The Justice, February 5, 2019

the

Justice www.thejustice.org

The Independent Student Newspaper Volume LXXI, Number 16

of

B r a n d e is U n i v e r sit y S i n c e 1 9 4 9

Tuesday, February 5, 2019

‘WHAT REMAINS TO BE SEEN’

Waltham, Mass.

STUDENT UNION

Election winners look to new terms ■ The Union’s Senate,

A-Board and E-Board gained new members from the 2019 winter elections.

By JOCELYN GOULD JUSTICE EDITOR

After a tumultuous fall semester, the Student Union began the spring by electing new members to the Executive Board, Allocations Board and Senate. Students could vote electronically in the 2019 winter elections from 11:59 p.m. Tuesday to 11:59 pm.

Wednesday, and the results were announced in an email to the Brandeis community last Thursday.

Executive Board

ANDREW BAXTER/the Justice

ARTISTIC INFLUENCES: Howardena Pindell shared stories from her life and how they impacted her art in her talk on Saturday.

Howardena Pindell talks sexism, racism and art ■ The artist discussed the

struggles and triumphs she encountered during her over 60-year career.

By SAM STOCKBRIDGE JUSTICE EDITOR

In her talk on Saturday afternoon, Howardena Pindell discussed her experiences with racism and sexism as a pioneering Black artist.

Pindell’s exhibit, “What Remains to be Seen,” opened at the Rose Art Museum on Friday, nearly 25 years after her Rose debut on Nov. 6, 1993.

The Rose is the “third and final stop” of her exhibit. It was previously displayed at the Museum of Contemporary Art Chicago and then at the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts. Saturday’s discussion was facilitated by Naomi Beckwith and Valerie Cassel Oliver, who are her co-curators for the exhibit.

Pindell was born in Philadelphia in 1943. Her life in the art world began in the third grade, when her art teacher told her parents that she was a gifted artist and recommended taking her to art museums and galleries. Only years later would Pindell appreciate the variety of artworks she saw as a child, created by not just by white men, but

also by women and people of color, she recollected during her talk.

Her father was a mathematician who frequently wrote down the numbers on their car’s odometer as if he were balancing a checkbook.

Pindell explained that this was the reason for her comfort with numbers, and for their prominence in some of her artworks.

Pindell also shared a formative experience she had on a car trip with her father through Kentucky. When they stopped at a root beer stand, she noticed that all the mugs had red circles on the bottom, which her father explained meant that those glasses were for persons of color. When she learned this, Pindell developed a fear of circles for a long time, an obsession which would manifest in her art. Pindell also appreciates circles for their “simplicity” and universality.

One year Pindell received a microscope for her birthday, which she explained would lead to a shortterm fear and eventually a fascination with water in her art. Looking through the microscope’s lens, a young Pindell was both horrified and intrigued by the amoebas and particles that she discovered swimming in puddles and ponds. Later in her life, she grew to appreciate water’s symbolism, especially as a representation for the Middle Pas-

sage, the sea route by which slaves were taken from Africa to the West Indies, she explained.

During her time as an undergraduate at Boston University, Pindell said she “kind of hated Boston,” because of the “implied segregation,” where residents kept themselves grouped by race. Her happiest moments in Boston were spent at the Isabella Gardener Museum, though she added that was before much of their artwork, including a Vermeer, was stolen in 1990.

At BU she developed a style of art that she described as “really tight, figurative paintings,” which would “gradually” give way to a more abstract style during her time as a graduate student at Yale University. At Yale, she said that she faced greater difficulties still, working five days a week and some nights to make ends meet. Sexism was rampant: The women’s dorm was colloquially referred to as the “Bay of Pigs.”

She found inspiration in the work of many contemporary abstract artists including Larry Poons, and experimented with using non-permeable surfaces to control the way that paint seeped into the canvas.

She also began to experiment with media and materials, including rice paper, canvas, spray paint,

See ART, 7 ☛

Remembering a Resistance

 The fight for an African and African American Studies department.

Simran Tatuskar ’21 claimed secretary, the sole available position on the E-Board. As secretary, she will “oversee the daily operations of the Union Government,” per the Union’s constitution. In her candidate profile, she stressed her leadership experience

Allocations Board

There were four open seats on the A-Board, which decides how to allocate money from the Student Activities Fund to student groups on campus. Alan Huang ’21 was reelected to the A-Board as a two-semester representative, and his goals for this new term are to “maintain consistency and equity of allocations, … align the goals of the board with that of the student body” and increase communication between groups the A-Board works with, per his candidate profile.

Huang envisions an ideal A-Board as “transparent, consistent, and accountable,” according to the same

See ELECTION, 7 ☛

STUDENT UNION

Union, A-Board await Judiciary decision ■ The Judiciary will rule on

whether the Union is a club and clarify the word ‘benchmark’ in the Union's constitution.

By NATALIA WIATER JUSTICE EDITOR

Student Union President Hannah Brown ’19, Vice President Aaron Finkel ’20 and Chief of Staff Emma Russell ’19 presented four claims to the Union Judiciary on Jan. 15 regarding the Union’s status within the Union’s constitution in a case that will determine whether it is considered a club or governing body. Currently, the Union is considered a club and is therefore under the jurisdiction of the Allocations Board.

Last semester, the Union did not receive the full $50,000 it requested for Fiscal Year 2019, and the ABoard then denied them $12,000 in emergency funding. The Executive Board met with the A-Board to discuss how each body interprets the constitution, but the two did not come to an agreement, which led members of the E-Board to take the case to the Judiciary, Brown said in a Jan. 31 joint interview with Finkel and the Justice.

The first claim, per an email obtained from Union Chief Justice Morris Nadjar ’19, states that “the Student Union is not a club - Recognized, Chartered, or Secured - as

defined by the Constitution. The Student Union is a governing body for clubs and organizations.”

In the interview, Brown said that though the constitution specifically states that the A-Board determines allocations for clubs recognized by the Union, the “Union wasn’t ever recognized by itself, it was recognized by the student body, and not only that, but it governs clubs.” In addition, it is not listed in the constitution under Article VI, Section 3, which defines and names secured clubs.

The second claim, “because the Student Union is not a club, the Student Union is not under the jurisdiction of the Allocations Board,” is contingent on the first, Nadjar said in a Jan. 31 interview with the Justice. Nadjar clarified, however, that the Judiciary may still decide on the validity of the succeeding claims independently, even though claims two, three and four “are tied to the first claim.”

The petitioners argue that the A-Board should not have control over how much money the Union receives. “When the administration gives us SAF [Student Activities Fund] money, they give it to the Union, they don’t give it to ABoard. A-Board is just our mechanism for establishing the budget,” Finkel said.

The third and fourth claims deal with the definition of the word “benchmark,” which Brown said

See CASE, 7 ☛

Rose Opening

Fact check: Alex Chang's resignation letter

 The Rose Art Museum showcases the works of Howardena Pindell.

By SAM STOCKBRIDGE

By KENT DINLENC

NEWS 3

Women's March has lost legitimacy

By RENEE NAKKAB

FORUM 12

Patriots win Superbowl LIII

By HANNAH SHUMEL Courtesy of THE ROBERT D. FARBER UNIVERSITY ARCHIVES & SPECIAL COLLECTIONS DEPARTMENT, BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY

with different campus groups and described how she has “immersed” herself to “truly [be] a part of the Brandeis community.” As secretary, she hopes to increase transparency within the Union, she said in an email to the Justice. She also sees the new position as an opportunity to advance social justice causes.

FEATURES 8–9 For tips or info email editor@thejustice.org

CLARA ALEXANDER/the Justice

Make your voice heard!

Submit letters to the editor to letters@thejustice.org

ARTS 19

By MEGAN GELLER

COPYRIGHT 2019 FREE AT BRANDEIS.

SPORTS 15

2

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2019

●

NEWS

●

THE JUSTICE

NEWS GLOBAL GALA

POLICE LOG MEDICAL EMERGENCY January 29—BEMCo staff treated a party with leg pain in Sherman Dining Hall. Party was transported to Newton-Wellesley Hospital.

January 30—BEMCo staff treated a party in the Foster Mods who was not feeling well. Cataldo Ambulance transported the party to Newton-Wellesley Hospital for further care, and the Area Coordinator on call was notified.

January 30—The Health Center requested Cataldo Ambulance for a party with flu-like symptoms. The party was transported to Newton-Wellesley Hospital for further care.

January 30—The Brandeis Counseling Center requested Cataldo Ambulance for a section 12 transport of a party from the Mailman House to NewtonWellesley Hospital, and the Area Coordinator on call was notified.

February 2—BEMCo staff treated a party feeling ill in Scheffres Hall. Cataldo Ambulance transported the party to Newton-Wellesley Hospital for further care, and the Area Coordinator on call was notified.

February 2—BEMCo staff treated a party who was reported to have fainted in Gosman Sports and Convocation Center. Waltham Police were dispatched and notified by University police that the party was in cardiac arrest. University Police confirmed that the party was in cardiac arrest and that the trainer on scene prior to BEMCo and the University Police had shocked the patient with an Automated External Defibrillator. The party woke up after the one shock. Cataldo Ambulance and the Waltham Fire Department were notified. Cataldo Ambulance transported the party to Newton-Wellesley Hospital for further care, and the Area Coordinator on call was notified.

February 2—BEMCo staff treated a party who had fallen down the stairs in Shapiro A and B. University Police transported the party to to NewtonWellesley Hospital for further care.

February 3—BEMCo staff treated a party who was intoxicated in Scheffres Hall. Cataldo Ambulance transported the party to Newton-Wellesley Hospital for further care, and the Area Coordinator on call was notified.

February 3—BEMCo staff treated a party who was intoxicated in Usdan Student Center. Cataldo Ambulance transported the party to Newton-Wellesley Hospital for further care, and the Area Coordinator on call was notified.

VANDALISM January 30—A party reported vandalism of a poster in Kosow. University Police compiled a report on the incident.

LARCENY January 30—University Police compiled a report of missing property in the Foster Mods.

DISTURBANCE February 3—An area coordinator reported a loud party in the Rosenthal South residence hall. University Police checked out the area and advised residents to lower the loud music. The two residents complied without incident and no active party was observed by the police on scene.

MISCELLANEOUS January 30—An Area Coordinator on call reported a suspicious package, which turned out to be a water bubbler in the area of Fellows Garden. University Police on scene reported that it was the bottom half of a Poland Springs water dispenser.

—Compiled by Jen Geller

CORRECTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS n Arts failed to credit Creative Commons for graphics on Page 19. (Jan. 29, Page 19) n A Sports article incorrectly reported a score in the Brandeis Gymnastics meet as 8.3. The score should have been 9.3. (Jan. 29, Page 16) The Justice welcomes submissions for errors that warrant correction or clarification. Send an email to editor@thejustice.org.

Justice

the

editor@thejustice.org news@thejustice.org forum@thejustice.org features@thejustice.org sports@thejustice.org arts@thejustice.org ads@thejustice.org photos@thejustice.org managing@thejustice.org copy@thejustice.org layout@thejustice.org

THU LE/the Justice

The Brandeis International Business School Student Association held a gala featuring music, dance, poetry and food from around the world on Friday.

Weed is burning up Waltham — in more than one way. Opponents and proponents of retail marijuana in Waltham attended a public hearing on Jan. 28, according to a Jan. 29 article in the Waltham Patch.

The hearing was set to discuss how Waltham would regulate the zoning of marijuana retail shops in the city. It followed a contentious Waltham City Council meeting on the issue in November. More recently, protestors gathered outside a meeting to discuss the ordinance on Jan. 17, according to the same Patch article. As written, the law would prohibit retail marijuana establishments within “500 feet of any pre-existing school, daycare center, park, recreational facility, elderly housing facility, facility for the developmentally disabled, or any facility in which children commonly congregate.”

Ward 7 Councillor Kristine Mackin has been vocal on the issue. In a post on Reddit after the first city council meeting in the fall, she said she was “fed up with the foot dragging in our council on marijuana, in the two years since we voted in favor of approving Question 4.”

Mackin said in an email to the Justice that a wide variety of residents have approached her in support of retail weed in Waltham. “I’ve had conversations with supporters of retail shops ranging from 21 to their mid 60s and 70s,” she wrote. However, Mackin also noted that because the current ordinance is zoned for areas primarily accessible by car, “we are at a high risk of massive traffic problems.” A similar situation occurred in Leicester, MA in 2018 when recreational marijuana shops were swamped with thousands of customers, according to Boston.com. Mackin called for the inclusion of retail storefront locations accessible by public transit into the zoning ordinance.

She is also pushing for an “economic empowerment” clause, which gives priority in licensing review to members of minority communities that were heavily hit by marijuana convictions, according to the state Cannabis Control Commission.

“I’m hopeful that we can use this opportunity to provide partial restitution to minorities that were disproportionately impacted by the ‘war on drugs,’” she said.

According to the ordinance, the City would be allowed to have four retail marijuana stores. Those in favor of the stores have focused on the economic benefit the stores would bring to Waltham, according to a Jan. 29 article in the Waltham News Tribune; those opposed are concerned by issues of public health.

At last count, a poll on the Waltham Patch website had the city almost evenly divided: 49 percent in favor of establishing retail pot shops in the City, and 51 percent against. The Rules Committee meeting on the subject will be on Feb. 6.

—Chiael Schaffel

justBRIEFS BranVan accessible transport hours extended

A pilot program was put into effect on Jan. 1 that extends the accessible BranVan hours in response to student requests.

The service will now run 8 a.m. to midnight Mondays through Fridays, and 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on the weekends. The service will last for the duration of the semester, and its “use factor will determine continuation of the new hours consistent with other services,” according to Director of Public Safety Ed Callahan.

In a Feb. 4 email to the Justice, Accessibility Specialist for Graduate Students Scott Lapinski explained that the previous system in place required those in need to first speak to Student Accessibility Services, who would verify their eligibility to use the accessible BranVans. Once that process is finished, the office would put them in contact with Public Safety, who would coordinate transport.

Director of the Office of Equal Opportunity

Sonia Jurado will join the University as director of the

Office of Equal Opportunity on March 18, according to Chief Diversity Officer Mark Brimhall-Vargas in an email to the Brandeis community yesterday. Durado will also serve as the University’s Title IX and ADA/504 Coordinator.

As director, Jurado and her office will investigate concerns, allegations of discrimination, harassment and sexual misconduct brought forward by members of the Brandeis community, per the email. She will also be tasked with reviewing University procedures regarding these issues, as well as organizing training sessions for faculty, students and staff on the same topics.

Jurado will also ensure that the University is complying with “Title VI, Title VII, Title IX, ADA, Rehabilitation Act Section 504 and other state and federal laws relating to bias, discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct, dating/domestic violence, and stalking,” according to the email.

With a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Chicago, Jurado has previously served in similar positions at

Wellesley College, Mount Ida College and Tufts University.

University President calls for Richman Fellowship and Gittler Prize nominations

In an email sent on Jan. 23, University President Ron Liebowitz asked the Brandeis community to nominate candidates for the Richman Distinguished Fellowship in Public Life and the Joseph B. and Toby Gittler Prize.

Nominees for the Richman Fellowship should have “improved American society, strengthened democratic institutions, advanced social justice, or increased opportunities for all Americans to share in the benefits of the United States,” per the email. Gittler Prize nominees should have “made outstanding and lasting scholarly contributions to racial, ethnic, and/or religious relations.”

Both awards come with $25,000 and require the recipient to “spend two to three days on the Brandeis campus,” the email explained.

Richman Fellowship nominations must be submitted by March 1, while people have

until April 1 to nominate individuals for the Gittler Prize.

Individuals cannot nominate themselves.

Outage at South Street crossing

On Wednesday, Director of Public Safety Ed Callahan reported that a vehicle had “struck the crossing-light pole adjacent to the entrance of the Linsey Pool” on Jan. 18, causing the crossing-light devices in that area to stop working.

“There were major damages done to the light mechanism when struck,” Callahan wrote in a Feb. 3 email to the Justice.

The activation button requires several depressing motions to activate and while some of the activation lights function, the strobe lights do not, he added.

Waltham Police will help guard the crosswalk during peak traffic periods (3 p.m. to 7 p.m.) until the City of Waltham’s Wires Department has repaired the lights. Callahan encouraged students to be cautious and to use the Squire Bridge when crossing South Street.

—Jocelyn Gould and Natalia Wiater

Want to advertise in www.thejustice.org

The Justice is the independent student newspaper of Brandeis University. The Justice is published every Tuesday of the academic year with the exception of examination and vacation periods.

Editor News Forum Features Sports Arts Ads Photos Managing Copy Layout

BRIEF Waltham residents, leaders consider zoning regulations for retail marijuana

The Justice?

The Justice Brandeis University Mailstop 214 P.O. Box 549110 Waltham, MA 02454-9110 Phone: (781) 736-3750 The Managing Editor holds office hours on Mondays from 7:30 to 8:30 p.m.

Contact Liat Fischer and Devo Meyers at ads@thejustice.org for more information.

THE JUSTICE

●

NEWS

●

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2019

3

SENATE LOG

New senators sworn in, 2022 senator resigns ■ The Senate discussed

the temporary removal of senators from meetings and Bylaws changes.

By SAM STOCKBRIDGE

JUSTICE EDITOR

YVETTE SEI/Justice File Photo

Chang shares reasons behind surprise resignation At the Feb. 3 Senate meeting, Class of 2022 Senator Alex Chang resigned.

This is the unabridged text of Chang’s remarks, which he has since sent out to members of the MyDeis2022 Facebook page. Justice editors fact-checked the speech and added clarifications and context in italics and brackets throughout.

The following is in regards to my position as Senator to the Class of 2022.

Fellow senators, I would like to take a moment to express some concerns regarding recent events.

Linfei Yang, the International Student Senator, was recently removed from office through a recall vote. I take issue with several aspects of this recent vote, which I would like to bring to light now, so that my fellow senators, the university press, and, most importantly, the Brandeis student body, may be made aware of some very concerning facts.

First, according to the constitution, a recall petition must be presented to the current Secretary for certification. The recent recall petition concerning Linfei never went through this process, and was instead delivered directly the president of the Student Union, in blatant disregard for the Constitution.

[At the Senate meeting, Vice President Aaron Finkel ’20 clarified after Chang’s remarks that the recall petition concerning International Senator Linfei Yang ’20 was presented to the Secretary who serves as the “Chief of Elections in all Union Elections,” per the Student Union constitution. The secretary at the time of the petition’s submission, Qingtian Mei ’21, recused himself from that role due to a conflict of interest, as he himself is an international student. In the event that the Chief of Elections recuses herself, the petition is to be reviewed by the Deputy Chief of Elections, a role entrusted to the President of the Student Union.

With Mei’s recusal, the petition was presented to Deputy Chief of Elections Hannah Brown ’19.]

Secondly, the constitution maintains that in order for a recall vote to be successful, it must receive a vote of approval from two thirds of the the official in question’s constituency.

The actual vote received a grand total of forty-two votes in favor of recall.

This is nowhere near the required threshold for a successful recall vote, and the insistence of the current administration on removing Linfei in spite of this shows yet more disrespect for the Constitution.

[The Student Union Judiciary initially ruled that this clause of the constitution should be interpreted to mean two-thirds of the senator’s entire constituency, not two-thirds of those who voted in the election. After Brown protested and Class of 2019 Senator Kent Dinlenc sent an email to the Judiciary urging them to reconsider their ruling, the Judiciary ruled that the “constituency” in question refers to the members of the constituency who represented themselves by voting, not all members of the constituency.]

Furthermore, there have been a number of instances in which individuals had their names added to the recall petition without their knowledge. The fact that this was ignored by the creators of the petition forces me to question their true intentions, especially considering the fact that they themselves are not even international students.

[Chang did not provide any proof that fraudulent signatures were added to the petition. He and Yang have both claimed that Secretary Mei had his signature added to the petition without Mei’s knowledge. Mei refuted this, and said a friend signed the petition on his behalf with his consent.]

Finally, when he first heard of the recall petition. Linfei took several substantive steps to remedy the situ-

ation. For example, he gave up his position as administrator of both the MyDeis2019 and MyDeis2020 facebook pages, and ended his Vice Presidential campaign, which he was running at the time. However, the petition, as well as the recall vote, was nevertheless forced through, without regard for the processes set out in our constitution.

[In an interview with the Justice, Yang said he removed himself from the administrator position of those pages because of the criticism he was receiving as admin, not in response to the petition. Similarly, in a Dec. 9 Facebook post, Yang announced that his decision to end his vice presidential campaign was due to “the unwelcome atmosphere that has been created this election season” which “has made it not worth it to participate in.”]

While we can all agree that Linfei could have at times acted with less hostility toward others, he by no means deserves to be the recipient of this blatant miscarriage of justice.

These extremely disturbing facts, coupled with the undemocratic and arguably unconstitutional bylaws amendment which was passed last just week (which itself was sponsored by the same individuals who brought about Linfei’s recall), forces me to the following conclusion: [Dinlenc and Ziv and Ridgewood Quad senator Leigh Salomon ’19 drafted an amendment to the Bylaws two weeks ago that would prevent recalled or impeached enators for running for a position in the Student Union for one year. The amendment passed at last week’s Senate meeting, with strong opposition from Chang and Yang.]

The removal of Linfei Yang from office was a clandestinely coordinated, carefully calculated, political hitjob, which was manufactured, orchestrated, and spearheaded by the opponents of the piano project.

[This statement echoes sentiments Yang expressed to The Brandeis Hoot in a Feb. 1 article: “I think that the real reason that this petition exists is the result of a personal vendetta against me

by Kent and Leigh.”

Both Dinlenc and Salomon told the Justice they did not initially oppose the Senate Money Resolution Chang and Yang proposed to put two electric pianos in the main lounges of North Quad and Massell Quad (the “piano project”). Salomon said he reached out to Chang on Facebook, offering to help move the piano. After Dinlenc and Salomon observed what they perceived to be obstructionism from Chang and Yang in the Senate, they became fierce critics of the proposal.]

Allow me to make myself clear here.

When I joined this legislative body, just one semester ago, eager and hoping to bring about some actual, substantive, change for the student body, Linfei was the only senator who actually reached out to me, and offered to help me with my goals.

Throughout the long and complex saga of our piano project, Linfei helped me every step of the way, providing me with invaluable advice, assistance, and support. As a freshman who had just joined this organization, and as someone with little experience in navigating the very complicated and oftentimes confusing environment of this Student Union, I found in Linfei not just an ally, not just a mentor, but a friend.

And when I saw this friend of mine have his reputation dragged through the mud and subsequently forced out of office, in what can only be described as a gross display of petty political vengeance, I was not only disgusted, but disappointed.

The students of this University trust us to represent them. They trust us to act reasonably and to be capable of respectfully disagreeing with each other, while, at the same

time, acting in their best interest, not our own.

Perhaps most importantly, they trust us to act with integrity and honor, upholding the very values which this entire institution was founded upon.

The fact of the matter is clear as day: the Student Union has broken this trust. At this time I would like to take a moment to apologize directly to the students of this University, who expected far more from us.

Now, I would like to address the Vice President himself. Mr. Vice President, when this semester began, I had high hopes for us and for you.

I expected that our differences would be put behind us. I believed you when you said that we would be focusing on more important projects and initiatives this semester. I trusted you to take your new position seriously, and to respect our Student Union.

Perhaps I was too idealistic. Perhaps I expected too much of you.

Perhaps I made the mistake of hoping that this year would go any better than the last.

Nevertheless, while I believe that you had only the best of intentions, it was with great dismay that I watched while you stood by idly while Linfei was being treated so terribly.

Furthermore, when, at the last meeting, I observed the disrespectful way in which you acted toward Richard and his committee, I was taken aback.

[At the Jan. 29 Senate meeting, Finkel apologized to Richard Kisack ’19 for only giving him a few hours’ notice of a proposal to change the name of the Campus Operations Working Group committee that Kisack chairs.]

Since the beginning of this year, my greatest fear was that this semester would be a repeat of the last one.

Unfortunately, given the current trajectory of the Student Union, it appears that this fear may be coming true.

It was with this in mind that I made the difficult and painful decision to resign from my current position as Senator of the Class of 2022. I simply cannot continue to serve effectively within an organization where I feel not only uncomfortable and unwelcome, but in which I worry that my concerns are not taken seriously, and furthermore am often interrupted or talked-over when I attempt to bring them up.

To you, Mr. Vice President, I am sorry that I felt it necessary to bring these feelings forth in this manner.

However, I know that I am not the only one who feels this way, and I encourage others to have their voices be heard as well.

To my fellow senators, I am sorry that it has come to this. Hopefully, in the future, you will have better luck than myself with achieving your goals on this Student Union.

To my constituents, who elected me to represent you, I am sorry that I could not complete my full term representing you. I hope that each of you understand the stress, hardship, and disappointment which I have endured since arriving on this Student Union, and will remember my tenure as your senator fondly.

To the student body, I am sorry that you are not represented more fairly here on the Student Union. Furthermore, I am sorry for the controversy which was created by last semester’s piano project.

In closing, I want to thank all of you for listening to me, and I sincerely wish each of you only the best of luck with your future endeavors, both on and off this Student Union.

Finally, while it’s deeply unfortunate that we must part ways in this manner, I truly believe it to be for the best.

—Annotated by Sam Stockbridge

Vice President Aaron Finkel ’20 swore in the semester’s newest members, while Class of 2022 Senator Alex Chang resigned his office in the last minutes of Sunday’s senate meeting.

Senators sworn in

Finkel began Sunday’s meeting by swearing in the newest members of the Senate: Senator for Off-Campus Students Jacob Diaz ’20, Senator for East Quad Taylor Fu ’21 and Class of 2020 Senator Thomas Alger.

Club Changes

Following the disbanding of Project Plus One NGO, the Project Plus One club partnered with the nongovernmental organization Partners in Health and their “grassroots program” PIH Engage. The senate voted on a proposal to change the name of Project Plus One to Partners in Health Engage Brandeis. The name change was approved by a unanimous vote of acclamation.

Unfinished Business

The first matter of unfinished business was resolving a proposed Bylaws amendment presented to the Senate by Rules Committee Chair Jake Rong’s ’21 last week. The amendment would eliminate a clause from the second section of Article II of the Bylaws requiring senators to deliver “weekly project reports.” Rong said the procedure is archaic and no longer needed, because the weekly Senate meetings already have senator reports and committee chair reports for this purpose. The Senate passed the motion by acclamation.

The second matter of unfinished business was voting on a Student Union Code of Conduct, which was introduced last week. The code outlined expectations of behavior in the Student Union, and detailed possible repercussions for violations. The repercussions include “taking away access to the student union office [and] romper room ... an official public statement condemning violation of rules … [and] a temporary removal from senate meetings … by a two thirds vote of the branch membership.”

Finkel clarified that removal from Senate meetings cannot last for more than two meetings at a time, but that a two-thirds vote would be required to allow a removed senator back into Senate meetings. Responding to a question from Rosenthal and Skyline Quad Senator Josh Hoffman ’21, Finkel said the meetings that a removed senator would miss would not count as unexcused absences. The Code of Conduct would apply to all branches

of the Student Union, not just the Senate.

The motion passed unanimously by a vote of acclamation.

New Business

Ziv and Ridgewood Quad senator Leigh Salomon ’19 and Rong presented a Bylaws amendment to change the voting procedure. The proposed amendment would require motions being voted upon to undergo no more than one round of voting, and to only allow senators to cast one vote. Rong and Leigh partnered on the amendment after several meetings last semester where a vote was tied, and senators changed their votes. Without a rule in place limiting the number of rounds of votes, the Salomon and Rong argued, senators’ ability to vote independently is hindered.

Massell Quad Senator Kendall Chapman ’22 objected to a motion to suspend the rules to vote on the amendment, saying she didn’t feel she fully understand it. The Senate agreed to postpone the vote until next semester.

Senator Alex Chang resigns

Class of 2022 senator Alex Chang dashed into the Senate meeting minutes before it adjourned to announce his resignation. Citing the Senate’s mistreatment of International Student Senator Linfei Yang ’20, Chang said he was disappointed in the Senate’s handling of the matter and felt he could no longer serve as a senator when he felt “unwelcome” at Senate meetings.

Chapman responded to Chang’s remarks as he was beginning to leave.

She closed the meeting with the following: “We’re both freshman senators, and I really looked forward to working with you, I know that you feel like in a lot of situations you were treated unfairly or that things didn’t go the way that you wanted it to, and I extend my sympathies to you because I think you did face a lot of unfair treatment. But there’s a difference between rising above it, and wallowing in it, and listening to other people tell you what went wrong.

“I think that I personally admire you because you have such passion and in the way that you treated the piano project, but based on your [participation] in the midnight buffet, based [on] the way that you conducted yourself at certain meetings by just sitting there and laughing, please do not think that you are completely excused from this. …

“You do admit [that you weren’t blameless], and I appreciate that, but there’s a difference [between] admitting it and growing from it. I hope in the future we can work together and I’d love to hear your ideas so that we can still get them implemented, but recognize the fact that you were not completely removed from this, and there was a reason that Linfei was recalled. And it was not pettiness.”

Image Courtesy of CREATIVE COMMONS

Join Forum! ant Do you w e your voic heard?

Send an email to Gabriel Frank at forum@thejustice.org for more information.

NATALIA WIATER/ the Justice

Want Quantitative to write Economicscrosswords Contact Quants Wanted | yu.edu/QEF

Contact Kressel at MayaHannah Zanger-Nadis arts@thejustice.org at arts@thejustice.org

THE JUSTICE

‘LET’S TALK TRASH’

THU LE/the Justice

Speakers discuss recycling, composting practices

hosted an event to examine eco-friendly waste disposal.

By EMILY BLUMENTHAL JUSTICE PRODUCTION ASSISTANT

Almost anywhere, one can find bins with the classic three-arrow triangle marking them for recycling, a practice that has been prevalent in the United States for years. Despite widespread education, however, many still do not understand the importance of recycling. Sustainability Programs Manager Mary Fischer sought to start a discussion around recycling and to raise awareness of composting at Sustainable Brandeis’ “Let’s Talk Trash” event on Jan. 25.

As landfills and incinerators near capacity, Fischer told the audience, it is extremely important to recycle and reduce waste. The problem has become so dire that many states have resorted to exporting their trash. According to Fischer, trash exportation will increase by 50 percent from today’s levels by 2022.

Recycling an item prevents it from taking up space in landfills and incinerators, ensuring it will be made into something new. Fischer noted, however, that it is better to avoid using these items in the first place, because “recycling never, ever cancels out the environmental impact” caused by producing the objects. Instead, Fischer encouraged people to buy reusable goods, which produce even fewer greenhouse gases than the recycling process.

While the desire to recycle is important, Fischer stated, many people “wishcycle,” or recycle non-recyclable items because of guilt about throwing them away. If a batch of recycling is contaminated by enough “wishcy-

cling,” the whole batch will become non-recyclable trash.

Fischer turned to discuss recycling and composting at the University. Brandeis diverts 30 percent of its waste from landfills — slightly below the national level of 33 percent, Fischer said. The University also recently began partnering with Black Earth Compost, which takes the University’s food waste to its industrial composting grounds.

At the University, many offices have their own compost bins, but the only “public” ones, according to Fischer, are in Upper Usdan. Fischer discouraged using those bins, however, as the high likelihood of contamination by “wishcycling” would render the waste non-compostable. Dispelling fears that there is no way to compost at the University, Fischer stated that kitchen staff composts food scraps left on plates in the dining halls. Director of University Services Jeffrey Hershberger added in an email to the Justice that providing compostable items in campus food service locations is “currently under discussion and evaluation.”

As part of an effort to meet “broader University sustainability goals,” Hershberger said in the same email that the University has begun to increase its compost output by switching tableware at catered events from plastic to compostable. In an interview with the Justice, Fischer explained that the switch came after the University’s recycling provider stopped accepting plastic tableware.

In the email, Hershberger expanded on how compostable tableware is more sustainable than the recyclable version.“If a compostable item is accidentally thrown in the trash, it doesn’t have the same negative impact of accidentally throwing a recyclable item in the wrong receptacle,” Hershberger

NEWS

●

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2019

5

BRIEF University updates community on Framework task forces

WISHCYCLING: The Sustainability Programs Manager explained the harmful consequences of “wishcycling:” people contaminate a batch of recycling with non-recyclable items because they feel guilty about throwing the items away.

■ Sustainable Brandeis

●

stated.

Though switching to compostable tableware for catered events was easy, it is much harder to do in the student dining locations, Fischer said in the same interview. The University cannot force external companies like Currito and Dunkin’ to use alternative products and has no control over the packaged foods sold at the Hoot Market.

At the “Let’s Talk Trash” event, Fischer then stepped aside to allow Gretchen Carey of Republic Services, the University’s recycling and trash service, to speak. Carey explained that reusable items are re-used in the “exact same condition” they started in and are not made into anything new, unlike recyclable items. Compostable means that “Mother Nature made it, Mother Nature breaks it down,” she said.

Carey also described Massachusetts’ “Recycle Smart” program. Until August 2018, each municipality in the state “had a different list of what was recyclable,” creating confusion and discouraging residents, Carey said.

Then, Massachusetts standardized its recycling and created a recycling guide for people to properly sort their items.

Carey added that “everything you buy probably could be made out of recycled material,” saying that buying recycled materials encourages businesses to create and sell these commodities.

In a Jan. 25 interview with the Justice, Carey stated that giving “a multitude of reasons why” to recycle will inspire people to examine how recycling could impact their own lives, and thus the planet.

“Let’s Talk Trash” will again take place on Feb. 11 and 14 from noon to 1 p.m. in the Shapiro Campus Center Multi-Purpose Room.

This past October, University President Ron Liebowitz announced his “Framework for the Future,” a multipronged plan to revitalize and focus the University. Per the Framework’s website, Liebowitz hopes to “reimagine the future of [the] institution” and strengthen three “essential pillars of our university.” On Jan. 28, Liebowitz provided the Brandeis community with an emailed update on the Framework’s process, leaders and themes. In it, he described four separate task forces, each focusing on a different aspect of his vision for Brandeis while remaining in “constant consultation and dialogue.”

The Task Force on the Student Living/Learning Experience is investigating how to offer students “a greater sense of home and belonging” at Brandeis, according to the same email. This task force is divided into five working groups: Residential Life, Undergraduate Academic Advising, Community Engagement, Graduate Academic Advising and Graduate Student Life.

Co-chaired by Kim Gocho, the associate provost for Academic Affairs, and Prof. Sara Shotask (SOC), the task force will present its report by “mid-spring 2019,” per the Framework’s website. To create a list of recommendations for creating a more “vibrant, inclusive, and engaged” residence experience, the task force is analyzing data and examining the resources available for both undergraduate and graduate students, according to the same website.

The Task Force on Supporting Research, Creativity, and Collaborative Innovation will also present recommendations based on its findings this spring.

This task force is investigating funding sources for research and innovation, and will look for solutions to “infrastructur[al] and organization[al]” challenges to research at Brandeis. It will also examine ways for students,

Follow

graduate students and faculty to collaborate on innovation. On the Framework’s website, sample questions for the task force to consider include how to better integrate independent institutes into the University, how to provide more high-quality research opportunities for undergraduates and how to fund newer and larger research projects. This task force is co-chaired by Prof.

Sacha Nelson (NBIO), the Gyula and Tauber Professor of Life Science and Prof. Constance Horgan (Heller), director of the Institute for Behavioral Health.

The Task Force on Honoring Our Founding Values is chaired by Liebowitz himself and is divided into two working groups. The group on Jewish Scholarship, Leadership and Service, chaired by Prof. Jon Levisohn (NEJS), is in charge of figuring out how Brandeis can identify as a “fully secular institution” while still “ensuring that Jews of all movements can thrive,” per the website.

The working group on Equal Opportunity, Social Impact, and Community Engagement is chaired by Prof. Chad Williams (AAAS) and is tasked with renewing Brandeis’ “culture of openness” across campus and in the classroom and with understanding the University’s “commitment to openness, inclusiveness, and justice,” the same website adds. Together, the two working groups must learn how to “weave together” these two sets of values.

In his email, Liebowitz also announced that a fourth task force on infrastructure will be launching this spring, and that it will bear in mind the issues raised at the recent Accessibility Forum. Further forums focusing on “services for students, faculty, and staff with disabilities” will be held throughout the semester, Liebowitz added.

—Eliana Padwa

Image Courtesy of CREATIVE COMMONS

Justice!

the

@theJustice

CAMPUS EVENT

Students design community engagement projects at ’Deis Hacks ■ Brandeis MakerLab hosted

a 24-hour competition inspired by last year’s Hackathon.

By ECE ESIKARA JUSTICE STAFF WRITER

Partnering with the Brandeis University International Business School, the Brandeis MakerLab held its annual ’Deis Hacks, a 24-hour innovative event during which students came together and competed to design the best community projects, the weekend of Jan. 26. “An evolution of the Printathon and Codestellation hackevents with a community engagement twist,” ’Deis Hacks 2019 expanded on last spring’s Hackathon, which focused on a “Social Design Challenge on Disequity,” according to the event description. Instead of working for a single challenge, each team of University students chose a design challenge to focus on from Waltham’s nonprofit and social enterprise organizations.

According to the description, “this event’s theme will fuse design thinking, digital fabrication [and] social impact to work on real world solutions

for non-profit companies.”

The event started Saturday at 9 a.m.

After hackers arrived and the teams were formed in the opening ceremonies, local leaders, such as the mayor of Waltham, gave a talk “on topics ranging from technical tools and workflows to ethical and policy implications of emerging technologies,” according to the event website. From 8 p.m. on Saturday to 8 a.m. on Sunday, the hackers developed their projects.

One team tried to merge nonprofits and businesses in their project for the Waltham Chamber of Commerce, while another developed a “Community Matching Portal: A New Way to Donate” for the Community Day Center of Waltham. Students who worked with Waltham Partnership for Youth tried to come up with solutions for transportation challenges of Waltham through Waltham Transport Hub. After hours of work, students pitched their ideas at 1 p.m. on Sunday. The Land’s Sake team came in third place, while the Waltham Transport Hub for Waltham Partnership for Youth team came in second and the Marketing with Websites, Posters and Calendars for The Leland Home team came in first. The Imphackting for Waltham

Partnership for Youth Team received the audience award.

Ian Roy ’05, who organized the event with his colleagues, is the director for research technology and innovation for the University Library, the founding head of the Brandeis MakerLab and an adjunct professor at the International Business School.

He explained in an interview with the Justice that the Brandeis MakerLab partnered with IBS by working with students from Prof. Gene Allen Miller’s (IBS) class — Field Projects: Consulting in Social Innovation Impact — who were placed on the boards of Waltham nonprofits for a year.

“They spent all spring semester working with the companies learning their challenges,” Roy said. He added that they devised a “matching activity to figure out which students could work with which companies.”

He continued, “When you have a career in design you’re going to get clients and you’re gonna have to work in a team — play a business role, play a technical role, play a science role, [a] human role … That’s really what we wanted to create in this challenge.”

Miller, who has been teaching the IBS class mentioned above for two

years, explained in an interview with the Justice that placing students on various boards as non-voting members was “all about teaching students how to lead and serve much earlier in life.”

She continued, “Why wait until your middle age to learn how to be a board of director?”

Miller also interpreted the results of this year’s event. “They’re bringing millennial, Gen X-er, Brandeisian intelligence to their assignments and doing wonderful things,” she said.

Students teamed up with organizations such as Charles River Community Health, “an open access health center that includes immigrants and low-income patients”; Land’s Sake, “a local organic community farm that includes education and community outreach”; and Two Ten Footwear Foundation, “an industry wide foundation for footwear firms to address employee challenges and community impact,” according to descriptions displayed at the event. Waltham Boys & Girls Club; the Boston Police Teen Academy, “an inner city youth development organization sponsored

by Boston Police”; and the Waltham Chamber of Commerce were also in-

volved.

Other teams worked with the Leland Home, “a service enriched housing solution that serves the aging low to moderate income seniors”; the Community Day Center of Waltham that “provides meals and a day-time place to go for the Waltham homeless”; and the Waltham Partnership for Youth, “a nexus organization for all entities that impact Waltham youth.” ’DeisHacks 2019 is the 13th hackathon event that Brandeis Maker Lab has held, Roy explained. “Last spring we ran this event as a pilot. … And this year we went a step further and we’ve really embedded the teams” in the organizations they are working with.

He said that the event shows how “a variety of different people from Brandeis — scientists, humanities people, business students — can all collaborate together to achieve an outcome that is greater than the sum of its parts.”

“It wouldn’t be possible with just one slice of the University,” he added, describing how the event brings together “a little bit of every piece of the University collaborating together for a social good.”

6

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2019

●

NEWS

●

THE JUSTICE

CAMPUS EVENT

‘THE DEMOCRATIC PROMISE’

Professor shares lessons from experience in political organizing ■ Ganz shared wisdom,

strategies and helpful tactics from his years of grassroots experience.

By GILDA GEIST JUSTICE EDITORIAL ASSISTANT

The Heller School for Social Justice and Management hosted a guest lecturer on Wednesday who spoke about his experiences with leadership and grassroots organizing in his talk, “The Democratic Promise: People, Power and Change.” The lecturer, Prof. Marshall Ganz, works in the public policy department at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard.

In 1964, as a junior at Harvard, Ganz volunteered for the Mississippi Summer Project, which was an effort to support Black organizers in the South who were working toward racial equality, mainly through voter registration. Ganz was a part of the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party, which was created to challenge the segregation of the Democratic Party.

Ganz recounted that shortly before he left for Mississippi, three of his colleagues at the project who were already down south — James Chaney, Andrew Goodman and James Schwerner — were killed by the Ku Klux Klan. This experience, along with spending part of childhood in Ger-

many after the Holocaust, showed Ganz the consequences of racism.

He explained, “If you turn people into objects, you can do anything to them.”

Ganz continued to learn “the craft of organizing” from civil and labor rights leader Cesar Chavez, who at the time was organizing migrant farmer workers in California. He worked and studied with Chavez for 16 years before going back to Harvard to finish his senior year, which he completed in 1992.

Drawing on experience from his years of volunteering with the Mississippi Summer Project, studying with Chavez and then organizing now-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s first campaign, Ganz had much wisdom to share with the audience about leadership in organizing.

He explained that leadership was about accepting responsibility in conditions of uncertainty more than being in control and about learning more than knowing. “If you base your claim to leadership on knowing everything, you’re lost, because you don’t know the future,” he said.

Ganz discussed several aspects of organizing, starting with building relationships through storytelling. “Narrative is a fundamental language of emotion that teaches us something about where to get the emotional resources for agency,” he said. Ganz explained that narrative moments of “hope and hurt” are necessary to help the world. Hurt in-

Follow

dicates that something needs fixing, and hope provides the motivation to fix it, he said.

The next component of organizing Ganz named was strategy. “Strategy is a creative process. It’s a recognition of your own resources,” he said. “It’s resisting the conventional wisdom and thinking clearly about where your points of leverage are going to come from.”

Ganz addressed the difficulty of having structure in organizing. He described structure as “micro-practices that are necessary to achieve macro-results.” Ganz pointed out the necessity of getting people to follow through with promises, show up for meetings and exhibit commitment.

Without structure and collaboration, motivation and passion cannot lead to change, Ganz explained.

At the same time, Ganz emphasized the importance of motivation in a movement. According to Ganz, motivating someone requires that the task be meaningful: Allow the person to take responsibility, let them use several different skills and give them the opportunity to creatively contribute.

Ganz explained that taking the time to train people can be beneficial to organizing, not only because it makes the trainee more efficient, but also because it equips them to pass the knowledge on to others. Ganz recommended seeing “every task as an opportunity for leadership development.”

Justice!

the

SARAH KATZ/the Justice

LESSONS FROM THE FIELD: Marshall Ganz, who worked with Cesar Chavez and the Mississippi Freedom Project, shared his experiences with organizing.

Image Courtesy of CREATIVE COMMONS

@theJustice

,

Interested in music, theater, film, comedy or museums?

Write for Arts!

Contact Maya Zanger-Nadis at arts@thejustice.org

Images: CHELSEA MADERA/the Justice, HEATHER SCHILLER/the Justice, LUCY FRENKEL/the Justice, MORGAN BRILL/the Justice, NATALIA WIATER/the Justice, YDALIA COLON/the Justice, ANDREW BAXTER/the Justice

ART: Curator discusses career CONTINUED FROM 1

ings” because of the use of charcoal pigment in the artwork. Pindell signed a letter protesting the exhibition and demonstrated in front of the gallery. She described how a white woman who was a friend of the director of the gallery told the protesters, “‘Who do you think you are, coming down here and telling us what to do? This is a white neighborhood!’” Following this incident, Pindell left her position at the MoMA to become a professor at the Stony Brook University, where she has taught for nearly 40 years.

Shortly after she left the MoMA, Pindell was in a near-fatal car accident while driving with critic Donald Kuspit. The crash left her with short-term amnesia and “changed her outlook on life,” she said.

Since then, Pindell has been hard at work producing new art.

She frequently weaves politics and social activism into her art, even while working as a professor.

After Pindell spoke, Beckwith and Oliver insisted that Pindell was being too modest about her achievements as an artist, and said that her attitude toward art and life is best described as “generous.”

Beckwith concluded that what makes Pindell’s art powerful is two things: “The insistence on having a message, and the insistence on having a method.”

hole-punched paper and even perfume, she explained. Pindell said her best teacher at Yale was also her meanest. He was often harsh, but he knew a wealth of information about materials, techniques and forms.

She graduated from Yale in 1967 with no debt, which she now recognizes as a great privilege for an art student. That same year, she became the first Black female art curator at the Museum of Modern Art in New York City, where she worked for 12 years. She recounted being shocked by the sexism and racism in the art world, especially compared to the diverse art she experienced growing up.

She made $5,000 in her first year — about $37,000 in today’s dollars.

Sometimes she had to sew her own gowns. After a year working at the MoMA, she received a letter announcing that she was to be awarded a raise of $5 a year — less than $40 in today’s money. “That was when I decided to re-unionize,” she laughed.

It was in this period that she began to advocate for social justice.

In 1972, she created the A.I.R. Gallery in New York with 19 fellow artists, dedicated to showcasing the art of underrepresented groups.

In 1979, Pindell protested white artist Donald Newman’s exhibition at the SoHo gallery Artists Space, which was titled “The N----- Draw-

—Editor's Note: The name of one of the exhibits described contains a racial slur.

Do you have a nose for news?

Want the scoop?

Contact Jocelyn Gould and Sam Stockbridge at news@thejustice.org

THE JUSTICE

●

NEWS

●

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2019

7

HOLOCAUST MEMORY IN A TIME OF NATIONALISM

ANDREW BAXTER/the Justice

Members of the Women Studies Research Center's Holocaust Research Group presented their scholarly work on Jan. 28, in honor of International Holocaust Remembrance Day.

CASE: Judiciary to decide intra-Union fund dispute CONTINUED FROM 1 “everyone agrees” is “confusing.”

The third claim states that “the Student Union is guaranteed the entirety of its benchmark by the Constitution,” while the fourth that “a benchmark is the minimum amount guaranteed to a Secured Club. The Allocations Board makes decisions on requests by Secured Clubs for more than their benchmarks.” Article VII, Section 2 of the Union’s constitution mandates a “benchmark” of $50,000 in funding for the Union per fiscal year — as well as varying benchmarks for secured clubs, listed separately.

Under the constitution, the Justice is the only club with an explicitly stated maximum amount of $50,000 in possible funding, while other secured clubs are “eligible to receive” their respective benchmarks, “with the opportunity to request more funding” through ABoard. The petitioners, however, claim that the Union is guaranteed the entirety of its benchmark by the constitution, and that the “benchmark” defines a minimum amount guaranteed to a secured club.

The Union should be allocated the amount of funding stated in the Constitution, “which is $50,000, which is what people voted on,” Finkel said. The constitution — and any amendments — are approved by two-thirds student body vote.

Brown said it is important to think about the specific amounts of money listed in the constitution as benchmarks for secured clubs.

“These are clubs students have voted into the constitution as suf-

ficiently important for this funding,” Brown said. “They called it an essential service.” Finkel added that “none of these other clubs exist without the Union in the first place.”

In a Feb. 1 interview with the Justice, Three-Semester Allocations Board Representative Roland Blanding ’21 provided a different interpretation of the benchmark, calling it a “standard, not a bottom line.” He said that his reasoning comes from incidents in the past when A-Board had fewer dispersible funds.

In those cases, A-Board needed “flexibility” to take money from secured clubs so that all clubs could get funding, “so we don’t have several people claiming rights to money that’s not there,” according to Blanding. Money that remains unallocated after marathons is left for Community Emergency and Enhancement Fund projects or emergency requests, he added.

“To give a group of six to eight people power to spend money that everyone pays in tuition is unethical,” Blanding said. Though A-Board may deny funding for some requests, “our prerogative is to give out as much money as possible,” he continued.

Blanding explained that A-Board tries to “maximize the effect [the SAF has] on all students,” adding that the E-Board has used funds that “blatantly don’t benefit the vast majority of students, things like a $10,000 television setup in the Student Union office.”

Finkel provided the Justice with the Student Union Management System receipt for that purchase

in fall 2017. The total cost for the TV and the renovation of the hollow wall cost $3,969, not the $10,000 Blanding said. Finkel defended the television as an “investment that will last years into the future,” and clarified that the Union’s conference room was the only room in the Shapiro Campus Center without a TV for video conferencing.

Blanding also spoke about accountability and oversight over both the Union’s spending decisions and A-Board’s decisionmaking process. Blanding referenced an amendment that Finkel proposed last semester that aimed to “maximize accountability and fairness,” per a copy obtained by the Justice. The amendment eliminated A-Board’s ability to override a presidential veto over allocations decisions, giving the Senate that power instead. In a Nov. 19 email to the Justice, Blanding called the amendments an “egregious power play” that eliminates A-Board’s funding scope and “conflates politics with the funding that clubs need.”

According to Blanding, members of the A-Board are drafting their own amendment “that would allow for more checks and balances on the Allocations Board … with regards to the vetoing process.”

Blanding also said, however, that he thinks there currently is “reasonable oversight” over the Union.

The case will be heard and decided on the evening of Feb. 10 so the Judiciary can get it done “as soon as possible,” according to Nadjar.

“It’ll be interesting to see how this language can be interpreted,” he added.

ELECTION: Winter election selects new Union members CONTINUED FROM 1 profile.

Newly elected Three-semester Representative to the A-Board Ruizhang Zhi ’21 also stressed the importance of communicating with clubs. In an email to the Justice, Zhi explained that clubs may not be familiar with their funding options, which is something he will aim to rectify during his term.

Zhi sees clubs as places where a student “can find their true interest” and “real friendship,” and plans to support them by helping clubs get “the funding that they deserved,” per his profile.

Sonali Anderson ’22 will serve as a two-semester racial minority representative to A-Board. She comes to the A-Board with experience sitting on the Union’s Social Justice and Diversity committee and advocating to the Office of Student Rights and Advocacy, which she credits with giving her “a bigger understanding of how the Student Union includes the many diverse cultures within our University,” ac-

cording to her profile. Anderson believes her new position will allow her to reassess racial minority clubs’ funding and to “better advocate” for their funding. Anderson also hopes to help non-recognized minority clubs and organizations on campus obtain recognition and funding, per an email with the Justice.

Zhi and Two-semester Representative Aria Pradhan ’21 both come to the A-Board without previous experience working with the Union. In emails to the Justice, both expressed their willingness to learn about the new position. “I hope to learn more and put my knowledge to use to benefit the Brandeis community,” Pradhan wrote.

Senate

Seven Senate positions were filled

by Wednesday’s election. The junior class gained two new class senators, Thomas Alger and Trevor Filseth. Alger’s most important goal, according to an email to the Justice, is to “in-

crease school pride” among Brandeis students. His plan for achieving this involves better publicizing campus events and athletic games, because, as he explained, students often don’t attend these events simply because they did not know they were happening — not than because they are not interested. He also wants to make it possible to guarantee four years of on-campus housing “so that everyone who wishes to live on campus has the ability to do so,” as well as to repair campus facilities, per the same email.

Both Alger and Filseth, in emails to the Justice, listed improving dining hall food quality as a focus of their platforms. Alger tied better quality food to improving students’ pride in Brandeis, and Filseth wrote that the Union “owes it” to the student body to “keep the quality [of food] as high as possible.” Filseth also said that as a senator, he wants to address the high cost of laundry services and keep the BranVans running on schedule.

Senator for Off-Campus Students

Jacob Diaz ’20 also wants to improve the BranVan’s operations to benefit students who do not live in University housing. More frequent BranVan routes, easier parking and information sessions to help students with the “tough learning curve” of living off campus are policies that Diaz plans to pursue, per his profile. In an email to the Justice, Diaz explained that these info sessions would cover basics of off-campus life, such as “how to shop effectively, some basic cooking recipes and ideas, and things you should expect while living off campus.”

In her profile, Senator for Racial Minority Students Denezia Fahie ’22 described how she aims to “ensure the voices of those minoritized and often dismissed are not only acknowledged but highlighted and prioritized.”

Taylor Fu ’21 will take the experience she gained serving on the Union’s Health and Safety committee since last semester to her new role as senator for East Quad.

Madeline Scherff ’22, now senator

for mid-year students, is dedicated to representing “the unique Mid-Year [sic] experience,” according to her profile. She also highlighted “sustainability and equity” as focus-areas for her term.

Newly elected Foster Mods Senator Matthew Reeves ’19 sees “serving on the Student Union as a unique opportunity to leave one final positive impact on Brandeis” before graduating, per his profile.

Recall Vote

A vote to recall International Student Senator Linfei Yang ’20 passed.

Yang was at the center of a controversy last semester over whether to install pianos in first-year residence quad lounges.

Huang, Scherff, Fu, Reeves and Fahie did not respond to a request for comment in time for publication.

—Editor’s Note: Trevor Filseth is a Forum staff writer.

8

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2019 | THE JUSTICE

just

features

AAAS: 50 years

Remembering a resistance The fight for an African and African American Studies department

By HANNAH SHUMEL JUSTICE STAFF WRITER

The Department of African and African American Studies (AAAS), established on April 24, 1969, is celebrating its 50th anniversary this week, but the history of Black students and their influence at Brandeis existed long before then. The legacy of Black intellectuals like Ralph Bunche — scholar, eventual Nobel Peace Prize recipient and Brandeis’ first convocation speaker — and Brandeis’ first Black graduate Herman Hemingway ’53, founder of the University’s NAACP chapter, helped Brandeis establish its reputation as an institution of social change.

Despite hosting several addresses delivered by civil rights figures like Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. during the mid-1960s, there were very few Black students actually attending the University. According to Angela Davis ‘65, the “physical and spiritual isolation were mutually reinforcing.”

The assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. on April 4, 1968 was a turning point for America, Brandeis included. To make Brandeis a truly welcoming place for those of African descent, the Afro-American Society issued various proposals to then-President Abram Sachar. These proposals culminated in the creation of the Transitional Year Program (now known as the Myra Kraft Transitional Year Program) and 10 Martin Luther King Jr. scholarships, as well as an increase in financial aid for Black students.

As a result of these changes, the number of Black students

Justice File Photo

STUDENT REPRESENTATIVE: Ricardo Millett ’68, M.A.’71 was the voice for Black students during the Ford Hall occupation.

enrolled in the fall of 1968 more than doubled that of fall 1967, and Pauli Murray became the first female African-American professor hired at Brandeis in 1968.

On December 11, 1968, the faculty approved the African and AfroAmerican concentration.

On December 18, 1968, a white student allegedly shot a Black TYP student with a BB gun, illustrating the amount of racial tension on campus. The administration refused to expel the white student unless a formal trial was held, but no one pressed charges.

While Brandeis has always considered itself an institution open to people of all backgrounds, ethnicities and races, the lack of an AAAS department was seen as a disservice to Black students. On January 8, 1969, more than 50 Black and Latinx students occupied Ford and Syderman Halls; the former was the main academic building where the University switchboard was located.

Ricardo Millet ’68, the Ridgewood residence counselor, and Roy DeBerry ’70, president of the Brandeis Afro-American society, read a prepared statement that presented a list of 10 demands to the University. They called for complete amnesty for the students involved in the occupation and claimed that their demands were non-negotiable. Their most prominent demand was for the creation of an African Studies department. While the already-existing African and Afro-American concentration could have been shut down at the University’s discretion, a fullfledged department would have the ability to hire its own faculty and determine its own curriculum. Other demands included an increase in the recruitment of Black students, the addition of Black professors to various departments, the establishment of an Afro-American center and the expulsion of the white student who had allegedly assaulted a Black student. The next day, the occupying students renamed Ford and Syderman Halls as the Malcolm X University; however, Ford Hall is still known by its original name.

The evening of the protest, some of the students involved in the occupation held a meeting in Mailman House. Phyllis Raynor ’69, a representative of the AfroAmerican Society, presented the demands to other, primar-

ily white students, but let them decide how they would respond.

A Jan. 10 issue of the Justice describes the “white Brandeis community” as reacting with “a stun­ n ing array of attitudes: sympathy, fear, hostility, recalcitrance, speculation, and, above all, confusion.”

Many white students did support the movement. On January 9, 400 students met in Gerstenzang 123 to draft a petition.

The ultimate consensus was that there should be no use of police or force of any kind, no more buildings should be occupied, and that all channels of communication should be kept open.

That day, there was also a sit-in at the Bernstein-Marcus Administration Building. On January 10, 22 white students engaged in a hunger strike.

However, there was also opposition to the occupation. President Morris Abram issued a statement condemning the Black students’ actions, noting how they never formally presented their demands to the administration.

After hearing this statement, faculty approved a resolution by a vote of 153 t o 1 8

Justice File Photo

PANEL ON CONFLICT: Phyllis Raynor ’69 (right) was a speaker during a panel on the Ford Hall occupation.

calling for the students to leave the building.

The occupation ended on January 18. While no substantive agreements regarding the 10 demands were made, President Abram stated that “every legitimate demand would be met in good faith.” Most students were granted complete amnesty, except for a few members who stayed in the building after the others had left. On April 24, faculty approved the creation of the African and Afro-American Department. Ronald Walters, a political scientist and specialist in African studies and international affairs, was announced as the chair of the AAAS Department on April 30. In the fall of 1970, the Department offered its first 20 courses.

However, the department has faced struggles.

After its creation, the University prov i d e d minimal f u n d ing, and some faculty believed the subject of African and Afro-American studies wasn’t significant enough to warrant its own department. Despite this, the department persisted.

Wellington Nyangoni, a renowned scholar of African politics and the first Black professor to receive tenure at Brandeis, was appointed as the chair of the department in 1976. The department has continually been a center for political

activism, especially regarding the anti-apartheid movement and divestment.

But even as recently as 2008, during the economic recession, a committee looking to optimize the University’s finances suggested combining the AAAS, American Studies, and Classics Departments. This suggestion was met with immediate protest

by University members and was formally opposed by faculty and the Student Union Senate. The resistance was successful, and the AAAS Department remains.

Following this incident, various improvements were made to the Department. There were incremental increases to the department’s budget. The Department has also bolstered its on-campus presence with better programming and more collaborations across the University.

The Department’s legacy as a focus for racial justice and change isn’t just something of the past. In 2015, the AAAS Department was largely involved in the occupation of the Bernstein-Marcus Administration center. As a response to the Black Lives Matter movement, students made 13 demands, including the hiring of more black faculty, an increase in the minimum wage for Brandeis employees, and diversity and inclusion training. The protest was named #FordHall2015 in honor of the movement for racial justice at Brandeis in 1969.

As a result of this protest, the University has hired faculty such as Mark Brimhall-Vargas, the first Chief DIversity Officer, and Allyson Livingstone, the first director of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion education, training, and development.

This Friday and Saturday, the AAAS department is hosting several campus-wide events as a commemoration to their 50th anniversary.

THE JUSTICE | TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2019

s in the making THE JOURNEY TO ESTABLISHMENT: a timeline

April 4, 1968: The

assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. sparks Brandeis’ Afro-American Society to issue several proposals to University president Abram Sachar.

Jan. 8, 1969: More than 50

students begin occupying Ford and Sydeman Halls. Black students, along with other students of color, would occupy the buildings for 11 days.

Jan. 14, 1969: Black students are

detained “in contempt of a civil restraining order,” according to President Morris Abram.

In the name of solidarity, 22 white students start a hunger strike.

April 24, 1969: The University approves the creation of an African and Afro-American Studies department. Ronald Walters is then appointed as the first department Chair.

Photos Courtesy of the Robert D. Farber University Archives & Special Collections Department, Brandeis University

9

10 TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2019 ● FORUM ● THE JUSTICE

Justice

the

Established 1949

Brandeis University

Avraham Penso, Editor in Chief Natalia Wiater, Managing Editor Amber Miles, Senior Editor Jen Geller, Deputy Editor Zach Kaufman, Nia Lyn Associate Editors Jocelyn Gould and Sam Stockbridge, News Editors Victor Feldman, Features Editor Gabriel frank, Acting Forum Editor, Megan Geller, Sports Editor Maya Zanger-Nadis, Arts Editor Andrew Baxter, Photography Editors Morgan Mayback, Interim Layout Editor Liat Fischer and Devo Meyers, Ads Editors Eliana Padwa, Copy Editor

EDITORIALS

Can this be the last BranVan editorial?

Last Thursday, Boston experienced nearly record-breaking freezing temperatures, according to CBS Boston. On such a cold day, the BranVan really had a chance to shine: extra vans could have been chartered to handle the mass of students who did not want to walk outdoors in a 14 degrees Fahrenheit windchill, the reservations system could have been streamlined to enable impromptu rides, and space heaters or designated indoor waiting areas could have been utilized.

Unfortunately, in typical BranVan fashion, no emergency plan was put in place and the vans ran as inefficiently as usual.

As vans ran late, students were stuck outside with no protection against the strong winds. When shuttles were too crowded, students were seen squatting in the corner rather than waiting 15 minutes (or more!) for the next one. The University should have put space heaters in place at the three major stations — the Rabb steps, Admissions and the Charles River stop — to make waiting for the van a more comfortable and, frankly, safer experience. Moreover, enclosing the stops or putting up temporary extra shelters would help shelter the many additional students resorting to the BranVan due to frigid temperatures. Now, many BranVan drivers do not linger at stops long enough for students waiting in the Admissions building or inside the Usdan Student Center to claim a seat, but they should be instructed to do so. Needs change over time; quick pickups and drop-offs may work well in the warmer months, but that system should be modified to accommodate winter conditions.

The extreme cold thrust issues of poor stations and long wait times into the limelight, but the truth is that the BranVan almost never functions well. The reservations system requires students to reserve rides at least an hour in advance,

New year; same broken system effectively preventing them from visiting Waltham on a whim. The van is also often late to its Waltham pickups, and stops are not clearly marked. For students, then, a casual visit to Waltham is often fraught with worries about having to trudge miles back to campus or pay for an expensive ride.

University President Ron Liebowitz claims “appreciation” of the City of Waltham, per BrandeisNOW — this dissonance is quite ironic. Brandeis should look at pairing with the MBTA, Boston’s public transportation system, or with a ridesharing company to provide better services to students. The commuter rail stops in Waltham near Moody street and Cafe on the Common — two popular student destinations. The University should consider negotiating for the one-stop rail ride to be made free for students, or for students to have reducedprice passes for local buses. We need reliable, consistent transportation, and the city of Boston has already established a working system.

Should Brandeis prefer to work with private corporations, this board beseeches the University to establish a relationship with Lyft to replace or supplement the BranVan and Waltham shuttle systems.

At the University of Southern California, students can use Lyft for free within certain areas to ensure safe travels at night. A similar system would benefit commuter students taking night classes, students who work in Waltham or even students simply looking to spend an evening in town.

Should these improvements seem miniscule or ineffective, the administration is free to peruse our 2011, 2013, 2017, January 2018 and October 2018 editorials on the subject for additional suggestions.

MARA KHAYTER/the Justice

Views the News on

As part of its developing “social credit” system, the People’s Republic of China has created software capable of detecting people nearby who are in debt. This system is one of several tactics designed to publicly shame debtors into paying off the money they owe. In addition to having one’s financial struggles on public display, an individual can also be barred from flying or purchasing train tickets due to this low “social credit score.” How do you view this system in terms of China’s politics and treatment of its citizens? Do you think there are any alternatives to encouraging Chinese citizens to pay off their debts in a timely manner?

Prof. Nelson Sa (ECON)

Big data and artificial intelligence: a perfect mix to elicit age-old Orwellian fears. Broadly speaking, reputational mechanisms are pervasive in our lives, and credit scores are heavily used in countries like the United States. Debtor-targeted policies like the ones making the rounds in the latest news require, however, excellent governance.

Expedited and transparent mechanisms need to be in place for individuals to dispute and correct errors. Sharing large databases across multiple platforms adds new risks for hacking and identity theft. In a political system prone to complex bureaucracy, individuals may easily get entangled in petty review processes and become subject to abusive rent-seeking behaviors. In the meantime, anyone marked as a debtor under such public conditions may be precluded from a large range of economic opportunities, facing layers of punishment that go beyond those legally prescribed. By the end of the day, when technological development outpaces the ability of institutions to handle new challenges in a fair and prompt way, distortions arise, and incentives may fail to accomplish their intended goals. Policies cannot be evaluated in isolation. Different areas of institutional development need to be addressed (in particular in the workings of the financial, legal and political systems in China) before initiatives of this kind can inspire broader trust.

Nelson Sa is a Lecturer in the Economics Department Specializing in Macroeconomics and Industrial Organization.

Alexander Holtmann ’21

The Chinese Social Credit System is in fact nothing outrageously new. In Nudge Theory, political agendas and behavioral economics are used by governments to change the environment so that a desired outcome - the citizens’ behavior - is achieved. What is new about the Chinese system, however, is how severely it paralyzes citizens’ access to important resources. The problem with this is that it sets personal debt equal to harming the public. One could only imagine this system on a college campus or at a Federal Reserve; we would be drowning in shame. In light of the Chinese government’s agenda to mass surveil its citizens, this is yet another tool that will further foster insecurities and public tensions. Looking forward, no changes are planned to make platforms less revealing, as the goal of them is to feed into a finger-pointing culture that abides the rule of the governing party’s ideology.

Alexander Holtmann ’21 is an Economics and Philosophy double major and an undergraduate Researcher at the Center for German and European Studies.

Students gain nothing from Union’s Judiciary case

Any club that spends an entire semester bickering, obsessing over minute projects and abandoning mature communication in favor of publicly shaming and defenestrating its leadership could be expected to try operating humbly and productively the following semester. But the Student Union is no club — a point it’s attempting to impress upon the Judiciary, which is poised to decide whether the Senate and Executive Board will be rewarded for last semester’s shenanigans with more funding and no oversight.

If the Union’s decision to engage in selfaggrandizement sounds familiar, that’s because last spring’s constitutional review included the equally misguided proposal to change “Student Union” to “Student Government.” Students were wise enough to see through the proposed amendment’s flimsy justifications and voted it down, delivering a valuable reminder that the Union works best when it addresses community needs instead of pondering the semantic implications of its name — or, for that matter, claiming absolute power for the sake of convenience.

Addressing student needs does require funding, of course, and the Union Constitution clearly establishes that funding is distributed to clubs by the Allocations Board. The Constitution does not specify the source of the Union’s funding, though it states that its “benchmark” is $50,000. In the absence of clear constitutional guidance, A-Board has effectively treated the Union as a secured club, generally granting the majority of its requested funds as long as the Union demonstrates a need for them.

There’s no practical reason that a system

Remember who elected you like this, which works for secured clubs, should elicit such sustained protest from the Union. Maybe the Senate and E-Board do have a valid constitutional excuse to wriggle away from the clutches of A-Board, but the Judiciary should be wary of guaranteeing the Senate and E-Board enormous funds with no oversight. If the Senate is upset about the size of its current discretionary fund, they should consider alternatives to allocating 80 percent of it at the start of the year to a couple of late-night snacking events. Midnight Buffet could easily join its companion extravaganzas under the umbrella of the Campus Activities Board, freeing up funds for initiatives that better reflect student needs.

Perhaps a future Union, one that demonstrates the ability to set aside politicking for two consecutive weeks in favor of implementing useful programs, will build enough trust with the University community to merit the convenience of generous funding and little supervision.

In the meantime, the Union would be wise to atone for last semester’s embarassing conduct by rebuilding trust with students.

A good start would be publishing a working link to the office hours page so that students can discuss ideas with their representatives.

Senators should also consider systematically polling their constituents to determine whether their initiatives have broad appeal, and tackling persistent campus issues such as unreliable BranVans.

—Natalia Wiater did not participate in this editorial.

Alden Good ’21 I feel that while this system may accomplish a practical goal for the Chinese government of eliminating a good deal of debt that might be present. It seems as though this system is another form of the Chinese Communist Party re-engaging in an invasion of privacy that was once quite normal and is, unfortunately, becoming normal once more. This is to say nothing of the millions of marginalized elements that have emerged in recent years. Exposing and exploiting the debt of these persons, who have often times gone unpaid by their government, would be an immense hypocrisy on their part. While the ultimate outcome of this program is unknown, it will no doubt serve to create an immense resentment in the already displeased Chinese people while perhaps having little to no effect on the actual debt that people may hold.

Alden Good ’21 is a Politics and Economics double major.

Nia Lyn ’19

This approach to China’s debt system is reminiscent of an episode of Black Mirror and has nothing but negative implications. While China generally has lower household debt than most Western nations, there has been a rise in debt within the past 15 years. This means of trying to shame people into paying their debts does not seem effective; this is under the assumption that everyone is motivated by public shame to improve their social standing and that people are simply not paying their debts due to laziness. The software is supposed to target those that have withstanding debt, despite their ability to do so but not everyone has the same social circumstances.

Money that the government assumes can be used to pay debt might be used to pay medical bills or other familial expenses.

A better way to address the issue might be to create more debtforgiveness programs that allow people to work off their debts, in a sense.

Nia Lyn ’19 is an Associate Editor for the Justice.

Photos: Alden Good; Alexander Holtmann; the Justice; Brandeis University

THE JUSTICE ● FORUM ● TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5 , 2019

11

What everyone seems to get wrong about climate change

By TREVOR FILSETH JUSTICE STAFF WRITER

Last Thanksgiving, I got up at four o’clock in the morning to go to Logan International Airport in Boston. When I left, it was freezing cold; my flight was briefly delayed on account of the snow.

As I watched it fall through the terminal window, I remember thinking how happy I would be to be back in California, where my hometown’s last snowfall was in the 1960s.

When I got back home, though, it was raining.

It didn’t stop raining until the weekend after Thanksgiving, which was unfortunate, as I hadn’t packed a coat. But even the rain was a blessing in disguise; it helped to put out the Camp Fire, the largest and deadliest forest fire in California’s history. In the aftermath of the fire, I wanted to write about climate change.

The consensus, though not the universal agreement, has been that climate change played a significant role in prolonging the duration and intensity of the fires. Our president contested this in the way that only he could, and a lot of people had a laugh at his expense. But I let the subject drop in December, because I had other things to do. I was reminded of the Camp Fire with the arrival of the “polar vortex,” an extreme weather pattern over the Midwest which has plunged temperatures to lower than Arctic levels.

The consequences have been tragic; a handful of people have lost their lives from the extreme weather, and it’s likely to cost the economy millions of dollars in lost productivity.

Fortunately, in exchange for this, we have a new Trump tweet asking us, “What the hell is going on with Global Waming? Please come back fast, we need you!”

The Trumpian worldview suggests that the globe isn’t actually warming, and as a result liberals changed “global warming” to “climate change” as part of a scheme to lie to you. Never mind the fact that the 20 hottest years in recorded history have occurred since 1995; this past weekend, it’s been colder in Chicago than in Antarctica. How can the Earth be warming if it’s colder than ever outside? The scientific answer is that low temperatures near the Arctic allow for a wind current called the jet stream, which contains the polar vortex in northern Canada.

As global temperatures increase, the jet stream slows down, allowing the vortex to expand.

However, I think the argument, faulty though it is, is insightful for a different reason. You’re just not going to convince someone in Minneapolis right now that he should be desperately worried about the average global temperature rising by a few degrees when he’s snowed in and it’s twenty below outside.

On this note, Americans need to change the philosophy with which we view climate change.

And, if these past few months have been any indicator, we need to do it quickly.

Reasonable people can have reasonable disagreements about politics. We can disagree about how much the wealthy ought to pay in taxes. We can disagree about whether a fetus constitutes a human being with a right to its own life superseding the mother’s right to choose. We can disagree about the proper way to administer health care in a society built on the free market, or the proper way to assimilate immigrants, or the proper way to handle race relations.

Historically, such disagreement has been tolerated, even lauded as part of American democracy. While some solutions are clearly better than others, none of these questions has a “right” or “wrong” answer in the same way that two plus two invariably equals four.

Since these problems can’t be solved with mathematics, they must be solved with discourse.

The global warming “debate”, on the other hand, is binary, with no middle ground; either climate change is real or it isn’t. And the answer is — oh, come on. You all already know what the answer is.

Of all the major political parties in the United States and Europe, the only one that refuses to acknowledge the reality of this problem, let alone pledge to do anything about it, is the Republican Party.

I don’t want to be too critical of the GOP because I agree with much of their platform, but on this issue, their attitude is simply disgraceful; it’s hard to come up with a more overt example of willingness to ignore the truth for the sake of political expediency. No one on Capitol Hill is completely innocent of this, but certain Republican lawmakers are shockingly guilty. For

LETTER TO THE EDITOR That the Department of African and African American Studies has chosen to include Angela Davis ’65 among the participants in the events commemorating its 50th anniversary later this month is disgraceful.

Angela Davis is an apologist for the Soviet Union, which under Stalin, according to the estimate of the late Robert Conquest, who wrote what remains one of the best accounts of the Great Terror, exterminated no less than twenty-three million Soviet citizens. Her slavish devotion to this murderous regime caused her to slander courageous Soviet dissidents like Andrei Sakharov who in the late 1960s, 1970s, and early 1980s exposed the moral degradation and the utter unworkability of the postStalin Soviet system. That alone would surely disqualify her from any role in any official proceeding of her alma mater (and mine). But there is more. The communism she proudly proclaims superior to capitalism and liberal democracy has been responsible -- in the Soviet Union, Communist China, North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Cambodia, and Eastern Europe while it consisted mainly of communist regimes subservient to the Soviet Union-for the deaths of approximately one hundred million people. I would strongly recommend that Ms. Davis and her supporters read carefully the Black Book of Communism, published originally in France and in English translation by Harvard University Press in 1999, which provides the empirical evidence for the figure cited here. Another book from which she might learn something about the Soviet Union is Martin Malia’s Soviet Tragedy, which neatly encapsulates the seventy-four year disaster that was Soviet Communism in the statement that “socialism is impossible, and the Soviets tried to build it.”

One can understand why Western intellectuals in the 1920s, who were rightly horrified by the senseless killings in World War I, would laud a new regime like the Soviet that promised peace and prosperity for everyone. But those like Ms. Davis who do the same today, after this system has been shown incontrovertibly to have been one of the most morally wretched in the entire history of humanity, deserve only contempt.

George Orwell, who in his intellectual honesty and moral courage is the antithesis of Angela Davis, captured an essential aspect of her political personae when he commented wryly that some ideas are so foolish only intellectuals would believe them.

—Prof. Jay Bergman ’70 is a Professor of Russian and Soviet History at Central Connecticut State University.

instance, Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who once brought a snowball into Congress to “prove” that global warming was a hoax, has received $2 million in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry during his tenure in the Senate.

Nothing to see here; move along.

The problem lies in the fact that many fossil fuel companies are fully aware that climate change is real, and human activity is causing it, and therefore we should prevent it by regulating the oil and gas industry. As soon as you admit to the first part of this, it’s only a matter of time before you get to the last. The only way to prevent this regulation and subsequent action is to cloud the consensus about climate change.

Unfortunately, the obfuscation of these facts is much easier than it should be, because the battle for science is fundamentally asymmetric.

Scientists must be one hundred percent correct one hundred percent of the time to be taken seriously. Any time one icecap fails to melt exactly in accordance with a scientific prediction,

EON KRAIEM /the Justice

L

the inconsistency/inaccuracy can be taken as evidence that the entire “global warming theory” is falling apart. So, over the last half-century, veiled interests have induced doubt in the scientific process by accusing academia of liberal bias, defending the patriotism of pollution, and hiring experts — many of whom denied the risks of secondhand smoke 30 years ago — to deny the risks of climate change today.

In this way, the debate shifts away from the realm of the scientific and into the land of politics, the safe space of irrational opinions. But you don’t need to be an expert in climatology, or even a Democrat, to understand the basic premise of global warming. Just as smoking isn’t healthy for your lungs, burning massive quantities of coal and oil — carbon-rich compounds that took thousands of years to form under high pressure deep underground — and releasing the gases they contain into the atmosphere all at once isn’t healthy for the planet. Whether it’s cold outside today or not doesn’t change that.

Understanding economic unicorns

By MORRIS NADJAR

SPECIAL TO THE JUSTICE

Growing up, many are made aware of the mythical creature known as the one-horned horse: the unicorn. It is an elegant creature, in fact, as far as we know, nonexistent. Similarly, in the world of business, very large companies valued at $1 billion or more are labeled “unicorns.” They are few and rare (at least once upon a time) and last year was predicted to be the biggest year of unicorn discovery in United States history. What was once deemed a mythical creature has been brought to life.

According to Crunchbase, a platform for finding business information for both private and public companies, by August of last year, 65 companies had reached the “unicorn” status, with their valuation sitting at $1 billion billion or more by this year’s midpoint mark.

Private investors were said to have invested more than $73 billion into these “unicorns” in just the very first few months of 2018. In 2017, $98 billion were invested in the year’s total, from the same private investors, into similar unicorn companies. That puts 2018 at a startling boost to its preceding year.

Some of the new “unicorns” are Juul, the dominant, apex predator of the e-cigarette market, and music streaming giant Spotify. Others include names such as Bitmain, Lime and Circle.

With regards to the U.S.-Sino Trade War, now at a ceasefire following the G-20 dinner, both the U.S. and China have seen 26 companies reach the value of $1 billion or more this year. It is understood globally that China is slower to release company valuations publicly, which leaves an open question: does China have a larger startup incubator than the U.S.? Public sentiment believes this to be the case, but of course only time will tell with the impeding recession headed in China’s direction.

A bigger issue with these “unicorns” is how they are assigned a monetary value in the first place. Does valuing a company at $1 billion or more really consider most parts of the company and, if so, would it be better to keep it undervalued rather than overvalued for the sake of growth and yield for investors? This question has been asked to top investors in corporate America, and their opinions have been mixed. For some companies and services, such as cryptocurrencies, the product cannot be looked at the way it is now. The entirety of the “blockchain technology” system is banking on the assumption that it will eventually be implemented.

Some central banks have even started talking about

implementing cryptocurrency to prevent money laundering and ease the currency-issuing system.

One such central bank is the Bank of Israel, which obviously raises bigger questions in its proposed implementation process. Other companies have looked into adding big delta to industries like data analysis and transportation.

Farming, an issue as a recent Goldman Sachs briefing shows, food supply and agricultural output will have to increase by 70 percent to maintain its pace with population growth. This issue is one constrained by the limits of natural resources today, which relies on technology being able to offer something different. Ideas like precision farming have done exactly that and are working to create more for the globe while implementing new sustainable measures for the environment.

Even companies like Mecai, in China, have used technology to bring business from rural farms to cities by connecting the Chinese farmers to restaurant owners. There is seemingly no boundary to the development of economies as inter-industry connections increase through technological efficiency.

As Warren Buffet might point out, the growth investor will look for the growth in the long run and not be enticed by the whims of the current market fluctuation. If this is the case for unicorn investment, one might be forced to consider the globe itself as a long-term investment. Technology seems to be “one of those things” that will enhance globalization and be that single salvation to finally bring emerging markets up to speed. The only thing lacking is the skills of people in those markets, which creates a geographical divide based off of career expectation and growth opportunities that simply cannot be offered. Whether it be in the environment of electric cars or data analytics tools, which are helping back up companies to the cloud, there is much to be done, and it challenges the minds of children today to achieve higher goals and higher successes.

The business model described above is way beyond anything people have seen in the last century. From here on out, the globe is moving at hyperspeed.

During this transition phase, as an investor in venture capital, do not be distracted by the dollar signs; instead, be focused on the innovation and potential for development. Just remember that you will be given the choice to read your story to your children one day in the future when they are going to sleep at night. When the time comes to read about unicorns, what will you tell them?

The opinions expressed on this page are those of each article’s respective author and do not reflect the viewpoint of the Justice.

Write to us

The Justice welcomes letters to the editor responding to published material. Please submit letters through our Web site at www.thejustice.org. Anonymous submissions cannot be accepted.

Letters should not exceed 300 words, and may be edited for space, style, grammar, spelling, libel and clarity, and must relate to material published in the Justice. Letters from offcampus sources should include location. The Justice does not print letters to the editor and op-ed submissions that have been submitted to other publications. Op-ed submissions of general interest to the University community­— that do not respond explicitly to articles printed in the Justice — are also welcome and should be limited to 800 words. All submissions are due Friday at noon.

Fine Print

The opinions stated in the editorial(s) under the masthead on the opposing page represent the opinion of a majority of the voting members of the editorial board; all other articles, columns, comics and advertisements do not necessarily. For the Brandeis Talks Back feature on the last page of the newspaper, staff interview four randomly selected students each week and print only those four answers.

The Justice is the independent student newspaper of Brandeis University. Operated, written, produced and published entirely by students, the Justice includes news, features, arts, opinion and sports articles of interest to approximately 3,500 undergraduates, 900 graduate students, 500 faculty and 1,000 administrative staff.

The Justice is published every Tuesday of the academic year with the exception of examination and vacation periods.

Advertising deadlines: All insertion orders and advertising copy must be received by the Justice no later than 5 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the date of publication.

All advertising copy is subject to approval of the editor in chief and the managing and advertising editors.

The Staff

For information on joining the Justice, write to editor@ thejustice.org.

Editorial Assistants

Forum: Ben Feshbach*, Trevor Filseth, Violet Fearon, Tafara

Layout: Yael Hanadari-Levi

Gava, Andrew Jacobson*, Maddox Kay*, Renee Nakkab

Photography: Thu Le

Sports: Brian Inker

Copy: River Hayes, Mia Rubinstein Arts: Luke Liu

Arts: Brianna Cummings, Kent Dinlenc*, Evan Mahnken*, Ella

News: Gilda Geist

Photography: Charlie Catino, Ydalia Colon, Zack Katz, Yuran

Production Assistant Features: Kirby Kochanowski News: Emily Blumenthal Staff News: Jiyin Chen, Ece Esikara, Gilda Geist, Chaiel Schaffel, Nakul Srinivas Features: Christine Kim, Eitan Mager-Garfield, Leigh Salomon*, Hannah Shumel

Russell, Mendel Weintraub Shi, Kalianni Neal-Desatink Copy: Sarah Fine, Klarissa Hollander, Rachel Moore, Peri Meyers*, Emily Shen Layout: Leah Samantha Chanen, Shinji Rho Illustrations: Mara Khayter, Aaron Marks, Harrison Paek, Julianna Scionti * denotes a senior staff member.

12

TUESDAY, FEBRURARY 5, 2019● FORUM ● THE JUSTICE

FORUM

The Women’s March has become a political laughing stock

By RENEE NAKKAB JUSTICE STAFF WRITER

As current United States citizens, we live in Thomas Jefferson’s state of Civic Republicanism. This Jeffersonian idea claims that we have a civic duty to not only our fellow man, but our community. As active citizens, we have an obligation to participate in civic affairs. Besides voting, we are expected to march, organize sit-ins and employ other methods of protest to ensure our voices are heard. Through this sacrifice of time and other responsibilities, we become the catalysts for the changes we seek.

In the midst of the tense political climate, predominantly Donald Trump’s victory in the 2016 presidential election amid the sexual harassment allegations against him and his harsh stance against Planned Parenthood, hundreds of thousands of women gathered to protest and advocate for their human rights. Unfortunately, this form of civil unrest for women’s rights was convoluted by corrupt biases within the women’s rights organizations, in addition to the poor planning and understanding of the purpose of this cause.

The 2019 Women’s Marches were seen by many as a great success because they continued advocating on behalf of women and other minority groups across the globe; however, a careful analysis shows that they were in complete disarray. The march closest to the Brandeis campus, the 2019 Boston Women’s March, resonated with an overarching antiSemitic sentiment. One of the Women’s March’s founders, Teresa Shook, accused the leaders of the national march organization of anti-Semitism.

The accusation was leveled at two primary leaders: Linda Sarsour, who released numerous comments supporting the radical Muslim Brotherhood and has praised the Sharia Law, which treats women as second class citizens, and Tamika Mallory, who has a long timeassociation with Louis Farrakhan, the leader of Nation of Islam, which the Southern Poverty Law Center classifies as a hate group. The concern about anti-Semitism has created a stark divide in a movement meant to unite people across race and gender boundaries.

Katherine Siemionko, who founded the Women’s March Alliance, which organizes the Women’s Marches in NYC, noted that her group lost of thousands of social media and newsletter subscribers.

As a Jewish feminist, I was conflicted between my religion and my duty to defend women’s rights. I, obviously, was not the only one. The Women’s Marches are supposed to represent all women, regardless of race, religion or nationality. It is an empowering, inclusive movement meant to showcase acceptance and tolerance with hope for a better tomorrow. How are Jewish women supposed to feel accepted when the women in charge are branded by their alliances with people who hate Jews? Aside from the obvious discouragment

HARRISON PAEK /the Justice

of Jewish women from participating, the anti-Semitism present within this year’s march has discouraged many other people and organizations from participating. The Democratic National Committee and nearly 300 other organizations that endorsed the 2017 march have since disaffiliated with this year’s demonstration. Very few potential or current 2020 presidential candidates are participating, barely two years after politicians like Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris made prominent appearances at marches.

Because it does not have the financial support or presence of famous faces and organizations, the march has since faced major obstacles that have cost it possible success. The purpose of the march is to unify all on the issue of equality; instead, it splintered its supporters and brought about extensive negative press. There were two New York marches because the Women’s March Alliance and the New York chapter of the Women’s March could not come to terms over the exclusionary anti-Semitic sentiment the leaders of the march were exuding.

As I have previously stated, the point of this march is to present a unified front against our oppressors and continue fighting for women’s equity. This factionalization?

Brouhaha? Negative media coverage? All of it is doing the exact opposite. In the wake of all the sexual assault victims speaking up in this

past year, women, now more than ever, should be supporting one another. Hate lurks in every shadow of this patriarchal society; women and supporters of feminism are the sole beings who can spread the light to erase the hate.

We need to remember that we are the victims of this hate and need the media to help spread our message: equal acceptance and treatment for all. This anti-Semitic shadow forced very negative media attention onto the March.

The movement is only two years old, in the beginning stages of its life, and should have only positive and uplifting media attention to ensure people will continue to support it in the future.

Because the March’s leaders are clearly exhibiting their inconsistency with their mission statement, the media has had a field day over the March’s underlining absurdity and its lack of legitimacy. By publicizing how splintered the international group became, it fed into the opposers’ stereotypical idea that these women really do not know what they are doing and cannot be trusted to handle organizing an event centered around tolerance.

Unfortunately, the people running the California Women’s March failed to understand the importance of positive media attention. The organizers of the 2019 Eureka Women’s March decided that it would be better to call off the march less than a month before it was set to

walk because of the “overwhelmingly white” supporters. They go as far as to acknowledge that their majority-white leadership board could be the first aspect of this problem. What is most baffling is that they knew from the getgo that their supporters are from all different backgrounds; why would they not institute a more diverse leadership team?

Aside from the obvious, the Eureka Women’s March organizers are completely ignoring the purpose of this walk: to stand as a unified front and defend equality and women’s rights. By shutting down their march, they are depriving their supporters of an opportunity to fight for their cause. No matter the color of the skin of those who show up to the walk, it is a necessity for bringing about better media attention and giving supporters a chance to rally and unite around their common cause. By selfishly cancelling the march, the organizers have thus again silenced women’s rights.

2019’s Women’s Marches were embarrassing.

Women are forced into a constant battle in their day-to-day lives to be seen as their counterparts’ equals. This march is purposed to celebrate, empower and unite women, and clearly, that is not what has happened. As Americans we have an obligation to protest to ensure our voices are heard, but we must be strategic and not let individual biases dilute the true purpose of our cause.

On the Gillette ad controversy: doing good is doing good

By HARRISON PAEK JUSTICE STAFF WRITER

I watch significantly more YouTube videos than I should. In the heaps of media that I consume on a daily basis, very seldom do I pay attention to advertisements. More often than not, I see adverts as an obstacle; if I am not watching the yellow line creep right toward my next video, I watch ads with the reservation of a jaded consumer. It is only when an advertisement oversteps its role as a distant annoyance that I lean in to show even a minor amount of interest.

Perhaps, in this sense, Gillette had the right idea. However, the commercial spearheading the fight against toxic masculinity for our times, “We Believe: The Best Men Can Be,” has drawn considerable flack from all sides. The ad depicts headlines from the #MeToo movement and male apathy toward female hypersexualization, and asserts that “boys will be boys” diffuses the responsibility men have to raise sensitive and aware male citizens.

There are so many different, conflicting opinions about the still smoldering issue of #MeToo that this ad may be difficult to decipher in the context of today’s sociopolitical climate. This article is a discussion of the validity of the various arguments put forward by an outraged audience on social media.

Post-Super Bowl, the bold message might have been expected in the melodramatic environment of the commercial breaks.

However, according to The Cincinnati Enquirer, Gillette’s parent company,

Procter & Gamble, will not air the commercial simply because it is too long. “[Procter & Gamble] officials say the reason is not male or conservative blowback, but the cost.”

It certainly would have been less of a shock to viewers as one of many controversial Super Bowl ads. The placement of such a heavy ad preceding such things as Vine compilations and Cardi B music videos was a conclusively odd decision for Gillette. Yanked out of a typical relaxing YouTube escape, disgruntled user “ghhn” remarked in the ad’s comments section, “Dear Diary: today I got lectured by a shaving commercial.” Similar skepticism at Gillette’s position to lecture its consumers came from Late Night host Stephen Colbert, who said, “Are our public institutions so weak that we need to be taught moral lessons by razor companies?” many opponents of the ad have adopted even more radical stances.

Reddit’s r/The_Donald went ablaze with talk that Gillette was deleting comments and dislikes and discussion that dismisses the ad as “feminist poison.” This degree of confusion is warranted; however, this is not the first time Gillette has tried to change the social sphere of gender.

Though it was significantly less virtuous, Vox cites a 1917 ad the company ran, which reads: “Milady Decolette is the dainty little Gillette used by the well-groomed woman to keep the underarm white and smooth.”

The article concludes that it is impossible to tell whether Gillette facilitated the villainization of women’s body hair for

the sake of profit, but it certainly helped perpetuate the message and particular gender roles that are contributing to the problem the company is trying to address with this ad.

“

It might even be beneficial for a company so entangled in gender image to set the record straight.

Many are rightly calling Gillette hypocritical for other reasons, too. “Thanks for the moral advice, multi-national company that was recently caught profiting off forced child labour and price fixing,” asserts the user “Peanut” in the YouTube comment section. This comment has over 35,000 upvotes as a repost, because it is believed that Gillette deleted the original comment along with many others. These claims are unsubstantiated. Although the negative reaction to hypocrisy is valid, one is pressed to find any definitive evidence of any of these phenomena from reputable news sources.

The most informed perspective on this issue comes from the New York Times

The opinions expressed on this page are those of each article’s respective author and do not reflect the viewpoint of the Justice.

interview of Dean Crutchfield, the chief executive of the brand advisory firm Crutchfield & Partners. “If this is just a quick campaign to get some attention, not something they’re weaving into the fabric of their company going forward, it’s going to blow up in their face.” According to this logic, all the counterarguments against Gillette effectively evaporate. It does not matter that Gillette lacks the moral credibility to mention this issue because any help is better than none.

It might even be beneficial for a company so entangled in gender image to set the record straight. In the same way, any company as big as Procter & Gamble is likely to have significant and inexcusable shortcomings, like the aforementioned child labor and price fixing scandal.

Whether or not this advertisement is a way to misdirect the consumer’s attention, it is irrelevant in the context of the problems many Americans face. Gillette is not taking a hard stance on either of these issues and will pay for it.

This does not disqualify them from taking a strong stance in another field of play and doing some good. If Gillette is making a good-faith effort to fight toxic masculinity, its only crime would be flippancy toward the issue, as Crutchfield mentioned. If this issue melts away from Gillette’s message after the controversy blows over, one may judge it a rotten company using the wave of #MeToo for profit. For now, this social upheaval is necessary, and we need all hands on deck.

THE JUSTICE ● SPORTS ● TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2019

FENCING: Team

13

TAKE IT TO THE HOOP

approaches end of regular season CONTINUED FROM 16 Technology and Boston College will all be coming to Waltham to compete.

In an interview with the Justice, Jessica Gets said, "Everyone [on the team] is super supportive when I fence. I love when my team cheers me on while I fence, it’s such an adrenaline rush!"

The next meet the Judges are scheduled to attend is the Beanpot Tournament on Feb. 13. After that, the team will attend the FDU Invitatuional in Teaneck, NJ. This meet is followed by the New England Collegiate Championship in Wellesley. The season is scheduled to end on March 24 after the NCAA Championships in Cleveland Ohio.

Want to be more than just a spectator?

Write for Sports!

Contact Megan Geller at sports@thejustice.org

ZOE BRODSKY/the Justice

LET'S GO JUDGES: Collin Sawyer '20 reaches for the hoop, defended by two Rochester players in their game on Sunday.

MBBALL: Team continues to work hard this season CONTINUED FROM 16 victorious game. The Judges started the game off with a layup and then a free-throw by Chandler Jones ’21. A Rochester player missed their free throw, and the game continued.

Seven minutes into the game, the Judges were 15–11. After this, the Judges did not score a single point for 10 minutes — in that time, Rochester scored 18 points. In the second half, the Yellowjackets started with a score of 54–22. By the end of the game, the Yellowjackets led by 34 points. The highest scorer

in the game was D’Aguanno, with 13 points, and Sabir tied with D’Aguanno for three assists. This game, Nolan Hagerty ’22 ended with a career high of 10 points.

During the game, the Yellowjackets had one player score double-digit points, and five other players each scoring eight or nine points.

Currently the team has 11 wins and nine losses this season, with a streak of losses. The team averages 65.0 points per game, a free-throw percentage of 70.8 percent and a three-point percentage of 36.5 percent. The Judges currently have an average of 32.1 rebounds

per game in 20 games. With five games left in the regular season, the Judges look forward to increasing their rank in the University Athletic Association standings.

Looking forward to the rest of the season, the Judges will face Carnegie Mellon University on Feb. 8, Case Western Reserve University on Feb. 10, University of Chicago on Feb. 15 and Washington University on Feb. 17. The final game is set to take place on Feb. 23 at New York University. The Judges currently rank sixth in the UAA have five games to increase their rank before the season's end.

WBBALL: Team loses to UAA rivals Rochester and Emory this week CONTINUED FROM 16 made two free throws, making a score of 62–53. Overall, the Judges were not able to overcome the lead the Yellowjackets formed at the beginning of the quarter that would capture the victory.

Emory 72, Judges 42 According to the

Brandeis

Athletics website, the women suffered a 72–42 setback to Emory University ln Friday evening at home. The Eagles scored the first eight points of the game, and the Judges never managed to overcome and pull ahead to capture the victory. This was also a season-low in points scored in one game for the Judges with only 42 points, despite players like Camila Casanueva ’21 leading the team with ten points, a

double digit amount. After the first quarter, the Judges were behind by eleven points, and the score was 21– 10, and although they outscored the Eagles in the second quarter, 17–14, it was not enough to overtake the team and create any type of lead.

The score at the half was 35–27, leaving the Judges still behind by eight points. At the end of the third, Sarah Jaromin ’19 scored two free throws with four seconds on the

clock to advance the Judges to 36 points, but they were still 20 points behind their rival team.

In the last quarter, the Judges were not able to come back to win the game. In fact, it took just under a minute for either team to score, when Kerry Tanke ’22 made a free throw to make the score 56–37.

However, from there it took until there was 6:59 left in the game before anyone scored again, and

it was Erin Lindahl for the Eagles who put the Eagles ahead more 58–37. The quarter continued with a relatively slow pace of scoring as the game would finally conclude with the Eagles ahead and a final score of 72–42.

The team's next game is scheduled for Friday, Feb. 8, against Carnegie Mellon University. The team has five more games this season between now and Feb. 23.

Image Courtesy of CREATIVE COMMONS

Join ! m u for Send an email to Gabriel Frank at forum@thejustice.org

THE JUSTICE

JUDGES BY THE NUMBERS

● SPORTS ●

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2019

15

SWIM AND DIVE

MEN’S BASKETBALL UAA STANDINGS

Emory WashU Rochester Chicago JUDGES Carnegie Case NYU

UAA Conf.

W L D 7 2 0 7 2 0 6 3 0 6 3 0 4 5 0 4 5 0 2 7 0 0 9 0

TEAM STATS

Points Per Game

Overall W L D Pct. 16 4 0 .800 14 6 0 .700 16 4 0 .800 13 7 0 .650 11 9 0 .550 9 11 0 .450 9 11 0 .450 6 14 0 .300

Corey Sherman ’19 leads the team with 13.8 points per game.

Player PPG Corey Sherman 13.8 Chandler Jones 11.6 Eric D’Aguanno 11.4 Collin Sawyer 10.1

Rebounds Per

Latye Workman ’18 leads the team with 6.4 rebounds per game.

Player REB/G Latye Workman 6.0 Chandler Jones 5.7 Lawrence Sabir 3.6 Eric D’Aguanno 3.6

EDITOR’S NOTE: Feb. 8 vs. Carnegie Mellon Feb. 10 vs. Case Western Reserve University

WOMEN’S BASKETBALL UAA STANDINGS UAA Conf.

W L D WashU 7 0 0 Chicago 5 2 0 Emory 4 3 0 Case 4 3 0 NYU 3 4 0 Rochester 2 5 0 JUDGES 2 5 0 Carnegie 1 6 0

TEAM STATS

Points Per Game

Overall W L D Pct. 13 5 0 .722 14 4 0 .778 13 5 0 .722 12 6 0 .667 7 10 0 .412 10 7 0 .588 8 10 0 .444 10 8 0 .556

EDITOR’S NOTE: Feb. 8 vs. Carnegie Mellon Feb. 10 vs. Case Western Reserve University

Camila Casaneuva ’21 leads the team with 14.9 points per game.

Player Camila Casaneuva Sarah Jaromin Jillian Petrie Shannon Smally

PPG 14.7 9.8 9.0 8.8

Rebounds Per Game Hannah Nicholson ’20 leads the team with 7.1 rebounds per game.

Player REB/G Hannah Nicholson 7.1 Camila Casaneuva 6.1 Jillian Petrie 5.4 Shannon Smally 5.3

SWIMMING AND DIVING Results from the home meet on Jan. 13.

TOP FINISHERS (Men’s)

TOP FINISHERS (Women’s)

100-yard Freestyle

SWIMMER TIME Marcelo Ohno-Machado 49.70 Matthew Acremont 50.17 Chase Chen 50.77

200-yard Butterfly

SWIMMER TIME Gazelle Umbay 2:17.83 Kylie Herman 2:20.16 Adrienne Aponte 2:31.56

EDITOR’S NOTE: Feb. 13 at UAA Championship Feb. 21 at NEISDA Championship

TRACK AND FIELD Results from the Branween Smith-King Invitational on Jan. 26.

TOP FINISHERS (Men’s)

TOP FINISHERS (Women’s)

60 Meter Dash

60 Meter Dash

RUNNER TIME Reese Farquhar 7.54 Leung Michael 7.62 Michael Kroker 7.71

RUNNER TIME Kanya Brown 8.39 Anna Touitou 8.45 Gabby Tercatin 9.10

EDITOR’S NOTE: Feb. 8 at Valentine Invitational Feb. 16 at USAT&F Indoor Championships

YURAN SHI/the Justice

HEAD FIRST: Brandeis swimmers dive into the meet, resulting in a win against Clark College on Saturday.

Clark College sinks against the Judges ■ The Judges defeated opponents in 21 out of 32 total races in this week’s meet.

By ELLIE WHISENANT JUSTICE CONTRIBUTING WRITER

Both the men’s and women’s swimming and diving teams continued their successful seasons this weekend against Clark University. The Judges celebrated their Senior Day meet with an overall sweeping victory in 21 out of 32 events. The women claimed a 153–116 victory, improving their overall record to 6–8. Men’s swimming won 182–91, making their seasonal record 6–5 according to the Brandeis Athletics website.

The meet began with the team’s two seniors, Sabrina Greer ’19 and Kylie Herman ’19, leading both the men’s and women’s teams in a cheer of school pride. This meet was dedicated to Greer and Herman because it was their last home meet at Linsey Sports Center.

The pair celebrated their swimming careers as they helped lead the women’s team to victory.

Greer swam a personal best in the 50-yard butterfly with a time of 31.51 seconds, while Herman won the 200yard freestyle with a time of 2:04.26

seconds. Later, in the 500-yard freestyle, the Judges claimed the top four spots, with Herman leading the team with a time of 5:34.69 seconds.

Both Greer and Herman were crucial in the final race of the day, the 200-yard freestyle. Along with team members Adrienne Aponte ’20 and Lauren Howard ’22, Greer and Herman’s last race at Linsey Sports Center took first place with a time of 1:48.32 seconds. The Brandeis B team relay, made up of firstyear swimmers Natalie Westrick, Gazelle Umbay, Olivia Stebbins and Claire Xu, ended only .07 seconds behind the A team. Both the A and B Brandeis relay teams were more than 8.5 seconds ahead of Clark University’s A team.

In their first race of the day, the men began the meet with an amazing win in the 200-yard medley relay with a time of 1:39.38 seconds.

Benton Ferebee ’22 swam first, followed by Alex Wang ’22 , Tamir Sitelny ’20 and Marcelo OhnoMachado ’21. They ended the relay an incredible 8 seconds before the next team. The Brandeis B team relay, made up of Thomas Alfer ’20, Jonathan Ayash ’22, Justin Wissberg ’20 and Rafi Rubenstein ’20 narrowly missed second place, with only 0.42 seconds between

them and Clark University’s A team relay. With these two strong races to kick the meet off, the Judges went on to continue claiming sweeping victories.

Daniel Wohl, a sophomore and overall men’s highest point winner, won the 500-yard freestyle with a time of 4:46.82 seconds, leaving an amazing 30 seconds between him and second place. In the 50-yard breaststroke, Wohl scrapped in a win with a time of 27.50 seconds.

Chase Chen, also a sophomore, took first in both the 100-yard freestyle with a time of 49.94 seconds and the 200-yard freestyle with a time of 1:51.08 seconds.

This victory comes just two weeks before the University Athletic Association Championship (Feb 13-16) and the New England Intercollegiate Swimming and Diving Association Championships (Feb 21-24).

Jonathan Ayash ’22,spoke to the Justice about how “every day [the team] comes in ready to train smart and hard to be as prepared as possible. Both teams are looking to move up in ranking from last year.” After winning almost every event against Clark, the Judges are highly motivated to continue this success in the upcoming championships.

PRO SPORTS BRIEF Super Bowl LIII: The tale of four eventful quarters and how we became the Brady Bunch After last year’s loss to the Philadelphia Eagles, Patriots fans have been waiting to see their team be victorious.

the Rams to punt with just under a minute of play left in the first quarter. The first quarter ended without either team having scored.

First Quarter The Los Angeles Rams won the coin toss and elected to kick off.

The New England Patriots started on offense and quarterback Tom Brady began an efficient-looking drive, but his pass was intercepted by the Rams’ Cory Littleton at 12:14. The Rams could not gain the momentum after the interception and punted the ball back to the Patriots. New England started another well-executed eleven play drive, using 5:40 minutes, only to have Stephen Gostkowski miss a 46-yard field goal. The Rams and Patriots then traded punts, neither able to sustain a drive, leaving

Second Quarter The Patriots scored on a 42-yard field goal by Gostkowski at 10:33 in the second quarter, giving them Patriots a three-point lead. After that score, neither team could achieve a scoring drive. Finally, with 1:14 left in the first half, the failed an attempted first down on fourth and one from the Rams’ 32-yard line. The team could have been 9–0 — but only came out 3–0 because of misses. At that point, it remained to be seen if those missed points would come back to haunt them. Statistically, the Patriots dominated the first half, having the ball on offense for 19:52

of the 30 minutes in the first half and gaining 157 total yards, while the Rams only gained 57. Still, points scored are the only statistic which counts, and the Patriots had a smallest of leads heading into the second half.

Third Quarter With 6:33 left in the third quarter, the Rams’ offense finally showed signs of life, as Jarod Goff led a productive drive to the Patriots 29-yard line, and it seemed that the Rams were on the way to scoring a touchdown. However, Dant’a Hightower sacked Goff for a loss of nine yards. Greg Zuerlein nailed a 53-yard field goal, tying the score 3–3, which held to the end of the third quarter. It was the first time in Super Bowl history that no team had scored any touchdowns

before the fourth quarter.

Fourth Quarter Crunch time! At 9:49 in the fourth quarter, Tom Brady reached into his bag of tricks and led a 69-yard drive which resulted in a 2-yard touchdown run by Sony Michel, giving the Patriots a 10–3 lead with seven minutes left in the game. Jared Goff then led a desperate drive, trying to tie the game. A promising drive was stopped as Stephon Gilmore intercepted a Goff pass intended for Brandin Cooks at the Patriots four-yard line. Brady, again playing as though he had ice in his veins, calmly led the Patriots down the field, leading to a 41-yard field goal by Stephen Gostkowski that clinched the Patriots and Brady’s record sixth Super Bowl. Julian

Edelman, who caught ten passes — many as clutch plays — for 141 yards was awarded the MVP. Following the game, Patriots fans celebrate their teams win with fireworks and the Patriots Super Bowl Victory Parade. It is expected that 50,000 fans will be in attendance. The parade is set for Cambridge today at 11 a.m., set to follow the same route as in 2017 and beginning at the Hynes Convention Center. Next, the parade will head down Boylston Street, up Treadmont, then turn onto and finish on Cambridge Avenue. There will, however, be no rally before the parade this year.

– Megan Geller

just Sports Page 16

PATRIOTS DEFEAT THE RAMS The New England Patriots defeated the Los Angeles Rams this Sunday, p. 15.

Waltham, Mass.

Tuesday, February 5, 2019

MEN’S BASKETBALL

GIANTS IN THE GYM

Team falls short of Emory again ■ Both games against

Emory and Rochester this week resulted in tough losses for the Judges.

By MEGAN GELLER JUSTICE EDITOR

The Brandeis men’s basketball team lost both of the two games they played this week. Friday, the Judges rematched the Emory University Eagles and were defeated for the second time.

Sunday, the Judges also lost to the University of Rochester Yellowjackets, despite having defeated them last week, per the Brandeis Athletics website.

Emory 88, Judges 64 After a little over a week, the Judges faced the Eagles once again, hoping to emerge victoriously this time. Within the first 30 seconds of the game, Brandeis graduate student Latye Workman ’18 made a layup, starting the Judges off strong. Following his layup though, Workman fouled. Within

the first five minutes of the game, the Judges outscored Emory 14–5.

However, Emory refused to give up; they scored 18 points in the following six minutes, bringing the score to 22–15. The Eagles increased their lead to as many as nine points before halftime.

Trailing behind, the Judges refused to let the Eagles pull ahead any farther. At the beginning of the second half, the Eagles scored 15 points, including two 3-pointers, while the Judges made four points total. The greatest gap in the score was 29 points in the second half.

The game ended with a difference of 24 points. The highest scorers in the game were Eric D’Aguanno ’20, with 21 points, and Lawrence Sabir ’21, with nine assists. Players D'Aguanno and Sabir tied for the most rebounds for the Judges this game.

Rochester 78, Judges 52 This week, the Judges rematched the the University of Rochester Yellowjackets. After last week’s win, the men hoped for another

See MBBALL, 13

☛

FENCING

Fencers post 3–3 records at 2019 Eric Sollee Invitational ■ Eric Sollee Invitational

leaves men at a 16–12 record overall, and the women at 16–16 overall.

By ZACH KAUFMAN JUSTICE EDITOR

The Brandeis men’s and women’s fencing teams each posted 3–3 records, splitting their six matches at the 2019 Eric Sollee Invitational. With this added to their record, the men's team currently stands at 16–12 overall, while the women’s team remains at .500 with a 16–16 record of their own. Each team defeated Yeshiva University, Hunter College and Haverford College while falling to Stevens Institute of Technology, New York University and the New Jersey Institute of Technology, according to the Brandeis Athletics Website.

Men's Team The men’s team was led by the saber squad, who went 4–2 in the meet. Leon Rotenstein ’19 played in five matches and racked up a 9–5 record to lead the way, with three others tied with seven wins each. Shawn Pyatetsky ’20 was one of those three, going 7–2 on the day. The foil squad went 3–3. Six different fencers within the squad had between four and six wins.

Men’s epee also won three and lost three, but the bigger winner of men Judges, Chris Armstrong ’20, went 11–6 for the weapon.

Women's Team The women's team was led by their epeeists, who were also the top-performing weapon that

Brandeis had at the tournament; they went 5–1. Madeline Vibert ’21 posted an impressive 13–3 record to lead the team, andwas closely followed by Dakota Levy ’20 ,who went 12–5. Women’s foil went 4–2 on the day, led by the top two performers from the tournament for the Judges. Captain Joanne Carminucci ’19 had the most wins for Brandeis, posting an overall record of 16–2. She was followed closely behind by Jessica Gets ’20, who went 15–3. The saber squad went 3–3 and was led by Jada Harrison ’22, who had nine wins.

The men’s and women’s teams each had a pair of dominating victories to highlight the day. The women shutout Yeshiva 27–0 and thrashed Hunter 25–2. The men had a 25–2 victory over Yeshiva and a 23–4 win over Hunter to be proud of.

Each team also took a match down to the wire but were narrowly defeated. In the men’s match against Stevens, saber won 7–2 and foil won 5–4, but both wins were not enough to overcome an 8–1 Judge loss in epee. The women’s team also won two weapons against Stevens college. They had six wins in saber and five in epee, but it was not enough to beat Stevens, as their saber squad swept Brandeis.

The women’s team also had a close call versus NJIT. Brandeis won in foil, 5–4, but NJIT responded with a 5–4 victory of their own in saber. It all came down to epee, which NJIT won 6–3.

The Judges will close out the regular season by hosting the Beanpot Tournament on Feb. 13 at 6 p.m. Harvard University, the Massachusetts Institute of

See FENCING, 13

☛

ZOE BRODSKY/the Justice

MAKE THAT BASKET: Lauren Rubinstein ’20 jumps into a three point shot in a game against University of Rochester on Sunday.

Women start new losing streak after falling to Rochester and Emory ■ Two failed games lead to a drop in UAA standings for the women's basketball team.

By JEN GELLER JUSTICE EDITOR

The Brandeis Women’s Basketball team continues their season by playing two more University Athletic Association rivals. This week, the Judges lost to the Emory University Eagles and the University of Rochester Yellowjackets making the team 7–11 overall and 3–5 in the UAA. Looking ahead, the Judges will take on Carnegie Mellon University on Friday at 6 p.m.

Judges 66, Rochester 42 The Judges’ most recent loss was against the Yellowjackets in the Red Auerbach Arena on

Sunday afternoon. According to the Brandeis Athletics website, the Judges actually led going into the second half but fell behind in the final two quarters of play.

The game began with a jump shot start within the first twenty seconds of the game, putting Rochester ahead 2–0. In fact, the Yellowjackets were up 6–0 before Kat Puda ’21 made a three-point shot to put the Judges on the map, and despite a Yellowjacket layup that increased their lead to 10–5, the Judges led at the end of the quarter 14–18. The second quarter brought a similar fate, as the Judges fought with the same energy as the first quarter.

Although Rochester tied the game at 20 points, the Judges led the rest of the quarter and would end the half ahead by an impressive margin of 32–41. However, come the third quarter Rochester

outshot the Judges 16–10, closing the gap in the score, and although a jumpshot by Hannah Nicholson ’20 left the Judges ahead 48–51 in the quarter, the gap was clearly closing, adding suspense as to what the final quarter would have in store.

The fourth quarter began with Rochester pulling ahead of the Judges after three layups by the Yellowjacket’s Lena Ethington and Julianna Okoniewski — Okoniewskis scoring two of them — during the first minute of the quarter. With the score now 54– 51, the Judges continued to fall behind with a three-point shot

by Rochester’s Tessa Ludwick with 8:46 to go in the game. The Judges in fact would not even score again until there was 5:56 left in the game when Puda

See WBBALL, 13

☛

Vol. LXXI #16

February 5, 2019

Howardena Pindell: What Remains To Be Seen

>>pg. 19

just

Arts

Waltham, Mass.

Images: Andrew Baxter/the Justice, Clara Alexander/the Justice. Artwork: Howardena Pindell. Design: Andrew Baxter/the Justice.

18

TUESDAY, THE JUSTICE FEBRUARY | ARTS5,| 2019 TUESDAY, I ARTS JANUARY I THE JUSTICE 31, 2017

IMPROV REVIEW

Bad Grammer celebrates the warm winter

By ELLA RUSSELL JUSTICE STAFF WRITER

Last Friday — Groundhog’s Day Eve — Improv group “Bad Grammer” put on an excellent Groundhog Day-themed show in the Pollack auditorium. Their Facebook promotional photo showed Mitchell Redfield ’20’s face on a groundhog, and when they bounded onto the stage, they announced that they would check Redfield’s shadow when the show ended.

The show began inauspiciously; for audience members arriving early to Pollack, the doors were locked, leaving them to stand out in the cold.

Eventually someone called over University police to unlock the door.

However, that was soon forgotten once “Bad Grammer” arrived. They introduced themselves with gusto and wasted no time in kicking off their short-form improv games, starting off with “Cube.” Four performers stood in a square and whichever two were closest to the audience put on a scene based on a suggestion from the audience. The scenes were wonderfully ridiculous, ranging from gerbil funerals to a conversation between a bee and a flower.

For the next game, three performers voiced each other’s characters — a clumsy kid who broke a flamingopatterned shower curtain, the kid’s grandfather and the shower curtain itself, whose ability to talk became part of the plot. After that came a love affair between a romantic English teacher and a lunch lady carried out while another performer sporadically

yelled out changes in the location.

One of the highlights of the show was “Real Fake Cafe.” This game was a conversation between one real and one fictional person, but the catch was that the performers knew only who their counterpart was playing. The goal was to give the other performer enough hints for them to guess their character. By audience suggestion, the fake character was Michael Scott from “The Office,” and the real character was Ron Liebowitz. Kwesi Jones ’21, playing Michael Scott, started things off by crying “Roll ’Deis,” mentioning that Jason Kwan ’20’s Liebowitz was a busy guy and wondering if he would like to divest from fossil fuels.

In his role as a waiter, Sam Gelberg ’22 helped the scene along by suggesting that Jones order “Scott”ch tape.

The show’s last short-form game was “Split Screen.” This game started with two performers on one side of the stage. When one left the stage, another performer would enter as that same character on the other side. The resulting scene depicted two kids being kidnapped, then killing their kidnapper and dumping the body into a lake.

“Bad Grammer” ended the show with line games, in which the performers stand in a line and say witty one liners based on a theme. By request, the themes were “Sex with me is like…” and “Worlds Worst.”

All of Bad Grammer’s sketches were unique and hilarious. The group members were magnificent both at integrating the audience into the show and adapting and playing off each other’s ideas.

Here’s to six more weeks of improv.

NATALIA WIATER/the Justice

TEAMWORK: Maya Satin ’19 and Sam Gelberg ’22 help each other create stories.

NATALIA WIATER/the Justice

FAKE AND REAL: Jac Guerra ’22 and Mitchell Redfield ’20 dive into their characters

CULTURE

Global Gala provides stage for international pride

By NIA LYN JUSTICE EDITOR

Photos byTHU LE/theJustice

FASHION FROM ABROAD: The fashion show featured a variety of countries.

SWING WITH STYLE : Students had a blast performing with their traditional customs.

FROM THE PROFESSORS: IBS faculty band “International School of Blues” played to the sound of non-stop cheering.

Brandeis’ International Business School Student Association hosted their fifth annual Global Gala, an event dedicated to honoring the cultures of students that comprise IBS, last F r i d a y . Before the show started, the audience was encouraged to browse the different cultural booths that were placed around Levin Ballroom. Each displayed information such as national currency, language or notable figures about the various countries represented.

The show began with a video created by Huiwu Wang IBS ’19, Elidaurys Martínez IBS ’20 and Ebube Iheme IBS ’20, which centered around an evil wizard who canceled Global Gala; the event could only be saved once students completed a series of tasks. Once the show officially started, students Erica Ma IBS ’19 and Arafat Mondol IBS ’19 gave a brief history of IBS, followed by Associate Dean Kate Goldfield ringing the IBS gong, which is only used for special events. Dean Kathryn Graddy then provided further welcoming remarks, stating that “this celebration really embodies the vision of one Brandeis.”

The first official performance of the night came from the Leadership Fellows. Their mashup of the Cha Cha Slide, Baby Shark and Watch Me showed the fun-loving side of the graduate students. Next was a cover of the Chinese pop song “Li Ge,” by student Junyuan Jiang IBS ’19. The crowd roared as Jiang hit each note skillfully. Following Jiang’s solo, African dance group Too Much Sauce grooved to a medley of hits such as “Caracara” and “Teré Teré.” The group lived up to their name with their hip and lively moves.

The next act to grace the stage was supposed to “take us back to 1969.” In her cover of the song “Wild Horses,” Maura Bastarache IBS ’19

did just that. Dance group Desi 2.0 followed; they danced to a number of songs featured in Bollywood films and ended with Punjabi MC’s “Mundian To Bach Ke.” Their performance was highlighted by their vibrant outfits and synchronous moves. Moving to the latter half of the show, Taiyi Xiang IBS ’20 and Qianshen Chen IBS ’19 sang a remix of “Where is the Love” and “Love Sickness,” masterfully singing in both English and Chinese. Additionally, Xiang and Chen’s voices complimented each other extremely well. The next group was LatinXtreme, who danced to a mix of songs ranging from “Guayacanal” to “I Like It.” Each was well done and represented the different aspects of Latin American music and culture.

As the night came to a close, the International School of Blues, comprised of Profs.

Grace Zimmerman, Robert Reitano, Aldo Musacchio, Debarshi Nandy (IBS) and Administrative Assistant to the Dean Kate Morreale. They delivered one of the best acts of the night. The audience cheered during the entire set — though this may have been due in part to an announcement made before their performance that students would receive extra credit for cheering on their professors.

The show closed with a fashion show that displayed clothing and music representative of the cultural backgrounds of IBS students.

The countries represented include Afghanistan, Benin, China, Madagascar, Dominican Republic, the Kingdom of Eswatini, Ethiopia, Lithuania, India, Pakistan, Myanmar, Nigeria, Vietnam and lastly the United States.

After the show’s conclusion, the guests and performers were invited to enjoy a dinner with food from some of the different cultures represented by the student body. Overall, the event was extremely entertaining and a great way to allow the students of IBS to take pride in their heritage and show a lighter side of themselves.

FAMILY: International students enjoy the company from the other “study abroads.”

THE JUSTICE I ARTS I TUESDAY, FEBURARY 5, 2019

19

ROSE ART MUSEUM

Howardena Pindell opens at the Rose

By KENT DINLENC JUSTICE STAFF WRITER

The Rose Art Museum opened up to the public for the first time in 2019 last Friday. The curators chose to honor Howardena Pindell, an underappreciated Black artist who innovatively used materials such as perfume and baby powder in her art and experimented with irregular canvases and unconventional techniques. Throughout her life, Pindell persevered in the art world despite facing the Jim Crow racism of 1960s and 70s. The Rose chose to display a collection of her work which spanned nearly five decades, ranging from homages to her father to work surrounding contemporary political activism.

The exhibit tracks her career, displaying various periods in her life. After a car accident that affected her memory, we can see her try to reconfigure her fractured past

The nebular pointillism of the pieces has an entrancing color field which makes one want to stare at her art for hours. These are pieces that invite you to spend time with them, to make something out from hundreds of dots.

However, the more I explored the exhibition, the less enthusiastic I was about her work. There was a section that seemed unapproachable. There was a clear influence by her father’s occupation as a mathematician, evident in works which used discarded circles from punched paper attached to grid paper. Even with context, there isn’t really a connection to be made with those pieces.

It jokingly seemed to look like the arbitrary tally marks or numbers found in the notebook of a math student, but the result seemed emotionally isolating and lacked resonance.

One of Pindell’s more interesting artistic experiments is her photography. After her painting took a toll on her physically,

space. She took pictures of public events like a parade for Nelson Mandela and tried to recollect the moment through paint. This is a visually stimulating way to share her experience through the lens of her fragmented memory.

The exhibition at the Rose honors Pindell’s life with respect to her victories, her hardships and her interests. It explores her personal life

from her family to her sometimes unsubtle political activism. Her innovative use of different powders, discarded paper and even her own blood on stretched, oblong canvases has allowed her to leave her mark on contemporary art movement. Her ability to combine abstract concepts to create a cohesive style makes her unique and distinctive as a modern artist.

Photos by CLARA ALEXANDER/the Justice

OVERCOMING ADVERSITY: Ms. Pindell

managed to succeed in the art world despite racial prejudice through the decades.

POINTLLISM: The use of dots and points allow viewers to form their own interpretations of the pieces.

COMBINED STYLES: The combination of different textures and concepts is a captivating aspect of Pindell’s works.

through different experimental phases, but what remains throughout her oeuvre is the use of dots and circles. Ever since she noticed dots on the silverware designated for Black people in restaurants she visited with her father, dots and circles have been found in every size and medium in her work.

Some pieces of Pindell’s that were heavily influenced by this experience are displayed on the first floor, mostly “Untitled” works.

They mainly consist of layers of dotted paint atop spray paint, creating textured surfaces that soothe the eye the more one looks at it.

she turned to taking pictures of her television screen and drawing vector arrows on them. This is referred to as video drawing.

This technique is a visually stimulating way to perceive the movement of a frozen figure within the frame. She does this later in the exhibit in her space exploration phase.

We can see that her techniques and ideas return to her later in her career, culminating in some of her most dynamic work.

Photography is also sliced up in some of my other favorites of her work. She cut out strips of photographs and painted in the negative

STEIN NIGHT

Musicians present a wholesome Stein Night ANDREW BAXTER/the Justice

START THE SHOW: Jordan Mudd ’20 and the jazz band opened for the night.

ANDREW BAXTER/the Justice

DYNAMIC WITH ECHO: Leah Sagan-Dworsky ’21 performed lead vocals in her band.

By KIMBERLY ERAZO JUSTICE CONTRIBUTING WRITER

The first Stein Night of the semester, held on Feb. 1, garnered a lot of attention for its performers. WBRS: Student Music is a remarkable community that fosters creative musical talents and definitely put on a show that placed listeners on the spectrum of comfort or hypeness. The first performers were a jazz band: The dreamy, colorful trio enacted a calm transition from the normally noisy talking at the Stein into respectful quiet for the performances.

Jordan Mudd ’20 then went on to perform Amos Lee’s “Love A Lot” on his own. Playing on the keyboard, he sang with his mellow, enchanting voice that pulled in the attention from listener. This could be attributed to the balance between the piano and the voice because his voice was clear, but not uncomfortably loud, as was the piano. Next, he sang John Lennon’s “Jealous Guy,” and although it is a sad song, Mudd didn’t bring down the mood. Appreciation radiated through the room as if everyone could understand and connect on some level of reflect-

ing on the past or on a loved one.

The third performer of the night, Eli Kengmana ’19, wooed everyone with his guitar. I’ve never seen anyone play the guitar like him; he included sounds like drum beats and a bass line somehow, using just one guitar.

If I didn’t know any better, I would have thought someone was playing the bass and drums with him onstage.

Right after Kengmana, Leah Sagan-Dworsky ’21 came onto the scene as she led the vocals for her unnamed band. There was a progressive element to her music and Leah’s dynamic voice could do by producing a

sort of echoing feedback pattern. In contrast to Sagan-Dworsky’s band’s sense of wam togetherness, Carl Warmuth ’21 followed with angsty rock vocals and electric guitar. As soon as he started performing, everyone turned to look at who was screaming into the microphone. He brought a chaotic energy as everyone watched him, lightly headbanging — I know I did.

As one of the final performers of the night, Ashley Kamal ’22 helped settle everyone back down. She was able to get the whole crowd to sing along to “If I Can’t Have You” by Alicia Keys. There was a feeling of

unity, and if there’s one thing that performers need to be successful, it is to get their crowd on the same page.

All in all, attending this Stein Night with my friends was a rewarding experience. Not only did we get to enjoy good food, each other’s company and the social atmosphere, but we also got to experience talented performers expressing many of the wholesome feelings that were floating around the room. If the amount of talent and work put into this first Stein Night indicates how well the rest of the upcoming shows will go, audiences will certainly not be disappointed.

20

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2019 | ARTS | THE JUSTICE

INTERVIEW

JUSTARTS SPOTLIGHT ON THE ROSE

By ADDISON ANTONOFF JUSTICE CONTRIBUTING WRITER

One of the many striking pieces in the newest exhibit at the Rose Art Museum is not a finished piece, but a stencil made by artist Howardena Pindell. In 1970, she began hole-punching cardstock to create stencils. She used to place these stencils over the canvas and spray paint hundreds of small circles onto it. Pindell would repeat this process until a painting was complete.

The paint-splashed stencil, which was lent to the Rose Art Museum courtesy of Garth Greenam Gallery in New York and the artist herself, hangs equal to the other paintings on display — it is as important as any piece in Pindell’s portfolio.

It is gratifying to be able to admire a finished piece of art in the same room as the tool that was used to make the painting. No matter one’s personal opinion on the pieces in the exhibit, being let in on the process demystifies the art.

A finished piece of visual or literary art can seem almost godlike. Seeing the process behind a creation brings humanity back into the equation. Abstract art, in particular, more easily lends itself to interpretation than, say, realism.

Whether or not one of Pindell’s pieces elicits a clear and immediate reaction, all of her art is human. The image of someone toiling over something they care about, stencil and canvas in Pindell’s case, is something to which everyone can relate.

STAFF’S Top Ten

THU LE/ the Justice

Top Ten Straight People

By GILDA GEIST

JUSTICE EDITORIAL ASSITANT

“When I was in the third grade I thought that I was gay ‘Cause I could draw, my uncle was, and I kept my room straight” -Macklemore 1. Hillary Duff 2. Macklemore 3. Naomi Campbell 4. Not J.K. Rowling 5. Kim Possible 6. Victoria Beckham 7. Rupi Kaur 8. Richard Nixon’s dog Checkers 9. Mary Todd Lincoln 10. Timotheé Chalamet

Jason Kwan ’20

ANDREW BAXTER/the Justice

Photo Courtesy of JASON KWAN

This week, justArts spoke with Jason Kwan ’20, who is co-President of improv group Bad Grammer along with Mitchell Redfield ’20 JustArts: Tell me a little bit about your experience with improv performance or performance in general.

Jason Kwan: I joined Bad Grammer during my sophomore year at Brandeis. I was nervous to audition at first, but I was persuaded by some of my upperclassmen friends who already were in improv groups. It’s been an absolute joy ever since; it’s such an honor to perform with such caring, funny, and supportive people.

JA: What do consider the most important quality for an improv performer?

JK: I think a good improviser should be open-minded and willing to be goofy on stage. No right-minded college student who does comedy in their spare time should think too highly of themselves. If you trust the people who you perform with and have fun doing so, then you can easily become comfortable performing on stage.

JA: Unlike many other forms of performances, improv is very much unscripted. How do you prepare for a show?

MEGAN GELLER/the Justice

CROSSWORD ACROSS 1 Cereal brand 5 America, patriotically 10 2016 candidate with an exclamation point 13 Like Granny Smith apples, typically 15 Girls, in Granada 16 Miner’s find 17 Major airline 18 *Pirate’s perch 20 Alabama county 22 Compass dir.

23 *Place of great danger 25 Hole punchers?

29 Common mineral in rocks 30 More terrifying 33 River in Poland 34 Flowering 37 _____ Alamos 38 Classic comedy set at Faber College ... and a hint to each starred clue 41 Dance style 43 Frolic about 44 Hawaii’s state bird 47 “Umbrella” singer 49 Brings out 51 Pastoral poem 52 *No-privacy lifestyle 54 Curvy letter 57 “_______ and Cleopatra” 58 *TV program with a lot of pitches?

62 Sounds like a train 65 “That sounds neat!”

66 Mad as hell 67 Playground retort 68 Famous Arthur 69 “Ain’t that a shame!”

70 Tiny, to a tot DOWN 1 ______ Soundsystem 2 Red state?

3 Actor’s body of work 4 Baltic native 5 Cry when defeated 6 Alluring sort 7 Sean Lennon’s middle name 8 Go gaga (over) 9 Part of NASCAR 10 Coffee 11 TV drama settings, often 12 Wager 14 Blue Ribbon beer 19 Close by 21 Visionary 23 _____- Tzu 24 Birth control device, for short 26 ACME’s biggest customer 27 Baseball manager Durocher 28 GRE takers 30 Manhattan neighborhood 31 Most dope 32 Unit for the weight of a proton 35 The Crimson Tide 36 Law sch. alum 39 Video game review site

JK: I prepare for shows by getting plenty of sleep, drinking lots of water, and eating my fruits and vegetables.

In the minutes before shows begin, every member of Bad Grammer goes over their goals for the evening and what they hope to accomplish. Then everyone gets a hug because improv is all about support.

JA: It takes more than one person to put on a great show. How do improv performers help each other during a performance when nothing is planned out?

JK: Improvisers always have each other’s backs, and that means we don’t let ourselves get too caught up in trying to tell a joke. We can count on each other to continue the scene with whatever comes to mind. Trying to force a joke is counterintuitive to the improv process. It’s all about making a scene with the partners you have on stage.

Crossword Courtesy of EVAN MAHNKEN

40 Like some pistols 41 Part of TNT 42 Help out 45 Fresh 46 Immigrant’s subj.

48 56-Down, e.g.

50 Robe for Gandhi 52 Orange Crush rival 53 Having tats 55 Goes downhill fast?

56 Houston player, informally 58 Have a good cry 59 Do some farm work 60 “I see now!”

61 Small batteries 63 Large amount 64 Ingredient in lactose-free “milk”

JA: Many people are hesitant to try improv because of the fear of drawing a blank in front of a crowd of strangers. Do you have any suggestions for them?

JK: Everyone is funny. Yes, you too.

The great thing about improv is that even if you blank on stage, you have another improviser right next to you to continue the scene until you can get back on your feet. Even better, your partner can help you bring out your inherent comedic talent even if you do not initially plan on the scene.

Make each other laugh!

JA: What’s the best reaction you expect from the audience?

JK: The best reactions from the audience is when everyone is having a good time. You don’t need to make everyone in the audience double over in a belly laugh. If they smile, engage with the improvisers, give suggestions, and laugh when a good zinger is told, then that’s all I can ask for.

JA: Is there anything else that you would like to add?

JK: Bad Grammer are the spiciest bois on campus.

Solution Courtesy of EVAN MAHNKEN

—Luke Liu