Page 1

Hanover Review Inc. P.O. Box 343 Hanover NH, 03755

Volu m e 3 7 , Is su e 16

Mond ay, Marc h 5 , 2 0 1 8


SUNSET Over Baker Berry Library

A Brief History of Pong Scotch Cara Joshua D. Kotran John S. Stahel Erik R. Jones Brian A. Morrison Contributor Executive Editor Associate Editor Contributors

Pong is quintessentially “Dartmouth.” It links students of the past to the students of the present, and emphasizes the camaraderie that exists within the larger Dartmouth community. Whether he or she won or lost, everyone remembers his or her first pong game with a great deal of affection. A right of passage for all freshman, most will eventually find themselves behind a table, paddle in hand, desperately trying to avoid being golden tree’d — losing a game without hitting a single cup — by the end of their first game. While the fate of any Dartmouth student’s first game of pong might

be an eternally sore subject, it marks the start of an intimate and long lasting respectful relationship with the game. However, the adrenaline rush that comes as you sink your first cup is one that most students never forget. Pong through the ages is a topic often discussed by outsiders without context for its true importance— Total Frat Move, Business Insider, The New York Times, The Tab, and strangely enough even The Yale Daily News have all written about pong. One accordingly famous ‘78 even wrote his thesis on the game. We at The Review wanted to write this because we love pong and all of its longstanding traditions and quirks. The first reported game of pong was in the mid-1950s. However, it was a niche social activity reserved only for certain fraternities that didn’t gain mainstream popularity until the early ‘70s — Fraternity leadership from the class of 1967 remarked that they

did not ever play pong when they were on campus. Multiple members from the class of 1971 made comments along the lines that pong “wasn’t a campus-wide folkway…[and its] culture only thrived in fraternity basements.” However, certain members of the class embraced this new game and played an average of anywhere from two to four nights a week — a number that may sound familiar to the average current student. As pong continued to permeate fraternity basements, its popularity began to spread. In 1976, with the addition of female students on Dartmouth’s campus, fraternities began breaking the handles off of ping-pong paddles to make it more difficult for women to hold the paddles and become acclimated to the game. Like most weak and pathetic attempts of excluding women from social spaces and activities, this failed miserably. Women quickly inte-

grated themselves into pong culture, adapting to these new paddles and sinking cups. In 1977, the College revoked pong’s status as the only college sponsored drinking game in history. Today’s Master’s tournament — played over each class’s sophomore summer might be considered an homage to this historical legacy — each Greek house puts forth their two best teams and one house reigns supreme in an epic tournament of pong. By the late 1980’s, pong’s place on campus had solidified. More and more frats integrated pong into their basement scenes and it became a fundamental part of culture at Dartmouth. The game spread and subtle changes began to emerge between the various houses on campus. Today, students can be seen playing pong in every basement, almost every day of the week.


2017 Football Season Recap Peter D. Vo Sports Contributor Dartmouth football’s 136 th season was looked upon as a season of change. With the arrival of Kevin Daft as the new offensive coordinator and quarterbacks coach, the Big Green hoped to improve their offense and leave their dismal 2016 season behind them. The previous year left a bad taste in Coach Teevens’s mouth as Dartmouth finished with a 4-6 record and a mere 1-6 in Ivy League play. The development of senior quarterback Jack Heneghan was going to be key. In 2016, Heneghan’s first year as a starter, he finished with 2,725 passing yards, 11 touch-

downs, and 14 interceptions. It was a shaky first year but a good way to get his feet wet. Fortunately for Heneghan, the coaches and players were fully behind in in 2017 naming him one of three team captains. Affectionately named QBJ, Jack Heneghan would go on to lead one of the most exciting and heart stopping football seasons to date. A new wrinkle in Dartmouth’s offense was the addition of a two-quarterback system. Heneghan would be the starter but every so often, the coaches would switch him out with sophomore quarterback Jared Gerbino.





Editor-in-Chief Jack Mourouzis offers his parting thoughts as he finishes his tenure as Editor-in-Chief

We sit down with the current leaders of the Dartmouth Investment and Philanthropy Program

The Review reflects on the life and influence of America’s most beloved reverend




2 Monday – March 5, 2018

The Dartmouth Review




For thirty-five years, The Dartmouth Review has been the College’s only independent newspaper and the only student opinion journal that matters. It is the oldest and most renowned campus commentary publication in the nation and spawned a national movement at the likes of Stanford, Harvard, Princeton, and countless others. Our staff members and alumni have won many awards, including the Pulitzer Prize, and have been published in the Boston Globe, New York Times, National Review, American Spectator, Wall Street Journal, Weekly Standard, Village Voice, New Criterion, and many others. The Review aims to provide a voice for any student who enjoys challenging brittle and orthodox thinking. We stand for free speech, student rights, and the liberating arts. Whatever your political leanings, we invite you to come steep yourself in campus culture and politics, Dartmouth lore, keen witticisms, and the fun that comes with writing for an audience of thousands. We’re looking for writers, photographers, cartoonists, aspiring business managers, graphic designers, web maestros, and anyone else who wants to learn from Dartmouth’s unofficial school of journalism.



SAFE space

“Because every student deserves a safe space”

– Inge-Lise Ameer, Vice Provost for Student Affairs

Meetings held Mondays at 6:30 PM at our offices at 32 S. Main Street (next to Lou’s in the lower level office space)

INSIDE THE ISSUE The Definitive History of Pong.............................................Page 1


Dartmouth Football 2017: A Retrospective........................Page 1 Editorial: A Dream of Spring................................................Page 3 An Interview with DIPP........................................................Page 6 The Review Reviews: 1984....................................................Page 8 Darmouth’s Finest Classes...................................................Page 12 In Memoriam: William F. Buckley....................................Page 14 The Reverend Billy Graham................................................Page 15

SUBSCRIBE The Dartmouth Review is produced bi-weekly by Dartmouth College undergraduates. It is published by the Hanover Review, Inc., a tax-deductible, non-profit organization. Please consider helping to support Dartmouth’s only independent newspaper, and perhaps the only voice of reason left here on campus. Yearly print subscriptions start at just $40, for which we will mail each issue directly to your door. Electronic subscriptions cost $25 per year, for which you receive a PDF of The Review in your inbox at press time. Contributions above $40 are tax-deductible and greatly appreciated. Please include your mailing address and make checks payable to:

Or subscribe online at:

The Dartmouth Review P.O. Box 343 Hanover, NH 03755 (603) 643-4370


The Dartmouth Review

Monday – March 5, 2018



“Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win great triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to takerank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat.” —Theodore Roosevelt




A Dream of Spring

Jack F. Mourouzis

Executive Editors Joshua D. Kotran Marcus J. Thompson

Managing Editors Devon M. Kurtz Daniel M. Bring

Associate Editors Rachel T. Gambee John S. Stahel Alexander Rauda

Senior Correspondent Michael J. Perkins


Robert Y. Sayegh

Vice Presidents Jason B. Ceto & Noah J. Sofio


Greg Fossedal, Gordon Haff, Benjamin Hart, Keeney Jones

Legal Counsel

Mean-Spirited, Cruel, and Ugly

Board of Trustees

Martin Anderson, Patrick Buchanan, Theodore Cooperstein, Dinesh D’Souza, Michael Ellis, Robert Flanigan, John Fund, Kevin Robbins, Gordon Haff, Jeffrey Hart, Laura Ingraham, Mildred Fay Jefferson, William Lind, Steven Menashi, James Panero, Hugo Restall, Roland Reynolds, William Rusher, Weston Sager, Emily Esfahani-Smith, R. Emmett Tyrrell, Sidney Zion

NOTES Special thanks to William F. Buckley, Jr. It only ends once. Anything that happens before that is just progress. The Editors of The Dartmouth Review welcome correspondence from readers concerning any subject, but prefer to publish letters that comment directly on material published previously in The Review. We reserve the right to edit all letters for clarity and length. Please submit letters to the editor by mail or email: Or by mail at: The Dartmouth Review P.O. Box 343 Hanover, NH 03755 (603) 643-4370 Please direct all complaints to:

In his 2006 novel The Road, Cormac Mc- All while her rank and reputation steadily Carthy wrote “People were always getting slides downward. The old adage rings true; ready for tomorrow. I didn’t believe in that. nobody rages anymore. And Dartmouth, it Tomorrow wasn’t getting ready for them. It seems, is not what she once was. didn’t even know they were there.” For quite a while now, I have been wholeMy favorite piece of literature has earned heartedly decided that I shall not offer Dartits status not only because of its masterful, mouth any kind of charitable contribution exquisite prose and captivating discussion – financial or otherwise – following my of life and death, but also because of its nu- graduation. In fact, I would even actively anced messages of hope in the darkest of advocate that other alumni forego donating conditions. Though I am hesitant to quote in the future. For the class of 2018, the Colhis words in such a trivial situation, I cannot lege has provided us with an ever-diminishhelp but see his commentary on the future ing product at an ever-appreciating price; as applicable to both a Dartmouth we have seen firsthand the black student’s undergraduate journey hole the College is with regards and the current state of affairs to its finances. Whether it be at the College on the Hill. forcing students into overI matriculated at the Colpriced meal plans, funneling lege with few preconceptions countless dollars into unatabout my potential path as a tended (and, frankly, often ristudent. As it were, my Dartdiculous) house system events, mouth experience included or dedicating untold (yet cultivating a profound interlikely astronomical) sums est in Russian literature, to the exploration of a cerliving nearly half a year tain unanimously-hated in Germany, spending project in College Park, countless hours in a huthe College has proved man osteology lab, and, its absolute supremacy naturally, taking the helm in one area only: wasting Jack F. Mourouzis as Editor-in-Chief of The money. As such, I would Dartmouth Review. My four years has been consider any donation I were to make just nothing if not unorthodox. Perhaps that that: a waste, and a damn shame. was because my vision never really looked That is not to say, however, that the futoward tomorrow; I was content with stay- ture of Dartmouth is entirely without hope. ing preoccupied with the here and now, put- Just this past week, President Hanlon anting off my concerns with the future until I nounced the cancellation of the College had to deal with them. And, at the end of Park dormitory project. In addition, the the day, I have few, if any, regrets. Upon my seemingly all-but-inevitable plan to drastiarrival at the College, I clung to the belief cally expand the size of the College has been that my Dartmouth experience was not tabled by the Board of Trustees, halting the set in stone – that I could study whatever I certain destruction of the very heart of the wanted and take advantage of the countless College we all hold so dear. Amongst the opportunities that I came across – and still faculty, it seems that the seeds of discord find success. But is this idea true? Well, if have been sewn, and there are apparently one plays his cards right, absolutely. still whispers of a potential vote of no conIt is interesting, then, that I leave Dart- fidence against Hanlon – an action which mouth with such an overwhelming feeling I have previously advocated for. Finally, of pessimism. While this institution afford- and most important of all, the enthusiasm ed me countless opportunities and plea- of the faculty and students – the true drivsures, I cannot help but recognize the dis- ing force of what makes Dartmouth a truly turbingly steady decline of the College. This elite institution – shows little sign of waverdecline is manifested in many forms, from ing. Tomorrow is coming, ever closer and the administration’s ongoing war against closer. We need not know what it brings; the Greek system to the increasing political we need not prepare for it. It is the decision polarization (and subsequent suppression of those who make the College what it is of open discourse) of the student body. Stu- to continue to do so. The Dartmouth of todents continue to have the unappreciated, morrow will only be what its students and unattended, downright undesired house scholars make it. system aggressively forced upon them. The It is difficult, as Alexandre Dumas sugtyrannical monopoly of Dartmouth Dining gested, to simply wait and hope. But with Services has no end in sight. The College’s the promise of a successful career and world infrastructure is, in many places, crumbling. of opportunity ahead of me, I can do nothAn ever-expanding student body threatens ing but simply take my leave and wish Dartto burst the College at its seams. Alum- mouth all the best. After all, she certainly ni support for the institution is waning. needs it.

4 Monday – March 5, 2018

The Dartmouth Review




As the investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct against three Dartmouth professors draws nearer to its close, President Phil Hanlon reemphasized the college’s commitment to the disciplinary action and intolerance of sexual harassment and misconduct at Dartmouth. While the college has charged an external investigator with the case, the College is meanwhile cooperating the New Hampshire’s attorney general’s office as criminal investigations into the alleged misconduct are carried out. Until the investigation comes to a close, the College is refraining both from executing disciplinary action and from disclosing many of the specific details of the case. Nevertheless, four students in the Department of Psychology and Brain Sciences emerged to claim that the three tenured professors, Todd Heatherton, Bill Kelley, and Paul Whalen, “created a hostile academic environment that they allege included excessive drinking, favoritism and behaviors that they considered to be sexual harassment,” as reported by The Dartmouth. Furthermore, fifteen graduate students in total formally signed a statement echoing that claim. While none of the details of the interactions between the students and the professors are certain, it seems evident that the professors encouraged socializing to a degree that blurred personal, professional, and even ethical boundaries. Regardless, none of the details will be decisively revealed by the administration until the investigation has run its course. In the meantime, the three faculty members are on paid leave and their access to Dartmouth property is restricted, as noted by President Hanlon in his most recent update to the college on the investigation. In the spirit of protecting and reassuring the students of Dartmouth, the President also reiterated the College’s commitment to creating a community devoid of “sexual misconduct and harassment.” He has thus charged the Presidential Steering Committee on Sexual Misconduct with assessing the policies and procedures about sexual misconduct and with using their power to continue to make Dartmouth’s campus a better place. We at The Review condemn and lament sexual misbehavior and thus the alleged actions of the three Dartmouth professors. Still, we hope that the investigation and recognition of wrongdoing serve only to unify Dartmouth against such misconduct and promotes a stronger and safer college community.

Dartmouth joined other colleges, including most Ivy League Colleges, in affirming that suspensions resulting from peaceful protests would not jeopardize students’ admission to the College. This was in response to disciplinary action taken by high schools against thousands of high school students walking out of school, protesting the lack of gun control legislation following the shooting at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Broward County, Florida on February 14th that killed 17 students. The shooter, 19-year old Nikolas Cruz, was a former student whose motive for shooting up the school is still unknown. Some claim that he was inspired by a white supremacist organization in Florida, while others claim that he was just a deranged individual. Regardless, just like after every other mass shooting, vociferous demands for stringent gun control have dominated the conversation. Joined by high school students, journalists and media figures have called for immediate action by lawmakers on gun control and condemned the Republican Party for seeking to retain current gun laws. In the College’s official statement, they urged the students to “Speak Your Truth” and told them that “Participation in peaceful protests in no way jeopardizes your admission to Dartmouth.” However, it is unclear if this applies only to protests calling for gun control, or to all causes ranging from immigration reform to more threeday weekends. Brown University, on the other hand, was clear that their support only extended to protestors of gun violence by specifying that “peaceful, responsible protests against gun violence will not negatively impact decisions on admission to Brown.” Harvard, Columbia, and Yale all released statements similar to Dartmouth’s. Of the eight Ivy League Institutions, only Princeton refused to support the protests in high schools across the country. They did, however, release a statement in which they said that they would take into account every suspended student’s explanation for why they were disciplined, along with the school’s justification. Speaking with The Washington Post, Dartmouth’s Dean of Admissions, Lee Coffin, said that he and presumably his colleagues in admissions across the country, “[encouraged] students on both sides of this issue to express themselves,” giving us a glimmer of hope that Dartmouth may finally start to, at the very least, pretend to be tolerant of opposing points of view.

Every four years, winter athletes get the opportunity to showcase their talents in the Winter Olympic Games. Dartmouth had a very strong presence in this year’s Winter Olympics, held in Pyeongchang, South Korea. The school boasts of the second highest number of athletes from any college, behind the University of Minnesota, with fifteen affiliated athletes competing. A number of the U.S. cross-country skiers are former Dartmouth students. Rosie Brennan ‘11, for example, finished 58th in the 15-kilometer skiathlon. The skiathlon is a type of cross-country skiing in which the skiers perform two styles of cross-country skiing: classical and freestyle. Emily Dreissigacker ‘11 raced in the biathlon events — a mix of cross-country skiing and shooting. Her best finish was in the four-by-six kilometer in which she was in the anchor position and came in 13th place. Dreissigacker is a well-rounded athlete, as she rowed at Dartmouth as an undergrad. Susan Dunklee ‘18 also competed on the biathlon team relay with Dreissigacker. Dunklee also placed 19th out of 87 skiers in the fifteen-kilometer individual biathlon competition. Next, Sophie Caldwell ’12 competed in the four-by-five kilometer cross-country relay, in which the American team placed 5th. This was the highest finish of any United States women’s cross country skiing team ever. Finally, Ida Sargent ‘11 finished 33rd in the women’s individual cross-country sprint. Tommy Ford ‘12 raced in the downhill skiing competition. He placed 20th in the giant slalom, out of over 80 athletes. This race was Ford’s second appearance in the winter Olympics, as he competed when he was an undergraduate in the 2010 Vancouver Olympics. One undergraduate at Dartmouth, Staci Mannella ’19, is still slated to ski in the upcoming Paralympic Games. She is a dual athlete — she also competes on the Dartmouth equestrian team. Finally, Dartmouth had a presence in the hockey rink. Laura Stacey ’16 competed on the women’s Canadian hockey team. This Canadian hockey team won the silver medal, losing to the United States team in the final. The United States women’s ice hockey team was coached by Dartmouth’s women’s hockey coach, who took a leave of absence to coach this year’s Olympic team. Her team won its fifth Olympic gold medal in a row. This year’s Winter Olympics were as exciting as ever, and it is inspiring to see so many Dartmouth alumni competing.


Stinson’s: Your Pong HQ Cups, Balls, Paddles, Accessories

(603) 643-6086 |

The Dartmouth Review

Monday – March 5, 2018

Alexander Rauda Paul Woodberry

DARTMOUTH SCRAPS COLLEGE PARK EXPANSION PLAN In a faculty meeting on Monday, President Phil Hanlon announced that the College is no longer considering the project to build a 750-bed dormitory in College Park. To the relief of many members of the Dartmouth community, the historic College Park and the Shattuck Observatory have in fact been saved, for now. The College has decided not to proceed with the construction on the grounds of lack of funding for the high-cost endeavor. “We have now determined the cost of building 750 beds is simply beyond our financial capacity,” said President Hanlon during the meeting, adding tersely, “That project is just off; we just can’t afford it.” This fell-swoop answer to the College’s housing crisis threatened to destroy one of the few natural oases near central campus, and its canning is cause for celebration. But with the possibility of the student body increasing anywhere from 10-25 percent still up in the air, Hanlon made sure to make it clear that there is still a need to add to the College’s housing, which is currently at full capacity. As a result, the College is still considering several different smaller projects with various possible building sites. President Hanlon did not rule out or name any of the sites upon which these new dorms would be erected, but hopefully, the choice in construction sites is a bit more considerate of the natural and historic aspects that make Dartmouth so unique. There is no question that there is a need for new housing on campus to end this housing crisis. Hopefully, this allows the College to tear down once “temporary” housing at the Choates, rather than using this to allow for an expanded student body. With growing class sizes and lines in cafeterias, a 25% increase in students would be disastrous. Alas, in the war between Moving Dartmouth Forward and the traditions that much of the Dartmouth community loves, this is a rare victory. And for that, we at The Review have to celebrate.

CONSERVATIVES STAND STRONG AT CPAC The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) 2018, hosted from February 27th to March 2nd, is an important moment for the conservative moment in America. Featured speakers included President Donald Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, and The Review’s very own Laura Ingraham ‘85. President Trump reaffirmed his commitment to tax reforms, the Second Amendment, and stronger immigration control. He also took a moment to mention Reverend Billy Graham’s important legacy role in shaping Christianity in the United States, declaring: “We will never forget the historic crowds, that voice, the energy, and the profound faith of a preacher named Billy Graham.” Vice President Pence stood his ground on his actions during the Korean Winter Olympics. “The U.S. doesn’t stand with murderous dictatorships we stand up to murderous dictatorships,” declared Pence, asserting the United States’ hardline strategy towards North Korea. With a 93 percent approval rating of Trump’s presidency, it shows that his agenda is resonating with many members of the conservative community. With the three most important issues among attendees being fiscal policy, constitutional rights, and national securi-


Eashwar N. Sivarajan Robert F. Carangelo

ty, CPAC shows a conservative moment that seeks to uphold responsibility both in government and in the daily lives of American citizens. Furthermore, 75 percent of attendees support a very generous immigration policy, which only goes to show the lack of initiative of Democratic lawmakers when dealing with President Trump. One CPAC panel, “#USToo: Left Out by the Left,” has received overwhelming coverage from liberal media sources. Mona Charen, who was portrayed as solely receiving a negative response from the audience, later recalled hearing that “several young guys, college age, who, when I said what I did, they stood on their chairs and applauded.” The inclusion figures like Marion Le Pen, Sebastian Gorka, and Sheriff David Clarke, caused disputes at CPAC. Nevertheless, the varying shades of conservativism invited to the conference present a clear divide from the monolithic atmosphere at other events. The CPAC is not only important in deciding the direction of the conservative moment in the United States, but also in determining the direction of the Republican Party. With 2018 midterms seen as crucial for both parties, CPAC gives an insight into the issues that matter for most Americans. For the foreseeable future, it seems as if only the conservative side of the aisle supports a government that is of the people, by the people, and for the people.


“That was a very fine wine. It cost seventy dollars!” “Well, this one cost fifty, and it’s much better!”


“It’s true. College turned me into the angsty teenager I never was.”

6 Monday – March 5, 2018

The Dartmouth Review


An Interview with DIPP: The Dartmouth more of a question of whether or not we think there is something else that would be significantly better off.

Joshua D. Kotran Brian A. Morrison Executive Editor Contributor

Editor’s Note: Founded in 2007, the Dartmouth Investment and Philanthropy Program is a student run investment group that manages a $450,000 portfolio. Commonly referred to as DIPP, the program aims to provide Dartmouth undergraduates with hands on investing experience while raising money for worthy charities. Since its inception, DIPP has donated around $50,000 to various local and national charitable organizations, including $9,000 in the past year alone. The Dartmouth Review had the chance to sit down for a Q&A with DIPP Co-heads Teddy Carter (TC) and Dylan Alvarez (DA) to gain insight into the organization. The Dartmouth Review (TDR): Thanks for being here guys. Let’s start with your philanthropy, which is really the core mission of your organization. How does the philanthropy process work, and what are your guiding principles in choosing which organizations to donate to? Teddy Carter (TC): We generally get 20 or so preliminary applications and then narrow that list down to maybe 10 who will come in and make a pitch to the club. One criteria we have is that these organizations are all run by Dartmouth students or have Dartmouth students or alums heavily involved with them. We also try to support organizations where our money is going to a direct cause. So it’s not like, “oh, we just need some money for operating”. It’s usually for some specific purpose. We also skew towards organizations that can’t easily raise the money elsewhere. So if they’re part of some larger organization that’s well-funded and we don’t feel like our giving will make a major difference, we will probably give to someone else. Dylan Alvarez (DA): One thing to note is that all of the money is being invested or going to char-

ities. There’s no club budget, management fees or anything like that. We don’t even have a budget to buy pizza for meetings, for instance. So, we are really maximizing the total profits going to outside organizations. Also, after we give to the organizations, we keep in touch with them and try to help them in any way we can. TDR: Through DIPP’s philanthropy, you have the potential to act as an activist for various issues. How do you deal with this as an organization? TC: I think we try to support a wide variety of causes. We don’t try to support causes with a political motive or groups pushing for some sort of policy reform. We’re more so trying to support people who are doing things that most humans would consider as good. You know, they might have some sort of agenda in some way, but ultimately the money is going to charitable causes that are actually making a difference and trying to get something done, as opposed to just advocating on behalf of a group. TDR: Do you guys look at your philanthropy through an ROIbased lens? DA: Yeah. So essentially, that’s exactly what it comes down to, return on investment. We look closely at how much good is going to be created for each dollar we give. And when we have some of these political groups come in, you know, we look at the ROI on that. While that may benefit some people in a particular group, the actual return on investment really isn’t there when compared to the potential ROI for things like sending underprivileged kids to school, helping with relief efforts for hurricane Sandy, or funding healthcare for low income people in the Upper Valley. TDR: So, given that there’s a trade-off between giving now and growing the portfolio in the future, how do you decide

how much to donate each year? DA: We have a formula that essentially breaks down how much we made over the past year, and then also takes a conduct comparison of how much we donated the year before. That formula led to us donating $9,000 last year and this year it’s looking like it’s going to be closer to $13,000. So, broadly, it’s based on capital gains. If the portfolio went down, which it did during the recession obviously, we would withhold donations for the future. In fact, because of the recession, our first philanthropic giving began in 2011, four years after the fund started. In our opinion, this is what’s best to do for everyone, including the organizations we are donating to, because if we give money away when the portfolio is doing well, that’s us giving away capital gains in the future that we could donate. TDR: Let’s talk more about your overall portfolio strategy. I know that the fund is long-only, but beyond that, how would you guys describe the general investment approach? DA: I would say we’re a mix between a value-based strategy and growth at a reasonable price (GARP). About 75 percent

TDR: When you guys decide you want to buy a stock, how long does it take for you to get moving? DA: We build positions over time, so especially right now, there’s a lot more volatility, but we’ll do is we’ll conduct our first phase of or research. So at the beginning of every term, each group will narrow it down to two or three names that they really like. We’ll meet as a leadership committee and decide which of those options we see as the most attractive. TC: Something to note is that even though it might be a good company, if it doesn’t fit with our portfolio, we’ll pass. TDR: The vast majority of your portfolio is comprised of bluechip, large-cap stocks, is that by design? DA: During the recession, there were a lot of large-caps with great businesses that were significantly undervalued. So a lot of those large-cap positions were initiated back then. If you look at the stocks we’re buying today, it’s much more mid-cap and smallcap oriented than before. TDR: The most successful holding in your portfolio to

I think both of us have been kind of bearish because we are running a valuebased fund in a market that is largely overvalued. If anything, that just means we have to be more selective in what we look for. of the portfolio is in traditional value investments, where we see the intrinsic value as higher than the current market price. We also typically look for a catalyst to bring the stock to its fair value. When we buy stocks, we are generally thinking about a three to five-year time horizon. So we’re not looking at quick trades and short-term profit opportunities. Occasionally, if something appreciates we will sell it within a year or so, but our sweet spot is three to five years.

date has by far been Apple, which was first bought very early on in the fund’s history. It’s still the largest holding in your portfolio. Have you been trimming that position over time? What is your outlook on Apple in the future? TC: We’ve been steadily trimming our position in Apple over time as it’s appreciated and as we’d had better ideas. At one point it was eight or nine percent of our portfolio, even after trimming a lot. But it’s really

DA: What Apple’s ultimate product is isn’t the phone as much as the ecosystem of products they sell. And so that network effect allows them to kind of be insulated from technological changes even though they are a technology company. Because if a new product comes out, people will wait for the Apple one, even if it’s like slightly worse just because they want to be integrated with everything they have. TDR: Given your value-based investment strategy, the one outlier in your portfolio seems to be Amazon, which, trading at a P/E ratio of well over 200, probably won’t stand up well to most forms of technical analysis. What’s your investment thesis on that position? DA: This is a big play on management and Jeff Bezos. In our opinion, he is the single best capital allocator of our generation. Many on Wall Street have pointed out that just because Amazon has disrupted industries doesn’t mean they’ll produce cash flows in all of those markets. However, we think that with our long-term time horizon, lets say we hold this for 10 years, that all of that disruption will eventually lead to cash flows. So we really have a lot of trust in Bezos and we think with our time horizon that it will play out well. TC: Amazon also functions as a form of hedge for some of our other holdings, like Costco and Apple, for instance, because Amazon could potentially influence the future of a lot of those companies and their industries. TDR: I’ve been told that you both have been somewhat bearish on the market for the past year or so. What led you to this stance, and how do you hedge the market in a long-only portfolio? TC: I think both of us have been kind of bearish because we are running a value-based fund in a market that is largely overvalued. If anything, that just means we have to be more selective in what we look for. The best way to protect the fund from a market downturn is to invest in good businesses that we think will perform well no matter what. We try to pick business models that have high recurring revenue and often-

The Dartmouth Review

Monday – March 5, 2018



Investment and Philanthropy Program times large contracts going out 10 plus years. These businesses tend to fare pretty well regardless of the broader market performance. The other thing we’ve done is just maintain a larger cash position as sort of a buffer. Obviously when you hold cash, you lose some upside, but its the best form of protection we have available given that we can’t short. Even though we’ve had between 15 and 20 percent of the fund in cash the past year or so, we’ve still slightly outperformed the market, so we’re content with that strategy. TDR: Can you take us through an example of how you pick a stock to invest in? TC: Sure, so one position we recently initiated was U.S. Foods. Basically, they’re a distributor of food to primarily restaurants and other institutions ranging from government agencies to corporations who have cafeterias. So these guys deliver everything you need for your restaurant. They’re the second biggest company in the industry after

conduct a few risk scenarios. So we, might look at what would happen if interest rates were to to go up like 200 basis points (2%), which would be a pretty drastic change. We also might look at what would happen to the portfolio if we went into another recession.

TC: We’re not looking at macro trends and saying, “we think that oil is going to do well in the next two years, so let’s go buy more oil stocks.” We look for companies that we really think are good companies and then try to see how the macro trends will affect them. And that’s where valuation plays in. So if valuations are high, we think the equity markets are in a decline in the next year or two years, and we don’t think there’s a lot of upside for us to capture in this particular company. So we’re just finding names, period. For instance, with oil, we own oil names, but we own them because we think they have some sort of idiosyncratic benefit where the company is going to do better than the overall oil industry regardless of

We’re not looking at macro trends and saying, “we think that oil is going to do well in the next two years, so let’s go buy more oil stocks.” We look for companies that we really think are good companies and then try to see how the macro trends will affect them. Sysco, their biggest competitor. What we liked about this business is that it’s an incredibly fragmented market. US foods and Sysco are basically the two main competitors, but US Foods is much more focused on smaller restaurants and franchises whereas Sysco is shipping to big food chains like Ruby Tuesdays. For instance, Ruby Tuesdays is doing terribly because millennials don’t like that type of restaurant. We like US foods since it serves these sort of smaller chains and individual restaurants that have generally been doing well. We also liked that there was really only two companies in this market and the biggest competitor isn’t even competing directly. Given that competing in this market requires massive scale, there is a huge barrier to entry and limited competition risk. TDR: Can you talk about how you analyze macro trends and how they relate to your investments? DA: Yeah. So when we look at the portfolio as a whole, we will Mr. Kotran is a senior at the College and an executive editor at The Dartmouth Review. Mr. Morrison is a freshman at the College and a contributor to The Dartmouth Review.

how oil prices play out. It’s not that we’re not looking at stuff to see how it would affect the companies we own, but it’s never the driving decision for going into a company. So we’re never like saying, “oh, we think big data is going to be a trend, so lets buy IBM.” TDR: Have you guys explored getting into shorting and other kinds of financial instruments? DA: One reason that we’re long-only is we put a lot of emphasis on quality of business and looking at business models, both in terms of our investment strategy and in our member education. Also, while shorting would give us some downside protection, there’s also a lot of risk. Shorts have a skewed risk-reward proposition where you can only make so much, but you can lose money indefinitely. So given that tradeoff the fund has stayed long. In terms of the cash we have on hand, we have been exploring keeping some of our portfolio in a money market account. However, we don’t keep any of it in bonds, in part because the interest rate environment is so weak. Also, just because, you know, we’re young students, and we’re barely knowledgeable about the equity markets, let alone fixed

income. So we really want to keep a narrow focus on what we think we can do best.

TDR: Is there any form of alumni oversight? What is alumni involvement like in the club? DA: So we have an alumni board which consists of one president from each of the past six years. These are people who ran the club and then went on to work in various roles in finance. We have two board members in private equity, two in investment banking, one at a mutual fund and another at a hedge fund. Essentially their role is to kind of advise us. They are there to help us if there is something we don’t have knowledge about or we just want some assistance.

We also find that it is pretty self-selecting. Of the around 60 people who submit the first assignment, only 32 submitted the final assignment. TDR: What is the level of expected background knowledge for prospective members?

TC: We start from square one, and we expect that people are coming in with zero knowledge. Often this isn’t the case, as there are a lot of people who have managed their personal accounts and have done some self-study, but we try to start everything from scratch. TDR: Although a lot of mem-

bers of DIPP will likely go on to work in finance, few will be going into traditional stock-picking roles after graduation. What do you see as the main benefits of being involved in the club? DA: We think the skills we teach are applicable no matter what field you go into. Familiarizing yourself with the ins and outs of a business is important for everyone. Not just learning terminology, but learning what matters in a business: what drives growth, what drives profitability, and also understanding how industries work and competitive dynamics. That stuff is really applicable to everything.

TC: They also speak to the club and talk to members members about their day to day lives. So someone going through the recruiting process doesn’t have to sit there and say “I don’t know if I like private equity or banking.” They already have some background about what work in each industry entails. TDR: Can you talk a bit about membership and the club’s education process? Do people have to apply to join DIPP? DA: You don’t have to apply to be a member. What happens is, during freshman fall, like every other club, we go to the club fair, we’ll send out emails to campus and we’ll try to spread the word. We generally have 120 kids show up the first day, and essentially that shrinks over time. Every Thursday, a leadership member will go and teach a certain topic. So one week it will be about business models, the next it’ll be industry dynamics. The next week it’ll be financial modeling and accounting and at some point we’ll do a Bloomberg session. So we have these sessions and then we also have assignments throughout the way. We’re looking for kids who are very interested in investing, growing their investor toolkit, and having this hands on experience. We try to shy away from kids who are just doing this for their resume. TC: At the start of the term, we give the prospective members a list of companies and tell them to pick one. They’ll write a page or two about the company and get feedback throughout the process as they learn about the company and study industry dynamics. We make cuts in two phases throughout the process, but aren’t really cutting based on ability or how much knowledge you already have. We make our decisions more based on effort and a person’s desire to learn and get involved.

Over the past six years, DIPP has made charitable contributions to the following organizations: Link Up Dandelion Project GlobeMed Growing Change Dialogue at Dartmouth Dartmouth Socioeconomic Alliance WISE @ Dartmouth Philanthropic All-American Rush Dartmouth for Clean Water Haiti DREAM Dartmouth Graduate Veterans Association Dartmouth Humanitarian Engineering Good Neighbor Health Clinic Habitat for Humanity Project Right Choice Global Leadership MAI

8 Monday – March 5, 2018

The Dartmouth Review


The Review Reviews: 1984

1984 The student production’s main advertising banner

Devon M. Kurtz News Editor It is common for theatrical adaptations of books to be poor. But, it is rare that a theatrical adaptation of a book misses as much of the very point of the book as the Dartmouth Department of Theater’s production 1984. I will discuss these areas later, but I should be clear first that I found that the acting was skillful and effective and that the stage design was creative, original, and the main point of salvation for the production. I intend to criticize the other elements of 1984 without reflecting poorly on the hard work and talents of most of the people involved in the production, as I do believe that there were many commendable and enjoyable aspects. The production, as a whole, was insecure and cautious—it made large, provocative statements, and then followed them up with awkward optimism that negated the power of the provocation. My criticism is not politically charged, as I won’t even get into whether or not I agree with the play’s not-so-subtle politics. Rather, regardless of my political leanings, I would rather a well-made, well-executed, and provocative production that I disagree with politically, than one that is confused and unintentionally internally inconsistent. These internal inconsistencies are complex, as they have some redeemable stylistic value, but ultimately, they deMr. Kurtz is a sophomore at the College and the news editor of The Dartmouth Review.

tract from what I perceived as the purpose of this production. If the intended purpose of 1984 was in fact to criticize the current administration’s authoritarian proclivities, to provide a sort of guidebook to resistance, and to adapt an historically significant book into a play, then it realized its intentions, although with some notable missteps. While the multi-media approach was innovative and, at times, effective, its execution led to a distracting inconsistency. The successful uses of the screen to play a relevant modern music video and to show the interrogation scene in Room 101 in greater detail were overshadowed by the bizarre and, frankly, annoying pre-recorded readings of a book about resistance methods. The narrator, who otherwise delivered a praiseworthy performance, appeared on the massive screen in the center of the stage and read different ways in which citizens can resist fascism. Not only did this addition to the production detract from the subtly informing strategy of the book 1984, but it also came across as itself fascistic, didactic, and condescending. The attempt to incorporate methods of resistance—or, in simpler terms, ways to fight Trump—was both poorly implemented and inherently contradictory to the styles that made Orwell’s book so effective. Despite the strange polemic videos, the production was entertaining and creative. In order to accommodate the narration, the play begins in a radio studio that is producing

a live reading of the book. In order to produce sound effects on-air, there were actors that made the noises themselves by, for example, walking upstairs repeatedly to mimic the sounds of the character Winston going up to his flat. The set of the radio show was also a particularly strong point for the whole production, as it was thoroughly fitted to the post-war period. But there was a slightly confusing plot point that occurred at the end of the radio show. The transition from the radio show

the stage and the audience’s eyes, the audience is disoriented and shocked from their tranquil place as distant viewers to participants in the action of the performance. To heighten the drama, the police detain an actor planted in the audience, which pretty clearly symbolizes the position that Americans are in today when ICE arrests undocumented immigrants and police forces target people of color. The allegory is obvious—just as Winston and Julia are criminals for thinking

to a high school drama class was undeveloped and unnecessarily abrupt. A quick synopsis—the radio show is ended by a power outage, someone says, “they’ve shut us down,” and then the scene ends. The power outage is only superficially explained, the development remains unexplored, and the audience is left thoroughly confused. While I thought this might have been a stylistic choice, it seems too sloppy to be given that excuse. The strongest scene in the film is the one in which Winston and Julia are arrested. Through loud sirens, yelling officers, and bright, blinding white lights oscillating between

out of step with the dominant ideology, undocumented immigrants and people of color are forced into the position of “criminal.” While the allegory lacks nuance, and is largely melodramatic, it is important to remember that this production is in fact theatrical, and thus can be expected to be dramatic. Regardless of the merit or defensibility of the allegory, this scene is powerful and effective—the audience does feel as though they are witnessing an abuse of power that they cannot stop, and, along with that, a penetrating guilt for not acting anyways. Unfortunately, the production had a debilitating flaw right

If the goal is to criticize, criticize. If the goal is to be optimistic, be optimistic. If the goal is to be both critical and somberly optimistic, then for the love of God don’t corrupt those intentions with a bizarre song sequence that drains the power out of the preceding scene---the most controversial and passionate part of the entire production.

at the ending. An otherwise relatively strong performance concluded with an obnoxiously overt political rambling. The montage of Trump quotes culminating with “We will make America great again,” was unnecessarily polemic, but given the intentions of the play, it made logical sense to include it. The aggressive politicization can be excused as cumbersome but justified, but the successive song sequence was inexcusable. If the goal is to criticize, criticize. If the goal is to be optimistic, be optimistic. If the goal is to be both critical and somberly optimistic, then for the love of God don’t corrupt those intentions with a bizarre song sequence that drains the power out of the preceding scene---the most controversial and passionate part of the entire production. It was painful to watch the performance destroy itself by eviscerating the Trump-montage of its climactic power. Whoever made that decision ought to be embarrassed. Since the production is no longer being shown, I cannot give a recommendation to see it. I can, however, commend the Dartmouth College students who performed, especially the actress who played Martin (her performance still gives me chills) and the actress who played Freddy (I couldn’t contain my laughter), and those who designed the aesthetically magnificent set. The production had its flaws, but overall, I do not regret seeing 1984 at all. If our theater department is striving only for “the audience felt like they did not waste their time,” however, then we have much bigger problems.

The Dartmouth Review

Monday – March 5, 2018



Dartmouth Football 2017: In Review

ALUMNI STADIUM Home of Dartmouth Football

> CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1 Gerbino was dubbed as the “running quarterback” and headed Dartmouth’s version of the wildcat. In layman’s term (or as close as possible), the wildcat implemented misdirection to create running lanes. Gerbino would be in shotgun while a running back or wide receiver would motion towards him from out wide. Ball would be snapped and Gerbino would either hand off to the “sweeping” player or keep the ball and run it himself. The strategy as Coach Teevens put it was to add a spark to the offense when needed. It was a way for Dartmouth to stick to the run game in a dynamic way. Some argue the two-quarterback system disrupts the rhythm of the starter, but it has found success before. Notably, the 2007 LSU tigers rode their two-quarterback system all the way to a national championship thanks to starter Matt Flynn and runner Ryan Perriloux. Offensive coordinator Kevin Daft was also tasked with building upon the other stars on offense, notably star receiver Hunter Hagdorn and running back Ryder Stone. Hagdorn burst onto the scene as a freshman in 2016 hauling in 56 catches for 706 yards. A dynamic receiver in space, Hagdorn was set for a break out 2017 season. Ryder Stone was also a contributor as a freshman and was part of the 2015 championship team. Now a senior, Stone hoped to make his mark and carry his team to a championship just as former star Kyle Bramble did. Defensively, Dartmouth hoped to continue the tradition of having stout defensive play. Captains Jeremiah “JD” Douchee and Kyran McKinney-Crudden were ready to lead the defense. Douchee is a fifthyear senior who has struggled with injuries in the past but returns in pursuit of another championship. McKinney-Crudden also missed the 2016 with injury and certainly wanted to make his senior season memorable. Both players were healthy for the 2017 season and started every game. Mr. Vo is a senior at the College and the sports contributor to The Dartmouth Review.

Image courtesy of Dartmouth Sports

Memorable, interestingly enough, is one of the many words people have used to describe the 2017 Big Green. The new-look Dartmouth offense opened and smashed Stetson to the tune of a 37-7 rout. The Big Green hit the ground running, literally, as they piled on 324 yards rushing and tacked on three rushing touchdowns. Quite a way to start a season, but the fun was just getting started. Somehow, Dartmouth for the next four games, found themselves in crazy come from behind situations. Against Holy Cross, Penn, Yale, and Sacred Heart, Dartmouth edged out their opponents in either the last minute of the fourth quarter or overtime. Dartmouth beat those four opponents by a combined eight points. In the home opener against Holy Cross, the defense held on making a fourth down stop in overtime for the 27-26 win. The very next week against Penn, wildcat quarterback Jared Gerbino ran in the winning touchdown as time expired for the 16-13 road win. To continue this bizarre trend, during Dartmouth’s very own homecoming, the Big Green feel down 21-0 against Yale in the second quarter before sophomore cornerback Isiah Swann intercepted a pass and took it back for a touchdown. Led by senior quarter Jack Heneghan, Dartmouth stormed back in the second half and took a one-point lead with 34 seconds left in the game ending homecoming with a 28-27 Dartmouth win. Against Sacred Heart, Dartmouth was again coming from behind. After being down 23-14 at the half, good ol’ QBJ threw the game winning touchdown pass early in the fourth quarter for the 29-26 win over Sacred Heart earning the 10th consecutive non-conference win for Dartmouth. The insane drama and last-minute magic would make even Les Miles, “The Mad Hatter”, blush. Unfortunately, the magic finally ran out against Columbia. Coming into the game, both teams were undefeated. Once again, Dartmouth fell behind 16-0 by halftime. The running game, Dartmouth’s supposed strength, on offense was completely stymied. Not a single

third down was converted. However, the team still believed. An interception by Bun Straton and crazy scrambling by Heneghan put Dartmouth behind by only one score a 22-17 game. Unfortunately, Lady Luck had other plans. On the last possession, Henghan was sacked with the clock running. Confusion and chaos ensued resulting in the clock hitting zero. The game ended, and Dartmouth lost. Hoping to vent their frustrations against Harvard, the Big Green actually led 14-6 at halftime. However this time, it was the Crimson’s turn at a comeback. Nineteen unanswered points later, Dartmouth once again fell to Harvard 25-22. Frustration really boiled over at that point. Fortunately, Cornell was coming into town and the Big Green defense did what it did best, hit and hit hard. Cornell was held to only 250 yards of offense as Dartmouth shut them out 10-0 proving Green is a better color than Red. Ryder Stone also ran effectively against Cornell piling up 119 yards, a season high. The next week was a cold and frigid game at the historic Fenway Park against Brown. Coming into the game Brown had yet to win an Ivy League game. That trend continued as Dartmouth completely bullied Brown. Dartmouth held Brown to only 264 yards of offense while they exploded with 421 of their own offensive yards. The cold air could not stop the Big Green air attack as Heneghan connected twice with Hagdorn with two touchdowns and Stone added another one on the ground. Senior defensive back Jarius Brown added the cherry on top with a pick six in the fourth quarter. Fenway may be home to the Boston Red Sox, but on that night, it was Dartmouth’s house as the Big Green finished with a decisive 33-10 victory. All that remained was the season finisher at home against Princeton. Just like in 2015, Dartmouth had a shot at the Ivy League title so long as they beat Princeton (and Harvard beats Yale). For the last game of the season, it appeared both coaches decided to toss defense out the window and reenact a Big 12 conference matchup. Both the Big Green

and Tigers offenses just exploded with 551 and 495 yards respectively. Princeton at the time at the top passing offense while Dartmouth’s strength was on the ground. Boy did it show. Princeton quarterback Chad Kanoff finished with 444 passing yards and three touchdowns while Dartmouth collectively had 343 rushing yards. Wildcat quarterback Jared Gerbino ran a whopping 32 times for 203 yards and a touchdown. In his final home game, Ryder Stone tacked on 91 more yards and two touchdowns. Ironically, the last score of the game came on defense. Senior defensive back Darius George recovered a fumble and returned it for a touchdown sealing Dartmouth’s 54-44 victory. In a season filled with wild plays, last minute dramatics, and just magical miracles, there was no better way to end the season. Sadly, Harvard could not do one job and lost to Yale making the Bulldogs the 2017 outright Ivy League champs. Dartmouth finished tied for second with an 8-2 record. However, 8-2 is a huge step forward in the right direction for the Big Green. Dartmouth finished fourth in the Ivy League in total offense averaging 397 yards per game. The team was third in rushing (180 yards/game) and fourth in passing (217 yards/game). Heneghan finished with 2,136 passing yards, 17 touchdowns, and only 6 interceptions, a huge improvement from last season. His top target was still Hagdorn. Despite missing two games, Hagdorn still led all receivers with 44 catches, 541 yards, and 6 touchdowns. However, other top targets included Drew Estrada, Emory Thompson, and Dylan Mellor. Mellor, a junior, emerged as Heneghans most reliable target as he hauled in 22 catches for 301 yards and a touchdown. Thompson, a senior, finished his last year strong 259 receiving yards and three touchdowns (second on the team). Estrada is starting to emerge as a future star for Dartmouth as he finished his sophomore campaign behind only Hagdorn in catches (32) and yards (318). Drew Hunnicutt was also supposed breakout this year behind Hagdorn, but injuries limited him to only six games. On the ground, Ryder Stone led all backs with 145 carries and 675 yards. He finished his last year with four touchdowns on the ground and one touchdown catch. Second in carries and yards was Jared Gerbino as he had 428 yards on 86 carries. He did lead the team with seven rushing touchdowns, four of which came in the last game against Princeton. The defense in 2017 was completely star-studded, some old and some new. Junior linebacker Jack Traynor led the team with 98 total tackles and five tackles for loss to go with his single sack, interception, and force fumble. His partner in crime was senior linebacker Eric Meile who was second with 90 total tackles. He also added seven pass breakups and eight passes defended to go along with his own interception and force fumble. Fifth-year senior Danny McManus definitely made his mark with his scrappy

and aggressive play as Dartmouth’s starting corner. McManus led the team with 55 total tackles and led the team with eight pass breakups and nine passes defended. Known as a hard hitter, McManus certainly put in over 110 percent in the game. Sophomore corner Isiah Swann didn’t begin the season starting, but after his breakout performance against Yale, Coach Teevens gave him the nod and Swann never looked back. Swann led the team with spectacular interceptions. One gave Dartmouth the spark it needed to comeback against Yale. The other was a crazy acrobatic interception against Cornell. Look for Swann to be the next shutdown corner at Dartmouth in 2018. For the season, Dartmouth landed 16 players for All Ivy Awards. The first team included linebacker Jack Traynor and offensive lineman Matt Kaskey. Kaskey anchored a Dartmouth line that allowed only 10 sacks all year. The second team had six Dartmouth players including corner Danny McManus, linebacker Eric Meile, defensive end Nick Tomkins, center Patrick Kilcommons, receiver Hunter Hagdorn and corner Isiah Swann. Tomkins held together Dartmouth’s stout defensive line nabbing 34 tackels and 1.5 sacks. The honorable mention team consisted entirely of Dartmouth seniors. Included were guard Jack Anderson, quarterback Jack Heneghan, tight end Stephen Johnston, running back Ryder stone, free safety Colin Boit, defensive tackle Rocco Di Leo, defensive tackle Carlie Pontarelli, and kicker David Smith. Johnston performed well as a blocking tight end while also catching a touchdown score. Colin Boit finished his senior season with 55 tackles, a pick, and a fumble recovery. Rocco Di Leo performed well on the defensive line with 29 tackles and two tackles for loss. David Smith, a fan favorite, led the team with 60 points as he hit 1013 field goals and 30-31 PATs. Like 2015, 2018 will look a little like a rebuilding year for Dartmouth. Many starters are seniors and will most likely move on from the program. There are holes almost everywhere on both sides of the ball, but Coach Teevens has always preached a next man up mentality. The 2018 Dartmouth Big Green will have a new quarterback and a new running back. Some candidates for the new starting QB job include the aforementioned Jared Gerbino and Jake Pallotta who saw some action in three games as relief. Replacing Stone as the workhorse running back may prove to be tricky, but Coach Teevens has a stable of speedy runners in Miles Smith and Rashaad Cooper. Defensively, Isiah Swann will look to take over McManus’s spot as the top corner while Bun Stratton may take over Colin Boit’s safety postion. Stratton actually started the final eight games of the season. There are a lot of moving pieces and the recruiting cycle may bore some stars in the making as well. Dartmouth’s 136th football season has come to a close. It is time to move onto spring training in preparation for the 137th season in 2018.

10 Monday – March 5, 2018

The Dartmouth Review


A Somewhat Brief History...

> CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1 The Review reached out to alumni to attain a better understanding of how the set up and execution of our favorite pastime has evolved since its widespread adoption in 1970s. A Sigma Kappa ‘74 — a self proclaimed pong expert — concisely described the rules he played with, “the game in the 1970s consisted of putting a full cup of beer in the middle of each quadrant of the ping pong table. The objective was to hit the opponent’s cup in which case he and his partner had to drink 1/4 of his cup or even better to hit the ping pong ball into the opponent’s cup in which he and his partner had to chug their beers.” However, should you knock over your own beer, you had to fill it, and both you and your partner had to chug their cups. After hitting your opponents cup 4 times, they were out and the next team came on table. Despite the common objective, the current practice of aligning the cups in a tree bears little resemblance to the game of old. Even the way we execute pong shots has changed. Prior to the turn of the century, pong much closer resembled the game of ping pong where shots were low and difficult to return. A strong player would ideally be able to smash the cups off the table in which case the opponent had to refill the cup and then imbibe. While still observed in houses such as GDX and Sig Ep today, aces were also crucial to prior variations of pong. An Alpha Chi ‘79 confirms that pong players were just as conniving back then as today with a description of service tactics: “pong involved both fast serves as well as serves using subterfuge, surprise, unconventional serving, and distraction (even physical distraction in doubles).” Nowadays, two players per team is the standard, and the standard pong shot is a lob hit which follows the trajectory

of an arc on it’s journey from the paddle to (hopefully) the opponents’ cups. One can only guess as to why pong moved away from the fast pace slams to the elongated lobs. Perhaps influence from pong’s ugly red-headed step sister—beirut, a carnival game that no reasonable person would ever consider as being classified as pong—encouraged the use of an arced shot to attack cups. Maybe, the slam pong involved much more movement and our game was bread of laziness. Regardless, many students would be shocked and uncomfortable to see the game of old played in our familiar basements. Not only is slam pong frowned upon, lobs are the only truly acceptable way to hit a cup. If a player hits the ball too low, or, more accurately, with a downward arc, anyone playing or even observing the game can call “low” and have the player re-serve. Cup placement has also deviated from earlier times. Many think of the eleven cup Tree formation as a sacred symbol to Dartmouth. Bearing questionable resemblance to the Lone Pine, the arrangement can be seen on table (in order to aid in set up as the night grows long) and even embroidered on fraternity shirts. Although this is the default formation in most Greek houses, a variety of different patterns are used for special occasions. When time is of the essence and waiting lines are long, many houses resort to Shrub, a smaller version of tree that only uses seven cups and less beer. On the other end of the spectrum, empty basements sometimes see the infamous Sequoia formation, a tree with an extra row of five beers behind the previous back row of four beers with a double stem. Obviously, this game takes longer and leaves participants substantially more intoxicated than a game of Tree. An even more ambitious and rare for-

mation referred to as 3-D pong which refers to the three dimensional set up. On top of the original tree, cups are stacked higher and higher until reaching a peak cup four cups above the table. Because of the larger target, this game can quickly turn into hedonistic chaos and is normally preserved for big weekends or reckless Keystone enthusiasts. One of the last four player pong formations played today is referred to as The Line of Death and still can be seen in the basement of Sigma Nu on rare occasions. Line consists of 9 or 11 cups placed in a horizontal line a paddle’s length away from the back of the table. A Sigma Nu ‘92 remarks that in his day, Line of Death had three separate variations. Standard Line of Death consisted of 8 cups centered on the table.

ponent placed side by side a paddle’s length from the back. One beer is split between the two cups and each cup contains four points. A hit represents one point while sinking a cup finishes whatever points are left in the cup. Although often overlooked, it is customary that after a cup is finished, it remains on the table and any strikes or sinks of said cup result in a point deducted from the remaining beer cup. These cups are only refilled when all beer is gone which happens to fall of multiples of 8 hence the name of the game, 48, referring to a game that ends when the loser finishes his sixth beer. An opponent may have to refill his cups multiple times before his adversary if severely outmatched. Considered a “gentleman’s game” it does not matter who serves the ball and participants are obliged to refrain from spin serving. When more than four players are looking for a game, often times two tables will be pushed together for a round of Harbor which requires four teams of two players. Harbor, as the name suggests, is comprised of five ships, straight lines of cups of varying lengths that are “sunk” when a cup is sunk and less that two and a half full cups remain in the ship. Each team starts the set up in a corner of the now square table. A ship consisting of six cups runs from the corner to the teams right along the edge of the table while a ship of five runs along the left edge starting about a cup length from the start of the six boat. From this “L” shaped start, a four length boat runs diagonally towards the center of the table, bisect-

Prior to the turn of the century, pong much closer resembled the game of ping pong where shots were low and difficult to return. A strong player would ideally be able to smash the cups off the table in which case the opponent had to refill the cup and then imbibe. Wall of Death consisted of 16 cups lining the entire width of the table. Great Wall of Death consisted of 32 cups—two rows together, lining the entire back of the table—and a great deal of regret the next morning. Line formations are thought to reward pinpoint accuracy as all the cups are at the same distance away from the other side of the table. Occasionally, games of pong involve more or less than four players and thus require adjusted set ups. For players serious about improving their game, 48 is a variation that requires only two players. The name is derived from the point system used to score the game, and it bears some resemblance to pong played in the 70s. Two cups are needed for each op-

ing the ninety degree angle created by the first tow boats. Running along the same edge as the five boat is the three boat which lies on the edge of the teams region right where the two tables have been pushed together. Placed horizontally in front of the four boat is the elusive two boat. Lastly, the one boat is placed in between the six, five, and four boats and is actually not a ship at all, but a mine. The mine is notoriously easy to hit and, when struck, the offender must go over to the opponent’s side of the table, drink the mine, and then refill it. This ordeal leaves the offender’s side vulnerable as the game does not stop while his other partner must now defend their whole quadrant. As teams are eliminated, they must leave

the table and when two teams are left, they take their remaining cups and play on one table as if a regular game of pong. It is important to remember that harbor waits for no one — anybody is able to serve the ball and stepping away from the table does not stop the game. Some also play where off table shots can be slammed at opponents and hitting them results in the drinking of a half. Today’s fraternities and sororities all have their own unique rules and customs. Chi Heorot, known for its high ceilings and spacious pong area, offers a space suitable for expert-level pong. Pong at Heorot is played with the regular tree formation, but without medians. Teams can usually decide who serves, and 3 serve attempts are allowed. Ceilings are always good at Heorot, even on serves, regardless of how hard the ball is hit. Slams are only good off of elbows or on saves, and there are no team saves, meaning that only the person whose turn it is to hit can save the ball. When one’s teammate is especially bad at saves, this rule can be liver-killer. Sigma Alpha Epsilon also uses the tree formation, but requires that serves be played to the person that has just sank a cup, if applicable. Servers also get 3 tries here, but team saves, along with team returns are allowed, meaning that anyone playing at SAE can save, or return a save. The brothers of Beta Alpha Omega have no problem flipping over their tables and clearing out their basement for dancing during the night, but pong is nonetheless an important activity in their basement. Beta uses the tree formation like most fraternities, and also allows 3 strikes on serve, but only counts a serve as a strike if the ball goes off the table. Beta allows team saves, and also allows the use of the body throughout gameplay. The one rule that makes Beta unique is that they allow ceiling slams. Phi Delta Alpha, or Phi Delt, has a heavy-drinking atmosphere that is very conducive for pong. The rules at Phi Delt are pretty standard, with tree formation and 3 off-table serve attempts, although any use of the body is strictly prohibited (and may get you booed out of the basement). Make sure not to hit the ceiling on serves! At Sigma Phi Epsilon, pong is played in tree formation, with only 2 serves, and aces garner a cup from the other team. Sig Ep also has a unique rule called the “playmaker,” where sinking the middle cup on the first hit will kill the entire back row of cups. Sig Ep also allows team saves, as most fraternities do. Tri Kap (Kappa Kappa Kappa) is one of the few frats to use the shrub formation, making

The Dartmouth Review

Monday – March 5, 2018 11


...of Pong at Dartmouth games shorter, but also making lines move more quickly. Tri Kap allows 3 serve attempts, and allows players to serve to either side of the table, and also allows team saves. The brothers here can chug like no other, and you’ll scarcely see beer being poured onto the floor. That being said, their somewhat-newly renovated basement contains a water fountain in close proximity to their tables. If you want to play with water— go for it, and drink it to stay hydrated! Alpha Chi Alpha, known as Alpha Chi, has a uniquely shaped basement with three standard pong tables and one table reserved for a drinking game called chesties— four players with one cup each stand at each corner, and attempt to hit the ball off of their chests into their cup. Alpha Chi allows 3 serves, and also allows environment on hits, meaning that they play anything that hits the table off of any object that is not the floor. Ceiling slams are also allowed. See a brother saluting while drinking? Ask him what it’s about! TDX (Theta Delta Chi) hosts a heavy-drinking pong scene, and plays with a double stemmed tree, placing a 12th cup at the base of a normal tree set up, and often pouring 7 beers. This basement also can often turn into a dance scene, but is great for pong during the early and extra late hours of the night. TDX doesn’t allow team saves, but does allow use of the environment and the body. GDX (Gamma Delta Chi) has a two-floored basement, allowing for a simultaneous dance and pong scene. One level of the basement is your standard scene, but the lower one used to be an underground pool. Ceilings are accordingly especially high at this lowest level. They only allows 2 serves, but play aces on serves as a cup. GDX doesn’t allow ceiling serves, but does allow for team saves. Chi Gamma Epsilon, known as Chi Gam, has the basement divided into two sections: Varsity and JV. The Varsity table has a higher ceiling than the other tables, but the same rules are played on the Varsity table and the four JV tables. Chi Gam only allows 2 serves that miss the table, and doesn’t count ceiling serves. People are expected to serve the ball to someone when they sink a cup, and team saves are allowed. As stated previously, Sigma Nu will sometimes play with Ms. Cara, Mr. Jones, and Mr. Morrison are students at the College and contributors to The Dartmouth Review. Mr. Kotran is a senior at the College and an executive editor at The Dartmouth Review. Mr. Stahel is a senior at the College and an associate editor at The Dartmouth Review.

the uncommon line formation as an homage to past pledge classes of the 80s and 90s. However, the basement more commonly plays tree. They allow for 3 serves. They no longer play with aces, and environment is good. Bodies fall into a weird gray zone, where nobody in the basement will you out on it, but they will give you a dirty look. Respect the house, respect the basement— only use your paddle. Psi U mostly plays with shrub, but most brothers prefer to play tree. Unfortunately for those unfamiliar in playing in their rather short basement, Psi U allows for ceiling slams. The brothers of Zeta Psi also mostly play shrub. As the first sorority to cut ties from a national organization and go local, Sigma Delt’s basement is always open as a female dominated social space. The women of Sigma Delta are known for their utter mastery of pong. Coining the phrase heard in most every house on campus “Sinking Halves and Respecting Women,” Sigma Delts are a force to be reckoned with in basements— especially their own. Sigma Delt’s claim pong as theirs and are happy to share that love of the game with all who wish to share it. The house’s official rules reflect this. There must be at least one sister on table at all times, and when playing with water they request that the cups be taken from their sustainable cup dispenser. If someone isn’t in the basement, nobody may call line for them. In order to ensure that as many games can be played as possible, the house plays with shrub and harbor may not be played

everyone in the group will plan a convenient time for an organization-wide tournament, and “rent out” a frat basement early during an “on” night (Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday) or on an “off ” night (any other night). These tournaments are always open to anyone within the student group, regardless of affiliation, but usually at least one member of the student group must be affiliated with the house that is being used. Pong tournaments are so crucial in fostering team camaraderie that many clubs will hold a tournament every term. In tightly-knit sports teams, two separate “rankings” will often develop — one for the actual sport being played, and one for pong. Sometimes certain playing traits will even carry over from the given sport, making

Regardless of what basement one plays in, pong is a quintessential bonding opportunity. This can be seen in its role as a social event for many non-Greek organizations, including varsity and club sports teams, academic clubs, and even classes and study groups. on on-nights when people are waiting to play. Sigma Delt’s open basement and rules clearly show how pong can be used as a tool on Dartmouth’s campus to promote equity and fun — all those in their basement and respecting the line can expect to play and have a wonderful time. A game can only be as good as its players’ desire to play fairly, and the sisters of Sigma Delt ensure that rules are respected and upheld within the entirety of their domain. Regardless of what basement one plays in, pong is a quintessential bonding opportunity. This can be seen in its role as a social event for many nonGreek organizations, including varsity and club sports teams, academic clubs, and even classes and study groups. Usually

for a distinct playing style and outlook on the game. Pong can be played with or without alcohol, and with almost any type of alcohol. While Keystone Light is certainly the most common poison picked, cups can be seen with everything ranging from batch and boozy lemonade to an IPA of one’s choosing and hard cider. Recently, White Claw’s hard seltzer has made its way into basements and cups, much to the chagrin of beer-lovers everywhere. Once a term, Sigma Alpha Epsilon hosts “Champagne” where invitees dress in classy garb and play with sparkling wines ranging from a $7 Prosecco, to bottles of Veuve Clicquot. However, an important terminology change must be noted — when one plays

pong with champagne, one ought to call it “Champong.” There is an argument that pong — like all drinking games — encourages a drinking culture. To a certain point, this argument has merit. A team holding table could easily consume 15 beers over the course of a few hours. Certainly, there are variations of the phrase “losing means drinking, drinking means winning, therefore losing means winning” espoused by alumni as far back as 1975. However, to play pong one is not required to drink. An Alpha Chi ‘79 emphasizes this sentiment stating “for all the folks who say [pong] only encourages drinking alcohol, please note that we played plenty of water pong when we didn’t want to drink beer.” As nights grow long and players’ tolerance become stretched, cups filled with beer get spilled onto the floor — much to the chagrin of new members responsible for cleaning the basement — and get replaced with water for the next games. This care to not push students past their limits could be attributed to numerous features of pong. The most cynical explanation might be that as pong is a team sport, teammates have a practical interests associated with preventing one another from over-indulging lest their overall performance suffer. There might also be a more tender explanation— the camaraderie brought about by pong could breed a semblance of mutual respect that incentivizes all players to look out for everyone’s best interest. After all, there is no honor in winning a game against someone incapable of truly playing it. Another important element of pong is that, throughout the ages, students have found ways to endow games with mirth. A Sigma Kappa ‘74 recalls of a fond memory of dragging a pong table onto his front lawn for a game on a lovely spring

Sunday morning — only to see then-President Kemeny walking down Webster Avenue with his wife on the way to church and greet them warmly with a jovial “Good Morning.” In the late evening of November 6th, 2016, two unknown students stole a regulation sized piece of plywood from a construction site and carried it across the green. After spending hours in Chi Gamma Epsilon’s hot tub and consuming quite a lot of wine, one student fondly recalls her decision to fill cups up with leftover Chinese food rather than alcohol. Certain houses might bring up empty cases of beer to build a wall in the center of the table and play “battleship” — each side decides where to put their cups, and each player blindly lobs the ball over the divider to try to sink their opponents’ ships. While pong may be just a game to some, it is the respect of the game that defines its value on Dartmouth’s campus. People call lows on themselves as a way to keep themselves to a high-standard. Close-calls are often left to the discretion of those closest to the cup. There are rarely referees in a basement. Instead, there is an overriding sense of honor that each player ought to have — one that is taught, reinforced, and cherished in every house and on every on-night. Lifelong friends are made across the pong table. Dartmouth’s unique version of pong has become embedded in virtually every aspect of student life, and the game has, time after time, proven not only to bring friends closer together, but also to make friends of strangers. In the wise words of a Sigma Nu ‘92, “Pong is...emblematic of Dartmouth as a whole. The underlying traditions and love of institution stays, while the specifics change with the times… we still bleed green and maintain that pong is not pong without paddles.”

12 Monday – March 5, 2018

The Dartmouth Review


The Best of the Best:

Image courtesy of Dartmouth Communications

DARTMOUTH HALL The symbol of education at the College on the Hill

The Dartmouth Review Staff Various Contributors ECON 26 – The Economics of Financial Intermediaries and Markets – Professor Meir Kohn B. Webb Harrington Econ 26 with Professor Kohn is more like evolutionary biology or detective work than it is like any other economics class. Rather than simply studying a new model and trying to memorize the exact motions on a graph that are caused by a change in inflation, Professor Kohn askes the simple question, why? Why does securitization work for mortgages but not for small business loans? Why does America use more credit cards than Europe? As students scramble to answer these questions and cope with Kohn’s feared Socratic, he remains completely composed, only pausing to interject a joke about big government or correct a student’s mistake. After teaching the class for decades, Kohn manages to maintain interest in the subject material and add, slowly but surely, recent developments such as bitcoin to the curriculum. More than just maintaining interest in the material, however, Kohn connects with each new student. He insists that every student that enters his classroom must come to see him during his office hours. All this does not do the class justice however. The simplest way to describe Economics 26 with Professor Kohn is this:

Professor Kohn teaching this class is the greatest academic treasures that Dartmouth currently possesses. PBPL 42 – Ethics and Public Policy – Professor Lucas Swaine Scotch Cara Ethics and Public Policy with Professor Lucas Swaine is by far the most interesting, engaging, and pertinent class I’ve taken at Dartmouth. Not only does Professor Swaine care about the wellbeing and future successes of his students, he has a deep appreciation of the nuances of the intersection between ethics and policy. While some professors might say that they’re open to new ideas besides their own, Professor Swaine truly recognizes the validity of views that he disagrees with. Accordingly, he gives all justified arguments due diligence. In a class that deals with what can often be considered a murky gray zone—the morality of largescale political decisions—the notion that a student could respectfully disagree with not only his or her peers, but also the professor, led to a welcoming classroom environment. Apart from the wondrous marvel of Professor Swaine, the class itself is something truly special. The class focuses on allowing students to explore their own views on the normative backings of government action— or, in some cases, inaction. Governments are fundamentally different from individuals by virtue of their

structure and obligations. As such, the study of how they ought to behave can sometimes feel needlessly complex and overwhelming. The structure of the class was such that everything from the basics of moral inquiry to the intricacies of different frameworks for developing an understanding of policies like immigration reform made the class manageable for people from all academic backgrounds. The assigned readings were always pertinent and engaging, and, unlike some readings for other classes, directly contributed to in-class discussions. All of the faculty in the Political Theory section of the Government

This was a one-time class offered only during the fall of 2016 and was taught by a visiting professor, Dr. Samuel Kassow (of Trinity College), one of the United States’ leading experts on the Holocaust. It met  during the 3A slot, and used the Monday X-hour while ignoring the  Thursday period, resulting in a marathon three-hour lecture once a week.  Despite the format not being conducive to discussion - or, for many,  even staying awake without a cigarette during the fifteen minute break - I was utterly captivated by Professor Kassow’s comprehensive knowledge  and captivating

International Politics – Professor David Rezvani Alexander Rauda

Although I have not taken many classes at Dartmouth, I can confidently say that Professor David Rezvani’s Debates in International Politics is one of the best classes I have taken so far. Whether we were discussing the benefits of war in Africa or the future of the Sino-American relationship, Professor Rezvani made sure that our work was based on both the theoretical and the practical aspects of international affairs. This literature on international affairs has expanded my knowledge on the topics of sovereignty, inProfessor Avishai not only imparted the tervention, and cooperation. theory of nearly a dozen critical political The class stripped away the ‘pop’ rhetoric that the media philosophers, but changed the way I uses when discussing international affairs, especially when think about politics and history. He has it concerns modern wars. Furimpacted every subsequent class I’ve thermore, the class reaffirmed taken. my view on America’s important role on the global stage. Department are amazing. Tak- commentary on an admit- In a day and age where the ing this class with any of them tedly dark topic. I will nev- United States is constantly anwould be more than worth- er forget the long, arduous tagonized, Debates in Internawhile. Governments have ab- Saturday night spent reading tional Politics is a class not to solute power to do whatever the entirety of Primo Levi’s be missed by the most ardent they wish— oftentimes, it is Survival in Auschwitz, nor defenders of America’s leaderonly a series of moral norms the breadth of fascinating  ship position in the world. (albeit with different en- knowledge Kassow impartforcement mechanisms that ed upon us throughout the GOVT 20.02 – Foundations depend on the structure of term. My final paper -  dealof Political Economy – Prodifferent government) that ing with underground newsfessor Bernard Avishai prevent them from doing papers of the Theresienstadt Marcus J. Thompson something they ought not.  ghetto -  earned the highest praise I’ve ever received Foundations of PolitiHIST 58 / JWST 37.01 – on a paper: “You should  cal Economy with Professor History of the Holocaust – write more on this topic.” Bernard Avishai is the most Dr. Samuel Kassow important course I’ve takJack Mourouzis WRIT 5 – Debates in en at Dartmouth. Not only

The Dartmouth Review

Monday – March 5, 2018 13


The Review ’s Favorite Classes is Professor Avishai a highly engaging and dynamic professor, but the content of this course revolutionized the way I thought about politics and history. Professor Avishai takes his class through seminal texts in Western political thought including Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Marx, deconstructing the intricacies and differences in these works through a mixture of lectures and discussion. The best aspect of this course was writing the final paper, which prompted students to apply Thomas Kuhn’s “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” to political economy. Kuhn theorized that the scientific process was not linear, as previously thought, but a cyclical pattern of paradigm shifts that led to upheavals in science. Professor Avishai not only imparted the theory of nearly a dozen critical political philosophers, but changed the way I think about politics and history. He has impacted every subsequent class I’ve taken. ENGL 52.04 – American Renaissance at Dartmouth – Professors Donald Pease and Jed Dobson Robert Y. Sayegh American Literature with Professors Donald Pease and Jed Dobson is without a doubt among the best classes I’ve taken at Dartmouth. Covering some of the most influential writers of the 19th and 20th centuries, like Frederick Douglas, Herman Melville, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and Henry David Thoreau, this occasionally-offered, 14-person seminar is a must-take for every Dartmouth student. Both Pease and Dobson promote an exceptionally engaging classThis article was compiled by Rachel T. Gambee, an associate editor at The Dartmouth Review.

room environment, casting a contemporary light on classic American philosophy by giving current issues meaningful historical context. Pease and Dobson are without a doubt two of the most prolific lecturers at Dartmouth, bringing an energy to the classroom that captivates students of all disciplines. They teach two other classes together: American Drama and Game of Thrones, neither of which I’ve had the opportunity to take, but would nevertheless recommend them on the merit of these professors alone. Perhaps most importantly, they completely and unequivocally support freedom of thought in the classroom and out, encouraging students from all walks of life and all schools of thought to express themselves freely in their everyday lives. They are truly a unique pair who bring alternate perspective to a sometimes-banal Dartmouth. Be it this seminar or one of their other classes, every student would be remiss to neglect the Pease/Dobson duo. COLT 64.02 – Writing at the Extreme: Jewish and Japanese Responses to Crisis and Catastrophe – Professors Alan Lelchuk and Dennis Washburn Michal J. Perkins

Choosing “the best class I’ve taken” at Dartmouth is difficult because my motivation for enrolling in particular classes varies greatly. You could ask me which class has been my most interesting, most rewarding, or most enjoyable and receive a different answer each time. For the purpose of answering this prompt, I’ve selected the class I found most enjoyable at Dartmouth. That class would be COLT 64.02,  Writing at the Ex-

treme: Jewish and Japanese Responses to Crisis and Catastrophe.  I could recommend this class for the unique blend of cultures it offers, masterfully portrayed by its two professors Alan Lelchuk and Dennis Washburn, or its engaging and enriching readings, but ultimately, this class stands out in my memory for the sheer excitement I harbored before each of our meetings. The round-table style classroom allowed for an open discussion that was the highlight of my week throughout the term. There are many classes that could be labelled unmissable in the Dartmouth course cata-

Tutorials across the fields of engineering teach valuable technical skills and highlight the capabilities of the magnificent Thayer complex. Theoretical exercises in production under the assumption that you take your product to market awakens the inner entrepreneur in everyone while the final presentation to the design board serves as great professional experience and the course in general is known to impress interviewers. Many groups even file for patents at the end of the project signifying the attachment to their creations. For any brave students seeking a rewarding, yet

Perhaps most importantly, they completely and unequivocally support freedom of thought in the classroom and out, encouraging students from all walks of life and all schools of thought to express themselves freely in their everyday lives. logue, but as I can only recommend one, this class receives my endorsement.

challenging course, ENGS 21 should be at the top of their shortlist.

ENGS 21 – Introduction to Engineering – Professor Ulrike Wegst John S. Stahel

CLST 11.11 – War Stories – Professor Roberta Stewart Devon M. Kurtz

As the resident engineer of The Review, obligation dictates that I give an alternative to the preceding accounts of liberal arts courses. ENGS 21, although primarily taken by engineers, also includes students from every major imaginable seeking to better understand problem solving and design. The objective of the course is deceptively simple: “Identify a problem, examine possible solutions, develop a prototype”. Daunting at first, the project becomes exciting as group chemistry develops and students realize the potential of their Ivy League brain.

Beginning in antiquity, and continuing through the major epochs of war, Stewart’s “War Stories” course explores the horrors of warfare, the camaraderie of soldiers, and the difficulties of homecoming. Taught by a Classical historian and U.S. military veteran TA’s, this course challenges one’s mental toughness as much as intellectual ability. While the coursework is fascinating — ranging from the Trojan war to the American Civil War to the War on Terror —there is a unique final project that differentiates this course from any other: an interview of a veteran and analysis of his sto-

ry. I will never forget the hours I spent talking with a veteran from the White River Junction area. His stories about his service in Vietnam were inspiring, terrifying, and unsettling. Analyzing his story as though it were a work of literature was as uncomfortable as it was rewarding. This course, and this project especially, develops skills that are not commonly prioritized at Dartmouth. Upon finishing the course — after reading and listening to dozens of war stories — the course reminded me of a great quote: “War never changes.” TUCK 3 – Business Strategy and Management – Professor Giovanni Gavetti Joshua D. Kotran One of the most transformative classes I’ve taken at Dartmouth was Business Strategy and Management with Professor Giovanni Gavetti from Tuck. Taught in the “case-method”, each class walks through a real-world business scenario and allows students to put themselves in the shoes of a company’s management.  The course challenged me to think critically, broadly, and creatively about competitive analysis, industry dynamics, pricing strategy, and segmentation.  Strategy as a subject comprises a blend of marketing, game theory, psychology, and managerial economics. It is in some ways the liberal-arts equivalent of business education, and fit in nicely with my other coursework. On a practical level, the exercises we did in class often closely mirrored the work of a consultant, and went a long way in helping to determine what I wanted to do after graduation. Dartmouth only allows you to take three Tuck courses, but they sure made this one count. 


14 Monday – March 5, 2018

The Dartmouth Review


In Memoriam: William F. Buckley, Jr.

WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY, JR. A great friend of The Review.

Daniel M. Bring Managing Editor

Last Tuesday, February 27, marked the tenth anniversary of the death of American conservativism’s greatest exponents, William F. Buckley Jr. Over a long and industrious career in the media, Buckley founded National Review magazine, a leading journal of conservative thought and opinion, and hosted around fifteen-hundred episodes of his public affairs talk show, Firing Line. He was crucially responsible for the ascendancy of conservatism in the Republican Party and this country, championing an open, non-discriminatory movement that centered on both traditional values and free market economic principles. Through his brilliant writings, media presence, and force of personality, Buckley became the veritable icon of conservatism’s rise in America. The effect of Buckley and his years of productive work for the conservative movement in American was immeasurably positive. George Will, the conservative commentator historian, wrote in National Review in 1980, “And before there was Ronald Reagan, there was Barry Goldwater, and before there was Barry Goldwater there was National Review, and before there was National Review there was Bill Buckley with a spark in his mind…” If anyone deserves the “Great Communicator” title as much as President Reagan, it would be William F. Buckley Jr. He brought the cause and values Mr. Bring is a freshman at the College and managing editor at The Dartmouth Review.

of new American conservatism to the country’s people and paved the way for generations of conservative politicians, writers, and thinkers to follow him. We at The Review believe we are but one of the many spiritual descendants of Buckley’s conservative vision for journalism and thought in America. As Heritage Foundation historian Lee Edwards once wrote, “Bill Buckley could have been the playboy of the Western world but chose instead to be the St. Paul of the modern American conservative movement.” With his class and privilege, Buckley could easily have been the indulgent scion of a rich family. However, he had another, higher calling in life, and that was to be a spirited defender of American liberty and traditions. He was a gifted man, who knew that he was too blessed to waste his life. Buckley’s creative talents extended beyond his role at National Review and his syndicated column, On the Right. Buckley brought the enormous power of his intellect and his personal vigor to all his endeavors. Buckley was born in New York City in 1925, the sixth of ten children born to a wealthy family. After spending his earliest years in Mexico, Buckley received his primary education in France and England. English was actually his third mastered language, following Spanish and French. During World War II, Buckley finished his secondary education at Millbrook School in upstate New York. As the war was still ongoing, he enlisted in the Army and after completing Officer Candidate School was commissioned as a second lieutenant. He served in

the U.S. for the remainder of the war and never experienced combat. After the end of the war, Buckley enrolled at Yale University. He became the Chairman of the Yale Daily News. He was an accomplished debater in his college years and an active member of the Conservative Party of the Yale Political Union. He studied political science, economics, and history and graduated with honors in 1950. After his graduation, Buckley was recruited by the Central Intelligence Agency, and he served as an officer for two years, including one doing political action in Mexico. Buckley’s first book, God and Man at Yale, was published in 1951; he took a critical stance towards his alma mater, condemning the university for forcing collectivism and secularism on its students. The book received considerable attention and criticism, giving the young Buckley a taste of his future in challenging the American Left. He joined a magazine known as The American Mercury but left after realizing that it was becoming racist and anti-Semitic. Buckley realized there was a desperate national need for a magazine of thoughtful conservative commentary. In 1955, he founded National Review, his magazine which would actively foster the growing conservative movement in the United States. With National Review, Buckley became the torchbearer for a new American conservative movement that combined aspects of traditional conservatism with libertarian economic values and anti-communism. The

from irrational hatreds and demagogy. He always prized reason and the thoughtful consideration of conservative beliefs, saying, “Conservatives pride themselves on resisting change, which is as it should be. But intelligent deference to tradition and stability can evolve into intellectual sloth and moral fanaticism, as when conservatives simply decline to look up from dogma because the effort to raise their heads and reconsider is too great.” Buckley endeavored to take an active part in the political advancement of the conservative movement, even if that meant running for office himself. In 1965, he ran for Mayor of New York City as the candidate of the Conservative Party of New York, a right-wing third party. He challenged liberal Republican contender, John Lindsay, a fellow alumnus of Yale. Although he lost the mayoral race with only around 13% of the vote, his candidacy had reshaped the political landscape in New York by demonstrating that there was any support at all for solidly conservative candidates. John Lindsay, who won the election, would later defect to the Democratic Party, while Buckley’s older brother, James, won a U.S. Senate seat from New York in 1976 on the Conservative Party ticket. Beyond National Review, Buckley brought conservative discussions and ideas to the popular consciousness. In 1966, Buckley launched Firing Line, his Emmy-award winning public affairs talk show. Defined by Buckley’s polite countenance and relaxed pac-

Even as he grew older, Buckley never lost the drive to advance conservatism and defend American values and freedom. mission statement printed in the first issue of National Review read, “A conservative is someone who stands athwart history, yelling Stop, at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it.” Buckley sought to demarcate the boundaries of American conservatism. He denounced racists, white supremacists, anti-Semites, and racially-divisive political figures like Governor George Wallace of Alabama. He condemned the John Birch Society, a contemporary conservative organization which was among the furthest right in the American political mainstream. He rejected the objectivist ideology of Ayn Rand as well as her atheism. He envisioned a conservative movement that was open to all Americans who upheld its values and those of the U.S. Constitution, free

ing, Firing Line hosted some of the most influential political figures of its day, with guests as far ranging as Dr. Henry Kissinger and Allen Ginsberg. His politeness never interfered with his debating ability; he was always able to dissect his guests’ views intelligently and to articulate points of both agreement and disagreement. Buckley was famous for his ability to trounce any verbal opponent with his robust vocabulary and argumentative skill. He delighted audiences on both sides of the political spectrum with his quick, acerbic wit. In addition to his regular appearances on Firing Line, which ran for thirty-four seasons until 1999, Buckley brought his debating prowess to well-publicized exhibition matches against ideological adversaries. In 1965, Buckley famous debated American au-

thor and activist James Baldwin at the Cambridge Union on the topic of the American dream’s ongoing relationship with African-Americans. Over the Republican and Democratic National Conventions in 1968, Buckley sparred with American writer and public intellectual Gore Vidal in a series of televised debates. Though the open hostility of the debate series devolved into a lifelong feud between Buckley and Vidal, their verbal engagements were an enormous success with television audiences. Through these debates, Buckley showed his resolve and commitment to his principles in even the most public of arenas. Over the 1970s and 80s, Buckley’s prominence within American conservatism continued to grow alongside the rise of conservative Republican Presidents Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan. He hosted both of them on Firing Line, the latter while still a Presidential hopeful in the 1980 primaries. His ideological proximity to the Nixon White House landed him a spot on the U.S. Delegation to the United Nations in 1973. President Reagan was known as an avid reader and supporter of National Review, proclaiming once, “National Review is my favorite magazine.” President Reagan and Buckley enjoyed a long personal friendship, dating back to the 1960s. Though they did not always agree, they were close allies in the political struggles of their day. With the exaltation of President Reagan as an American conservative legend, Buckley, his friend and brother in arms, achieved iconic status as well. Even as he grew older, Buckley never lost the drive to advance conservatism and defend American values and freedom. Buckley remained Editor-in-Chief of National Review until 1990 when he retired upon his 65th birthday. In 1991, he was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President George H.W. Bush. He was active in conservative politics even after his retirement from National Review and the end of Firing Line. He was critical of Republican President George W. Bush’s administration, particularly concerning the War in Iraq. Up until the very end of his life, Buckley was hard at work on his syndicated column. He passed away in his study at the age of 82, after suffering a heart attack caused by emphysema and diabetes, on February 27, 2008. He may be gone, but his impact on this nation will never be forgotten — he will always be an inspiration to the young men and women of The Review.

The Dartmouth Review

Monday – March 5, 2018 15


The Reverend Billy Graham

Rachel T. Gambee Associate Editor

Billy Graham — the father of Evangelical America — passed away last week at the age of 99. Having risen to international recognition during the late 1940s, Graham is accredited with influencing over sixty years of Christian thought. He has been an advisor to almost all presidents in recent memory, in addition to other global leaders such as Queen Elizabeth II. For his funeral this week, thousands of onlookers lined the streets of North Carolina as his body processed through the state. Thousands more attended viewings and memorial services in Washington DC. Despite this outpouring of love for a man called “America’s pastor” and the “greatest Christian of a generation,” recent trends in AmeriMs. Gambee is a freshman at the College and an associate editor at The Dartmouth Review.

can Evangelicalism could leave Graham’s legacy in jeopardy. Billy Graham was born in 1918 on a dairy farm in Charlotte North Carolina. From very early on in his life, he seemed unlikely to become a Christian apologist. Although he was raised in the Southern Baptist Church, Graham was denied admittance to his local youth group on grounds he was “too worldly.” Unlike most other pastors, he never attended Seminary — instead bouncing from college to college before finally graduating from Wheaton College in Illinois. Graham worked various jobs in ministry following graduation before finding work in a long term position as a college ministry leader for Youth for Christ (YFC). It was during his time with YFC that Graham hosted his first “crusade” — or Christian revival event — in Los Angeles in 1949. The event was so well-attended, that it garnered national atten-

tion and thrust Graham into the spotlight. Over the next several decades, until his effective retirement in early 2000’s, Graham held over four hundred of these crusade events across the globe. By the numbers, Graham visited over 185 countries on six different continents and spoke live to an estimated 210 million people. During these events Graham shared the simple message of the Christian Gospel: that Christ is the Son of God and the savior of humanity having died on the cross to pay for the sins of man. In addition to his live sermons, Graham also broadcasted this message over the radio and television as well as through his dozens of novels. The combine reach of his crusades and these other means is estimated to be 2 billion people worldwide. Billy Graham represents the very first of what would become a hallmark of Evangelical America: the mega-pastor. The number of mega-pastors that have cropped up following Graham’s retirement from has been staggering. Men like Kenneth Copeland and Joel Osteen are household names for the American evangelicals. These pastors often preach to tens of thousands each week, in their home mega churches, “satellite” campuses of those churches, and over television and radio broadcasts. Just as with Graham’s ministries, the focus of many of these mega-churches is to evangelize: to bring as many people into contact with the gospel as possible. As a result, their sermons and teachings tend to be extremely simplified and palatable to the average audience. This was always a great criticism of Graham’s work, but whereas Graham’s sermons were largely considered to be simple but still theologically sound, the televangelists of today often venture into theologically dubious waters - especially when soliciting funds.

Thus, their sermons are not just creating a culture of superficial Christianity, but actively preying on their viewers. This kind of predatory behavior is certainly uncommon, but still exists among even very famous pastors such as the Copelands or Mike Murdock. These men preach something called the “prosperity gospel.” This gospel roughly states that all money given to the church will directly result in blessings coming in one’s life. Christian channels will often broadcasts up speakers, running them almost like infomercials. For students of history this will hearken back to the days of the Catholic Church selling indulgences, an event that ultimately brought about the Protestant Reformation. This makes it ironic that almost 7% of Protestant Evangelicals agree with the prosperity gospel. Usually these 7% are the most vulnerable members of the church: the poorest and the least educated. During the 1970s there had been a big crack down on this kind of televangelism, something that Billy Graham supported. However, it has made a resurgence in recent years, often connected to the rising tide of American populism. Those victimized by the prosperity gospel are the same people that President Trump calls the “forgotten” Americans. Just as his message spoke to them, some of the more radical aspects of Evangelical Christianity also have a strong foothold in these areas. This has resulted in the increasing association of the two ideologies. Unlike the case of the prosperity gospel, which is objectively dangerous but still a fringe ideology, the equating of faith and Trump’s brand of populism has become commonplace in the church. This phenomenon has received much attention both inside and outside of the Christian Community. Unfortunately the consensus among the general public is now to think of

evangelical as a synonym for Trump supporter. This is not to say that they are mutually exclusive, but to equate religious ideals with political ideals both alienates unbelievers (something that undermines the mission of evangelism), as well as undermines the importance of the faith itself. Nevertheless, Evangelical leaders themselves are often guilty of this association. One such example is Franklin Graham, oldest son of Billy Graham and currently the head of the Billy Graham Ministries. While Billy Graham was a lifelong registered Democrat, his son is staunchly conservative. During his later years, Billy Graham was famous for rarely making political assertions; he openly warned against political polarization within the church claiming that it overshadows the gospel teaching. It was never revealed who Graham voted for in the 2016 election; his only comment on the issue was to say that he is praying for the best for the country. Franklin Graham however, often uses his platform as the head of Graham Ministries to endorse president Trump’s policies. Following his father’s death he even went so far as to comment on what he “knows” his father would have wanted for the country. This is not to say that Franklin Graham, as an American citizen, does not have the right to voice his political opinions. This is rather to say, that in an era when Christianity in America is increasingly based around a handful of mega-pastors, those pastors must be extremely careful about the way that they present themselves to the public. Their entire lives, and more importantly livelihoods, are based around presenting themselves as a spiritual authorities. Therefore what they endorse becomes almost holy for thousands of Americans. This is a power that requires immense wisdom, the wisdom of Billy Graham.

16 Monday – March 5, 2018

The Dartmouth Review



“I am a Republican, a black, dyed in the wool Republican, and I never intend to belong to any other party than the party of freedom and progress.” –Frederick Douglass “I was a Democrat for a period of time early on. And then I was also an independent. And then I became a Republican.” -President Donald J. Trump “All great peoples are conservative.”

–Thomas Carlyle

“It’s time for conservative Americans to right the ship again.” -Vice President Mike Pence “I like to say I’m more conservative than Goldwater. He just wanted to turn the clock back to when there was no income tax.” -Pete Seeger “I like to say I’m more conservative than Goldwater. He just wanted to turn the clock back to when there was no income tax.” -Vice President Dick Cheney “Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.” -William F. Buckley Jr.

“The New Deal repudiation of democracy has left the Republican Party alone the guardian of the Ark of the Covenant with its charter of freedom.” -President Herbert Hoover

“The republican is the only form of government which is not eternally at open or secret war with the rights of mankind.”

“The most radical revolutionary will become a conservative the day after the revolution.” -Hannah Arendt

“To me, to be a conservative means to conserve the good parts of America and to conserve our Constitution.”

“My dad was fiscally conservative, and I was influenced by that. He didn’t believe in spending more than you had because it gets you into trouble.” -Clint Eastwood

“President Reagan stood for conservative principles in a way that brought people together.”

“I’d rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University.” -William F. Buckley Jr.

“The best defense against usurpatory government is an assertive citizenry.”

“I don’t think the U.S. military is conservative. It’s pragmatic.” -Gen. James Mattis

-President Thomas Jefferson

-Ron Paul

-Ted Cruz

-William F. Buckley Jr. “American history is the story of Democratic malefactors and Republican heroes.” -Dinesh D’Souza

“I actually get more conservative when I’m in Vegas.” -Roseanne Barr

“O Captain! My Captain! rise up and hear the bells.”

“We expect to foster a conservative governing philosophy consisting of limited government and respect for traditional American virtues.” -Betsy DeVos

“Thank you, Jack and Rob.”


The Only Easy Day Was Yesterday Ingredients

• An endless toolbox • Huckleberries from right outside of a horse pasture • A White Ford Double-Wide F-150 • Loyalty • Selflessness • Honor

To t h e i n d i v i d u a l s w h o s e r v e o u r c o u nt r y, p l e a s e k n o w t h at w h i l e t h e av e r a g e c i t i z e n c o u l d n e v e r u n d e r s t a n d t h e e x t e nt o f y o u r h a r d s h i p s , y o u a r e n’ t a l o n e . It c a n f e e l i s o l at i n g t o b e i n a s i t u at i o n w h e r e y o u o u g ht t o s e e k h e l p. B u t p l e a s e d o. Fo r e v e r y t h i n g t h at y o u g i v e t o y o u r f r i e n d s , y o u r f a m i l y, y o u r u n i t , a n d p e o p l e w h o d o n’ t k n o w y o u a n d w i l l n e v e r e v e n k n o w y o u r n a m e o r w h at y o u’v e d o n e t o t h e m , p l e a s e l e t u s a l l t r y t o g i v e b a c k t o y o u . Yo u a r e d e s e r v i n g o f a f u l l a n d h a p p y l i f e . T h e Nat i o n a l Al l i a n c e o n Me nt a l I l l n e s s h a s s p e c i a l i z e d r e s o u r c e s f o r Ve t e r a n s a n d Ac t i v e D u t y Mi l i t a r y. C o n f i d e nt i a l c o u n s e l o r s a r e av a i l ab l e v i a Mi l i t a r y O n e S o u r c e at 1 - 8 0 0 - 3 4 2 - 9 6 4 7 . C a l l 1 - 8 0 0 - 9 5 0 - NA M I o r v i s i t w w w. n a m i . o r g f o r m o r e i n f o r m at i o n . T h e Ve t e r a n s C r i s i s Li n e c a n b e r e a c h e d at 1 - 8 0 0 - 2 7 3 - 8 2 5 5 . Yo u c a n s p e a k t o a n o t h e r c o m b at Ve t e r a n at T h e Ve t e r a n C o m b at C a l l C e nt e r at 1 - 8 7 7 - WA R- V E T S , a n d y o u C a l l t h e S u i c i d e P r e v e nt i o n Li f e l i n e at 1 - 8 0 0 - 2 7 3 - TA L K . In l o v i n g m e m o r y o f J. H . — t h a n k y o u f o r a l l y o u r kindness to all those around you and your ser v ice.

-Walt Whitman


-The Dartmouth Review

The Finals Issue - 3.5.2018  
The Finals Issue - 3.5.2018