The Milton Paper MARCH 3, 2017
MILTON’S INDEPENDENT WEEKLY STUDENT NEWSPAPER
News
Opinion
Deans Provide Vans for Planned Parenthood Rally By MARSHALL SLOANE On Monday February 27th, school administrators announced that the Dean's office will be providing transportation to the North Quincy Train Station on Saturday March 4 for students who want to go to the Planned Parenthood Rally in Boston. Mr. Ruiz announced the van in a brief schoolwide email. The school intends to provide the van because of strong interest demonstrated by a group of students. Anooshka Gupta, Class I, helped lead the initiative, and, when asked why she wanted the van, she explained, “We just want transportation similar to the transportation to The Women’s March. We want a van that can drive us to North Quincy and can then pick us up from the North Quincy Station because that cuts out so much travel time and it makes it so much more accessible for students to get to events in Boston.” The van may serve a practical purpose since it cuts out the time and cost of transportation, but the students pushing for the transit had more significant motivations. “There is a group of us that is trying to create change on campus and make events in Boston more accessible to students on campus,” said Anooshka. “I think the vans are just letting people have their voices heard.” Keisha Baffour-Addo, Class I, also helped to organize the van, and she continued to explain the group’s larger objectives. “I feel like when we talk about having discourse or conversations there is this implication that everyone’s voice is heard equally, but that is not the case. I think we
CONTINUED ON PAGE 3
US HISTORY
page
4
DIGITAL DETRITUS
page
7
THE OSCARS 2017
page
9
page
Finding a Stress Day Shouldn't be Stressfull By VIVIAN SOONG I’m sure everyone would agree that Milton is a stressful place. In the past 10 days alone, I’ve had a Precalculus test, an English in-class essay, a Chemistry test, a summer program application due, a final chemistry lab data, and, of course, the notorious U.S. History research paper. Thankfully, the administration acknowledges that Milton is stressful, and that is why they created stress days. However, the way that stress days are
designed makes it difficult for students to take one, and what is the point of having stress days if students can’t even take them when they are actually stressed? Of course I “followed” the timeline that my teacher gave me for the research paper, but I still would have liked to take a stress day the week before the assignment was due. Unfortunately, however, last week was short because of President's’ Day weekend,
CONTINUED ON PAGE 5
Fast News By TMP News Staff
Dance Concert: Tickets Sell Out in One Day The annual Winter Dance Concert, one of the most widely anticipated events of the year, took place this Thursday, Friday, and Saturday. The show thrilled audiences as much as ever, with over a dozen dances directed by a number of student and faculty choreographers and with a runtime
over two hours. This year, Dance Concert tickets were sold online, as opposed to being handed out in the Student Center; tickets for the Friday show sold out in a number of minutes, with the other shows almost reaching full capacity by the next day. •
Mud Season: Captain's Practices Conflict with Winter Playoffs
As the Winter season drew to a close after Nobles’ Day last weekend, many spring teams began holding optional captain’s practices this week to prepare for next week’s launch of the Spring athletic season. However, with both the Boys’ Varsity Basketball and Hockey teams
making their playoffs, the athletics department limited access by Spring teams to the ACC, even closing off the ACC, RSG, and CSG entirely to non-athletes on Monday in order to ensure that all teams which had arranged practices had space. •
New clubs and Affinity Groups on Campus
Inside This Issue
HOOLIGANS
VOL. 34, NO. 014
10
With the new round of accepted clubs being released by the Activities Office a couple of days ago, a number of new clubs have started hosting meetings this week. The IPIC (Issue-Based Politically Independent Club), for example, started meeting on Monday; IPIC hopes to promote “balanced and broad political discussion to educate and enlighten
Milton students ... to provide a political space for everyone -- not just those who fall towards the far ends of the political spectrum”. Also, a new affinity group for Muslim students on campus was founded this year, to provide a safe space and a voice for the growing Muslim population of Milton. •
PAGE 2
The Milton Paper The 34th Editorial Board Editors-in-Chief Managing Editor Editor at Large Opinion Manager News Managers Senior Editors A&E Editor Rachel Handler Opinion Editor Gabrielle Fernandopulle
Malcolm McCann and Eli Burnes Letitia Chan Cheyenne Porcher Mateen Tabatabaei Marshall Sloane and Henry Westerman
Chloe Kim and Henry Burnes Sports Editor Sarah Willwerth
Layout Editor Jack Daley Photo Editor Caroline Massey
Faculty Sponsor Lisa Baker
Cartoonist Lilly Le
Associate Editors Navpreet Sekhon Jonah Garnick Nihal Raman Website Manager Alex Iansiti
News
Opinion
Abby Walker Alexandra Millard Allison Reed Elina Thadhani Ellie Lachenauer Evita Thadhani Lyndsey Mugford Jack Sloane Juliana Viola Sarah Alkhafaji Will Torous Jimmy Delano Brendan Hegarty
Barbara McDuffee Celena Eccleston Elaine Wu Jerome Vainisi Molly Wilson Natasha Roy Noah Cheng Rachel Ding Serena Fernandopulle Vivian Soong Willa DuBois William Kim Jack Weiler Pierce Wilson Jessica Wang Pierce Wilson Jessica Kim Edward Moreta
A&E Aditya Gandhi Emma Comrie Emma James Liz Foster Zoe Camaya Olivia Zhong Pierce Wilson Madison Lynch Hannah Hachamovitch Columnists Michelle Erdenesanaa Tyler Piazza Semi Oloko Thea McRae Hana Tatsutani Clare Lonergan
Sports Chris Mathews Liam Kennedy James Oh Sophia Li Theo Miailhe Humor Sophia Wilson-Pelton Lydia Hill Zack Herman Nick Govindan
Milton’s Independent Weekly Student Newspaper “A Forum for Discussion and Thought” Founded 1979 • Publishing Weekly Since 1983 Founders David Roth • Mark Denneen The Milton Paper is an independent, student-produced publication. It does not necessarily represent the views of the students, faculty, administration, or Milton Academy itself. Please do not copy or reproduce without permission. Letters Policy: The Milton Paper gladly accepts letters from anyone who sends them. We do not promise to publish any or all letters, and we retain the rights to edit letters for content, length, and clarity. We will not publish anonymous letters. If inclined, please take the opportunity to write to us. Send letters by mail (Letters to the Editor, The Milton Paper, Milton Academy, 170 Centre Street, Milton, MA 02186), by email (TheMiltonPaper34@gmail.com), or by personal delivery to our office Warren 304.
Editorial
Rename 'Pieh Commons' On Monday, February 21, 2017, Mr. Bland announced to the school perhaps the most disturbing revelations presented in recent history. For some background, beginning in May of 2016, Milton employed T&M Protection Resources (T&M) to look into Milton’s past regarding sexual abuse. In its findings, T&M reported that four former employees sexually assaulted Milton students several decades ago. Mr. Bland, in his liaison with the community, divulged information on one of the perpetrators. Rey Buono, a performing arts teacher from 1973 to 1987, engaged in multiple incidents of sexual misconduct with students while he was at Milton. Thus far, T&M has verified that at least 12 male students, all of whom were minors at the time, were abused by Buono. While the transgressions of Rey Buono are particularly egregious, the systemic failure on behalf of Milton is unequivocally horrifying. From the information released, it seems certain that Jerry Pieh failed to act on at least two occasions. The first failure was in 1982 when Pieh had “some knowledge” of the abuse yet did not further investigate or terminate Rey Buono, but instead allowed a sexual offender to remain a teacher for 5 more years. The second failure was in 1987 when Buono was terminated for abusing a student and Pieh did not further investigate whether other students were abused– a particularly appalling failure considering Pieh had “some knowledge” of Buono’s transgressions 5 years earlier. Sexual abuse alone is undoubtedly heinous, but sexual abuse that is systemically allowed and left unchecked is absolutely abhorrent. The Milton Paper Editorial Board believes that Milton must take every opportunity to support the victims and condemn those accountable, and as such we believe the space in Kellner designated ‘Pieh Commons’ must be renamed. Jerry Pieh was the headmaster of Milton from 1973 to 1991, and “The Commons” was dedicated to Pieh by Milton’s Board of Trustees in May of 1991. The dedication plaque in the commons reads, “The Commons / is dedicated with deepest gratitude to / Jerome A. Pieh / Headmaster 1973-1991 / from the Milton Academy Board of Trustees / May 18, 1991.” We believe that in light of the recent revelations, the dedication and the designation of ‘Pieh Commons’ was made under false pretenses and a continued use of that name would be inappropriate and distasteful. With full knowledge of Pieh’s actions, Milton’s Board of Trustees would not have elected, “with deepest gratitude,” to dedicate a common space to Pieh. Unless Milton is willing to give further context as to the extent of Pieh’s awareness of sexual abuse, it would be unbefitting to give Pieh the benefit of the doubt considering the severity of the situation: “some knowledge” is enough knowledge to be be held accountable in this instance. Decade’s ago, Pieh’s inaction supported an environment where 12 or more students were sexually abused. Today Pieh’s actions are a stain on Milton’s history– a sickening reminder of when our school systemically compromised the safety of and allowed the abuse of its students. Pieh could have prevented further sexual abuse, and his failure to do so invalidates all justifications to have him immortalized in the Kellner Performing Arts Center. Out of respect for the victims, as a statement of condemnation against those accountable, and as a gesture of progress, we must rename ‘Pieh Commons.’•
News US History Opened to Class III Students By BRENDAN HEGARTY As the first phase of course planning is reaching its end, many Milton Academy students are still making choices about what classes will fill up their next year's course load. For the first time, starting next fall, the current Class IV has been offered the choice to take U.S. History in their sophomore year. U.S. History, one of the Milton Academy history department’s two graduation requirements, has long been available to only juniors and seniors; this year, the History Department decided to break from tradition and open up options for incoming students. History teacher Mr. Blanton explained that the driving reason for the change was “to enable more students to be able to take electives in the History and Social Sciences during their junior and senior year.” Most departments want students to take their courses beyond the diploma requirements, and it appears that the History department decided to enable this by making it possible for students to complete their requirements in the first two years of the upper school. This change allows for two open years of course planning based on each student’s own interests, unburdened by diploma requirements. The sophomores that do take U.S. History will be in sophomore only classes, classes that will have a curriculum adapted from the current course. When asked what changes would be made in the curriculum, Mr. Blanton said, “At this point, it is hard to articulate exactly what changes to the curriculum will be introduced. That will be the task of some members of the department this Spring and Summer.” Until next year we will not know the major changes in the course, but freshmen are expected to make their choices before then. A multitude of opinions was expressed by possible students in U.S. History, from the excited, to the undecided. Leo Khadduri (IV) reveled in the idea of “getting [U.S. History] out of the way as soon as possible”. He expressed his notions about the course’s difficulty, as well as his hopes for it to be easier for sophomores, and his hopes to at least get such a tough course out of the way as soon as possible. Although this is a widespread sentiment among freshmen, there are those who aren’t so sure. Charlie Rebuck (IV) was more undecided about the possibility of taking the course, juggling two thoughts. On one hand, Charlie said “junior and
senior year would be made easier because I can take art as a core class,” yet he also debated taking art next year instead of history because it may “lighten the load short term.” Many decisions and indecisions have stemmed from what the current freshmen have already heard about the difficulty of the upcoming years, as well as the difficulty of U.S. History. This change is not without opposition. In particular, upperclassmen who have already taken or are taking US History are concerned with how this change will affect the balance of curricula at Milton. As Henry Westerman (I) explained, “this new sophomore-only class will not be the same US History experience that we [upperclassmen] went through. US History is known as one of Milton’s best courses, but also one of the most challenging. With the class no longer being aimed at upperclassmen, undoubtedly the level of challenge and depth will go down; for example, the homework expectations for sophomore are lower than those for juniors and seniors, limiting the amount of reading a teacher can assign per night.” Westerman also worried that sophomores who chose to take US History will be unlikely to take their art requirement sophomore year, which would limit the number of students who end up taking advanced art in their junior and senior years. “If people don’t take art sophomore year, they’re more likely to push off the requirement until senior year, which means less and less people will be taking advanced art courses.” These upperclassmen fears were somewhat put to rest last Friday in the Class IV assembly, when Ms. Bonenfant officially introduced the option of U.S. History for sophomores. Her announcement mainly served to dispel the rumors that the course would be any easier for sophomores than their junior and senior counterparts. The announcement made the case that freshmen should not look to take U.S. History sophomore year simply because they are looking for an easier time. Class IV Dean Mr. Lou (a member of the History Department faculty) followed up on Ms. Bonenfant’s announcement, explaining the logistics of the course. Mr. Lou explained that, though these new US History classes would be sophomore-only, the history faculty would be creating a new, sophomore specific curriculum over the summer, intended to offer equivalent challenge and breadth to an underclassmen audience.•
PAGE 3
Deans Provide Vans CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1 wanted to kind of empower those groups that are not given that same voice. Typically, you give power to the male, white voices, and we are not those voices. We are trying to empower those.” The school’s providing transit to a Planned Parenthood event could be viewed as a political statement in a very charged climate where any action can be misconstrued as partisan. When asked about the political repercussions, Mr. Ruiz stated, “I would say that I, as Dean of Students, want to support student initiatives. I don’t feel that it’s necessarily a stance on anything political per se that I am making or that the institution is making. I’m simply meeting an expressed interest on the part of students in getting transportation.” Mr. Ruiz cited costs as a major motivation. Anooshka believes that the van “is not an endorsement” since “the administration is just providing transportation.” However, Keisha explained, “I think [the van] just comes down to basic human rights which I think does not have to be labelled as political. I think in terms of the school doing too much, I don’t think that is a thing. The administration itself has not come out to say that we publicly denounce Trump or publicly support whatever.” The van policy could set an uncomfortable precedent. After all, the school has now provided transport to The Women’s March and a Planned Parenthood Rally, two liberal movements. While the school has never denied transport to a conservative event, the school has not yet confronted such a challenge, the hypothetical circumstance could bring a whole new slew of challenges. When asked how the administration would respond to a request to go to a conservative event like a Trump rally, Mr. Ruiz said, “Without having a specific event in mind, I don’t know how I would approach that conversation...I would not shut down that conversation. I would need to think through what they are asking as far as administrative support. My gut right now is yeah. With any major events like this, one of the things we think about is student safety. With that in mind, I think there would be conversations that would extend beyond this office, so we would want to talk to parents and make sure that they are aware of possible challenges and dangers. If we landed on that piece, then maybe, but it’s hypothetical.” Planned Parenthood may be associated with the left, but the student activists that pushed for the van welcome conservatives. In fact, Anooshka explained, “We are not trying to be exclusive. I feel like that when people hear about these events. If you are a conservative voice on campus- I cannot speak on behalf of these peoplebut I feel like you would not be as comfortable participating, but if there are conservative voices that want to be a part of the group and want to create a safe space on campus, I am not opposed to that.” •
PAGE 4
News
Teaching US History the Old Way By HENRY WESTERMAN The other day in the JV Puck locker room, over the clamor of sophomore banter and senior complaints about Project applications, I overheard the two freshmen discussing course planning. After initially laughing out loud that I never again would have to consider what courses to take in my next years at Milton, I made my way over and asked whether they needed any course planning advice. “I was wondering whether colleges will care if I take US History sophomore year?” asked one of the pair. Initially, I didn’t take the question seriously, believing that he was simply misinformed. “You can’t take history as a sophomore, just take it as a junior or senior, depending on when you decide to take Bio,” I replied. But the other freshman spoke up to correct me. “No, our teacher said that starting next year, you can take History as a sophomore, in a class with only other sophomores.” I frowned, and answered, “That’s weird, why don’t you ask your advisor about that one?” before returning to my own seat and continuing to get dressed. At first, I didn’t make much of the revelation, but while driving later that afternoon, I mulled the anecdote over again. Only then did I realize what an issue this change could become, with repercussions harming more than just the History Department. According to an article published this week in The Milton Paper, the History Department this year decided to allow sophomores to take US History, as part of a continued attempt to revitalize the humanities at Milton, which I agree is a valiant cause. Over the past several years, students and faculty alike have noticed a gradual shift toward STEM fields of interest among students; as one senior pointed out in lunchtime conversation the other day, “Generally, when you think of the smartest kids in the school, they’re all math and science students, and I don’t think it’s always been that way.” (see “The War on the Humanities” by Marshall Sloane (I) and William Powers ‘16 for more on this issue) Thus, the History Department hopes that, by allowing more students to get through their requirements earlier in their Milton careers, more students will be encouraged to pursue advanced electives in history and social sciences, courses which in recent years have seen less interest from the student body. Though I agree that this could be the case, knowing myself and my fellow students, I’m afraid just the opposite will occur. From my experience, students, like water travelling downhill, try to travel the course
of least resistance through Milton. Most often, students will attempt to fill out their requirements early, taking the most difficult courses they can handle, to fill up a successful (and, most importantly, good looking) catalog of courses to send off to colleges. In the past, US History has been a course delegated to junior or senior year. Generally seen as a challenging course, and one of Milton’s best and most important, students tend to balance the course with Biology, choosing to take one of the two during each of their upperclassmen years (to those who brave the challenge of both US History and Biology in the same year, I salute you, but it's actually pretty easy). This trend will likely change when sophomores are allowed to take US History. Students will most likely elect to take US History sophomore year, as the sophomore version of the curriculum--which will be restructured from the course for upperclassmen to offer easier workloads--will be easier. Students will then be essentially forced to take a history or social science elective in order to fulfill the expectation from colleges that students continue each major branch of academics for at least three years of their high school career, achieving the History Department’s goal of more students in electives, but not for the desired reasons. At the same time, none of their other course expectations will change, meaning that art will need to be pushed off in order to accommodate these new history blocks in the course planning schedule. As a result, the majority of students will likely end up taking their art requirement in their Senior Year, inevitably limiting the number of students in Advanced Art classes. Though, one could argue, the potential changes I outlined above would simply shift the focus of the student body from an emphasis on arts to an emphasis on history, just as student interests have naturally moved toward STEM fields. These changes would therefore act as a counterforce to the ‘War Against the Humanities’. But, in my opinion, art is such a central part to the Milton way of life that cannot be thrown aside in this way. I love that art is such an important part of the Milton community. Just this Monday morning, we recognized the dozens of student artists who were recognized on a local and national level for their work. Several times a year, our community is enriched by student art shows in Kellner and the AMC; student artwork adorns the halls of each academic building and hangs
CONTINUED ON PAGE 6
Should Celebrities Be Involved in Politics? By BARBARA MCDUFFEE The recent election cycle and following inauguration have created an almost overwhelming amount of conversation and debate from news sources and, most notably, social media. This debate is clearly justified, for the current political climate demands this sort of dialogue. An interesting and sometimes controversial aspect of politics is the involvement of celebrities. Many stars use their large followings on social media to voice their opinions on legislative decisions and endorse various candidates and policies. While many celebrities are passionate about issues and feel that they have a duty to speak out about them, some people believe that celebrities should not involve themselves in politics. I believe that, while the famous may have a larger following than the average Twitter user, they are still people who should be allowed and encouraged to share their opinions. However, I also believe that due to their large followings, celebrities must be more responsible than the everyday person about the facts that they share and the politicians they endorse. We are used to seeing selfies with Hillary and hearing celebrity speakers at the DNC. Many stars feel it is their duty to use their followings to spread awareness for polarizing issues. Conversely, some famous people don’t approve of this involvement in politics. Late last year, Mark Walhberg was quoted by The Independent as saying that many celebrities are “living in a bubble” and “are out of touch with the common person;” therefore, he believes that they should stay out of politics, a practice that he follows himself by choosing not to comment on his political affiliations or opinions. While I do agree with Wahlberg on his point that celebrities do not understand the life of an average person, that does not mean they should not be allowed to speak about issues that are important to them. In fact, celebrities have the amazing privilege of being able to reach out to millions of people to bring awareness to important causes. For example, Ashton Kutcher recently spoke at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee on behalf of his organization, Thorn, which fights to end the sexual exploitation of children—the video of his testimony gained a little less than
CONTINUED ON PAGE 7
Stressful Stress Days CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1 so I was not allowed to take one. And even if the week was a full length one, I still wouldn’t be able to take a stress day because the infamous Student Handbook specifically states that students cannot take stress days the week before the term paper is due. This got me thinking: why are there so many restrictions when trying to take a stress day? According to the Student Handbook, a student can only take a stress day when said student has “no tests or graded exercises scheduled on the personal day and there is no major assignment for which other schedule accommodations have been made.” In addition, “the personal day may only be granted on Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday” of a full length week, and an upperclassman boarder is only allowed one stress day per semester. If all of these requirements are met along with received approval from the House Head, only then is the student allowed to take the day off. With all of these restrictions, finding the right day for a stress day is almost impossible. I will admit that some of the rules set for taking a stress day make sense, such as the rule that states that students cannot take a stress day on days that they have major assessments due; however, some of the other rules, such as being allowed to take a stress day only on a Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday of a full-length week, are less reasonable. I’m sure that many students can confirm the fact that four-day weeks are just as stressful as fiveday weeks, so some may find that taking a stress day during a four-day week would be more useful than taking one during a five-day week. Furthermore, students should be allowed to take stress days on any day of the week, not just Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays. I understand that the administration doesn’t want to allow students to create a three-day weekend for themselves, but allowing students to take a stress day on Monday and Friday can allow for them to plan ahead and catch up on work if they know that they have an especially busy weekend. Stress days can be beneficial for students, but the way the administration designed the rules for these days off prevents students from actually taking one when they truly need it. I am certain if I were allowed to take a stress day last week, it would have significantly helped me with my research paper. Milton tries to acknowledge the importance of taking care of our mental health, so wouldn’t relaxing the stress-day policy rules allow us to do just that? •
Opinion Yale Renames Calhoun College
Calhoun College, Yale University
By MOLLY WILSON After decades of controversy, Yale University decided this month to change the name of the residential college commemorating John Calhoun. John Calhoun (1782-1850), an American statesman and politician, is best remembered for being one of the most ardent defenders of slavery and white supremacy in history. He is infamous for defending the institution of slavery as “a positive good” at a time when most of his southern contemporaries regarded slavery as a necessary evil. And while Calhoun lived in an era in which the majority of white Americans presumed African inferiority, Calhoun went so far as to believe that the American dream was founded on this inferiority. In a speech given in 1838, Calhoun stated that slavery is “the most safe and stable basis for free institutions in the world.” Yale’s Calhoun College is not the only namesake of John Calhoun. The Calhoun School, a New York City private school, bears the name of the white supremacist, as do the Calhoun School in Montgomery, Alabama, and the Calhoun Community College in Decatur, Alabama. Additionally, John Calhoun is just one example of the many slave-owning white supremacists whose names adorn our country’s institutions, and Yale’s movement to rename the college is just one of many protests of this nature. At the University of North Carolina, Saunders Hall, named for the alleged 19th-century Ku Klux Klan leader William Saunders, was renamed
PAGE 5
IMAGE COURTESY OF THE NY TIMES
“Carolina Hall” in May 2015. In May 2016, Harvard Law School replaced its official shield which featured the crest of an 18th century slaveholder. Yet many of these protests meet strong opposition. Some worry that changing the names of these institutions is an effort to obliterate history and believe it is better to let a community struggle with the painful history of these namesakes than to erase the name and risk obscuring history. Jonathan Holloway, the dean of Yale College, explains that “history is filled with ugliness, and we can’t absolve ourselves of it by taking down something that offends us.” Institutions convey their values through the names of its buildings; by choosing to retain the names of these buildings or schools, these institutions fail to reject the abhorrent discriminatory values of these historic figures. Additionally, denying these slave-owning white supremacists whose ideals fundamentally oppose those of these institutions the honor of having a building or school named for them does in no way erase these figures or their ideas from history. Renaming a building does not mean removing a chapter from a history book or removing a history book from a library, nor does it mean banning a topic from class discussion. Instead, by struggling with the painful legacies of these men and choosing new namesakes whose values better align with those of the institutions, institutions make the choice to confront history rather than ignore it, and to reject the values of these figures rather than passively promote them. •
Opinion
PAGE 6
“Don’t Touch My Hair”: What it Really Means
"Dont Touch My Hair" by Solange
By CELENA ECCLESTON For everyone who knows me, I’m sure you remember when I decided to cut off all of my hair at the beginning of sophomore year. And miraculously, a year later, I find myself walking around with a decently sized Afro. For those of you who may not know, I use the term “miraculously” because, on average, a black woman’s hair could take up to three years to reach the length that only took me one year to attain. Since my hair has grown back, I found myself, along with many other black girls who I’ve befriended, having to repeat the phrase: “please do not touch my hair, thank you.” However, I’ve come to realize that I never actually gave reasoning for why I say that phrase over and over. First, I will provide some background on why so many of us black girls have decided to cut off our hair in the first place. As a young girl, usually around four years old, it’s quite the norm to relax our hair, turning our tight kinks and coils into straight hair, making it resemble the hair of our white counterparts (despite being able to achieve the non permanent straightness with a flat iron). Most mothers justify this by saying it makes the hair of a little girl more “manageable”, even though it does end up doing more harm than good. Not only does the hair become dead weight hanging onto the scalp, but it also makes the hair extremely thin. Not to mention the fact that, if you don’t continue to apply the chemicals approximately every 2-3 weeks, the hair will eventually begin to fall out. However, since approximately 2012, more black females nationally have started to abandon relaxer kits and decided to rock their natural hair, no alterations at all. After going through such a drastic change, one can already get some sense of why I would be a bit more protective of my hair than other women.
So the question still remains: why do we deny permission to touch our hair? Ultimately, it boils down to a few reasons. Personally, the biggest reason is that the people who want to touch my hair the most are my white friends. There’s no problem with that, obviously. They like what they see, and human nature is to touch it. But the real issue lies here: they don’t know how to touch it. After I spend over an hour just washing it, another three waiting for it to dry, and then another two or more hours trying to style it or put it into some form of a protective style (the best example being braids), I don’t want that ruined by someone plumping their hand down, palm first onto my Afro that I spent time making that morning, especially after not even so much as a warning of what you are about to do. Please, just don’t. And we get it, you’re curious to touch it. After all, it’s only so often that you see certain hairstyles walking around campus. But here’s a little secret: you are not the only one who has ever asked to touch our hair. On the contrary, many people ask, and it gets annoying. Fast. So sometimes do us a favor and admire from the distance. Then there’s the issue of our friends with straight hair. They don’t have a problem if people touch their hair, so they don’t understand why it’s such a big deal for us. Honestly, our hair is not only a matter of looking pretty. It’s also a political statement, of sorts. For so long, workforces and other sources have described our hair as “unkempt”, “unruly”, “wool-like”, and “dirty-looking.” Wearing our natural hair is the biggest way to flip off the rest of the world for disrespecting our hair. The funniest reason, however, must be the compliments I get about my hair. If I change my hair one day and come to school, I notice
CONTINUED ON PAGE 7
Old Way of US History CONTINUED FROM PAGE 4 in many teacher’s classrooms, a testament to meaningful teacher-student relationships past. Though no expert artist myself, I found Creative Writing to be one of the most valuable and fun classes I have ever taken; crafting my own creative work improved my English skills immensely, allowed me to look at all art differently, and taught me the importance of peer collaboration and criticism to the artistic process. Plus, and I’d argue most importantly, being encouraged to take art early in their Milton career allows students to potentially discover a hidden talent waiting to be cultivated; senior year, with its lax expectations and even more lax student attitude, is too late for these sort of changes to occur. With all this in mind, I say that the History Department could take one of two courses to avoid the potential issues caused by allowing sophomores to take US History. Firstly, they could undo the move altogether, avoiding all these potential issues by sticking to tradition. Or, on the other hand, the History Department simply could not segregate these new classes to sophomores or alter the curriculum to fit underclassmen needs. This would present US History as a more difficult option to sophomores looking for a challenge (in the same vein as the current 2 year US and the Modern World course), not an out for students looking for an easier time. Additionally, this would make US History one of the only Harkness-style classes open to three of the four classes at Milton, a change with the potential to forge bonds across classes and engage in discussions between more grades than possible in any other classroom at the school. But, in my opinion, the current course of action is not the correct choice for the History Department to make, as it will potentially harm the status of the arts in our community, and disrupt the current traditions for course planning which have been maintained for years.•
Don't Be a Handler
Opinion
PAGE 7
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 6
By ELI BURNES
the high increase in the number of “I like your hair”s that I get for the day. Whereas, my white counterparts never get so much as an eyeblink for changing their hairstyles. The reason for this is usually because the compliment is probably followed by the same question: “can I touch it?” This is an indication that your compliment doesn’t stem from genuine like, it stems from simple fascination. Fascination is where you view my hair as an object, not as something I own. Fascination is only there because you don’t have this type of hair yourself. It’s not flattering to be objectified as some exotic creature. Imagine a different scenario. You’ve crafted a beautiful, hand-made hat, which you’re proudly wearing at the party. I walk up, eyes wide with fascination, and say, “I like your hat.” Then, before you can say “thank you,” I reach out and smash it with my palm. Wouldn’t that be frustrating? Wouldn’t it be even more frustrating if you got upset and I replied, “You should appreciate it! It’s a compliment”? Last but not least: personal space. Please. It’s a simple concept that doesn’t require explanation. We can simply say “yes” or “no” (and please don’t get mad at the “no”; you are not entitled to touching it anyways). So hopefully this article did provide a bit of insight into the mind (or hair) of your fellow black female friends. Remember: they love that you love their hair! Just be wary of where your hands go from now on. •
While researching for my US history paper, I read letters, memoirs, and reports of Milton soldiers who sacrificed their lives in World War I. These pieces provided deep insight into the beliefs and values of these soldiers. Some letters spoke of intense spiritual duty. Other letters vividly conveyed the soldier’s emotions. Soldiers filled their letters with mundane details and inner thoughts, and these letters proved invaluable to my understanding of their lives. Nowadays, this invaluable form of intimate communication rarely exists in a society driven by instant gratification. In a letter he left for his parents before leaving for war, Philip Comfort Starr, class of 1909, wrote that “I knew I had to go to make myself better. I had to go because it has been coming up before me ever since a year ago. I mean the war, my responsibility, the place where I ought to be, the chance I was losing…” In a different letter, Ambulance Driver Carleton Burr, member of the same Milton class, tells his family that “This life is a fascinating one, as every day brings new incidents into one’s life. My only regret is that I cannot transfer to you at home my many varied impressions.” The letters, memoirs, and articles that these soldiers left behind conveyed their true character, detailed with slow, deliberate thought. In a way, these soldiers live on in the writings that they left behind. In the twentieth century, much of human communication was written down on paper in the form of letters. Letters exist physically, contain long expressions of thought, and are created with conscious effort and purpose. Today, letters have been replaced by emails, text messages, instagram dms, and tweets. These digital connections are largely devoid of thought, feeling, or effort. Digital communications are often fleeting jests, only understandable in the current frame of mind. Therefore, when looking back on digital communication we had when younger, they are almost indecipherable and meaningless. Looking back on ourselves, others, and people close to us who have died, in the form of the writing left behind, is essential to understanding history and ourselves. However, this activity is becoming more and more meaningless. Digital detritus, the bits we live behind in the form of electronic communication, will bring about a coming cultural crisis, because they are rendered practically meaningless by time. Letters are a physical representation of the moment of writing. Stains, stray marks, tears, and handwritten characters all represent actual events that occurred in the world. The letter physically exists in the world. It is a real thing. Further, it changes with time, yellows, withers, maybe tears. This gives
the letter significant personal power. On the contrary, digital messages are merely electrical pulses, not rooted in any meaningful way to the physical world. They will exist in the same form, potentially for all eternity. The ethereal nature of digital communications reduces significantly its personal and metaphysical power because they do not transport the receiver to the moment of writing. The texts that we send today are smaller, and require less time and effort, than a letter would. Therefore, texts contain meaning that is less thoughtful or detailed and is based in the moment of instantaneous writing. Because texts are so quick and easy, the actual meaning of a text us more separated than the words than in a handwritten letter. Texts can contain references to cultural memes, inside jokes, etc. that rely on the receiver making an inference. Therefore, in many years when looking back on these texts, we can be lost to their exact meanings. Letters, because they require time and effort, and take so long to send, must be written as to not be misinterpreted. Deciphering letters written long ago, as hard as it is, is much easier than deciphering digital communication will be in the next 100 years. Because letters contain more literal meaning, more conscious effort, and are longer, they are necessarily more emotionally powerful than any fleeting digital communication can hope to be. When looking back on old letters, we can feel and understand emotions, thoughts, feelings, and complex opinions. Looking back on old emails and text messages simply is not the same. Even if you can decipher the meaning of the digital communication, it is shorter and less thoughtful--less emotionally powerful. Understanding the past is essential to comprehending the future. However, in the days of digital communication, understanding the past, especially the thoughts, feelings, and emotions of people who lived in the past, will become harder. Though we may not have to fear forgetting history on the scale of society, because many people still keep diaries, write letters, or otherwise share their thoughts in writing, we should be wary of forgetting ourselves or our friends. Looking back at our younger self is an essential activity to understanding how we got to where we are, and how that can shape who we want to be. Further, when you or a friend die, the feelings, emotions, and beliefs of the deceased should be meaningfully preserved past death. Though we are communicating more than ever, and this communication is being stored indefinitely, communication is declining an emotional value. If we do not take steps to ensure the lasting power of our communication, we will lose touch with who we are as people and as a society. •
Don't Touch My Hair
Celebrity Politics CONTINUED FROM PAGE 4 five million views on Facebook. Kutcher’s starpower enables him to spread awareness of this crime and hopefully speed up the battle against it. Thus, while celebrities do not necessarily have a duty to comment on their political opinions, I firmly believe that they have the right to do so and should if they feel that they are educated on the topics they wish to discuss. Their reach means that they have a responsibility to vet the sources that they’re citing and to realize that their lifestyle is unlike the common person’s. Furthermore, while all of us have a favorite celebrity (or celebrities), just because he or she may endorse a candidate or favor a policy, we should all take the approval of celebrities as just another opinion to listen to, not the end all be all. Hear them out, but then do your own research, since they are really just regular people after all. •
Digital Detritus
Arts & Enterainment
PAGE 8
The 2017 Faculty Play
By EMMA JAMES At 8:30 last Saturday night, a brave troop of twenty-five faculty members hit the stage in a performance of A. R. Gurney’s The Dining Room. Performing arts faculty members Ms. Kelli Edwards, Ms. Eleza Kort Moyer, Ms. Darlene Anastas, and Mr. Peter Parisi directed the play. The story itself centered around the demise of the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant, or “WASP,” a sector of upper-middle class Americans, a seemingly odd choice for a fairly diverse community like Milton and a matching cast. What led up to the production? The faculty play had been a long-running tradition -- cast member Ms. Wehle recalled watching a faculty production in 1973 -- but it died out in the past few years. I sat down with Ms. Moyer to get the inside scoop on the revival. “At the beginning of the year,” she began, “me, Kelly, Dar, and Patrice were sitting around at lunch, and I think it was Patrice or Dar that said, ‘We should bring back the faculty play.’ We emailed the entire campus asking who wanted to be involved, and anyone who replied was cast immediately.” The Dining Room was ideal for the faculty play because each scene features just a handful of actors. The script suggested that six actors play a set of nearly sixty different roles. This versatility allowed for extra actors to be added into the production without much of a problem. Casting relied more on individual availability than any other factor: “It’s not a play that everyone needed to be in the same room to rehearse – you can rehearse in little pockets.” Cast member Ms. Mundinger explained that Ms. Edwards and Ms.
The Chainsmokers are Literally the Alt-Right of the Music Industry
Moyer sent out a form surveying levels of commitment (how many scenes), musical interest (there was a singing scene), and availability to form a schedule. Ms. Moyer and Ms. Edwards each directed four scenes, and both Dar and Mr. Parisi directed two. Teachers squeezed rehearsals into free periods and other fleeting moments of free time. In fact, the night of production was the first time the entire cast performed together, and many cast members enjoying being able to both watch the play and act in it. Although the production had been in the works since September, the cast didn’t start rehearsing until after winter break. That left less than two months between getting scripts and stepping onto the stage. Because line memorization can take lots of time, many actors used scripts while performing. Luckily, when asked if many faculty members had theater experience, Ms. Moyer said that “there’s a lot more [faculty with theater experience] than you’d think.” Trying something new as an adult in front of your professional peers requires immense courage. Even still, Ms. Moyer shared that “Mr. Reilly from the math department [had] never been in a play before in his life; Mr. Kassatly [is] a big singer but he’s not a big actor.” “One thing I didn’t count on,” she reflected, “is that for us theater people, we’re like ‘oh it’ll be fine, just go with it and you’ll be fine,’ but for other people that haven’t [acted], that’s scary.” As an audience member, I enjoyed seeing teachers I’d known only in the halls, the classroom, or the dorm take the stage. The last time I’d seen a faculty
The Chainsmokers absolutely dominated 2016. American EDM-pop-bro-DJs Andrew Taggart and that one guy whom you know only as the not-hot Chainsmoker, Alex Pall, were everywhere. From their hit “Closer,” which dominated the charts for eleven consecutive weeks, to their grammy-winning song “Don’t Let Me Down” featuring Daya, the Chainsmokers saw a year of huge success. And what other group saw success in the year 2016? The Alt-Right. Now, Taggart and Pall certainly aren’t neo-nazis or white supremacists, but their position in the music industry somewhat mirrors that of the Alt-Right in America’s political climate. Terrifying headlines such as the Independent's “White House blocks CNN, BBC, New York Times, LA Times from media briefing” strangely mirror articles like Forbes’s recent “The Chainsmokers’ ‘Closer’ Has Now Spent More Weeks In The Top 5 Than Any Other Song In History.” Is it mere coincidence that as conservative extremists like Sean Spicer attempt to control the press, The Chainsmokers control their respective industry? The Alt-Right and The Chainsmokers have similar target audiences. Supporters of the Alt-Right are mostly white, heterosexual men who promote their ideology
CONTINUED ON PAGE 9
CONTINUED ON PAGE 9
COURTESY OF YOUREDM.COM
Drew Taggart and Alex Pall, The Chainsmokers
By LIZ FOSTER
Arts & Enterainment Faculty Play CONTINUED FROM PAGE 8 member in a production was when Mr. Ball cameoed in the Class IV play, Peter and the Starcatchers, back in the fall. I won’t soon forget seeing Mr. Furst and Ms. Edwards play children. Ms. Moyer emphasized that participating in the faculty play “[wasn’t] part of anyone’s job” but rather just an extra community event that many faculty members wanted to participate in. At Milton, we’re very lucky to have faculty members that give up their few free periods not only to talk about an essay but also to put on a play for us. I hope that the faculty play returns to the stage next year. Cast: Darlene Anastas, Lisa Baker, Jess Bond, Kristan Burke, Amanda Chapin, Katie Collins, George Duryea, Kelli Edwards, Heather Flewelling, Shane Fuller, Josh Furst, Jenny Hughes, Simone Jadczak, Patrice Jean-Baptiste, Michael Kassatly, Danny Lamere, Joanna Latham, Brad Moriarty, Eleza Kort Moyer, Louise Mundinger, Pam Pleasants, Malinda Polk, Beth Reardon, Gregg Reilly, Olivia Robbins, Debbie Simon, Murielle St. Paul, Sarah Wehle, Heather Zimmer •
The Chainsmokers CONTINUED FROM PAGE 8 through social media. Similarly, based upon a study on EDM, primarily white, heterosexual men between the ages of 18 and 24 compose The Chainsmokers’ audience. People in this age range typically frequent social media platforms like Twitter, a place where the Alt-Right often gains traction through “trolling” and other obscene behaviors. Most similar between The Chainsmokers and the Alt-Right is how easily persuaded their supporters are. While the Alt-Right seeks to project the voices of those “oppressed” by the liberal, politically correct media (read: “I’m white and I can’t say the N Word? That’s injustice!”), The Chainsmokers make easy-to-comprehend music, songs without elaborate breakdowns or beat drops. In fact, their hit song “#SELFIE” is arguably one of their most sonically complex works. Easy to consume, The Chainsmokers’ simple music can infiltrate the minds of America’s youth and lead to world domination. So, we must ask, who do we truly have to fear in 2017? Is it former Breitbart CEO Stephen Bannon, or is it music industry influencers Drew Taggart and Alex Pall? •
PAGE 9
The Politicization of This Year’s Oscars
La La Land (Left) and Moonlight (Right)
By ADI GANDHI The debate over which film deserved Best Picture at this year’s Oscars became a black-and-white issue after centering around two films in particular: La La Land, the jazzy musical full of Hollywood dreams and hand-clapping, and Moonlight, a darker, independent film about the covert struggles of a queer black man. Both films received outstanding reviews from critics, but many fans began to accuse La La Land of brimming with white privilege while lauding Moonlight for addressing issues that need attention. Many opponents of La La Land have claimed that the film is indeed enjoyable to watch, but that it is only a shallow story following a straight white couple as they dance and sing through the streets of Los Angeles. To these viewers, La La Land deserved an Oscar as much as Mean Girls did. Meanwhile, they believed that Moonlight was the rightful winner of Best Picture because it speaks to the problems that are unsurfaced when conservative cultures enforce gender roles and suppress sexuality, issues that are especially relevant today. This sort of controversy also surfaced at the Grammy Awards when many spectators took Beyoncé’s loss to Adele for Best Album as further evidence of racism in Hollywood. Many insisted that Adele’s album about yet another heartbreak was not as pertinent as Beyoncé’s album, which unapologetically found pride in racial identity. The problem with taking such stances on Oscar or Grammy winners is that these perspectives politically charge the awards shows, which are meant as celebrations of the arts. Whether the arts are diverse or not is indeed an issue that Hollywood must address; however, diversity does not generally appear on the rubric for determining the brilliance of a work of art.
Some critics also argue that the Academy’s choosing a film such as La La Land over Moonlight essentially insists that Moonlight’s message is not important. Yet such a decision would not devalue Moonlight’s message but instead would simply deem La La Land to be more deft than Moonlight, strictly artistically speaking. Those who put on political goggles instead of artistic ones when arguing for or against a Grammy or Oscar nominee potentially blind themselves. They forget the non-political messages in artwork. By disregarding La La Land as a cheesy musical, audiences neglect the relevant message about the distinctions between following one’s dreams and following a fantasy. Furthermore, the pressure that the general public puts on the judges for these awards shows both restricts and distracts those judges. The choice the Oscars had to make between La La Land and Moonlight, for example, was intrinsically linked to the public image of the Oscars. The Oscars would undoubtedly have received much backlash if La La Land won over Moonlight, unless the director of La La Land honored Moonlight during his acceptance speech like Adele did to Beyoncé. So the judges of the Oscars had to make decisions within these lines. They had to vote on the winner of the award, at least to some extent, based on whichever film’s win would appease the audience rather than on which film was artistically superior. Clashes such as La La Land versus Moonlight or Adele versus Beyoncé threaten the meritocratic ideal of awards shows like the Oscars and Grammys. The “wrong” film may win the award because it is more politically-focused or more diverse. So politics aside, the judges, as well as the audience, should look at art as art and only art for the few hours of shows such as the Grammys or the Oscars. •
PAGE 10
This opinion piece was misprinted last week.
We need more Teachers of Color
Sports Excessive and Repressive: A Look at the Administration's Response to the Hooligans
By NATASHA ROY Schools across the country, including Milton, are slowly growing more inclusive and diverse. The percentages of students of color in high schools and universities rise as people of color continue to shatter glass ceilings. Yet, as people of color gain educational opportunities, a lack of diversity amongst teaching faculty prevails. A 2012 NCES analysis reveals that, while students of color make up over 45% of the PK-12 population, teachers of color comprise only a meager 17.5% of the educator workforce. Why are we, a generation of racially and ethnically diverse students, exposed to mostly white educators and role models? As we continue to form our ideologies and perspectives, our classroom discussions and interactions continue to be led largely by white adult voices. In fact, when, for this very article, I sought out to gather Milton students’ experiences with faculty of color, I repeatedly found myself unable to even ask my first question as so many people had never had a single a teacher of color in their Milton careers. Every young student, regardless of their race, deserves to have a multitude of diverse adult voices in their lives. For one, future generations simply cannot continue to grow up surrounded by mostly white role models, if our society ever hopes to shed its toxic narrative that being accomplished and being white are intrinsically linked. Students of color who face unique identity struggles require adult guidance and understanding in their complex lives: a role that only teachers of color can truly fill. To break away from our prep-school bubble, I ventured to the Taylor Elementary School, a public school in Dorchester, to interview Ms. Simmonds, a Haitian-American 2nd grade teacher. “If [teachers are] going to be servicing these kids”, she remarks, “we [as teachers] need to make sure that we are culturally aware of what they’re going through and their background information, that’s basic to me”. Teachers of color also bring to the (harkness) table unique perspectives and experiences, capable of shaping and even transforming students’ worldviews and understandings of themselves and their peers. When you’re a person of color, issues pertaining to race, inclusion and discrimination entwine themselves in every fiber of your being: you push those around you to have difficult conversations about these themes because you yourself are constantly enshrouded by them.
CONTINUED ON PAGE 11
By CHRIS MATHEWS “You guys have been awesome all season!” - Coach Mike. “I can’t believe the school isn’t paying you guys for your work at the games.” Milton hockey parent. “Well, it looks like they beat us in school spirit this year!” - Nobles hockey parent. All of the above quotations were overheard by multiple Hooligans last Wednesday. On the whole, the Centre Street Hooligans have received overwhelmingly positive and enthusiastic feedback from those in the Milton Academy community and beyond. Unfortunately, the administration's enthusiasm has not been what we hoped it would be. When the Hooligan movement started, we all assumed that the administration and the athletic directors would love our willingness and enthusiasm to support Milton Academy athletics. For us out-ofseason athletes, we saw it as a fun way to stay involved. However, for reasons unbeknownst to us, their response has been rude and downright hostile at times. At the onset of the winter season, several soon-to-be Hooligans were asked to come to a meeting regarding “fan expectations.” More or less, the “meeting” turned into a sustained lecture about our perceived poor behavior at sporting events up to that date and a harsh warning against any kind of cheering against the opposing team. While I thought it was totally fair for Mr. Reddicks to remind us of the ISL rules surrounding cheering, his aggressive tone in the meeting and his generalizations about our intentions as a collective made it clear to that the administration would be out to get us.
There have been numerous other occasions throughout the season that have highlighted the administration’s apparent contempt for the Centre Street Hooligans. From their banning our use of confetti at sporting events, to their threats of suspension for lacrosse player Hooligans, to Mr. Reddicks’ shutting down of our celebratory lap on Nobles Day for no apparent reason, we have consistently been met with a level of disrespect that our actions have not merited. Every time we attend a sporting event en masse, we are met with the disapproving and hawkish gaze of the deans and athletic director(s). That is not to say that every member of the administration has been unusually harsh and stern; Mr. Ball, Mr. Bland, and Mr. Heard have, to their credit, found a way to keep us within appropriate boundaries while simultaneously being fun, kind, respectful and supportive (which I hope they realize has not gone unnoticed within the Hooligan’s ranks). On the whole, however, our treatment at the hands of the administration has been perceivably unfair. After Nobles Day last weekend, we learned that Mr. Reddicks had told his varsity basketball players to not cheer along with us at hockey’s rivalry game, despite the fact that we - and several hockey players - created a fan section and an atmosphere unlike any Mr. Ball “had ever seen.” We are fed up with this treatment by the administration. Moving forward, the administration needs to understand that respect garners respect; despite the fact that the Hooligans have, for the most part, listened to and
CONTINUED ON PAGE 11
Sports
Mustangs of the Week: Caroline Spahr and Evan scales
By SARAH WILLWERTH
By JAMES OH
The month of February has been a busy one for the Varsity Girls Squash team. On February 10th, the team drove down to Avon Old Farms in Connecticut to compete in division 1 of the national championships for squash. The team played three competitive matches over the weekend, with two incredibly close 4-3 loses. The girls placed 15th in the nation. Over the course of the weekend, one girl went undefeated: Caroline Spahr (III). At nationals Caroline dropped only one game the whole weekend, winning decisive games over the talented Nobles #2 along with the Hotchkiss and Germantown Friends #2. In the regular season, Caroline was undefeated. There are very few players in the ISL that can challenge her, and her ranking of #6 among all high school players in the country is a testament to her level of excellence. The weekend after Nationals, Caroline competed in a Junior Championship Tournament, or a JCT. These tournaments are open to only the top 32 players in the country in each age group and are the highest level of tournament play. Caroline flew to Baltimore Thursday night, prepared to fight hard and represent Milton. After an incredible weekend of grit, strength, and endurance, Caroline finished 2nd. Most notable was her semi-finals match against a talented Greenwich Academy girl, where Caroline came back after being down 2-0 in games to win the match 12-10 in the 5th. In the GU17, Caroline’s highest ranking is #2 in the country. This past weekend Girl’s Varsity Squash travelled to Deerfield to compete in the New England’s tournament. The team placed 6th, a result everyone was incredibly proud of given the team was not at full strength. Once again, Caroline’s play was nothing but excellent, and she finished 3rd in her draw. Not only does Caroline contribute to the team with her incredible athletic abilities, she is also an important leader (even as a sophomore). Charis Palandjian (II) noted “[Caroline] inspires me to be a better squash player every time I see her play." Maya Bokhari (IV) expressed similar opinions of Caroline, explaining “her determination, focus, and energy on the squash court motivates me to improve every time I step on the court.” Although the team will be losing four seniors this year, with leaders like Caroline the future looks bright for the talented squad. •
Though the JV Boys Hockey team had an undesirable record this year, their ambition, resilience, and team spirit was unrivaled to any team on campus. The team evidently has a lot of fun on and off the ice. When asked about the team’s camaraderie, Max Li (II) remarked that the locker room environment is like a “family away from home” and added that “win or lose, everyone keeps their head up and has a great time.” Tim Minot (II) also did not hesitate to say that “[the JV Boys Hockey team] plays every game like it is Noble’s day,” and added that “[he] is thankful for such a supportive and exciting group of hockey players and, of course, the fans.” The February Mustang of the week for boys is Evan Scales from the JV Boys Hockey team. Renowned around campus as an exceptional photographer and cinematographer, Evan is also an outstanding hockey player. Evan plays forward for the team and makes clever plays, beating opponents across the ice with his speed. Over the course of the year, Evan also developed his skills as a vocal leader. Alongside captain Henry Westerman, Evan motivates his team to skate harder during practice, serving as an excellent role model for the underclassmen. Evan’s goal came during a competitive game against BB&N on February 10th. The breakaway goal brought the team to within one and gave the team momentum despite being shorthanded. Although it was a losing effort, the Mustangs did not give up until the final whistle. •
PAGE 11
Hooligans CONTINUED FROM PAGE 10 abided by the administration’s increasingly restrictive instructions, they have continued to clamp down on us as if we have been screaming obscenities at sporting events. If they feel like we’re disrespecting them and don’t want us to sarcastically chant “Free Jay!,” “Sportsmanship!,” and “we love Milton!”, then a change in treatment would definitely reduce the animosity that some within the Hooligans currently feel towards them. A recent survey found that approximately 75% of the student body believe the Hooligans have a positive effect at Milton, and also found that a whopping 86% of athletes want us at their games. Coupled with the fact that we have literally only received overwhelming appreciation and praise from Milton parents, I struggle to understand what it is about us that angers the administration --and specifically, Mr. Reddicks-- so much. Whether or not people want to believe it, athletics play a huge role in an overwhelming number of the Hooligans’ day to day lives. All we have tried to do is bring our athletes and our friends the kind of support and passion that we know can erase records and turn the tide in tight game. There’s absolutely nothing malicious about it. And whether this article actually catalyzes any sort of change in our treatment at the hands of the administration, you can bet that the Hooligans are going to mob out to Choate this Wednesday for hockey’s tournament game. We’re going to bring as many artificial noisemakers as we want, and we’re gonna rock the place of its foundation. Everyone who is willing to make the trip is eagerly encouraged to. Love. Respect. Sportsmanship. Hooligans out. •
Teachers of Color CONTINUED FROM PAGE 10 Conversations about race feel not like a conscious effort, but more just a part and parcel of your own life. Ms. Simmonds, herself, thinks “it feels more organic when like, it is coming from people of color, in [her] personal opinion.” Teachers of color thus have the invaluable ability to urge and facilitate meaningful discussions about race relations in their classrooms. Students need such discussions and experiences in their educations in order to fully understand the racial complexities of our world and to later contribute to the world as considerate, aware and thoughtful adults. •
Ad Nauseam
PAGE 12
New destinations for Repurposed Fan Buses 1. Hathaway 2. Not Goodwin 3. Art history trip to New York 4. Marine Bio trip to The Water 5. Globalization and Islam trip to Mosul 6. Punta 7. Inside my retina with Ms. Frizzle 8. Secret faculty hangout of more than ten individuals 9. Very slowly through the Lower School loop 10. Shuttle to boarders’ cars just off-campus 11. Party bus to Deluxebury
Printed on 50% post-consumer waste. Please recycle this paper. www . themiltonpaper . org