Senate discusses upcoming plans and events, cont’d

u CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1

Following announcements and updates, the session opened for questions and concerns. The senator for MacGregor asked if there is any way to get a printer installed in MacGregor or Ham halls.

When asked why they found this necessary, they elaborated that because MacGregor and Ham are so out of the way from the rest of campus, it can be an issue of accessibility for some students. They believed that it might be beneficial because of the time and distance it takes to reach the nearest printer.

Next, a representative for the Jewish Student Union brought up the issue of Narcan for RAs, something that had previously been discussed in the fall semester.

They asked if there were any updates, and an E-board member confirmed that there were not, but that the issue had been brought up to ResLife and was possibly being discussed. The E-board member also stated that there might be other people, such as a member of ResLife, who might know more.

The Mead Hall senator raised a concern about the new dining hall setup. Since the L’Chaim-Kosher station still serves with paper plates, she wondered if the dining hall should still have garbage and recycling bins out for students to use to avoid extra work for the dining staff. A dining manager who attended the meeting spoke up and stated that they do have bins en, and that having them inside not only saves workers from completing the extra work of moving them from outside the kitchen to inside but also creates a safer environment for students, as no one is liable to slip on spilled food. was his breaking point. Literally just such a clever movie.”

Finally, another senate representative asked if there was a possibility of changing the COVID-19 bathroom schedule, as she had had COVID-19 a few weeks ago, and found the schedule to be problematic, especially because there was no time during the middle of the night.

To close, senators and representatives began work on their commissions. The commissions are academic outreach, accessibility, COVID-19 health and safety, dining, environmental sustainability, international student outreach, mental health outreach and SGA anti-racism, each ranging from three to five members.

To complete their work, members were asked to touch base with their commission and review past notes so that everyone was on the same page about the issues and topics that were being discussed. If they had not yet emailed a point of contact for their concern they were asked to do so.

Additionally, commissions were to draft a petition or begin drafting a petition.

Petition samples were available for reference. Once the petitions had been drafted, each commission showed it to their E-board member. Following this activity, the meeting concluded.

Following praise for Chef Slowik’s controversial executions — literally and figuratively — Klurfield also criticizes the Chef.

“There is too much satire when it comes to [Chef Slowik’s] choices,” explained Klurfield. “Because he is portrayed as so terrible, there’s this ‘Oh, he’s insane and clearly the villain’ truth which prevents us from being able to fully endorse Chef Slowik — I wish we could.”

Klurfield explained that while she couldn’t fully get behind Slowik, she could get closer to supporting the kitchen staff: “The way they as a team of diverse people in the service industry ‘get back’ at the snobby food critic by handing her broken emulsion after broken emulsion, or stabbing Slowik in the nether region, or chopping a cheating millionaire’s finger off.”

Focusing on the staff, Klurfield declares, “If I could emphasize anything, it would be the role of the staff here. Are they being used? Is this what they want? Of course, the movie cleverly gets to sidestep these questions when it reaches their rich asshole viewers by claiming the genre of satire sneak in simultaneously; a good way out.”

One comedic aspect of the film, depending on the audience, was the almost laughable portions of the food presented. Rondinelli agreed with the ludicrousness of the food: “All the dishes made me angry. Like the whole time I was asking where the food was.”

The various courses presented during the meal seemed to be a satirical take on the pretentiousness of both Chef Slowik and the diners. One notable dish was the bread platter that did not contain bread. Instead, the plate contained dollops of dipping sauces for the diners to eat without any sort of accompaniment, illustrating a scene frustrating for the wealthy patrons and comedic for viewers.

Rondinelli mentioned multiple scenes and scenarios that stuck out to them in particular. “The. Cheeseburger. Scene! Also, the fact that NONE of the rich people tried to run away better! What the fuck! Hilarious and such a reflection of [the rich] today. But yes, the whole interaction about [Margot’s] cheeseburger and her bill — slayed.”

Concluding their thoughts, Rondinelli and Klurfield both offered praise for the movie. “We need more horror movies that take FOREVER to chill you to your tailbone, y’know? … I thought this movie was a whole new kind of inside-diss to Hollywood,” began Rondinelli, “But obviously, they all have thick skulls and probably won’t ever understand what this movie was about until they work a minimum wage job again.”

Klurfield provided a synopsis of her final thoughts: “It’s an impressive film, if predictable or pompous at times. The right amount of gore, the right amount of food shots, the right amount of bro humor. I thoroughly enjoyed [it].”

“The Menu” proves itself to be an enjoyable watch for foodies and the everyday watcher. Characterized by sustained intensity throughout the film that keeps viewers on the edge of their seat, “The Menu” is a gory riot whose message of social critique will remain prevalent for the next generation of film watchers.