4
OpiniOn OP-ED
TOWER/MARCH 10, 2023
TOWER 2022-2023 editors-iN-chieF Maia BarantsevitCh ellie yanG
EDITORIAL
Become a global citizen
MarketiNg director Carlos heredia News Lead editor Gisele Cestaro
“Catastrophe reveals character.” - Abhijit Naskar, When Call The People: My World My Responsibility
W
hen was the last time you thought about what is going on in Iran? China? Between essays, sports, and time with family and friends, we are often caught in the chaos of our own lives. However, it is also important to recognize our place as global citizens in the world. Recently, Turkey and Syria experienced a devastating earthquake that killed over 47,000 people. For the past two years, Iranian women have been protesting for their freedom and gender equality. The ongoing war in Ukraine against Russian imperialism has continued to disrupt many communities. As Covid-19 measures loosen in Chi-
na, the Chinese and world economy has seen and will see fluctuation for months, if not years, to come. These are just four prominent events which we cover in this paper, however there are many other struggles both domestically and around the world which are equally dire though they may not be a headline. Some of these events may be viewed through an optimistic lens as China’s reopening brings promise against rising inflation. And the Iranian women march in the hopes of effecting real change. Others may seem devastating and overwhelming to those not directly affected, and even worse for those caught in these tensions. Both are
events that exist beyond the articles in this paper and influence the lives of many just like you and me. The looming sense of guilt and need to help in the face of such huge problems may be daunting to those who have not yet contributed towards justice. However, it is never too late to begin. History is in never-ending repetition of itself, and there can only be hope of breaking out of the repetitive cycle or advancing it if we are willing to pay attention to not only those in our immediate community, but also those in the larger world far away. Because the reality is, it’s not so far away. Whether it is through responsible consumption of me-
dia, involvement with nonprofit organizations, or everything in between, activism can start from your phone and move out to impact the lives of strangers in need. In addition, observing the past, to weather the future, is a consistent source of knowledge we must use to recognize the main causes of distress in our environments. Being informed is the first crucial step toward helping. When was the last time you watched the news? Or read a New York Times article? We are given so many resources and options for information consumption that can fuel our drive to help, there is no better time than now to pick them up and use their power for good.
Iconic children’s author’s work censored sorship.” This public backlash has resulted in the publisher announcing that Justime Pascutti it will continue to publish the original texts alongside new edited versions. More than 300 million copAd and Distribution Manager ies of Dahl’s books have been sold, and they have been translated into ccording to a represen63 different languages. His works tative from the author’s have also been widely adapted on estate, new editions of the both the big and small screens. legendary works of best-selling British Dahl died in 1990, aged 76. An author Roald Dahl, whose children’s evaluation of his works began in 2020, before Netflix acquired the Roald Dahl Story Company, which controls the author’s copyrights and trademarks. The estate had worked with Inclusive Minds, a group that promotes accessibility and diversity in children’s books. While noting that the group did not “write, edit or rewrite texts,” Inclusive Minds said they “provide valuable input when it comes to reviewing language that can be damaging and perpetuate harmSONALI RAO//TOWER ful stereotypes.” The TelePASCUTTI BELIEVES THAT CENSORSHIP is not the answer. Although Roald Dahl is graph, a British a controversial figure Pascutti does not support rewrites. She is alarmed by the distor- newspaper, reported tion of the author’s work. that at least 10 of
A
classics include “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory,” “Matilda” and “James and the Giant Peach,” have been rewritten in an attempt to render them as less offensive and more inclusive. The news that these changes have been made has sparked widespread criticism and outrage from many novelists, such as Salman Rushdie, the prizewinning author of “Midnight’s Children” and “The Satanic Verses”. Rushdie described the revisions as “absurd cen-
Dahls’ 19 children’s books had hundreds of words modified or erased, including descriptions of characters’ appearances, races, and genders. Additionally, language relating to weight, mental health and violence had been removed or modified. As part of this, descriptions that used the colors black and white as well as adjectives such as “fat” and “ugly” were eliminated. Chief executive of PEN America, Suzanne Nossel, reacted angrily to the news about the revisions on social media. Nossel posted on Twitter that the organization was “alarmed” by the changes which had been implemented in “a purported effort to scrub the books of that which might offend someone.” She wrote that “If we start down the path of trying to correct for perceived slights instead of allowing readers to receive and react to books as written, we risk distorting the work of great authors and clouding the essential lens that literature offers on society.” Matthew Dennison, who wrote a biography of Dahl, said that the author had a history of having problematic relationships with his editors and despised anyone who tampered with his work. Dennison remarked that Dahl always “resisted unnecessary sanitizing” and Dahl recognized that changes made to his books were a result of the political atmosphere that represented adult sensibilities rather than children’s concerns. Mr. Dahl once said, “I never get any protests from children. All you get are giggles of mirth and squirms of delight. I know what children like.” The censorship of books within school districts is a timely issue. Recently in my English class we discussed
the New York Times article, My Young Mind Was Disturbed by a Book. It Changed My Life. In the article, Nguyen argues that if schools ban books, children will be deprived of learning important values and historical events. Another thing he argues is that the reason books get banned is because of the parents, not children. It’s the parents who have an issue with the content of the books, and don’t want their children reading about it. I found this really interesting, and something that I never thought about, but agree with completely. “And perhaps that’s the real reason some people want to ban books that raise complicated issues: They implicate and discomfort the adults, not the children. By banning books, we also ban difficult dialogues and disagreements, which children are perfectly capable of having and which are crucial to a democracy…Perhaps we will eventually have less war, less racism, less exploitation if our children can learn how to talk about these things,” Nguyen said. By banning books, we are just avoiding topics that need to be talked about. This got me thinking, why do some books get banned while others don’t? How do people categorize a “good” book that kids can read, vs. a “bad book” that kids cannot read? What content in books is considered bad? I believe that no books should be categorized as “bad.” Roald Dahl was indeed a controversial person, and many of the things he said and wrote troubles and offends me. Yet I don’t think censorship is the answer. I agree with author Philip Pullman who told BBC Radio 4 that Dahl’s books “should be allowed to fade away” and not be rewritten if judged by modern society to be offensive.
I wouldn’t like to thank the Academy, Grammys, Globes, and Oscars Lucas Seguinot
Lead Features Editor
E
very year award season comes around and embarrasses itself. From the Golden Globes in the beginning of January to the Academy Awards (commonly known as the Oscars) which usually takes place in March, there is a new scandal. This year’s Grammys takes the cake for me, though. Who won record of the year and how did Harry Styles win Album of the Year? No disrespect to either artist because their work was great and they deserved the nomination, but there are better options for both of these awards. This isn’t a stand-alone case, though. These award shows, especially the Grammys, have a history of making controversial and in my opinion wrong decisions on winners. Voting: First, it is important to recognize how the winners are chosen. In regards to the Grammys, winners are chosen by members of the Recording Academy. To ensure fairness, Academy members (fellow artists, producers, and more) are tied to a category in which they participate and vote in. In theory, this does make sense; who
better to choose winners than people who pursue music for a living? Masters even uses similar logic in the concept of Community Council; peers recommending appropriate consequences for fellow peers. Currently the Oscars follow a voting structure almost exactly the same as that of the Grammys. So why is it so faulty? There is no exact reason. The only reason that can be possibly attributed to this is personal bias or lack of knowledge on there section. Nevertheless, something needs to be done to revamp this system. Only 12.4 million viewed the Grammys this year compared to 2012’s 39 million people, and for the Oscars 15.3 million watched in 2022. This is a 24 million drop in viewership compared to the 39 million in 2012. Famous Mistakes: What truly demolishes my view of these awards are the snubs and notable losses. One perfect example of this is Macklemore beating Kendrick Lamar for Best Rap album in 2014. Macklemore’s album “The Heist” won five Grammys that year and deserves its flowers, but Kendrick Lamar’s “Good Kid, Mad City” is known as a generational storytelling album about Kendrick Lamar’s life growing up in Compton, California. Even Macklemore agreed that Lamar
CHANA KIM//TOWER LUCAS SEGUINOT ARGUES THAT award shows need drastic reform.In recent years there have been various voting mistakes. Seguinot believes that the winners should be reviewed. Additionally, he claims that the voters should be changed. should have won the Grammy. “You got robbed… It’s weird and sucks that they robbed you.” These are the exact words Macklemore sent over text. On the Oscar side, one perfect example is one win in 11 nominations for legendary director
Stanley Kubrick. He was nominated for four movies including “Clockwork Orange,”Doctor Strangelove or: How I Stopped “Worrying and Love the Bomb,” Barry Lydon, Full Metal Jacket and lastly “Space Odyssey.”His only win was “Space Odyssey,” for
which he won Best Visual Effects. To make matters worse, Kubrick didn’t receive a nomination for any of his parts of “The Shining.” Lastly, the Golden Globes didn’t nominate the 2019 film Roma for Best Picture because there was a rule that non-English films couldn’t receive nominations in that category. In comparison, “Roma”was nominated for 10 awards and won three at the Oscars. They received a nomination for Best Picture at the Oscars but fell short. Thankfully they change this rule in 2022. This rule is a disgrace to all non-English language movies in the past and it is appalling to see how long it took for such a prominent body as the Hollywood Foreign Press Association to change this rule. What can these awards do better in the future? Well, the goal is to return to the glory days when viewership was the highest. Some controversy is all right, but only scenarios that don’t harm the reputation. What they should do is review the winners and oversee who can vote. After horrible voting, those people shouldn’t be able to vote again. Also, the glitz and glamor of iconic hosts and tributes made these events more special. I look forward to hopefully seeing the glory days return.
News editors oliver KreeGer alexa MurPhy opiNioN Lead editor Maya PhilliPs opiNioN editor Matthias Jaylen Features Lead editors Marianna Gu luCas seGuinot Features editors tara PhilliPs lily zuCKerMan sports Lead editor noah Kassell-yunG sports editor adaM Bello sociaL Media MaNagers lydia ettinGer sandra liu weB editor xavier rolston staFF writer
viKtoriia soKolenKo photo editor Josh MarKowitz advertisiNg & distriButioN MaNager Justine PasCutti Lead copy editor aurora rose horn copy editor aviv eMery accouNtaBiLity aNd Media advaNceMeNt MaNager rooKe wiser executive producer, tower Broadcast News Carol Queiroz hanna sChiCiano coNtriButiNg writers ayaLah spratt chaNeL NeaL NeeNa atkiNs ella BlaCK staFF photographers aNd iLLustrators Chana KiM lisa yao alyssa wanG euniCe wanG sonali rao ellie sChalKwyK Jenny xu sydney starKey ryan Guan FacuLty advisers ellen Cowhey Matt ives online MeDia
For more information, follow Tower on the following platforms: Website: Tower.MastersNY. org Facebook: MastersTower Twitter: @MastersTower Instagram: @MastersTower
Distribution Process
Tower is hand-delivered on the day of publication to the Upper School. 650 copies are printed. A copy is sent to each of our advertisers.
scholastic Press affiliations, letters anD eDitorial Policy
Tower is the winner of the Pacemaker Award for Overall Excellence, an award-winning member of the National Scholastic Press Association (NSPA), Columbia Scholastic Press Association (CSPA), Journalism Education Association (JEA) and Quill and Scroll. We encourage Letters to the Editor, which can be submitted to the following email address: TowerEditors@MastersNY.org. Published approximately five times a year, Tower, the student newspaper of The Masters School, is a public forum, with its Editorial Board making all decisions concerning content. Commentaries and opinion columns are the expressed opinion of the author and not of Tower and its Editorial Board or its advisers. Furthermore, the opinions conveyed are not those of The Masters School, faculty, or staff. Unsigned editorials express views of the majority of the Editorial Board.