tradition, and self-defense taught at every school for a wide range of ages and sizes. Find a style that challenges and appeals to you.
Freshman
Sophomore
Junior
23
Jacob Shalkhauser
Hillsdale in Photos