Page 1


MARCH 6, 2018


VOL. 129, ISSUE 34

Donors Sue Over Fate of One of the Largest-Ever Gifts to the University BY EUIRIM CHOI MANAGING EDITOR

In the fall of 2015, University of Chicago president Robert Zimmer made a surprise announcement to a packed audience at a formal event in Mandel Hall. Flanked by sleek graphics and illuminated by camera flashes, Zimmer said that the University had received a $100 million gift—then the second-largest donation in its history. The widely-covered donation was made by Thomas L. and Timothy R. Pearson on behalf of their family. The brothers, neither of whom had ties to the University, donated the money to establish the first research institute of its kind at the Harris School of Public Policy. The Pearson Institute, as it was called, would aspire to recruit world-class scholars who would produce groundbreaking research used to design and implement policies that would reduce conflict Continued on page 3

A Challenger Emerges in the Fifth Ward BY EMMA DYER & ALIA SHAHZAD NEWS REPORTERS

Remembering Dean Jonathan Z. Smith. On page 6.

Maroon Staff

The Pearson family in attendance at the 2015 announcement of the Institute.

Gabriel Piemonte, progressive community organizer and editor emeritus of the Hyde Park Herald, announced his candidacy for Alderman of the Fifth Ward this morning on the corner of 71st Street and Merrill Avenue. P iemonte made the announcement in front of an abandoned storefront, using the scene as an example of the economic struggles that have taken place in the fifth ward. “We’re here today on 71st Street not only because my campaign headquar-

ters are going to be just a few doors down, but also because we believe that this is emblematic of the consequences of exclusive leadership,” Piemonte said. Piemonte was surrounded by family, friends, and colleagues supporting his campaign, and his announcement drew attention from local passersby. One woman got out of her car after being informed of the occasion. Walking up to Piemonte, she affirmed he had her vote. She told Piemonte that, as a long time Fifth Ward resident, she knew every store owner and business on 71st and had watched it become riddled with vacancies unContinued on page 4

Underground Collective Present Midnight Oil Page 9 Performers explored “what keeps you up at night” through a set of spoken word, dance, and theatrical acts from the newly-recognized RSO.

A Dream Deferred Page 2 University students put at risk by the retraction of the DACA program are advocating for a solution. See video online.

IOP Hosts Gov. Candidate Ives

Alexandra Nisenoff

WTTW correspondent Paris Schutz speaks to Jeanne Ives.


Illinois State Representative and gubernatorial candidate Jeanne Ives (R-42) outlined her policies and sharply criticized her op-

Women’s Basketball’s Winning Streak Ends Page 12

The team lost to University of Saint Thomas in the second round of the NCAA finals.

ponent in the Republican primary, incumbent Governor Bruce Rauner, in a talk on campus on Monday afternoon. The event, hosted by the Institute of Politics, was moderated by Continued on page 4

Advertising in The Maroon If you want to place an ad in T he M a roon , please email or visit pages/advertise.

Excerpts from articles and comments published in T he Chicago Maroon may be duplicated and redistributed in other media and non-commercial publications without the prior consent of The Chicago Maroon so long as the redistributed article is not altered from the original without the consent of the Editorial Team. Commercial republication of material in The Chicago Maroon is prohibited without the consent of the Editorial Team or, in the case of reader comments, the author. All rights reserved. © The Chicago Maroon 2018



Events 3/6-3/9 Tomorrow Debts, Crime, and Prison: Daily Life in Babylonia CA. 1200 B.C. Oriental Institute, Breasted Hall, 7–8:45 p.m. Susanne Paulus explains how clay tablets offer a glimpse into the everyday lives of middle- and lower-class Babylonians, whose struggles still resonate today. A reception will follow the lecture. Bite Magazine Presents: Winter 2018 Issue Release Reynolds Club, McCormick Tribute Lounge, 5:30 p.m.–6:30 p.m. Bite Magazine will celebrate the publication of its Winter 2018 issue with pierogi, kolaczki, and free copies of the magazine. Video Online: We spoke with UChicago organizers on deferred action, Donald Trump, and the fate of immigrant youth.

Friday Study Break at Crerar Crear Library, Kathleen A. Zar Room, 2:30–4:30 p.m. Tea, coffee, and cookies will be provided. LaDale Winling - Building the Ivory Tower Seminary Co-Op Bookstore, 6:00–7:30 p.m. Virginia Tech professor LaDale Winling will discuss his book, Building the Ivory Tower, which examines the relationship between universities and cities across the United States.

Support Our Advertisers Page Two: Howard Brown Health provides sexual health services. 1525 E. 55th Street. Twenty percent off with UCID at the Sitdown Cafe and Sushi Bar. 1312 E. 53rd St. Page Three: Lecture– “ The Witness of Contemplative Women in the Heart of the Church,” by Anders Cardinal Arborelius, Catholic Bishop of Stockholm. Tuesday, March 13, 4 p.m., Swift Hall Online: Sell and bid for apartments at Find an apartment at rentyhydepark. com. Prize—The T. Kimball Brooker Prize for Underg raduate Book Collecting awards $1,000 and $2,000 to secondand fourth-years, respectively, who possess exemplary themed book collections. If you want to place an ad in T he M ar o on , please e-mail ads@ or visit pages/advertise.

In this week’s Citizen Bulletin: Cochrane defends animal shelter; Preckwinkle dumps on assessor; Flynn-Currie fights harrassment. Find more and subscribe at


Subscribe to the M aroon newsletter for e-mails every Tuesday and Friday

Meet the U of C Students Organizing for a Clean DREAM Act BY ANNABELLE RICE NEWS REPORTER

“Up, up with liberation!” protesters called from one side of the Hart Senate Office Building in downtown Washington, D.C. Across the hall from Florida senator Bill Nelson’s office, another group answered, “Down, down with deportation!” From seven stories below, hundreds of demonstrators raised their fists in solidarity, unfurling a banner demanding that Congress “Pass the Clean DREAM Act now” while their chants resounded through the atrium. The youth immigrant advocacy network United We Dream, which arranged the protest, reported to the Huffington Post that the rally was the largest group of undocumented youth they had ever gathered in the nation’s capital. This was just another day in the life for second-year undocumented student Moises Rodriguez. As a leading organizer at United We Dream, he is on a seemingly endless quest to secure protection from deportation once and for all. Signed by former president Barack Obama in 2012, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) offers two years of relief from deportation, or “deferred action,” along with a social security number and work permit application rights for its recipients. It does not confer lawful immigration status, provide a direct path to citizenship, or alter an undocumented individual’s existing immigration status. To qualify, applicants must meet a set of specific conditions, including attending high school and having a criminal record free of felonies and other significant misdemeanors. Of the recipients, more than nine in 10 were born in Latin America, an approximated twothirds are 25 or younger, and the majority are female. DACA’s predecessor, the DREA M Act, was first proposed in 2001 but failed to pass through the House of Representatives. The “DREAMers” descriptor commonly applied in DACA revisions is a vestige of this program. This protest took place in January, just three months after the Trump administration formally rescinded the DACA program and ceased processing new applications. President Donald Trump officially declared his administration’s decision to rescind DACA on September 5, 2017, saying that “there can be no path to principled immigration reform if the executive branch is able to rewrite or nullify federal laws

at will.” He urged Congress to “advance responsible immigration reform that puts American jobs and American security first,” giving elected officials six months to replace DACA with their own legislation. At a Center for Identity and Inclusion event in January, Rodriguez spoke about the potential effects of recent DACA developments and United We Dream’s effort to combat a “humanitarian crisis” in the United States. The group, which was founded to protect and empower undocumented immigrant youths, has fought alongside countless other groups in what Rodriguez described as a “war of white

! r e v i l e d we

supremacy in the White House.” “The DREAMer narrative of who is the ‘good immigrant’ is very problematic. There is a harmful pattern of justifying the presence of immigrants using economic terms. I think that most people sometimes [ignore] the fact that we are people trying to make something out of nothing. There is certainly a stereotype that in order to be deserving of papers, you have to be going to college. It’s an issue of humanity, not about what you bring to the economic table.” For Rodriguez, the only realistic way to ensure that legislation replacing Continued on page 3

20% discount with U of C student ID* *Discount does not include alcohol

Cafe & Sushi Bar 1312 E. 53rd Street Chicago, IL 60615

Sun – Thurs 11am – 9:30pm Fri & Sat 11am – 10:30pm 773.324.3700



“This is not just an effort for . . . DACA recipients; this is an effort for everyone.” Continued from page 2

DACA passes through Congress is to include it in a continuing resolution, which appropriates money for specific government programs and agencies. Simply put, if the new legislation is not explicitly connected to government funding, it will fail to pass. United We Dream, along with DACA-supporting senators, used this strategy throughout December and January to keep the legislation under government provision. “Ideally, a permanent solution would include a clean path to citizenship with no strings attached, no changes to the Diversity Visa program, no changes to any sort of sponsorship that [the government is] trying to exclude. ‘Chain migration’ is just family reunification, [and] people have always been limited to sponsoring only immediate family members. For Trump to claim that migrants sponsor, say, the great-grandson of a third cousin and use this to steer away from family reunification isn’t grounded in facts…. Ultimately, what we want to do is make sure families stay together.” First-year Emilio Balderas and second-year Raphael Espinoza have joined United We Dream as documented allies for the undocumented community. Balderas and Espinoza both have U.S. citizenship but have undocumented immigrants in their family background. Balderas stressed that attending rallies and helping with organization is one of the most effective forms of alliance. “It’s important to know your place in the movement. When there’s someone who’s directly impacted, you should let them speak before you try to provide your own opinion,” Balderas said, adding:

“All movements should be spearheaded by the people who are most affected.” Espinoza believes that DACA is an issue that everyone should care about. “A DACA ally is someone who is willing to put their body on the line. I protect my undocumented friends in extreme situations where they have to confront the police. I am willing to throw a punch at an officer. I’m documented, so anything that could possibly happen to me is better than what could happen to my friends,” Espinoza said. Balderas and Espinoza joined Rodriguez earlier this quarter for a series of protests in D.C., where they occupied the Senate offices of representatives who Espinoza said could “possibly be convinced to side with DACA.” For Balderas, the trip to D.C. was “empowering.” “I had never met so many inspirational people in one space. I was homeless for most of my life, and I know what it’s like to feel left out of society. I carry my experience with me, and it’s this fire that drives me to demand justice,” Balderas said. UChicago avoided formally commenting on DACA at its inception in 2010, but voiced its support of undocumented student applicants. In an interview with T he M a roon in October 2010, former vice president for campus life Kimberly Goff-Crews said that the University has always been open to undocumented students. “Our culture has been that we don’t comment on political larger social issues as a university. We comment on things that relate directly to our mission—attracting, enrolling, and supporting the best students no matter who they are,”

Goff-Crews said. University spokesperson Jeremy Manier echoed Goff-Crews’s statement and avoided using the phrase “sanctuary campus” explicitly in response to whether the University would cooperate with immigration enforcement officials seeking to deport students in the event of DACA’s repeal. “The Provost has instructed several administrative offices to examine how potential changes to immigration policies could affect our university and the community, especially in relation to our students and staff who currently benefit from DACA,” Manier wrote in an e-mail to T he M aroon. When DACA faced a direct existential threat last autumn, the University publicly changed course. As part of DACA’s removal, the Trump administration planned to adjudicate applications filed by September 5 and reject any requests filed after that date. Those who were already protected under DACA with the provision expiring on March 5, 2018, would be eligible to apply for renewal by October 5, 2017. On September 2, 2017, University president Robert Zimmer and Provost Daniel Diermeier sent a letter to Trump, urging that he allow DACA to continue. “Our students who qualify for DACA are among the most talented and intellectually energetic students in the world. Our university community and our nation will be diminished if they are unable to continue contributing their talents here,” Zimmer and Diermeier stated in the letter. Rodriguez says that the University needs to take a more inclusive approach to both admitting and engaging with un-

documented students. “I think the University needs to encourage undocumented students to participate in conversations regarding the decisions that are made about our community. I’ve only had one or two phone calls with administrators, and that’s it. Providing mental health services [to the undocumented community] is also very important,” Rodriguez said. As the March 5 deadline approaches, Congress has yet to propose a concrete solution for reforming the program. If Congress fails to pass a reform bill by Monday, the future of an estimated 700,000 DACA recipients remains in jeopardy. However, in a number of pending federal court cases, judges have temporarily ruled that the Trump administration has to keep accepting DACA renewals, and that officials can’t revoke DACA protections without prior notice. “On campus, I don’t feel immediately threatened, but I do know that there are people here that would prefer that to not be here. It’s painful, and there is an element of fear. Wherever you go, if you’re undocumented, you’re afraid of what could happen, but that doesn’t mean I’m not going to continue taking up the space I’ve taken up. I know that this is where I belong, and that I deserve to be here just as much as any other person,” Rodriguez said. For Rodriguez, the work doesn’t end when DACA passes. “We are not just undocumented. We are queer, black, brown, Asian—we are so much more. This is not just an effort for the millions of DACA recipients; this is an effort for everyone, and we have to lift up every voice.”

The Witness of Contemplative Suit Was Culmination of Year-Long Conflict, According to Confidential Docs Women in the Heart of the Church Continued from front page

a public lecture by

Anders Cardinal Arborelius Catholic Bishop of Stockholm

Tuesday, March 13 | 4pm | Swift Hall Also on Tuesday, Cardinal Arborelius will celebrate a public Mass for the occasion of the fifth anniversary of Pope Francis’ pontificate at 8am at St. Thomas the Apostle Catholic Church (5472 S Kimbark Ave). To read more about the Cardinal’s visit and to register:

After living for nearly twenty years in a contemplative hermitage, Anders Arborelius was made a bishop by John Paul II in 1998. This summer he was elevated to the Cardinalate by Pope Francis, becoming Sweden’s first ever Cardinal.

around the globe. It was an extraordinary accomplishment for then–Harris Dean Daniel Diermeier, one that would be cited when he was appointed provost six months later. On February 20, however, the muchhyped Institute’s status and future were publicly put into doubt as the Pearson Family Foundation sued the University of Chicago for $22.9 million—the total value of the installments of the gift it had given to the University thus far—in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma, making it one of the largest lawsuits of its kind in recent memory. The suit was a culmination of a year-long conflict, according to sensitive documents obtained by The Maroon last summer. In the suit, the Pearsons declared that they had lost all confidence that the University would be “an appropriate or capable steward of the Pearson Family legacy” as it had allegedly failed to fulfill several key contractual obligations that were agreed upon when the gift was made. These included the University’s hiring of an institute director who allegedly recruited underqualified faculty due to favoritism, its insistence on participating in a Catholic conference that celebrated heterosexual marriage instead of hosting a required academic forum, and Diermeier’s purported unwillingness to act as a steward of the Pearsons’ grant. They also allege that the University persistently engaged in deceptive and bad-faith behavior in the relationship. A spokesperson for the Pearson Family Foundation would not comment on the record about specific allegations, but said in a statement to The Maroon that the Pearsons’ story should lead other philanthropists

to rethink donating to universities. “The Pearsons are profoundly disappointed, and regrettably have been left with no other choice or course of action. The lawsuit speaks for itself,” the statement read. “The Pearsons believe their story is a cautionary tale that should give pause to any family, philanthropist, benefactor or donor who is considering granting a university any amount of money—large or small.” The University, which has yet to reply to the suit in the Northern District Court, provided a statement to The M aroon that denied that the Institute was floundering, and stated that the Pearsons’ complaint was baseless. “The University has created a flourishing Institute that has attracted world-renowned scholars and outstanding students to pursue research and education aimed at understanding and resolving global conflicts. In the short time since its formation, the Institute has hosted dozens of events, enrolled more than 200 students in courses related to the study of global conflict, and fostered an engaged community of scholars,” the statement read in part. “The University honors its grant agreements with its donors, and it did so with the Pearsons.... The Pearsons’ complaint is without merit, and the University will vigorously defend itself against the baseless allegations.” The Pearsons are no strangers to lawsuits regarding their philanthropic contributions. In 2011, Thomas Pearson sued Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary, his father’s alma mater, alleging that a $1.2 million gift made in their name to the Methodist seminary had been misused. The United States District Continued on page 5



“If I get elected, everything stops,” Says Piemonte

Illinois “one big Ponzi scheme” Continued from front

Piemonte announces his candidacy for Fifth Ward Alderman at the corner of 71st Street and Merrill Avenue. Continued from front

der current Alderman, five-term incumbent Leslie Hairston’s tenure. Piemonte is the first candidate to challenge Hairston in advance of the citywide Aldermanic elections in February 2019. Hairston received 52.5 percent of the vote in 2015. This was 33 points ahead of the next closest candidate, but was only 2 percent more than the vote needed to call a run-off election. It also represented the lowest percentage Hairston earned of her five elections for Alderman.






30-40 % 40-50 %

50-60 % 60-70 %

See for interactive map and underlying data. Results data from the Chicago board of election; Map data ©2018 Google. Adam Thorp.

Hairston is a senior member of the City Council’s Progressive Caucus and one of the first Aldermen to call for more transparency in the hotly contested development of the Obama Presidential Center (OPC). She has refused to endorse a Community Benefits Agreement (CBA), a legally binding agreement that community groups have been advocating for the Obama Foundation, the University of Chicago, and the City of Chicago to sign. The CBA would require the Obama Foundation to abide by a list of development principles that, among other demands, aim to prevent resident displacement and reserve jobs for members of the community surrounding the proposed site of the OPC. Hairston’s dismissal of a CBA has disillusioned Piemonte of the Alderman’s commitment to Fifth Ward residents. “There’s a moment on record when the Alderman said there should be more transparency, but it was [only] a moment,” Piemonte told the M aroon Editorial Board in a meeting last Friday. “It’s not clear when you look at news coverage whether she’s arguing for more community input, or access for herself. And that’s an important distinction.” Originally from Boston, Piemonte moved to the South Side in 2000 to write for the Hyde Park Herald. In the following years, he has worn many hats—including founder of Woodlawn Visions and Voices, co-founder of South Side Community Federal Credit Union, and advocate for public housing residents. In early 2017, Piemonte launched a personal blog, South Side United, in response to the creation of the University’s Community Advisory Board for the OPC, a group of South Side community leaders who function as a liaison between the Obama Foundation and the communities surrounding the proposed development site. Piemonte refers to the board as the “Development Corporation,” as he be-

Emma Dyer

lieves that a majority of people on the Board “are in some way invested in aggressive development.” Disappointed by the City of Chicago’s lack of transparency regarding its involvement in the OPC, Piemonte and other neighborhood activists requested information about the OPC’s development from various city agencies via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). When all of their requests were denied, Piemonte and his co-organizers started pursuing litigation against each department. If elected, Piemonte is not afraid to take more drastic steps to demand transparency and community input, he said. “If I get elected, everything stops,” Piemonte said. “I would say we’re not approving another permit, zoning change, or piece of this project until we sit down and convince me to trust you. And when I say you, I mean the Obama Foundation, the University, and fundamentally, the City.” Piemonte also proposes the creation of a local development council, a democratically elected legislative body that would check the Alderman’s power within the ward and make granular decisions about community development, in response to the privately appointed University Community Advisory Board for the OPC. “This is a level of governance that we have a unique problem with in Chicago. We have nothing but an executive branch—everybody has their own little fiefdom,” he said. Piemonte also said he does not see all development as good development, and criticized University-led 53rd Street development projects. “Where there is a small business [on 53rd Street], have a conversation with the business owner. They’re from the North Side,” he said. “The University of Chicago has recruited people from other parts of the city to take part in the prosperity of 53rd street.”

WTTW’s Paris Schutz. Ives was first elected to the Illinois House of Representatives in 2012, and represents a district that includes parts of the Chicago suburbs Naperville, Wheaton, and Carol Stream. Ives stressed the importance of pension reform, calling pensions the “biggest burden that we face as Illinoisans.” “The city of Springfield, literally every single dollar that they collect in property taxes goes only to pensions,” she said. “Not roads. Not services. Not salary for policemen, but only to pensions...Illinois government has become one big Ponzi scheme played against taxpayers.” Ives called for an “austerity budget,” which would call for the state to delete grants and to reform Medicaid. She cited the state’s budget troubles as being the reason public college tuitions have increased. In addition, Ives stated that taxpayers should not need to pay for abortions and voiced her disapproval for HB 40, a bill expanding abortion coverage and signed by Rauner into law to expand abortion coverage. Schutz also brought up the topic of a controversial anti-Rauner ad Ives ran, which includes an actor portraying a transgender woman saying “Thank you for signing legislation that lets me use the girls’ bathroom.” The ad has been criticized as “racist” and “transphobic.” Schutz asked Ives asked whether she understood why some might have taken offense at it. “That ad actually shows the policies that Governor Rauner put in place,” Ives said. “We need to show it upright and upfront what happened.” Fourth-year musa bouderdaben posed the first audience question to Ives, asking, in the context of budget cuts, “How do we know, as voters that you won’t just delete support for the marginalized and vulnerable people that don’t live and act the way you do?” “Well, you have the same rights as anyone else,” Ives responded. “But I’ll tell you what, my husband and I are not on board with fully developed males being in the same locker room as our daughters.” “The responses to my question were incredibly dissatisfying,” bouderdaben wrote in a message to The Maroon, adding that Ives’s controversial ad prompted his choice to attend the event. “I order to make it clear to her...that she cannot be bigoted without at least some small discomfort.” During the event, Ives also detailed how her administration as governor would be different from Rauner’s tenure in a series of responses to audience questions. She first called on Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, a Democrat, to resign, citing recent furor over his office’s handling of sexual misconduct claims as well as his management of state finances. Madigan has turned Illinois into a “fiscal basket case,” Ives said. Ives criticized Rauner for his response to veterans’ deaths from Legionnaire’s at a Quincy veterans home, saying,“Of course [Rauner is] responsible for some of the later sicknesses.” She added that She added that she would have differed from Rauner and closed the home, saying, “Absolutely, I would close it right now.” In response to audience questions about her campaign plans, Ives criticized Rauner for influencing the election with his money, but remained optimistic about her campaign’s chances. “It’s an uphill battle.... But we have a ground game, and we have people working for us every single day, and all he has is his checkbook,” she said. Despite her criticisms, Ives said she will vote for Rauner if he becomes the Republican nominee.



University Has 21 Days to Respond to Lawsuit, Filed in Oklahoma Court Continued from page 3

Court for the Northern District of Illinois ultimately ruled that the Seminary had respected the terms of the contract and dismissed all of the Pearsons’ claims. A Troubled Partnership The Maroon first learned about the conflict between the Pearsons and the University when it obtained 66 pages of internal University documents last summer. T he M aroon decided not to publish or mention the Pearson Institute documents, which were marked “privileged and confidential attorney-client communication,” in order to avoid escalating a still-nascent dispute. With litigation now moving forward, The M aroon deemed the documents newly newsworthy as they, along with the Pearson Family Foundation’s complaint, outline the events that led to the lawsuit. In January 2014, the Pearson brothers approached the University to discuss the possibility of providing a large grant to create an institute to rigorously study global conflicts. The brothers reportedly looked at a dozen universities to host the Institute, but they ultimately selected the University of Chicago because it was a premier academic institution with a reputation for rigorous data-driven research. After over a year of negotiations, co-led in the later stages by Diermeier, the Pearsons and the University signed and executed a grant agreement on April 3, 2015, a contract that stipulated the obligations of both parties surrounding the $100 million donation, which would be paid out in installments. After announcing the Pearson family gift, a panel including (from left) then-Harris Dean Daniel Diermeier, Thomas L. Pearson, President Robert Zimmer, Timothy R. Pearson, and Council on Foreign Relations President Richard Haass participated in a Q&A. The grant agreement required the University to appoint an institute director by September 1, 2016, who would, according to the Pearsons’ complaint, manage its day-to-day operations. In June of that year, the University appointed professor James Robinson, who had moved to Chicago from Harvard in 2015, as the Pearson Institute’s faculty director. The University press release announcing Robinson’s appointment said that “An internationally recognized executive director, who will be responsible for the overall activities and initiatives of The Pearson Global Forum, is expected to be announced in the near future.” No new director has been announced for the Institute since that statement was issued. The Pearson Institute’s website currently identifies Robinson as Institute Director, a change that the Pearsons’ lawsuit alleges was made at the last moment to secure the University’s legal position. James Robinson’s name is scribbled in pen next to the term “Institute Director” in the leaked documents. (As in our coverage last summer, the handwriting has been redacted to protect the identity of the original owner of the document.) The Pearsons further alleged that the University admitted to them that Robinson was not interested or capable in fulfilling the administrative responsibilities required for the institute director role. When the University did not appoint someone other than Robinson to an administrative position by the September 2016 deadline, the Pearsons sent it a notice of default—a document that declares that a party in a contract failed to fulfill an obligation—on June 5, 2017. After the University sent a response several weeks later, the Pearsons told the administration that they would not pay the next $13 mil-

Courtesy of the University of Chicago News Office

After announcing the Pearson family gift, a panel including (from left) then-Harris Dean Daniel Diermeier, Thomas Pearson, President Robert Zimmer, Timothy Pearson, and Council on Foreign Relations President Richard Haass participated in a Q&A. lion installment due at the end of the month. This prompted the University to send the Pearsons its own notice of default after the deadline. A few days before Robinson’s appointment as institute director, the University also announced that two scholars, an associate professor at Columbia University and an assistant professor at New York University, would assume named full professorships at the Pearson Institute. These hires filled two of the four chaired faculty positions specified by the grant agreement, with Robinson eventually filling the third slot. The Pearsons were unhappy with the hires. They claimed in the complaint that, besides Robinson, the two junior professors were hired despite being inexperienced and underqualified, which they argued undermined the Institute’s goal of becoming a world-class entity. “For the other two chaired positions, the U of C hired two junior, non-tenured professors from academic institutions that are ranked below the U of C in national academic standings,” the complaint reads. “Elevating these two junior, non-tenured professors to chaired professorships at the U of C was contrary to reasonable and intended academic hiring criteria and standards, and required that the newly hired professors be skipped over several ranks in the ordinary course of academic advancement.... By hiring these professors, the U of C deliberately failed to use the chaired professorships, as agreed by the parties, as a significant resource to be used to help establish and advance the reputation and standing of [the Pearson Institute].” It is unclear which rankings the Pearsons were referencing, but it is possible that they relied on the popular 2018 U.S. News & World Report Best Colleges Rankings— which lists the University of Chicago above both Columbia and NYU. The complaint also alleges that the two junior professors were only appointed to chaired positions because both were “protégés and former students of Faculty Director Robinson.” While the University, Robinson, and the two professors would not comment about this specific allegation on the record, The Maroon was unable to find evidence that the junior faculty members had significant relationships with Robinson. The two professors were indeed students at Harvard University and University of California, Berkeley when Robinson was a faculty member there, but he was not their dissertation advisor. Furthermore, tenure applications are typically approved by the provost at the University of Chicago, not by an institute’s director. Apart from ensuring that the Institute

had a world-class in-house faculty, the contract also mandated that the University host an annual “Pearson Global Forum” (PGF) that would convene leading conflict scholars and policymakers from around the world. The University, according to the suit, was obligated to hold the first PGF by October 31, 2018, but said that it could not host the event by then as “it had not planned or done the necessary preparatory work.” The Pearsons alleged that the University informed them that it would attempt to meet this obligation by that date by instead involving the Institute in the 2018 Irish Catholic Bishops’ World Meeting of Families Congress, an event which, according to its website, “brings together families from across the world to celebrate, pray and reflect upon the central importance of marriage and the family as the cornerstone of our lives, of society and of the Church.” The Pearsons said that it found the proposal unacceptable, as this event had its own agenda and purpose. When asked directly whether it had suggested involving the Pearson Institute in this event to the Pearsons as a substitute for the PGF, the University declined to comment. According to the complaint, the University was purportedly cutting corners on budgetary issues as well. The Pearsons claimed that UChicago suddenly informed them in March 2017 that the University thought it had the right to collect many millions of dollars from the Institute to pay for some of the Harris School’s operating costs, which would increase the Institute’s expenses by approximately 50 percent. The Pearsons said that by this time, they had already given the University $22 million, which they would not have done had they been aware that the Institute would have to pay these extra expenses. The University again declined to comment. The Pearsons made a number of smaller allegations in the complaint, with many centering around the University’s purported lack of transparency. These included the University changing the number of Pearson Institute scholarships without notice, it not inviting the Pearsons to most Institute events, and Diermeier purportedly failing to adequately “serve as the primary contact for communications” with the donors. The Beginning of a Long Legal Battle With the lawsuit officially filed in the Northern District Court, the University has 21 days to respond, with room for further extensions. The University declined to discuss next steps with The M aroon, but

the sensitive documents from last summer as well as similar cases of donor-University litigation provide some clues. The documents obtained over the summer suggest that the University believes it has the option to terminate the grant agreement, as the Pearsons did not, according to their complaint, make their $13 million payment to the University in 2017. According to the documents, termination would allow the University to remove the Pearson name from the Institute after the second anniversary of the date of termination. While still obligated to use all funds previously received for the sole benefit of the Pearson Institute and PGF, the University would not be required to continue to expend University funds to preserve these bodies. One of the documents, an agenda for a June administration meeting, suggested that the University was actively contemplating whether it should “wind down” the Institute as the dispute was escalating. One of the discussion topics on the agenda posed the question “What would a Pearson Institute look like for $22 million we have to date?”. In the statement to The M aroon, the University denied that the Institute was in danger, saying that the Institute “will continue their important and meaningful work with the full support and endorsement of the University.” Shortly after the University provided this statement, Harris Dean Katherine Baicker informed Harris faculty about the lawsuit and reiterated this point. The documents also indicate that the University considered engaging in litigation with the Pearsons. Suing a donor would not be unprecedented, but can be poor optics. Duke sued the estate of a deceased donor for $10 million in 2016 to try to recoup the remainder of pledged donations. It later withdrew its claim after heavy public criticism. Whether the University decides to countersue or not, the documents reveal that the administration anticipated a contentious conflict with the Pearsons, with the family possibly making false public allegations that would require the University to have a clear communications and public relations strategy. What is certain is that conflict between the Pearsons and the University is just beginning. With up to $100 million in both current and future donations, the legacy of a family, and the fate of what was supposed to be a world-changing research institute on the line, the stakes are high. Adam Thorp contributed reporting.



Jonathan Z. Smith (1938–2017) The College’s iconoclastic, beloved, chainsmoking dean. in a way the most important thing about Jonathan Smith.”

A Chicago Character

Maroon File Photo (ca. 1977)

Former University President Hanna Gray said Jonathan Z. Smith taught more classes than anyone she knew.


An eager yet unimpressive Tutorial Studies student managed to convince a dean to let him have one more read on his senior paper after his two assigned faculty reviewers chose not to recommend it for honors. “He was trying to write about the Holocaust, and I just think he had no real ideas,” said Classics professor James Redfield (Ph.D. ’61), who taught at the University of Chicago for 50 years, retiring in 2016. He’s telling a story from the ’70s. Redfield was the master of the New Collegiate Division, which runs Tutorial Studies (the College’s design-your-own-curriculum program), and he became fed up with accommodating this student. But he knew just the man for the job: Jonathan Z. Smith, a historian of religion at the University of Chicago who is remembered by colleagues and students as an honest intellectual and an unshy critic. Redfield will never forget how Smith, who was born Jewish but secular, responded to the paper. “This is the first time I have ever felt sympathetic to anti-Semitism,” he said. This was Smith’s style as a scholar. He was a brutal critic who pushed academia to join him in raw, deliberate analysis.

“He did not suffer fools gladly, either on the page or in person. He was critical in every sense of the word,” said Wendy Doniger, the Mircea Eliade Distinguished Service Professor of the History of Religions at the Divinity School, and a longtime colleague. “His critique of the way religion was studied is that it was not critical enough. Paradigms were not closely enough examined. He had a sharp mind, and he rightly wanted scholars to be more cold-blooded, more analytical in their treatment of religious phenomenon.” Scholars throughout Europe and America listened to Smith and changed the way they studied religion, Doniger said. On campus, Smith was a beloved teacher. He taught prolifically at the University from 1968 until he retired in 2013, serving as dean of the College from 1977 to 1982. He was a sharp writer, a mesmerizing lecturer, and an intriguing character. A lifelong smoker, he died from lung cancer at age 79 on December 30. Dean of the College John Boyer, who went to Smith for advice when he was offered the deanship in the early ’90s, said Smith was a wonderful man, loved by students, and an excellent colleague. Boyer, an expert on the University’s history, said his conversation with Smith when he was offered the deanship inspired him to write his book, The University of Chicago: A History.

“He told me he thought it would be very important for whoever took the deanship to try to give more of a public voice to the University’s and the College’s history,” he said, adding that Smith was always an interesting person for him to debate. “The thing about Jonathan is that you never quite knew which side of an argument he was on because he was able to see not only what emerged as his own point of view, but to understand and to give legitimate representations of other people’s points of view. You never quite knew where he was coming from, or where he was going until the end of the argument.” Hanna Gray, whose 15-year term as University president from 1978 –1993 overlapped with Smith’s deanship, said he was a remarkable teacher and colleague. She remembers the hard conversations they had about whether the College could be expanded from 2,700 to 3,200 students without losing its character. “ The important things about him were an extraordinary commitment to teaching—a wonderful commitment to teaching; a person of the highest kinds of standards; a person who taught really quite selflessly, that is, he didn’t think about how many courses a person was obliged to give. He gave more courses than anyone I know because he really loved it,” she said. “He was an extraordinary colleague and an extraordinary presence at the University, and that was

Colleagues said they place Smith among a group of renowned University of Chicago scholars that includes Wayne Booth, Charles Wegner, and Jock Weintraub. “I always think of Jonathan as being part of that old-school Chicago, which is extremely erudite, an intellectual polymath,” said history and law professor Dennis Hutchinson (J.D. ’70). “Not afraid to challenge any conventional wisdom, and also stylized: [We] never called each other ‘professor.’ It was always ‘Mr.’ and no honorifics, as there should be no hierarchy of learning or intelligence.” College students were not to be called “undergraduates,” for Smith believed that would imply they were beginners, waiting to become real students when they went to graduate school. “Smith thought this was all wrong and that college education was where it was at,” said Christopher Lehrich (Ph.D. ’00), a professor of religion at Boston University and a former mentee of Smith’s. Lehrich later edited a collection of Smith’s writings about teaching, titled On Teaching Religion. Smith is known as one of the most influential historians of religion of his generation, but Lehrich was inspired to put together the book when he discovered that there was a whole other side

Maroon File Photo (undated)

to Smith’s scholarly output: essays about teaching that were often “very radical.” Lehrich remembers sitting in Smith’s office, talking to him about changes to the College and the Core. University president Hugo Sonnenschein was trying to expand the College—this time from 3,500 to 4,500 students. As not enough students were applying to Chicago to allow for such an expansion, the College had to move toward, as Sonnenschein said, “a curriculum more appealing to


THE CHICAGO MAROON - MARCH 6, 2018 17-year-olds.” The “Chicago plan” reduced the size of the Core from 21 to 15 classes. Smith rejected this curricular trend away from a rigid core and toward “electivity,” which he took to mean the offering of more preprofessional tracks. “I think that College students should be able to major in Undecided. It would be a wonderful thing if you didn’t have to major,” Smith proclaimed to Lehrich between drags on his cigarette. “From Jonathan’s point of view, he loved the place, and he loved the students, and he loved what in his mind Chicago was devoted to and all about,” Lehrich said. “And so he was sickened to see what was happening to it. He could be a little bit sort of ‘the sky is falling!’ about everything, but he was horrified by things like the Chicago plan.” Lehrich said Smith was so “greatly beloved by the students iwn part because he just didn’t seem to have any respect for anything, except, he loved the students and he loved the College.” He had a story that illustrates his point: In 2000, item #265 on the University of Chicago Scav list was “J.Z. Smith in a lawn chair on the quads, drinking MGD; what else? [20 points].” Smith was approached by one of the Scav teams, eager to collect points. “Oh yes. Absolutely,” he told them, as Lehrich remembers. And he lounged in a lawn chair and threw back a beer in front of the administration building. “He was not pandering to the students. It’s like: The students want him to do something, and he can see why it’s funny. ‘Sure, I’ll be happy to do that.’ I don’t think he had any sense that this was beneath his dignity, or an inappropriate thing to do. No, it’s part of the College life,” Lehrich said. Smith was a private person; he organized his life to maximize time for reading and thinking. At the same time, however, he was a very human presence on campus. He ate lunch in Cobb Hall before class and had coffee in Swift Hall after class, and he welcomed his students to join him. Doniger remembered that Smith always commanded the attention of a room when he talked. “He smoked; he was a chainsmoker. And he would let the ash on his cigarette roll longer, and longer, and longer, and longer. And everyone in the room was mesmerized watching the ash on the end of his cigarette, waiting for it to fall. You could’ve heard a pin drop.” If his character and presence brought people in, it was his ideas that kept them engaged. “That crazy stick he walked with in recent years and so forth—that kind of made him a beloved character around campus. But the reason you listened to him when he talked was because he was a brilliant and arresting speaker,” Doniger said. “He was just smarter than anybody else.” As Smith aged, he grew out his beard, carried a hand-carved cane, and wore huge glasses. “I’m going to invent myself as this old guy!” Charles Long (Ph.D. ’62), professor emeritus of religious studies at UC Santa Barbara, remembers Smith saying to him, around the time he started losing his curly black hair. “The giant rhododendron cane. The beard down to his navel. He was a character, and he knew it. And he took advantage of it,” Hutchinson said. “It made him more engaging: What’s this guy on about? What’s his intellectual agenda? And it turned out his intellectual agenda would get people to think. And I think one of his accomplishments of being in the College—and something John Boyer

Maroon File Photo (undated)

John T. Wilson (center left), president of the University of Chicago (1975-1978), with Smith (center right). has carried on—is he viewed himself as a spokesman for liberal education: What are we trying to do here? How do we do it? Is the Core such a good idea, or is the Core authoritarian?”

Smith’s legacy as dean of the College Hutchinson met Smith in 1981, the first month he joined the faculty, when there was a holdup with his appointment. “That’s a bureaucratic snafu! I can take care of that. What a stupid rule!” Smith told him animatedly. “He had just no pretense, no decanal affect. And I immediately warmed to him,” Hutchinson said. He could navigate University bureaucracy and get things done. Katherine Karvunis, who was Smith’s assistant for the nine years he was an administrator (1973 –1982), spoke in awe about his productivity. He dutifully followed through on all tasks, he made every meeting, and he was very easy to work with, she said. President Hanna Gray was disliked

by students because she was seen as too focused on fundraising. Smith, however, wasn’t thought of as a money-grabber; he was regarded as someone who cared about academic standards, multiple alums from that era told T he M a roon , remembering that Smith was dean at a time when the University was more apathetic toward College students. “He was very well-liked by a student body that didn’t like many administrators,” said Abbe Fletman (A.B. ’80), a judge in Philadelphia, who was editor-in-chief of T he M aroon from 1978– 1979. But not everyone remembers Smith as the outlier in a cold administration. Wendy Oliver (A.B. ’81), now a business attorney in Portland, Oregon, described the administration during this time period as “indifferent at best to students. It was kind of like an English boarding school, where they felt they needed to toughen you up,” she said, adding that Smith was at least partially responsible. Oliver recalls being brushed off by Smith after going to his office to request a sexual misconduct investigation. According to Oliver, a professor had told her to come to his apartment to pick up an assignment, offered her a drink, and then tried to proposition her sexually in exchange for a grade, asking: “What’s it going to be: an A or a B?” A January 22, 1982 M a roon story about the administration’s mishandling of her complaint explained that Smith had told her he would investigate the allegations fully. During their meeting, however, Smith treated her report lightly: “He went on to tell me little anecdotes about other cases of female harassment where professors met their students at the door in a bathrobe or something…. He thought it was funny,” Oliver was quoted saying. “It was certainly another time. The College was just not very responsive to students. It was just not a very friendly place to be. And I don’t think anyone I knew considered the administration to be friendly or helpful,” she said.

The College was his home Maroon File Photo (ca. 1978)

To the extent that some students may

have seen Smith as just another administrator, it’s clear that the students who took his classes adored him. “Obviously the smartest person teaching at this school,” reads an Intro to Religious Studies course evaluation from fall 2008. “I know this is impossible to change, but if he could become less intimidating, that would be great. He’s so smart it’s scary.” But Smith said in a 2008 M aroon interview that the teacher evaluation website, ratemyprofessors. com, is an awful idea, (“I mean, I’ve been married for nearly 50 years, I’m not on the market. What other reason would one have for such a thing? It’s like reading a stud book.”), so these evaluations will not be indulged any further. Smith typically wrote out his lectures by hand before each class. He said it took him at least three or four hours of preparation to give a one-hour lecture. Unusual for a scholar of his stature, Smith almost exclusively taught College students. “He did not teach doctoral students,” said Harvard Divinity School professor Kimberley Patton. “I mean, that is unheard of. He could have taught them, and he could have easily been chair of the department for years and years and established a doctoral dynasty.” Colleagues and academics have different theories for why this was. It’s clear that Smith wasn’t interested in teaching students who were highly specialized or pursuing a preprofessional track. He did not like that graduate students already had their minds made up; to Smith, college students tended to be more intellectually honest insofar as they tended to be more open to being influenced. That was the theory, at least. “I think his view was that doctoral students were so far socialized into repeating what they thought their professors wanted to hear that you often didn’t hear what they really thought,” Patton said. Lehrich, one of only a handful of Divinity students whose dissertations were supervised by Smith, said he probably felt graduate students were in it for the wrong reasons: Most of them “wanted to say, ‘Oh, I worked with J.Z., so I’m a strong candidate.’ He wasn’t interested in that kind of thing.” Smith was an excellent spokesperson Continued on page 8


THE CHICAGO MAROON - MARCH 6, 2018 Continued from page 7




for principles he saw as fundamental to the University. While advancing his beliefs about education, Smith also tried to hold the University to its own word, and he came to be regarded as somewhat of a thought leader in higher education. In his self-penned preface to Lehrich’s collection of writings, Smith wrote that he was invited to address “some one hundred fifty colleges, universities, professional associations, and regional and national conferences” over the years. His talks would get published, but often in remote out-of-theway journals. Lehrich worked with Smith to find copies of his lectures and select which ones to include. “They really challenged the whole notion of how collegiate education ought to be done,” Lehrich said. “I felt that this stuff shouldn’t be forgotten.” “It’s the kind of thing a graduate student does for an old mentor.” Central to Smith’s education philosophy were his first three rules for teaching (as printed in On Teaching Religion): 1. Students should gain some sense of mastery. Among other things, this means read less rather than more. In principle, the students should have time to read each assignment twice.


2. Always begin with the question of definition, and return to it. 3. Make arguments explicit. Both those found in the readings and those made in class. The 1982 Aims of Education address challenged Smith because, according to his second rule, it forced him to define two words. Referencing a dictionary definition of “aim,” he said in his speech to first-

years, “If, ‘aim implies a clear definition of something that one hopes to effect,’ then my assigned title puts me in double jeopardy. For it requires a ‘clear definition’ of education (no small task), a clarity, even if attainable, that seems to be placed at risk by the pluralism of ‘aims.’ If education, in the context in which we gather this evening, means baccalaureate education or liberal education, the problem is intensified,” he said. The word “aim,” he explained, is derived from the old French verb for “to guess,” giving Smith some solace because there is confusion and uncertainty built into it. He declared that he was retitling his address, “A Guess About Education.” The talk continues, and Smith pauses to wrestle with defining the word “interesting.” He says that when we use the word interesting, we often use it to mean “tres amusant,” French for “very amusing.” But the “very amusing” is not fundamental, and it shouldn’t be the basis of a curriculum. Smith, in the Aims address, moves on to another understanding of the word “interesting”: the one that Smith’s iron law says ought to ground a college curriculum. “In this understanding, things that are ‘interesting,’ things that become objects of interest, are things in which you have a stake, things which place you at risk, things which are important to you, things which made a difference…. Courses must be designed to be ‘interesting.’ For, students cannot be asked to be consequential while the faculty abstains. Students cannot be asked to integrate what the faculty will not. Students will not be critical if the faculty is not.” Note: This is an abridged version of a longer article that will soon be published online at

VIEWPOINTS Regulating Speech: Not a Job for LSA Student Government Should Not Become the Arbiter of Campus Free Speech Recently, the Law School’s conservative Edmund Burke Society drew condemnation for an offensive whip sheet, which promoted an upcoming debate by comparing immigration to “inviting disease into the body politic.” The society apologized, and the debate was canceled. Considering the scale of the backlash, it’s no surprise that some want student government to play a larger role in regulating organizations like

the Burke Society. T he M a roon understands this sentiment, but too much involvement from the Law Students Association (LSA) could set a dangerous precedent for student government as a gatekeeper of campus politics. Initially, LSA, which controls funding for Law School Student Organizations (LSSOs) such as the Burke Society, considered defunding the group. However, University administrators informed LSA that defunding would vi-


Grace Hauck, editor BUSINESS

Andrew Mamo, chief financial officer

Adam Thorp, Editor-in-Chief Hannah Edgar, Deputy Editor-in-Chief Euirim Choi, Managing Editor Stephanie Liu, Managing Editor The Maroon Editorial Board consists of the Editors-in-Chief and editors of The Maroon.


Katie Akin, editor Pete Grieve, editor Deepti Sailappan, editor Sonia Schlesinger, editor Katherine Vega, editor Alex Ward, editor VIEWPOINTS

Peng-Peng Liu, head designer


Wendy Lee, editor


Jamie Ehrlich, editor


Vishal Talasani, editor Hari Pingali, deputy editor

Michael Perry, editor Cavell Means, editor DESIGN

Kay Yang, production manager

Regina Filomeno, business manager Harry Backlund, distributor


Morganne Ramsey, copy chief Michelle Zhao, copy chief Katrina Lee, copy chief Patrick Lou, copy chief

Cole Martin, editor Urvi Kumbhat, editor Alexia Bacigalupi, editor May Huang, editor

Olive Lopez, director of development Antonia Salisbury, director of marketing Ross Piper, director of marketing Taylor Bachelis, director of operations Alex Markowitz, director of strategy



Feng Ye, editor Brooke Nagler, editor Zoey Kaiser, editor


Design Associates: Jessica Xia, Patrick Yeung Editor-in-Chief: Newsroom Phone: (314) 239-0993 Business Phone: (773) 702-9555 Fax: (773) 702-3032 For advertising inquiries, please contact or (773) 7029555. Circulation: 2,000. © 2018 The Chicago Maroon Ida Noyes Hall / 1212 East 59th Street/ Chicago, IL 60637

olate campus free speech policies, and wasn’t authorized by LSA’s own bylaws. Now, LSA is discussing additional policies that would allow it to cut funding if another LSSO is similarly offensive. One proposal would establish standards of “civility, respect and professionalism” for LSSOs, while another would prevent LSA funds from being used to “disrespect, denigrate, or threaten a population represented at the law school.” It’s hard to foresee where this language could be applied in the future. For instance, might LSA justify taking sides on an issue like Israel–Palestine? No one except LSA itself can say what “civility,” or “disrespect,” or “professionalism” would mean, and where they’d be applied. Not only could these policies threaten speech on campus, but they would also be dangerous to the credibility of LSA. If LSA’s officers were in charge of deciding which viewpoints are offensive, then their elections would run the risk of becoming proxy wars over hot-button issues, preventing the organization from doing its job. Moreover, the proposed language is not nearly as content-neutral as it sounds; determinations about offensiveness are inherently political. On especially contentious political issues, it’s hard to say where protected viewpoints end and offensive rhetoric begins, and nothing good would come of letting stu-

dent government decide. There may well be larger issues of climate to address at the Law School, but using LSA to defund LSSOs would be an ineffective way of solving them. Under its bylaws, LSA will never allocate more than 3 percent of its funding to a single group, and the Burke Society has received just $600 in funding this year—hardly an irreplaceable sum if its funding were cut. Especially consider ing that the group has faculty members and supporters who don’t need LSSO status to organize events, it seems unlikely that a loss of official sanction would do much more than anger members and deepen existing divides. Of course, there are plenty of cases in which defunding is reasonable. LSA clearly shouldn’t sponsor a group that threatens violence or directly harasses students, and T he M a roon supports the development of explicit policies to that effect. But the policies under discussion would go far beyond banning direct threats. Regardless of how you feel about the University’s free speech policies, imposing more restrictive ones cannot, and should not, be the job of student government. — The M a roon Editorial Board



Letter: UChicago Should Support #neveragain Dear UChicago, We are alumni of the University of Chicago. As students at the University, we learned the value of ideas. We not only support people’s rights to share ideas, but are also against those who would punish people for exercising their rights to free speech. That is why we are angry that the University will not commit to doing the same. In the past, UChicago has made some controversial decisions in support of free speech. In the fall of 2016, it told incoming students that it would not provide academic safe spaces or cancel speakers out of fear of limiting the exchange of ideas. UChicago

stated that it would not allow trigger warnings (even for ideas that could retraumatize students) because the ideas and debates were more important. It is therefore disappointing that you will not commit to ignoring any punishments that result from potential students’ expressions of their ideas when considering them for admission. Recently, news broke that a school district in Texas would suspend students who participated in #neveragain activities, which could jeopardize their admission to college. Many universities rushed to reaffirm their commitment to free speech by stating that

they would ignore any suspensions or other punishments resulting from these protests. However, the University of Chicago chose only to state that it reaffirms the University’s longstanding principle of free expression. It is not enough to passively sit by and reaffirm the idea of free expression. As a university, you must act to undo any damage done by those who are against it. As alumni and people who value the power of ideas, we urge you to act. It is vital that the University of Chicago publicly support all those who protest in support of an ideal like #neveragain by promising to ignore all punishments for protests when making ad-

missions decisions. Sincerely, Phyllis Clark Dykhuizen (A.B. ’66) Elizabeth Clewett (A.B. ’92) Marta Dykhuizen Shore (A.B. ’92) Charles Ellenbogen (A.B. ’91) Jennie Goldberg Roffman (A.B. ’92) Ju Namkung (A.B. ’92) Brendan A. Niemira (A.B. ’91) Michael Newirth (A.B. ’92) Sean Shore (A.B. ’92) Rachel Smith (A.B. ’92) Meegan Stock Niemira (A.B. ’91)

Letter: Rasmussen Says PSA’s Claims Are Inaccurate On Monday, January 22, 2018, the Viewpoints section included an opinion piece entitled “University of Chicago: The Second Assailant,” which presented an inaccurate portrayal of the University-wide disciplinary system. The piece includes the misleading statement, “Between July 1, 2014 and June 30, 2016 alone, there were 148 reports of ‘harassment, discrimination, and sexual misconduct,’ yet the University-wide Disciplinary Committee only found 16 people responsible.” As is reflected in the annual incident report statistics, many, if not most such reports made to the University, are impossible to address through the University-wide disciplinary system, which applies only to complaints where the respondent is a UChicago student. In many cases, however, the respondent is not a student at the University, is never identified, or the complainant chooses not to initiate an

investigation. As a result, between 2014 and 2016, 44 allegations—not 148—were made against 18 individual respondents. Seven of the allegations were withdrawn by request of the complainant, leaving 37 allegations that were heard by the University-wide Disciplinary Committee. Of these 37 allegations, the Committee found that students were responsible for 16 of them (43 percent, not 10.8 percent, as was suggested in the opinion piece). In addition, the piece attempted to condense multiple alleged incidents into a single persona, and in so doing, mischaracterized both the University’s process and the actions of University staff. Each complaint is addressed in accordance with University policies, federal and state law, and the wishes of complainants. The piece’s characterization of this process is inaccurate and does a disservice to the dedicated students, faculty, and staff who take their responsibilities in this process

extremely seriously. When a student or anyone else reports a potential violation of the Policy on Harassment, Discrimination and Sexual Misconduct, there are three phases that occur: the report phase, the investigation phase, and the adjudication phase. These phases are separate from each other. If a student chooses not to initiate an investigation, the University is obligated to honor that request, with certain limited exceptions. Regardless of whether or not students choose to move forward with an investigation and the disciplinary process, they are entitled to receive University support and resources. More information about this process can be found online. We deeply appreciate the collaborative work of students and organizations on this issue, including that of the Phoenix Survivors Alliance, and we want to continue the positive strides that these very stu-

dents, staff, and organizations have made toward the safety and security of our campus community. We remain committed to presenting annual statistics in ways that are clear and informative and will make enhancements to these reports based on feedback and suggestions. Your sustained engagement on these issues is our best hope for positive change. More information on University support and resources can be found online at UChicago’s “Sexual Misconduct and Title IX” and “UMatter” pages. Sincerely, Michele Rasmussen Dean of Students in the University The University of Chicago

ARTS Underground Collective Delivers Cathartic Winter Showcase BY LEXI FRANCISZKOWICZ MAROON STAFF

As Rex Orange County played in the background of McCormick Lounge last Thursday night, the audience filled the room for the Underground Collective winter showcase, “Midnight Oil.” Performers explored their theme, “what keeps you up at night”, through a set of spoken word, dance, and theatrical acts from the newly recognized RSO. Though many of the performances tackled difficult topics like death, mental health, and racism, the show also included comical moments in songs and a skit-based rendition of When Harry Met Sally. Highlights of the show included a moving spoken word piece by second-year Jhanelle Smith, the newest member of the collective, which was a tribute to her late grandmother entitled “Eulogy.” In her piece, she likened her grandmother to a lantern, weaving Wikipedia definitions and facts about the lantern into the poem. The contrast between the formal language from Wikipedia and intimate details about her relationship with her grandmother illustrated the distance between the poet and her grandmother—or, metaphorically speaking, the lantern. Next was Claire Moore’s poem “Water and Rock,” written about her struggles with mental health and eating disorders. The poem blended Spanish and English, switching between languages mid-thought or even mid-sentence, reminiscent of the poetry of Juan Felipe

Herrera. Moore conveyed complex emotions through natural imagery, playing with the way bilingualism communicates the same nuanced ideas. One performance that spoke closely to the night’s theme of “ Midnight Oil” was second-year Ashvini K artik-Narayan’s “(Not) Thinking About You,” in which she described being freed from obsessing over a crush. “Sometimes you like toxic people, and it’s horrible, but when you don’t, you have so much to think about, and it’s great,” she said to introduce her piece. Her specific examples, like corduroy pants and blueberries, invited the audience members into her thoughts, and her confident delivery garnered loud applause. Other performances included music by second-years Trish Zulueta and Jeremy Lindenfeld, both of whom composed and wrote their lyrics. Zulueta and Kartik-Narayan performed a duet called “ The Grind,” an appropriately named song as finals week approaches. Accompanied by a recording of Zulueta’s electronic music, the song detailed the motions of everyday life, feeling overwhelmed by schoolwork, and the insecurities of UChicago students. The song spoke to the anxieties of college life, in a comical and self-deprecating way with lines like, “How did I get into UChicago in the first place?” The penultimate performance was Lindenfeld’s “Foxfire,” which channeled Bon Iver with its strummed guitar and metaphorical lyrics ripe for interpretation. The show ended with a group per-

Estelle Higgins

The members of Underground Collective performed spoken word poetry, sang original songs, and performed movie skits in their winter showcase “Midnight Oil.” formance by Smith, fourth-year Bryan Waterhouse, and third-year Felix Lecocq. With an ode to Lakeshore Drive, they explored the ways in which we attach significance to certain places. For them, that meant recounting their past experiences with Lake Shore Drive, or framing other experiences in terms of it. In “Ode to Lakeshore,” there were elements of melancholy and nostalgia found in Smith’s “Eulogy,” clever wordplay from Waterhouse’s “Growing Older,” and charming lightheartedness found in Lecocq’s “Nightmares.” The group performance was a satisfying conclusion to the show, bringing together three members with different talents

for each other to build on. Throughout the evening, the performers managed to navigate difficult themes and include a variety of acts that highlighted each member’s strengths. Although not all of the performances connected directly to the theme of “Midnight Oil,” each one seemed to build well on the others, gathering momentum as the show went on. The members’ mutual love and support was palpable; it was clear that they are each other’s strongest supporters. By the end, the audience members felt like they were part of the show, snapping and clapping with each line that struck them.



Artists Discuss Role in Society at Logan Center BY JAD DAHSHAN ARTS STAFF

“Martyrdom is not a practical life strategy,” painter Mike Cloud said at a talk about living as a contemporary artist. On display now in the Logan Center Gallery, The Myth of Education is a multimedia collection by the Brooklyn-based painter and pedagogue. On Thursday, March 2, Cloud joined artist Oscar Murillo in a conversation about the concepts of stardom and heroism in the contemporary art world, as well as their own experiences within it. The discussion was moderated by Logan Center Exhibitions Curator Yesomi Umolu, and took place in the Gray Center Lab. Among the works on display are giant, unusually shaped canvases caked with thick paints, displayed side-by-side with collages of Annie Leibovitz photographs and newspaper cut-outs. Some canvases are shaped like six-pointed stars, while others resemble arrowheads or computer screen cursors. Even before examining the various abstract patterns, text, and symbols populating the canvases, viewers are welcomed into a field of ambiguous semiotics by Cloud’s distinctive canvas shapes. A rainbow flag, hands, feet, and

genitalia drawn as mazes, and oppositional phrases such as “Brown VS White Rice” are signs already rife with connotations. Cloud takes advantage of that to build new associations for viewers to explore, much like they would explore the organ-shaped labyrinths Cloud includes in the work. Marked with clear starting and ending points, the mazes add a temporal and interactive dimension to his work. The exhibition opened on January 26 with a tour given by the artist. Following the reception, Umolu coordinated a series of programs, complementary to the exhibition, that addressed motley issues in the contemporary art world. The first was a February 15 panel involving Cloud, Taylor Renee Aldridge, assistant curator at the Detroit Institute of Arts, and Alexander Provan, editor of Triple Canopy. The three prodded “the notions of offense and aesthetic judgement” in the 21st-century painter’s life. On February 16, Cloud’s interlocutor was arts education specialist Peter Stover, who shifted the conversation towards pedagogy, a field Cloud himself is immersed in as an assistant professor at Brooklyn College of the City University of New York. His discussion with Murillo was the last of these exhibition-related programs.

Like its antecedents, this particular event was only tangentially tethered to Cloud’s exhibition. While his recent oeuvre stretches the contemporary practice of abstract painting, the talk was concerned more with an artist’s relationship to society than with Cloud’s work in particular. Examining this relationship, Cloud borrowed a binary opposition highlighted in Hito Steyerl’s essay, “A Thing Like You and Me”: that between subject and object, art hero and art star. The former is iconic and actively resists society and tradition, while the latter is a commodity and a celebrity, desired and exploited by the world. The hero is martyred while the star is celebrated. While Cloud and Umolu discussed his own classification, Murillo was more cynical about the distinction and expressed his frustrations with the intoxicating myth of the starving artist and the romantic need for creative self-fulfillment. For him, the question is not whether to sacrifice everything for art in the name of cultural rebellion or to indulge in fame and recognition, but rather, how to be both “selfish and responsible.” Murillo’s own art is often described as complex and chaotic; his installations, paintings, and video art often involve the use of various, and sometimes unusual, materials to create different communal

narratives. His focus on community can be attributed to his international exhibition and studio network: Born in Colombia, Murillo currently works in London and has been exhibited in places like Azerbaijan, Spain, and the United States. As such, geography has an impact on Murillo’s work on a conceptual level as well as a logistical one. Considerations like shipping costs and the speed of a piece’s delivery are essential aspects of any artistic career, even though such practicalities are often shirked in stereotypical and romanticized representations of an artist’s life. In one of Cloud’s teaching exercises, he offers his students vaguely descriptive statements extracted from artist biographies and obituaries. In what he describes as “Build-A-Bear” fashion, they attempt to piece these together to create the perfect hypothetical artist. The game is a chance to observe the contradictions between different people’s conceptions of “success” in the contemporary art world. Thursday’s program acted as an investigation into those same contradistinctions, as seen through a framework of artistic martyrdom, celebrity, and the gray areas in between. The Myth of Education will run until March 11 at the Logan Center Gallery.

Lyric Opera Puts Surreal Twist on Faust BY JADE YAN MAROON CONTRIBUTOR

Written by French composer Charles Gounod in 1859, Faust has often been dismissed as sentimental mix of religion and romance, with a melodramatic plot and excessive emotion. In Lyric Opera’s production, however, director Kevin Newbury explores the complexity of this feeling by delving into the opera’s darker subtexts. The story begins with a depressed, ageing Faust contemplating suicide. His anguish is interrupted by the Devil, who tempts him with a deal of eternal youth in exchange for his service in Hell. Faust becomes young and handsome again, and immediately falls in obsessive love with the beautiful Marguerite. However, he later arbitrarily abandons her, leaving her pregnant and disgraced. A messy situation ensues: Marguerite’s baby dies, allegedly at her own hands, and her brother is soon after killed by Faust in a duel. Marguerite is thrown in prison. But the opera ends with her eventual salvation, for when Faust attempts to rescue her from prison, she rejects him and calmly ascends to Heaven as he is marched off to Hell. Production designer and visual artist John Frame’s surrealist set complements

this fantastical plot. The background consists of various projections of abstract images and stop motion clips, taken from Frame’s previous work. His experimentation with scale results in a background of huge flowers, Marguerite’s disconcertingly small house, and a quiet sense of unease. Four silent figures follow the Devil around, wearing huge, grotesque masks. Color also contributes to the surreal nature of the production. The Devil is debonair in an outlandish orange threepiece. Faust sweeps off his old clothes during his youthful transformation to reveal a bizarre, electric blue suit. A vibrant chorus dressed in unconventional shades of maroon and yellow parades across the gloomily lit stage. The result is unsettling. Cryptic sculptures are wheeled out, including a tower laden with grape vines amid unilluminating references to Bacchus, the Roman god of wine. This material adds surrealism, but also confusion. In an interview with The Chicago Tribune, director Kevin Newbury alluded to the idea that the Devil is the fruit of Faust’s creation, offering an explanation for the surreal staging. “You see him sculpt the Devil—will him into being—with his own hands,” Newbury explained. This throws the production into a new light, suggesting that

Courtesy of Cory Weaver

Christian Van Horn as the debonair and suave Mephistopheles.

Courtesy of Cory Weaver

Ailyn Pérez’s rich soprano adds emotional depth and strength to her portrayal of Marguerite. the Devil is a figment of Faust’s imagination, and prompting the viewer to question whether everything else is, too. Regardless of the answer, the intensity and realism of emotion keeps the production grounded, allowing us to empathize with the key characters. This is particularly true of Marguerite. Wine-drinking soldiers in Act II declare that “young women must be plundered.” Faust’s young women, a twittering chorus in identical flowing dresses, sing in unison and hang onto the arms of soldiers. By contrast, Marguerite cuts an intriguingly independent figure in her white gown. She walks supported by a crutch, and tells the besotted Faust that “I am neither lovely nor a lady, and I don’t require your assistance.” Despite this bold proclamation, we are nevertheless forced to witness the plundering of Marguerite. Faust courts her relentlessly, with the orange-suited Devil as his wingman. She resists, but then succumbs in a bed prepared for her by the four grotesque figures. Her emotions, given heightened depth by Ailyn Pérez’s rich soprano, quickly dominate the production, ranging from an endearing glee in the Jewel song to black despair as she sits alongside the Devil in church, unable to pray.

Benjamin Bernheim offers a less compelling version of Faust. His performance hangs largely on his undeniably strong vocals, which ring out across the stage, particularly in Act V as Faust calls out to an imprisoned Marguerite. However, this is striking more in terms of impressive technical skill; a certain lack of conviction in his movement renders his character less memorable. Christian Van Horn’s combed hair and cravat set the tone for his suave portrayal of the Devil, Mephistopheles, who, along with his elements of comedy, emerges as a character more likeable than Faust. Marguerite’s brother Valentin, rather stiffly portrayed by Edward Parks, verges on unremarkable. Granted, Valentin is away at war for the majority of the opera, but his death scene is unexciting, lacking in some necessary feeling. In this way, the intensely human aspect of Marguerite juxtaposed against Frame’s almost supernatural atmosphere alludes to the universality of feeling, an idea that is particularly pertinent to Gounod’s timeless opera. Faust will show on Tuesday, March 6, Friday, March 9 and Monday, March 12 at 7:30 p.m. Tickets are $15 with UCID.



Soloist In Mo Yang Explores Passion in USO Program BY RENA SLAVIN ARTS STAFF

On Saturday evening, the University Symphony Orchestra (USO) presented a program of three works exploring various musical conceptions of passion, love, and emotion. From an apparent lack of passion to an overwhelming wave of it, as well as many shades in between, the orchestra conveyed the subtleties of each composer’s work with great finesse. Conductor and Director Barbara Schubert masterfully guided the audience through Igor Stravinsky’s enigmatic Symphonies of Wind Instruments, highlighting moments of melodic alternation between instruments. Schubert’s approach reflected the reticence with which Stravinsky hoped his listeners would approach the piece. After several minutes full of sudden entrances, abrupt passages, and shrill high notes, the warm and peaceful final resolution was a welcome contrast. The wind section then headed into the balcony while guest soloist In Mo Yang took the stage for Leonard Bernstein’s Serenade (after Plato’s Symposium), a work for strings and solo violin. Yang is currently a student at the prestigious New England Conservatory but has already garnered international recognition for his superb playing. He is the First Prize Winner of the 2014 Concert Artists Guild Competition and the 54th International Violin Competition Premio Paganini,

Wednesday [3/7] Stories on Race in the Classroom Smart Museum, 4:30 p.m., free. The Smart Museum hosts a panel of students and teachers to discuss the topic of race in the classroom. Led by the Race and Pedagogy Working Group, the event is inspired largely by Emmanuel Pratt’s approach to “regenerative placemaking.” A Lady Has the Floor Reading 57th Street Books, 6 p.m., free. Author Kate Hannigan visits 57th Street Books to talk about her latest release,

the latter of which had not awarded a First Prize since 2006. “I just love the energy of the orchestra and the attitude to make the best music we can,” Yang told The M aroon ahead of his performance with the USO. He spoke fondly of the rehearsal process with University of Chicago musicians and has enjoyed spending time with them outside of rehearsals. Despite what must be a grueling rehearsal and performance schedule throughout the season, Yang enjoys playing with different ensembles. “Part of being a soloist is to make music with different people from different backgrounds,” he said, “to prove that where we came from, our races, [and] our cultures don’t really matter when it comes to music.” Saturday’s performance of Bernstein’s Serenade was not Yang’s first collaboration with Barbara Schubert, but it was his first performance of this work. The novelty of the piece in Yang’s repertoire produced an inspired performance that was dynamic and full of life throughout. At no point in the five movements did any phrase seem stale; rather, the different affects and styles were brilliantly conveyed to the audience. Though programmatic in nature, the Serenade felt accessible to the entire audience, not only those well-versed in Plato’s Symposium. Indeed, Yang stressed the importance of “[keeping] the abstract aspect of the music intact.” He was “more interested in presenting [his] own, genuine interpretation,” than in confining the work to a single program-

matic meaning. From the pastorale-esque opening melody to the jazz inflections in the last movement, Yang’s commitment to his interpretation was well worth it. The orchestra supported the soloist particularly well during the second, dance-like theme of the first movement. The second and third movements were vivid and well-executed. The slower fourth movement stood out with an exceptionally beautiful, lyrical theme as the rich tone of the strings complemented Yang wonderfully. The final movement was a triumph of orchestra and soloist alike, with a convincing chorale and enticing duet between Yang and the principal cellist. Multiple rounds of applause brought Yang back to the stage after the Serenade came to a close, and as warm as the audience was following the Bernstein, Yang’s encore of Niccolò Paganini’s Caprice No. 1 earned him a standing ovation. The second half of the concert consisted of Tchaikovsky’s Symphony No. 6 in B minor “Pathétique,” the last piece the composer ever conducted, only nine days before his death in 1893. The USO certainly did this masterpiece justice. The poignant first iteration of the main theme by the bassoon foreshadowed the grief and anguish to come in later movements. The climax of the first theme was exceptionally delivered, as was the subdued ending. The elegant quasi-waltz of the second movement emphatically contrasted with the solemnity of the first. The third movement, which may have benefited from more clarity among the string sections, was bright and

Exhibit [A]rts

A Lady Has the Floor. The picture book biography, illustrated by Alison Jay, is a celebration of the fascinating life of Belva Lockwood, the first woman to run for president. Iris Presents: For Colored Girls Logan Center, 7:30 p.m., free. Iris, a theater group dedicated to sharing voices of people of color, performs Ntozake Shange’s the acclaimed choreopoem tragedy For Colored Girls Who Have Considered Suicide / When the Rainbow Is Enuf.

Thursday [3/8] Jazz X-tet Logan Center Performance Hall, 8 p.m., free. UChicago’s very own big band Jazz X-tet will be performing its triannual concert, focusing on the 1960s style of fusion jazz. Study at the Smart Smart Museum, 9 p.m.–midnight, free. Add some excitement and artistic inspiration to your late-night cramming with free pizza, snacks, and coffee at the Smart Museum. UChicago ArtsPass, the Office

invigorating. The final movement, however, was truly superb. In the USO’s interpretation, it embodied the Symphony’s title, Pathétique. The key here is to consider its meaning in Russian (pateticheskaya, meaning “passionate”) and to not fall prey to the less-robust French definition, which merely suggests “pitiable.” The orchestra’s build-up to the climax was undoubtedly intense, but it was the bleak— though no less passionate—pianissississimo ending that made the performance remarkable. Oddly enough, the faded end of the Tchaikovsky provided the audience with a moment of clarity reminiscent of the final chorale of Stravinsky’s Symphonies. The two works could hardly be more disparate in affect. The former is one of Western music’s most expressive symphonies and yet ends in a barely audible chord. The latter is cold and pure throughout but ends with a seemingly out-of-place, although relaxing, chorale. One is the epitome of Romanticism, while the other is its antithesis. Yet while the conductor’s baton was up and the musicians remained in position at the dying final chord of the emotional tour de force that is Tchaikovsky’s sixth symphony, one nonetheless found oneself contemplating love and life in a rather Stravinskian manner. The USO returns next quarter with performances featuring 2018 Concerto Competition winners and Artist-in-Residence Daniel Pesca.

of Health Promotion and Wellness, and Uncommon Nights open up the museum to students for the night . Partner Charleston Workshop Ida Noyes Library Lounge, 7–9 p.m., free with UCID. Dance away your finals-week blues by learning the basics of Charleston, an energetic swing dance style! The Chicago Swing Dance Society will also host a Collegiate Shag work-shop on Saturday afternoon.

SPORTS Maroons Take Fourth at the ITA Championships WOMEN’S TENNIS


This past weekend, while the majority of UChicago students were enjoying their last taste of freedom before reading period, the women’s tennis team was in the midst of the National Women’s Indoor Championships in Chattanooga, Tennessee. Although the weather might have been warmer in Chattanooga, this was no holiday for the tennis team. Instead, the team was stuck in competitive tournament play throughout the entire weekend. On Friday, the Maroons faced a difficult start to the tournament against the No. 12 team in the country, Washington and Lee. In dual play between the two teams, the women’s tennis team remained perfect with a record of 9–0 for the season. They defeated the Washington Generals in dual play despite missing their usual number-one player, second-year Marjorie Antohi. Overall, it was a comprehensive

display for the Maroons as they pulled off a 7–2 victory over the Generals. This allowed for the women’s tennis team to move onto the semifinals of the tournament against Pomona-Pitzer. Once they reached the semifinals, the Maroons started to dream of a national championship win to bring back to Chicago. Pomona-Pitzer stood in the way between UChicago and the final. Ideally, the Maroons would depend on their perfect dual play throughout the season. However, the Sagehens were able to beat the prior unbeatable dual play of UChicago. Firstyear Claire Handa was the only singles winner for the Maroons, but a few of her teammates were locked in tight battles that sadly went the wrong way. The No. 6 Sagehens were able to defeat the Maroons with a score of 6–3, relegating UChicago to the third-place match against No. 10 Carnegie Mellon. Even though the result was not ideal, third-year Adrienne Travis said, “[the] match against Pomona

was easily the best match all season. We played as a team, not as individuals, and carrying that into the rest of the season will be instrumental to our success.” Even with the disappointing loss in the semis, UChicago still had a chance to come home with a third-place finish. However, the Maroons did not perform at their best as the Carnegie Mellon Tartans took charge of the match. The UChicago dual play lost their second match of the season and the team ended up being swept 5–0. Although it was not an ideal finish to a promising tournament, the team grew throughout the season and was happy with making it to the semis. “I think this weekend showed us how much we have improved since the beginning of the season,” Travis said. “Obviously the outcome today was not ideal, but we have made so much progress and will only continue to improve as the season goes on.” Alexandra Nisenoff

Second-year Abhin Sharma




UChicago’s Season Ends in NCAA Second Round “I’ve never been more proud to be a part of a group of girls that care so much about each other” BY DIESTEFANO LOMA SPORTS STAFF

Zoe Kaiser

Second-year Mia Farrell gets physical as she goes up for a layup against Wash U.

After a tremendous regular season, the sky was the limit for the University of Chicago women’s basketball team as they entered the NCAA DIII tournament. Each game was decided by their determination and unified effort as they consistently left everything on the court. In the second round of the tournament, however, the Maroons were unable to complete a monumental fourth quarter comeback, bringing their record-breaking season to an end. The Maroons made easy work of their first-round opponent Wisconsin Lutheran College with a resounding 70–46 win, securing their 22nd straight victory after going undefeated in conference play. Second-years Miranda Burt and Taylor Lake scored 18 points and 11 points, respectively. Although three minutes passed before the first points were scored, the Maroons struck first before their offensive onslaught, when third-year Olariche Obi made a layup. UChicago continued to build momentum after going on a 7–0 run, with second-year Mia Farrell also contributing to the scoreboard. By halftime, UChicago led by 13 points with a 34–21 lead. The Maroons broke out in the third quarter when they outscored the Warriors 22–9. Three straight layups made by Burt, Lake, and Obi, followed by a three-pointer from Farrell helped to pull the lead comfortable away from Wisconsin Lutheran’s grasp. Burt helped close out the game with an impressive four-point play. As eight minutes remained in the fourth quarter, the Maroons already led by 30 points. The bench came in and contributed another 16 points, and the Maroons combined to force the Warriors to commit 24 turnovers.

UChicago’s second-round matchup against the University of St. Thomas did not disappoint as two of the top ranked teams in the country squared off. While the Maroons were down 14 points at the half, they were not deterred. The Maroons charged back, led by Farrell’s 19 points in the final two quarters. Obi also captured her 15th double-double of the season with 11 points and 15 rebounds. Going into the fourth, the Tommies’ lead had been cut down to 10 points. Crucial three-pointers by Lake helped cut the deficit to five, and Obi supported by being aggressive with rebounds and eventually scoring to further cut the lead. Although the Maroons took a 58–57 lead, decisive shots made from downtown and at the free-throw line gave the Tommies the final advantage. In the end, it was not enough and the Maroons lost 68–62. The Tommies outdid the Maroons when it came to shooting from the field, notching 45.8 percent compared to 36.7 percent. Despite this, the Maroons were persistent, only turning the ball over 13 times, and forcing the Tommies to turn the ball over 21 times. When asked about the team’s identity this season, fourth-year Elizabeth Nye said, “Going into the beginning of the year, you don’t really know who you are going to be, and I think with this team, we didn’t have an idea. We made a goal going into Christmas to be 9–2. At that point, we were 4–2, and we didn’t lose from then on until now. I’ve never been more proud to be a part of a group of girls that care so much about each other. I think that’s what made this group so special.” The Maroons finished the season with 24–3 record, including 14–0 in the UAA and an incredible 22-game winning streak.

Maroons Grab First Two Wins of Season BASEBALL


This past weekend the University of Chicago baseball team traveled to Greenville, Illinois, to compete against the University of Dubuque and Greenville University on Saturday, and Grinnell College on Sunday. The Maroons grabbed their first win of the season, making it a solid weekend. The squad went one for three, losing to the University of Dubuque 7–5, but reigned victorious over Greenville and Grinnell with scores of 15–4 and 16–0, respectively. Saturday’s opening game against the University of Dubuque went long as it continued on for 14 innings. Fourth-year outfielder Max Larsen and third-year outfielder Connor Hickey led the way for the Maroons with one run and two hits each. Immediately following the loss against the University of Dubuque on Saturday, the Maroons competed against Greenville University. Larsen led the way for the Maroons once again with one run, two hits and four RBIs. On Sunday, the Maroons won their second-straight game and completely swept Grinnell College, dominating them with a score of 16–0 in just seven innings.

This past weekend was the turnaround the Maroons needed after suffering two tough loses to Dominican University and Fontbonne University the weekend before. The Maroons are happy with their performance, but of course are far from satisfied. Hickey shared his feelings in response to the weekend. “It was great to get back on the field after the rough start last weekend,” he said. “I think we showed a lot of fight and a lot of improvement from last week, and it will be important to build on that moving forward.” First-year catcher Jake Fauske echoed his teammate’s sentiments. “The team morale was really great this weekend,” Fauske said. “We really bounced back from the tough weekend before, which I think shows our resilience. We hit our stride at the right time, and although there’s still plenty of room for improvement, we are proud of the improvement we’ve made thus far.” The weekend was fun for the Maroons and served as a great way to continue the kick-off of their season. Hickey commented that his favorite part of the weekend was getting into the win column, while Fauske said he enjoyed watching the offense take

off, a promising sign for the season ahead. Fourth-year catcher Matt Slodzinski commented on the importance of the underclassmen on the team. “I really enjoyed seeing the younger guys settle in and compete this weekend,” he said. Taking both the good and the bad from this weekend and using it as motivation moving forward will be key for the Maroons. With its spring trip in sight, the squad will need to continue to improve. “Our pitching staff really brought it this

weekend and the offense started to click in the last two games. It’s important that we bring that mentality into every game and I think that is where we can see the most improvement,” Hickey added. “Our bats came alive on a consistent basis while pitching stayed excellent for most of the weekend,” Fauske continued. “We stepped up when pressure called, and that is something we will need to continue as we move forward and prepare for the spring trip.”


SPORT Women’s Tennis Women’s Baskeball Baseball Diving





Carnegie Mellon St. Thomas Greenville NCAA Regionals

5–0 68–62 15–4 7 of 22





Track & Field


NCAA Champs

10 a.m.