OCTOBER 2025

Letter From The Editor

Dear Reader,

We’re officially more than halfway through the semester, as midterms have ended and (hopefully) work has slowed its pace!! By the time you’re reading this, it’ll be a week or so until Halloween! I’m aware it’s so cliché that once the fall season rolls around, it is all anyone can talk about. But I will admit it, I fall into the fall traps. Around this time last year, I was writing a piece on “Christian Girl Autumn” for The Plant, and god, it was fun to write about.

In that same vein, for this issue, we tried our best to be a bit festive, and we sincerely hope you enjoy it!! As for the cover, another attempt at showing our love for where The Plant’s locality rests. Here, Old Port’s clock tower is visible as a nod to Montréal.

Have a Happy Halloween, and a great day!

Yours,

Maya Editor-In-Chief

From Civil Rights to Civil Wrongs: How the US Fails to Protect Student Activism

CHLOE BERCOVITZ NEWS EDITOR

Earlier this year, a 30-year-old PhD student was dragged into a car by masked-men and driven across multiple state lines. The next day, she was 1500 miles away from her home.

Rumeysa Ozturk was detained by ICE following the publication of an op-ed urging for her university to recognize the Palestinian genocide. According to The Tufts Daily, she wrote that “credible accusations against Israel include accounts of deliberate starvation and indiscriminate slaughter.”

Since the 1950s, the Secretary of State has held the authority to determine if an individual poses a “national security threat.” A representative of the Turkish consulate went to ICE offices, and they refused to disclose Ozturk’s forced whereabouts – her visa was revoked.

Her story is far from an anomaly; thousands of student visas have been revoked this year in the USA.

The first amendment protects one’s freedom of expression, and further, peaceful assembly. This tapestry extends to the freedoms of association and privacy, as well as protection from arbitrary arrest and detention. However, foreign students under the Trump Administration have been given a cruel choice: censor themselves or have their education pried away.

Regardless of the risks it entails, students have been protesting for decades. In the 19th century, U.S. college campuses saw Black protesters rise against slavery and praise the Haitian revolution. Come the 20th century, this blossomed into the civil rights movement. During the same period, campuses became loud in condemning the US involvement in foreign conflicts, such as the Vietnam War. Today, we are all surely familiar with student solidarity – whether in support of Palestine (such as Dawson’s recent involvement in the October 7th walkout), global warming, or 2SLGBTQI+ rights.

Protesting has long been tightly woven

into campus life, but most importantly, they often serve as catalysts for tangible change. Take the Greensboro sit-ins of the 1960s: they began with four Black students demanding service at a segregated lunch counter. Upon their refusal, they left – sparking a movement that inspired hundreds of students to follow their lead. Given a mixture of economic pressure and media coverage, the counter was desegregated just a few months later.

Student-run triumphs for social reforms have been successful on a global scale, as well. In the 1980s, protests in the US and Canada alike proliferated in universities as the apartheid tore South Africa apart. According to Harvard University, their diverse strategies all culminated in a single goal: “[to] pressure their universities to divest shares in companies that did business in South Africa.” Even Dawson students joined the protests alongside those from McGill, with The Plant covering both the demonstrations, as well as providing an overview of the issue itself.

Even if academic institutions claim neutrality, student voices have always –and will always prevail.

At a time when the Trump administration has retracted billions of federal funding over unauthorized protesting, institutions nationwide are caving in and kneeling down. According to the Columbia Spectator, “22 Columbia students had been suspended, expelled, or had their degrees revoked as a result of pro-Palestinian protests.”

Similarly, at Virginia Commonwealth University, many were arrested and had their diplomas temporarily revoked over a peaceful protest. There were no speeches – no chants and no tents. Students gathered on the lawn until the police came. The mere right to protest has become a threat to this administration.

By taking away the rights and freedoms of students, the very institution that is education has become weaponized. Well-earned degrees are a conditional privilege. In a first world country, education is suddenly devalued.

According to Inside Higher Ed, recent policy allows “immigration officials [to] have the ‘inherent authority’ to terminate students’ legal residency status in the Student Exchange and Visitor Information System ‘as needed’.” This means that any arrest of an immigrantstudent likely leads to deportation. ICE has absolute authority in entering campuses. Under the scope of student protest, authorities claim that the reason is “terrorism,” which is a charge that masks the act of racial profiling.

Since the beginning of his term, Donald Trump’s administration has undergone efforts in dismantling the Department of Education. Alongside a myriad of other things, the department is responsible for administering the student loans that allow low-income families to attend university. According to the BBC, in July the supreme court ruled that half the department's workforce – more than 1,000 people – are to be fired.

Given that the Department of Education plays a vital role in keeping low-income families in universities, this action effectively excludes the same demographic that tends to demand change from these spaces of activism. Stripping away this means of empowerment consolidates the Trump administration’s control. Cutting the workforce in half does much more than simply weaken it – it risks restructuring and destroying the diversity of the student body itself. It poses an existential threat to students’ ability to organize, protest, and even remain in school.

“Student protests are far more than simply a right for those who choose to exercise it; it is a pillar of democracy itself.”

By challenging authority, protests give young people a voice that can shape the institutions they belong to, all while embodying the very principles of free-speech and collective action. When education becomes conditional on silence, then democracy becomes conditional too.

But What About the First Amendment?

CHARLOTTE RENAUD ARTS & CULTURE EDITOR

“Give us back the Statue of Liberty,” was the message Raphaël Glucksmann, the French politician and member of the Socialist and Democrat Progressive Alliance, had for Americans a few months ago.

The United States of America, known for its advocacy of freedom, has been losing its core principles. The right to bear arms, the right to not have any soldiers quarter a person’s house without consent, the right to a speedy trial, and most importantly the right to freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition, are all Amendments found in the Bill of Rights. However, the “land of the free” no longer seems to apply to what this country is becoming. Silencing through violence and media control is threatening the very thing that America prides itself on.

What everyone seems to be talking about is every catastrophe that’s been happening in the States: Charlie Kirk and his death, Trump’s administration controlling the press, and the cancellation of Jimmy Kimmel’s show. These issues can all be traced back to the same dangerous cause: a threatened freedom of speech. How can the First Amendment – the core of American beliefs and the ultimate form of freedom—be so casually infringed upon?

The American political activist and media personality, Charlie Kirk, was known for his right-wing ideologies. He would visit college campuses and debate students on various topics— gun regulations, abortion, DEI programs, 2SLGBTQI+ rights, etc. He gained a lot of conservative support with his organization Turning Point USA, founded in 2012, from his TikTok videos and his radio program The Charlie Kirk Show Although more than anything, Kirk’s main beliefs were loyal to Trump.

“Having an armed citizenry comes with a price and that is part of liberty… But I think it’s worth it. I think it’s

worth [it] to have a cost of unfortunately some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the 2nd amendment to protect our other God-given rights,” Kirk famously said. On September 10th, he was shot during one of his talks on the campus of Utah Valley University in Orem. A 22-year-old from Washington, Utah, Tyler James Robinson, was arrested for the crime. The news spread like wildfire and stirred up even more conflict between the left and right. Some were mourning his death, others remained apathetic, while some went as far as celebrating it. Charlie Kirk was killed by the very thing he was defending and justifying.

“The irony behind his death begs the question: should death truly be the price to pay for freedom? ”

The famous New Hampshire motto, “Live free or die,” is bitterly becoming “Live free and die.” No one should be killed for practicing their freedom of speech. Violence of all forms should never be celebrated; this comprises murder and hatred. His death should not be celebrated, nor should his hatred.

Kirk was known for his strong opinions and statements that could be classified as hate speech. According to Bernd Debusmann Jr. and Mike Wendling’s article “How a college dropout from the suburbs became Maga star Charlie Kirk” in the BBC, “he was against gay marriage and abortion, argued for Christian nationalism and was highly critical of Islam. […] He was also an opponent of diversity programmes and spread falsehoods about topics such as Covid vaccines and voting fraud.” However, the most troubling aspects remain in his hateful statements towards specific minority groups. Chris Stein’s article in The Guardian quotes sexist and Islamophobic comments such as the one about Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce’s engagement, “Reject feminism. Submit to your husband, Taylor. You’re not in charge,” as well as “America has freedom of religion, of course, but we

should be frank: large dedicated Islamic areas are a threat to America.”

Despite everyone having the right to their opinions, hate speech is very dangerous for those who are targeted. The United Nations’ definition of hate speech is a language that “refers to offensive discourse targeting a group, or an individual based on inherent characteristics (such as race, religion, or gender) and that may threaten social peace.” Many of his statements, including the two mentioned, promote the idea of one group’s superiority over another—such as the dominance of husbands over wives and American Christian culture over Islam. The belief in the superiority of certain groups is a dangerous ideology—one that has fueled violence throughout history and continues to do so today. While there is no legal definition of hate speech in the U.S. legal system, given that it is protected under the First Amendment, speech is a powerful tool that can easily be wielded as a weapon, and we must not forget that.

After his death, his influence has only grown as many began to see him as a martyr for all these hateful and dangerous ideas. The Trump administration has gone as far as punishing and silencing those who criticized Charlie Kirk and his beliefs. The administration and president that Kirk supported is going against what he believed in: free speech. He himself expressed that “Hate speech does not exist legally in America. There’s ugly speech. There’s gross speech. There’s evil speech. And all of it is protected by the First Amendment.”

According to Huo Jingnan, Jude Joffe-Block, and Audrey Nguyen’s article “People are Losing Jobs due to Social Media Posts about Charlie Kirk” in NPR, “over thirty people across the country have been fired, put on leave, investigated or faced calls to resign because of social media posts criticizing Charlie Kirk.”

The cancellation of Jimmy Kimmel’s

show came as a scary slap in the face, a harsh reality of a government impeding on people’s freedom of speech. Adrian Horton and Anna Betts’ article in The Guardian reports that Kimmel’s comments on Charlie Kirk’s death aggravated Trump supporters. The Trump-appointed chair of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Brendan Carr, “threatened ABC’s affiliate licenses if Disney did not ‘take action’ against the host.” The broadcast groups Nexstar and Sinclair refused to air the show, forcing Disney to suspend its production. Kimmel’s show returned to ABC on the 23rd of September. However, the affiliate networks owned by Sinclair and Nexstar also confirmed they would pre-empt Kimmel’s show on its stations in 22 states. Therefore, the show “did not air on almost a quarter of ABC affiliate stations.” Three days later, Sinclair and Nexstar’s affiliate stations started airing his show again.

The show’s suspension was a deliberate attempt by the Trump administration to silence American voices. During the episode of his return, Jimmy Kimmel

addressed the severity of the situation—one that had a negative impact across the political spectrum. In fact, Ben Shapiro, Candance Owens, and Ted Cruz, despite holding different political views from Kimmel’s, reached out to him in solidarity during the suspension of his show. Though they often stand on opposite sides of the political spectrum, they all share belief in the American principle of freedom of speech and oppose any governmental violation of it.

On air, Kimmel powerfully expressed, “This show is not important. What is important is that we get to live in a country that allows us to have a show like this.” If freedom is the basis of all American values, silencing is innately anti-American. “I have many friends and family members on the ‘other side’ [whom] I love and remain close to even though we don’t agree on politics at all. I don’t think the murderer who shot Charlie Kirk represents anyone. This was a sick person who believed violence was a solution. And it isn’t. Ever,” Kimmel proclaimed during the episode.

“This isn’t a war between the left and right; this is a war between our right to speak and those silencing us. ”

Freedom of speech—especially speech that fosters understanding—is essential to bridging the divide and reducing the sense of alienation between people with differing views. It is what unites us all. Without speech, there is no journalism, there is no opinion, and there is no truth. Without speech, there is no freedom.

TV Shows Aren’t Exclusive, You Are

MINOLA GRENT MANAGING EDITOR

I’ve been looking back on my childhood recently, and I couldn’t help but notice an obvious trend in the shows I watched. Winx Club, Totally Spies, Lolirock, My Little Pony, Strawberry Shortcake, Horseland: they were all “girly” cartoons. They were cartoons utterly undeserving of boys’ attention. So, when my male cousins snickered at the shows that had gently cradled my little girl heart as I clawed my way into womanhood, I laughed along with them. Then, I hid in my bright pink room with the family computer to delight in the media that understood me so well. Now, in my late teens, I can’t help but notice the same boys that mocked me enjoy the same girl cartoons they looked down on.

Beyond the sparkles and the aesthetics, what makes a cartoon girly? Less than you may think, unfortunately. Oftentimes, featuring a predominantly female cast of characters was enough to get the show categorized as “for girls”.

If young boys initially rebuke these cartoons, it must mean they don’t identify with their messages and character depictions. Can boys truly not relate to girls at all? Or is it rather that boys may not be allowed to see themselves reflected in media traditionally aimed at girls? Societally, girls are encouraged to have nurturing attitudes towards their relationships and the people surrounding them, often taking a secondary role to help others thrive. Hence, women are expected to be fulfilled by giving. Boys, on the contrary, are encouraged to prioritize individualistic values and to be the main character in all spheres of their lives, often to the detriment of their relationships and others around them. Rarely are these attitudes ideal for a fulfilling life in the long run.

This gender division is then reflected in the media produced for each demographic. Children’s series whose main character is a boy and which, by extension, cater to boys, tend to focus on adventure, strength, and perseverance in difficult situations. In contrast, the ones with a girl as a main character, and

therefore aimed at girls, push forward themes of friendship, understanding, and communication. Following these societal templates, the media views approaching the world with kindness and vulnerability as a trademark of female-led children’s media. Female protagonists are often examples of compassion and humanity. This is particularly true with “girl power” cartoons that take all these “girlish”

traits and turn them into strengths. For instance, the most obvious example is My Little Pony. Its catchphrase is literally “Friendship Is Magic.”

Though some of the shows I listed earlier, like Winx Club, Lolirock, and Totally Spies, still include themes of adventure, strength, and perseverance, they are often not meant to be the focus. In the case of these three cartoons, the stakes presented by the plot and the world are high. For example, the Winx girls fight to protect the Magical Dimension, the Lolirock girls are trying to save the main character’s home planet, and the spies combat evil in Beverly Hills. However, it is important to note that a careful emphasis is still placed on the characters’ friendships and their kindness. That is because the resolution to many of the shows’ conflicts relies on these themes.

For example, in the third episode of the first season of Winx Club, the Trix, the show’s villains, want to sabotage the fairies’ school ball with cursed eggs that will birth squirming insects and steal one of the character’s magical ring. The Winx stop their plan by joining their powers to disenchant the eggs. In the end, they don’t denounce the Trix for this stunt that could have gotten the three witches expelled. Instead, they simply swap the ring with an a harmlessly pranked egg. The themes exemplified in this episode are friendship and kindness. It is thanks to the Winx working together as a group that the disaster is stopped. This couldn’t have happened without their friendship. Then, the girls prefer to give the troublemakers a less drastic consequence. Instead of getting them expelled, they decide a prank will do.

While these traits were exactly what drove boys away from girl cartoons, it seems they are also the very thing drawing them back in. Humans are fundamentally social creatures that thrive in groups, big or small. Therefore, is it really surprising that cartoons valuing kindness, vulnerability, and relationships forage a special little place in men’s hearts once they settle into adulthood? Not really. This is shown not only through the enjoyment of this media by your average man, but also through the creative minds behind them. Surprisingly, the creators of many cartoons for girls are in fact men. Once past their childhood and teenage years, they actively search the very things they may have lacked in the media presented to their demographic.

“Ironically, in adulthood, boys who were invariably taught that strength should take center stage may end up searching for kindness.”

The Ouija: The Least Spiritual Spiritual Tool

ORION PEYROL STAFF WRITER

Ouijas have been a part of our cultural zeitgeist for over a century, generating millions upon millions of dollars and innumerable horror stories. The question now is: where did this board come from, and how has it lasted this long ?

The Ouija board owes everything to the spiritualism movement. The start of spiritualism in America is often linked to Kate and Maggie Fox, two sisters living in New York in 1848. These women claimed they could communicate with spirits from beyond the grave. They did this through knocks, automatic writing, and turning tables. These tricks caught mainstream attention, and soon enough they took their show on the road, spreading spiritualism across America.

At the time spiritualism was accepted by the wider public. Christians saw these practices as compatible with their beliefs, even if the Church did not.

“Speaking to ghosts was the hot new thing!”

Even Mary Todd Lincoln was conducting séances in the White House. There were no mass crusades or fear of demonic possessions and, for a while, séances were as mundane as Thanksgiving dinners in American culture.

The original Ouija board, however, was never spiritual—it was always a capitalistic endeavor. It was made by multiple men who worked at the Kennard Novelty Company in 1890: Charles Kennard, Elijah Bond and Washington Bowie. Their concept was simple: these séances took too long. The usual séance communicated with spirits by calling out the alphabet and awaiting a knock or sound from a ghost when they reached the right letter. Waiting for a knock once every 26 letters. Boringggg. The solution came in the form of a board and planchette—and a whole lot of marketing.

It was never explicitly advertised as a tool for spirit communication. Instead, they sold it as a tool for answering ques-

tions and divination—the most similar product being the Magic-8 Ball.

The now iconic name was coined by Bond’s sister-in-law, a medium who had simply asked the board what it wanted to be called—to which the board responded with O-U-I-J-A. It was a séance darling from the moment it was released, immediately being adopted by spiritualists across the nation.

The ouija board was successful, incredibly so, especially when everything was going to the dogs. They hadn’t normalized therapy and hadn’t quite invented doomscrolling yet, so they talked to ghosts to deal with their problems. In 1966, Parker Brothers bought the rights to the board, and a year later, it outperformed Monopoly. It sold two million copies, out capitalism-ing the board game about capitalism!

So when did it all go wrong? How did the Ouija go from séance fun to being burned on bonfires for satanism and witchcraft? Well, a little film called The Exorcist came out in 1973.

The movie is based on a book, which is itself loosely based on a real-life case from 1949. The inspiration was a case in which a priest was called to perform a series of exorcisms on a 14-year-old boy. The Ouija board was not present in the original cases, compared to the film, in which it’s implied that the Ouija is partially what caused the young girl’s possession. That artistic choice would take hold in the minds of millions of Americans—and still has ripple effects to this day.

The late ‘70s and ‘80s was the time of the Satanic Panic. Suburban America had demons to exorcise, and they came in the forms of Dungeons and Dragons, rock music, and Ouija boards. Satanic Panic started because of a general feeling of danger and fear for their children. Child abuse cases were being denounced left and right. People grew afraid for the safety of their children and

families. A villain that could be hiding anywhere is much more terrifying than one you can easily spot and name. The fear needed a face, and with pop culture churning out films like The Exorcist and Rosemary’s Baby it’s no surprise that they chose Satanism as their scapegoat. Two hundred people were charged with Satanism-related crimes, and dozens were convicted—many of which were falsely imprisoned and later released.

All of this was enough to completely change the Ouija’s reputation. Now, it was the tool of the devil; his way of getting his fingers on your children. And even nowadays, when the panic has died down and exited the thoughts of the ordinary civilian, the Ouija is still thrown out of houses by worried parents and is the subject of more than a few horror stories.

But when did that ever stop capitalism from doing its thing? The board has been owned by Hasbro since 1991, and sales don’t seem to be slowing down. They sell things such as Salem Witch Trial and Stranger Things themed boards, as well as Funko Pop and Hot Topic merch. It seems to me the Ouija board is here to stay—as long as it keeps expertly playing the game of capitalism… as it has been since its inception. I, for one, won’t be surprised to see a Ouija board-themed Labubu in the next few years.

ARTS & CULTURE

The Plant Watches: When “No plot, just vibes” Works: Fallen Angels

ROMANE RANDRIA DIGITAL STAFF

Wong Kar-Wai’s 1995 Fallen Angelsz is one hell of a movie ride. Unique visuals, odd camera work, non-linear story-telling, those aren't never-seen-before elements in the world of cinema, but no film does it quite like Fallen Angels.

The movie, an interesting mix of comedy, crime, drama, and elements of the noir genre, recounts the story of multiple characters, all evolving separately, but connected by brief or relatively meaningless encounters. It exudes a very distinct and memorable feeling of solitude, something it achieves not by isolating its characters in the middle of nowhere, but by suffocating them in the faceless crowds of post 1990s Hong Kong, a time and place where the city, barely emerging from the 1997 handover, was marked by a “lack of identity” and was “not

so much a place as a space of transit” (according to Ackbar Abbas in his work Hong Kong: Culture and the Politics of Disappearance). There’s something distinctly nihilistic about the way the movie depicts its different characters and the way they interact, with life and with each other.

For example, the hitman and his unnamed partner. Though they work together, there is an emotional chasm between them. She yearns for connection, but that yearning is depicted in that way that makes it obsessive. She skims through the hitman’s trash, she masturbates in his sheets… Their relationship lacks substance and reciprocity, their relationship is, ultimately, quite empty.

The hitman as a character lacks purpose, he is aimless in his own lifes. His murders are stripped from the gravity of the act, his assassinations are as any other action that he does; pointless, and an act of empty routine. In Fallen Angels the characters are not

represented through the lens of morality or immorality, but amorality. The mute character Ho Chi-mo, who breaks into shops to "pretend" he’s running a business, does not rob or destroy; his actions are absurd and comical, and the short montage that presents this aspect of the character makes them feel ritualistic. In a typical movie, characters and their relationships would evolve, progress, not in Fallen Angels. We observe them happening, we observe the characters existing in a way that leads to no satisfactory conclusion or climax.

Historically, Wong Kar-wai’s movie captures the existential weight of a generation confronting the void, and emotionally, it’s something that echoes what many of us might’ve felt at some point in our lives. “Do you feel alone, even surrounded by people” it asks you, and, chances are, the answer is yes.

Yellowjackets: Girlhood in Survivalism

MAYA JABBARI EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

When Yellowjackets, the 2021 survival and psychological drama begins, it disguises itself as no different than any other series in those genres: the token soccer team flies to a tournament and suddenly goes down in a plane crash, forcing them to survive. But what the show delivers in outdoor survival and psychological drama, it uses to reveal how girlhood is raw, complex, and transformative in ways society rarely allows. It forces its characters and its

ing cars, paint each other’s faces and lip-synch to the radio before pep rallies, and—crucially—take their aggression out on each other, often brutally, on the soccer field.” To me, and my experience on an all-girls competitive soccer team, these scenes are engaging, frustrating, and wildly familiar. They stake out the terrain of girlhood even before the true wilderness-trauma begins.

audience to ask: What happens when teenage girls are stripped of all rules except those instinctual survival demands, and what remains of them when they return back home?

By grounding itself in a recognizably teenage way, with cliques, rivalries, adolescent sexual experiences, and the pressure to conform, it demonstrates the true realities the girls are living with, which are deemed “normal” to the high school experience. As Vogue’s Emma Specter puts it, “They submit to sex that doesn’t actually do anything for them, get harassed by guys from pass-

Yellowjackets truly reels you in; you’re familiar with its narrative, but then it lets go of your hand and expects you to follow along with the characters as they’re simultaneously freaking out about the crash. And once that crash occurs, the wilderness doesn’t just do its own thing in the background, unbothered; but no, it, of course, amplifies everything: fear, identity, survival instincts. The girls must now create their own rules, moral codes, and decide who will take authority. Pure, pure chaos ensues. Assistant showrunner Ashley Lyle said in an NPR interview that they intended not to draw too neat a line between “high school mean girl behaviour” and actual violence in the woods. The show repeatedly demonstrates that the girls, unlike the stereotype, are already capable of cruelty, wielding power, and moral compromise before rescue or redemption.

One of Yellowjackets’ greatest achievements is, to me, the way in which they expose the emotional underbelly of girlhood, that being the shame, the trauma, the rage. The wilderness becomes a house for them to lash out and express everything they’re feeling. The girls bond in raw and brutal ways. One second, they’re on the same page, and the next, they’re having a screaming battle or worse, physically

fighting with one another. Violence is often internal (between friends) rather than just external (starvation and/or predators). Through characters Jackie and Crystal, we see the true outcomes of internal battles, leading to the killing of them by Shauna (to Jackie) and Misty (to Crystal) on the team. These displays of violence flip the narrative of what girlhood is stereotypically deemed: here, it isn’t a delicate thing; it carries internally and manifests into violence just as intense as any external threat.

It must be noted that the series doesn’t just end once the girls are rescued; the show continuously jumps back in time (to the crash of 1996) and to the present day, with the girls as adults. These women never leave their trauma behind in the forest; rather, they carry it with them into adulthood both physically and psychologically. It’s specifically adult Van, Shauna, Natalie, and Lottie who harbour the trauma of what they did and what was done to them. In an Entertainment Weekly article by Samantha Highfill in conversation with the actress of adult Van (Lauren Ambrose), Ambrose says “I think they all are, in a sense, stuck in the trauma.” It’s clear: girlhood isn’t a stage you just pass through.

Yellowjackets asserts that girlhood is never just a lead-up to womanhood. It is rich, violent, beautiful, and terrifying. The series highlights the fact that many of the ways society tries to control us that affect our rage, appearance, loyalty, and fear, are not anomalies but a part of the thing. Audiences are more receptive to stories that deal with the reality society is living in.

Girlhood never truly leaves us; it transforms within us. Even when all grown up, the show reminds us that we carry the wilderness inside us.

“If society expects girlhood to look a certain way—quiet, compliant, aesthetic— Yellowjackets refuses that.”

VIA EMMA

JABBARI

Between Efficiency and Expression: The Shift from 2D to 3D

NADIRA ZIBIROV COPY EDITOR

My five-year-old cousin can’t sit through a 20-minute cartoon episode without switching to YouTube shorts. And he’s not the only one. Many kids today scroll through clips that last a few seconds only, whereas before, they could sit through an hour-long cartoon. Now, I also find myself getting distracted and scrolling through fast-paced content, which is also the case for many teenagers and adults. Living in a world where time seems to be escaping us, our attention spans are struggling to keep up. We continuously seek instant gratification, which impacts not only how we consume media but also how we reshape animation, especially with the decline of 2D animation.

2D animation made its first appearance in the animated film Pauvre Pierrot (1892). Later, it was Walt Disney who made the first-ever 2D animated short film with sound and colour: Steamboat Willie (1928), marking the debut of Mickey Mouse. Over the past decades, Disney’s hand-drawn classics that took years to create have become worldwide staples of childhood movies. Through various eras, such as the Golden Age with Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) and Bambi (1942); and Disney Renaissance with Beauty and the Beast (1991) and The Lion King (1994), Disney shared its magic with the world.

Then came the first full-length 3D animated movie: Pixar’s Toy Story (1995), which marked the shift from hand-drawn to computer-generated imagery (CGI). This transition brought a new level of depth, movement, and visual dynamism. With reusable models, it also allowed for faster production. By 2011, Winnie the Pooh became Disney’s last 2D project, making 3D the new industry standard.

The change wasn’t just technological but also reflective of our present society. Today, we forget to live in the moment, always thinking about what awaits us in the future. People nowadays seek

gratification through novelty, whether it be through fast fashion or our consumption of fast-paced content—the latter reducing our attention spans by 25%. According to Microsoft Study, humans’ attention span has dropped from 12 seconds in 2000 to 8.25 seconds today. We crave constant stimulation and quick rewards, a habit shaped by platforms like TikTok and Instagram Reels. 3D animated content feeds into this mindset: it’s visually stimulating, fast-moving, and produces quicker results, instantly gratifying its audience.

Still, 2D animation feels alive. Its charm comes from the artist's hand, which adds soul to every frame. While 3D captures realism and depth, 2D evokes warmth and intimacy. Essentially, it reminds us of childhood, bringing us closer to these cherished memories. Its slower pacing also contributes to less frequent angle changes, which is better for children’s development compared to the constant, fast-paced visual style of modern 3D animation. This slower rhythm invites the audience to reflect and connect—something we are nowadays losing, both in animation and in everyday life.

That’s not to say 3D animation lacks talent or effort. However, as industries increasingly use it as a shortcut for efficiency, it has gradually become more uniform and less emotionally “warm”. Early 3D animated films like How to Train your Dragon (2010) and Big Hero 6 (2014) took years of work and creativity; their high-quality animation and storytelling earned them worldwide success. Today, however, with studios preferring faster and cheaper production, recent Disney and Pixar releases have been criticized for their lower quality. Their art styles are often described as too generic, particularly due to the “Pixar bean-mouth style,” a simplified, cartoony character design with bean-shaped mouths that is seen as a sign of laziness and a lack of visual complexity. While 2D animation has also faced similar criticism, it is less pronounced thanks to the unique human touch that 2D possesses. It begs

the question: are we really appreciating art—the patience, effort, and dedication that goes into animation? Can industries find a balance between both without one overruling the other? Unfortunately, right now, industries are prioritizing marketability at the expense of artistry.

Some companies, however, have resisted the shift, notably Studio Ghibli. Founded in 1985, Ghibli continues to use hand-drawn animation as it perfectly reflects the nature of its films. According to producer Toshio Suzuki, just one minute of animation takes Miyazaki and his team a month to complete. Yet, Hayao Miyazaki remains dedicated to hand-drawing, stating: “I believe the tool of an animator is the pencil.” From older films like My Neighbor Totoro (1988) and Spirited Away (2001) to the most recent one, The Boy and the Heron (2023), the studio’s works have captivated audiences with their visual richness and emotional depth. Studio Ghibli films remind us that 2D animation remains one of the oldest and most influential art forms, even in a time of fast production.

Yet, even as technology keeps evolving, nostalgia seems to be making a comeback. From vintage fashion to vinyl records, our generation is rediscovering what the past has to offer. The animation world seems to be following suit. Industries have begun experimenting with hybrid animation, which incorporates 2D and 3D simultaneously. Both Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018), which blends CGI with comic book art, and Puss in the Boots: The Last Wish (2022) gained popularity for their hybrid approach. This technique offers an innovative blend of 2D’s charm with 3D’s visual energy.

In the end, animation is the art of storytelling—and art can only be truly appreciated when one understands the value of patience and effort. In our time of constant movement, perhaps slowing down might be the answer—in animation and in life.

Finalists of the 21st Montreal International Black Film Festival

JULIA AZZOUZ

CREATIVE WRITING EDITOR

Best Narrative Feature: Frantz Fanon by Abdenour Zahzah (Algeria, France)

Set in colonized Algeria in 1953, this powerful debut follows Frantz Fanon, a young Black psychiatrist newly appointed as head of the fifth ward at the Blida-Joinville psychiatric hospital. There, he confronts a system entrenched in racist and colonial practices, where Muslim patients are denied autonomy, forcibly restrained, and medicated without consent. Filmed on location at the very hospital where Fanon once worked, the film captures his radical efforts to reform psychiatric care. He introduces humanitarian programs that foster collaboration between staff and patients, and establishes facilities such as a football field and a mosque to restore dignity and promote healing. As Algeria’s war for independence intensifies, Fanon becomes increasingly involved in the resistance, guided by a deepening anti-colonial commitment. This film offers an intimate portrait of the political philosopher, psychiatrist, and author of The Wretched of the Earth

Best Documentary Feature: Ammaki (Ta Maman) by Celia Boussebaa (Ethiopia)

Amakki (Ta Maman) is a lyrical documentary that follows three generations of women in Ethiopia’s Sidama region over the course of a single day. In a household shaped by love, labor, and loss, Dorite, her daughter Mulu, granddaughter Tigu, and baby Mita navigate the quiet complexities of daily rituals like cooking, farming, and storytelling. The film captures the richness of routine in relational time with an intimate cinematography and a textured soundscape. Structured in four poetic chapters and spoken entirely in Sidaamu Afoo, Amakki resists Western documentary conventions, offering instead a decolonial, immersive experience that invites the viewer to witness indigenous knowledge without narration.

After the death of Blanche, an elderly woman, her family gathers in a rural village for the funeral. Among them is Zaza, a biracial teenager visiting with her mother, quietly observing the tensions that simmer beneath the surface of family grief. Amid the emotional weight of the day, Zaza connects with a young cousin, a quiet, overlooked girl adrift in the chaos of mourning. Blanche tenderly explores themes of identity, belonging, and the small moments of human connection that emerge in the wake of loss.

Filmed over 10 years, this documentary short follows the relationship of Gloria Clayborne and the renowned jazz pianist Junior Mance. Having played with the likes of Dizzy Gillespie, Cannonball Adderley, and Dinah Washington, Mance met Clayborne in 1996. They quickly married, she became his manager, and they traveled the world together. In 2012, Mance had a stroke and developed dementia, forcing both to confront a life where music would no longer be at the center. The film becomes an intimate portrait of rediscovering identity—both as individuals and as a couple—while navigating love, loss, and devotion through profound change. Loosely structured around Gloria’s journal entries and layered with vérité footage, archival photos, and film, the story moves between past and present like a memory. It captures the enduring power of partnership in the face of time and illness.

Best Narrative Short Film: Blanche by Joanne Rakotoarisoa (France)

Best Documentary Short Film: Sunset and the Mockingbird by Jyllian Gunther (USA)

ARTS & CULTURE

Broken Telephone: The Death of True Dialogue & What We Can Learn From the Great Philosophers

NICOLE F. MOTTA STAFF WRITER

Ring, ring. Who's there?

No one, apparently. The line is dead in 2025. It’s not really clear when it stopped working, but, for some reason, people just can’t reach each other the way they used to.

Do you ever feel that disconnect? Despite being in the same room, sitting together, at the same moment, an overwhelming wall gets between you and the person you’re trying to have some kind of discussion with—especially when leaning into any politically or socially motivated topic. Instead of your words coming together, weaving mental wavelengths, you’re throwing ideas over this barricade, hoping one is strong enough to overcome the battle. It is even more incredibly frustrating to feel like your own loved ones have been lost on the other side. Too often, dialogue today looks less like a mutual reflection and more like: “may the loudest, most manipulative opinion win.”

It’s not all that surprising things have turned out like this. Everywhere we look, we are being served “versus” thinking: left vs. right, citizens vs. immigrants, Israelis vs. Palestinians, climate vs. capitalism. The media, always on the hunt for more “engagement,” is eager to cultivate this hostile online environment by fueling polarization and pushing binaries. The surge of questionable online debaters—who seem to have forgotten that the art of debating requires listening and reciprocity—is a testament to this. The conversation often stops before it even begins. In fact, it’s not so much a conversation, as these debaters seem to want to perform their idea rather than genuinely lay out its groundwork for dissection. They accuse and evade rather than ask pertinent and self-critical questions. Emotions and ego get involved, and it doesn’t help that this happens on the big stage that is the internet—for, quite literally, anyone and everyone to witness. Unfortunately, these “performers” are setting

a model for discussion that many people are following in their personal lives.

However, these binary-driven spaces do not reflect reality.

“Human life is made of coexistence, inconsistencies, and contradiction. Yet society has forgotten how to explore these complexities—we’ve forgotten the art of true dialogue.”

Without it, dominant single narratives stay intact, and global empathy and togetherness crumble under their weight.

It is understandable—because who really wants to sit down with someone whose perspectives just tick that button in us? It does feel so much better to just avoid or distance ourselves from these interactions altogether.

However, this easy way out comes with a logical cost. It undermines the first conceptual prerequisite to dialogue. Refusing to engage means that we are taking for granted that our knowledge on a particular subject is complete. It is based on the presumption that we have nothing to learn from different perspectives—which is a logical fallacy. Plato reminds us of this in his writings, Five Dialogues, in the section “Apology”, where he writes of Socrates’ attempt to reconcile the paradox of being declared the wisest man in Athens when, on the contrary, he did not at all believe himself wise above human possibility. After interrogating other self-proclaimed wise men—Socrates realized they did not actually know all—the philosopher came to understand that he has been proclaimed the wisest because “human wisdom is worth little or nothing” and true wisdom comes when we are ready to recognize our own ignorance and limits to knowledge.

To flesh this out further: imagine knowledge like a web. We all carry such a small fragment of it—a web spun from our own lives. The more we weave ours together, the stronger and more expansive they’ll become. Humans are always chasing the truth, and we need each other's fragments to continuously and productively build a fuller picture of reality. Butting heads only ends with us treading water in the fallacies that come from our limits to knowledge.

This relates back to our opinions, which we are constantly trying to push onto one another. They are built upon what we know. If what we know can only be partial to what reality truly consists of (as we are not omniscient), our beliefs and attitudes can simply never perfectly align with fact. This is why, when engaging in dialogue, the second thing we must be ready to accept is that our opinions and feelings about things remain separate from reality—and thus should remain relatively detached from the subject discussions. This, of course, is a difficult thing to swallow, which is why we struggle to execute this second conceptual prerequisite to dialogue. It requires great mindfulness and self-awareness. The good news is that this is something we can practice, taking it day by day.

Once we take on the right headspace to engage in dialogue, where do we go from there? How do we go through the process itself? The great philosophers have extensively explored this, especially through their own versions of the concept of “dialectics,” which typically refers to a method of reasoning through arguments and counter-arguments that arise within dialogue. However, this concept is known to be somewhat muddled, precisely because many different thinkers have approached it in so many different ways. For the purpose of cultivating productive dialogue today, it is useful to draw into the many different theories, particularly Socrates’ and Hegel’s methods.

The Socratic dialectical method uses refutation as its central technique. Instead of simply accepting what people said, the philosopher would engage in probing questions that aimed to reveal inconsistencies or inadequacies in people’s beliefs. This process often left them confused and shamed about their previous solid statements. Socrates wanted others to come to the realization that he had come to: recognizing your own ignorance is the first step towards knowledge. Today, we can apply this in our conversations by actively choosing to truly listen to what the other is saying and engaging with the material they’re presenting—by asking as many questions as possible. By committing to the full investigation, breaking down the barricade and allowing foreign ideas to flow in, it is easier for both people discussing to hone in on a particular questionable point of whose web might need more weaving. This approach transforms dialogue from battle to shared exploration.

Hegel’s dialectics are similar in the way that there are opposing forces in a discussion, but they do not come from people like Socrates and his interlocutors. Instead, they come from within the subject matter itself—within one's own mind. This introspective aspect is essential to dialogue because the result of discussion can only take place within oneself. In fact, each person has the responsibility to resolve the matters of the dialogue within them and bring about internal change. Hegel based this method in the theory that many truths can arise from the same subject. According to the philosopher, every thesis will have an antithesis: a contradiction equally as true. Truth emerges when we allow these opposing forces to interact. This is called synthesis. In dialogue, putting this method into practice not only implies passively receiving others’ ideas, but also creating space for them to contradict and expand our own. This does not mean someone is necessarily in the right or wrong; rather, synthesis is a union of pieces coming together to build a larger concept. Believe it or not, conflict is actually a good thing—when

embraced in the right way.

The death of dialogue is affecting each and every one of us. Good dialogue is the key for cultivating empathy and togetherness, and diminishing rashness, anger, and hate. It feels uncomfortable when views are so opposing to ours, but every opportunity for understanding is for the better. Opening this reflective space within ourselves isn’t about endorsing harmful beliefs, but allowing oneself to delve into how certain beliefs come to be held by some

similar way. This process of being able to understand and share the feelings of another is what we call empathy. Empathy is how we will break down our walls. Empathy is how we will grow love and compassion.

Right now, we are being served polarization on a plate. Walls are constantly being put up, and the distance growing between us feels overwhelming and disillusioning. It is enticing to give in to the conviction that dialogue is impossible with those who do not

people. It's about trying to dissect the knowledge that is the foundation for someone else’s worldviews— and recognizing that maybe they stem from fear, ways that society has failed them, or from experiences we could never have imagined one person would have to endure. We might even discover that our own opinions are corrupted by the way that society has shaped us. After all, we are all the sum of our own experiences. Tracing issues back to their roots can be done in the hope of preventing society from failing others in a

immediately align with our ideas. But the reality is, our world is interconnected—whether we like it or not. We have no choice but to move forward together. It’s time for us all to accept and explore complexity instead of allowing our worldviews to fall within binary boxes. So, pick up that phone, dial that estranged friend’s number and start asking some questions.

To the rebirth of true dialogue.

You Don’t Need More Clothes

ALINA EMILIA CONTRIBUTOR

OMG, leopard print is in right now— be sure to grab that top!

What’s that? You just donated last summer’s Brazil baby tee? No reason to be concerned—Earth was made to die for your endless spending.

Trends have always been a thing. It’s not illegal to want to participate in fun, cute, cool stuff that genuinely makes life feel better. We all like some trends, but there are good and bad ways to follow the new aesthetic on the rise.

Someone who indulges in trends, finds garments that last, intends to use them until they can no longer be worn, and makes sure they don’t have an absurd amount of clothes doesn’t live an immoral lifestyle. However, I don’t see any of you wearing the cow print pants you begged your parents to buy you back in 2021.

“In a world where we have surpassed trends and have moved onto microtrends, you can’t redo your own closet every three to five months. ”

And regardless, I know that buying so many new clothes with that minimum wage salary doesn’t exactly align with any sort of moral code.

When a trend arises, a small business can only pray it miraculously goes with the items they already carry (think Selkie during the rise of cottagecore or Hoes4Clothes during the Y2K’s resurgence). At most, they get a few weeks of recognition before falling back into the abyss. The only companies capable of keeping up are ultra-fast fashion brands—who end up winning, time and time again.

Fast fashion is pure wickedness—it’s based on the exploitation of vulnerable communities around the world, all in the name of profit. It also normalizes the poor quality in everyday garments, so the consumer ends up needing to make a new purchase every time. Once,

we could’ve said it was a fair trade for the low prices. But Zara asking $80 for a polyester “silk” skirt suggests that there’s not much of a win from the purchaser’s side anymore. Fast fashion is clearly bad. So, if there was an even greater evil than this (already bad) concept, we’d know not to support it, right?

Wrong.

Every day, new clothes are introduced into these companies’ websites. Zara— formerly seen as the worst fast fashion company—uploads 45 times fewer garments to their website than Shein. Our demands are growing exponentially, which creates monstrous industries that pump out tons of plastic clothing and place even more pressure on already overworked textile employees.

The current trend cycle isn’t only awfully short—it’s extremely specific. It’s not just silhouettes or patterns: it’s Lirika Madoshi’s strawberry dress or nothing. That level of specificity makes it hard to find a purpose for it after posttrend clarity. And I get it—I’m not some immoral robot, here to impose my beliefs. We all regret certain purchases. There’s an entire industry dedicated to making sure some of us fall for their ads. For example, social media insists with every scroll that you need cowboy boots for fall, convincing you that you should’ve bought them like, yesterday. But think of the pairs of shoes you already have!

I can already hear the counterargument against fast fashion:

“It’s all I can afford!”

“There aren’t any affordable brands that carry my size!”

Look—as much as I am passionate about the environment, I totally see how sustainable fashion can be unrealistic for some people. And honestly, shopping at unsustainable stores isn’t the

problem in itself. The people filling their pockets aren’t getting rich off of single moms trying to find decent shirts for their kids. The issue lies with the people looking forward to a $700 Temu haul every few months. If you buy clothes based on what is essential and what lets you pay the bills, your priority lies exactly where it should. Would it be better if you could thrift instead? Possibly. But it isn’t realistic to expect everyone to dig through bins or find their size in a Renaissance-style corset—good luck with that in the age of resellers.

So, how do you fix it?

Go through your entire closet and figure out what you haven’t been using—get rid of it. Set a limited number of pieces per category—for example, no more than five pairs of shoes. If you want new shoes, either get rid of a pair (trade with friends!) or re-evaluate your limit (e.g., if you discover a passion for hiking, buy boots and adjust your max to six). Accessorize more to spice up your outfit! Lastly, wait before purchasing! Don’t get the Tabi flats immediately—if it’s really meant to be, the few weeks without them won’t matter in the long run.

Earth will thank you!

VIA BUSINESS OF FASHION

ARTS & CULTURE

READER BY KARISHMA WAGNER-VANAMALA

@ SOLOCHISM

MARRIE HAN GAZE

Lover, You Have Attachment Issues

JACQUELINE GRAIF VOICES EDITOR

“We accept the love we think we deserve.” - Stephen Chbosky

The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky was my book of choice in 10th grade, and I loved every single aspect of it—from the portrayals of mental health to the desperate, unrequited love. However, one thing that I could never quite understand was the line: “We accept the love we think we deserve.” I used to think it meant that as a society we see the love we wish we had in our partnerships, blind to reality. However, the meaning runs much deeper.

Attachment issues are a difficulty that many young people face today, which has, arguably, manifested in many forms of modern media. Lots of music has glorified yearning and attachment issues. Prime examples are Conan Gray’s “Nauseous” which has “Maybe that’s why I feel safe with bad guys because when they hurt me I won’t be surprised.” Similarly, Lorde’s “Shapeshifter” expresses avoidant behavior: “I’ll kick you out and pull you in… Say that you were just a friend, and when it’s all over, again, say I’m

not affected.” The avoidant attachment type has become romanticized in contemporary media, to the point that it is even considered cool to be unattached.

Due to this glorification in the media, independence has become increasingly idealized, namely in the young adults of Western society. Western society has led young adults to believe they need to reach success by isolating themselves, says Sari Cooper, a couples counselor and sex therapist and the director of the Center for Love and Sex in New York City.

Extreme independence and isolation

leads to attachment issues; which has become an issue of its own amongst young adults. According to Cleveland Clinic, attachment issues are typically classified into three types: avoidant, anxious, and disorganized. Anxiously attached individuals often have low-self esteem and rely on others for validation and a sense of purpose; they tend to feel distressed when someone pulls away or leaves. An avoidant type is the opposite—they are incredibly independent and struggle letting others see their vulnerable side. Disorganized attachment is a mix of the two.

Social psychologist Sarah Konrath led a study on attachment theory, revealing a 56% spike in avoidant attachment styles between 1988 to 2011, as reported by The Atlantic. The rate rose again in a follow-up study in 2020.

It is no secret that yearning has returned to our generation—but is yearning truly what we think it is? The physically painful longing or need for someone else in your life; usually someone you cannot have or who doesn’t want you back. Yearning is the result of a mix of unrequited love and avoidant attachment. But what exactly has caused this spike?

As someone born in 2007, I grew up around social media during the rise of the iPhone. My childhood revolved around unrestricted internet access and a copious amount of time spent on my iPad. I am not alone in this, however, between 2010 and 2019, depression and anxiety rates among adolescents rose by more than 50% in the U.S., according to The Atlantic. Hearing “It’s the phones!” all the time from adults when I was a kid was exhausting. I did not want to believe they were right, but as I grew older, I realized they were. It is not possible to say exactly that the phones and unrestricted internet access are the cause of this depression and anxiety spike, but given that the iPhone came out in 2007, most sociologists and psychologists tend to make this connection.

The rise of social media has exposed our generation to relationships we wouldn’t otherwise witness—cute posts of your friends and their partners, or your distant relative getting married.

This constant exposure to others in happy relationships has sparked our need for authentic connection. However, the increasing amount of people with unhealthy attachment styles makes deep connections a lot harder to achieve.

“It is the impossibility to be vulnerable with others, restricted by the time spent on our phones, where we lack face-to-face connection more than ever before. ”

Young adults now are prevented from seeing what a realistic, healthy relationship looks like because of the curations on social media. We resort to yearning for an unrealistic reality, and completely avoid or disassociate from any real essence of a relationship when it is presented to us. What young adults really need right now is authentic, face-to-face connection. Instead, we accept love that we cannot obtain because it is a reflection of what we see in popular media. It is a disassociation from any form of a real relationship, and a fictional reality we each create in our heads.

Jeff Buckley’s hit album “Grace” (only really a hit in Europe during its release) was revitalized by Gen. Z because of its themes of young love and intense yearning. The song “Lover, You Should’ve Come Over” encapsulates this feeling best, and even charted 20 years after its release. Our generation feels most understood by this album, with the “yearning epidemic” gaining traction on social media.

The “yearning epidemic” needs to come to an end, and our generation should find peace in healthier relationships. If we make a stronger effort to overcome these attachment issues, yearning may subside, and allow for us to create deeper connections. So let’s stop accepting the love we think we deserve, and accept the love we actually deserve—authentic connections free from attachment issues.

Storm Amy & The Beauty in Destruction

MIA MOUDILOU ARTS & CULTURE CORRESPONDENT

On Saturday, October 4th, Storm Amy swept through Norway, bringing uncontrollable wind and rain. In the small Eastern town of Larvik, locals who have lived in the area for the past 40 years said it was the biggest and most destructive storm in 25 years. Countless trees were torn from the ground, their roots fully exposed and left above the soil. Tore-Kay Landbo, a local resident, noted that trees are usually more bare at this time of year in Larvik. However, due to climate change, the forests were still full of leaves, which intensified the wind’s power. Driving beneath partially fallen power lines and witnessing the sudden gap in the forest—where just a day earlier there had been thick woodland—created an apocalyptic atmosphere in the town.

The ocean was wild, with significantly rising water levels. Waves reached deep into the town, shattering windows in apartment buildings, splitting the Larvik Sauna near the port in two, and destroying several seaside restaurants that typically draw heavy tourism in the summer.

The morning after, despite the lingering rain, locals in raincoats and boots walked through Larvik, gathering at the port to observe the damage. In a contradictory way, although sorrowful, many seemed awestruck by nature’s power. Conversations quickly turned toward rebuilding, with community members already discussing ways to help clean up the aftermath.

A rainbow appeared in the clouds above the ocean—a symbol of hope in the wake of destruction. That hope, as strong as nature’s force itself, reflected the community’s determination. Humanity, after all, is part of nature’s power—and in Larvik, people are coming together to rebuild what was lost.

PHOTOS BY MIA MOUDILOU OF LARVIK, NORWAY.

OPENING STATMENT

JULIA AZZOUZ CREATIVE WRITING EDITOR

Every season is inaugurated by one moment of perfect clarity. Last week, I drove through the Quebec countryside, peripherally tracing the sunlight that trickled down yellowed cornfields and through bronzed maples. I sped past lazy meadows and sprightly sheds and tailed a camper that clumsily clunked between the rectified lines on the road. With the windows down and Bob Dylan’s laments unfurling in ripples, my heart tightened like an aperture over time passing. I felt the end of summer and the start of autumn as if I were wedged between them, as if I could look backwards and forwards from a gangling lighthouse. I saw the leaves flutter down and the crops spring upwards. I saw the glory of the past extinguish itself to leave room for other flames. I saw the death of one kind of beauty and the birth of another, and then I saw a blur of gold and blue as I squinted through the wet warmth of a peaceful epiphany.

I’d like to thank the contributors of this issue for deciphering the shapes in their blurry visions to impart these moments of clarity with us. Keep seeing, keep writing, and please keep sharing. Your work is invaluable.

Advice for the Neighborhood Ghost

EMILY SILVA CONTRIBUTOR

Don’t hold on to heavy stones Of past hurts and mistakes. That pain will sink deep in your bones. Your heart, it sure will weigh.

If you keep heart and soul light You won’t be led askew. And maybe in the dead of night Haunting you will not do.

CREATIVE WRITING

Toothache

ASHLEY DELPHINE MURISON CONTRIBUTOR

Ever since childhood, my teeth have bled

Gums raw, molars cracking

The dentist would rip and pull I would cry for hours

Since then my teeth have been hidden

Behind braces, behind fillings, behind retainers

The first I let in, the first I allowed to run their tongue over my cavities

Gave me a toothache

I thought you’d be the same

Instead you put gems on my chipped teeth

And you smiled with all your imperfections

Making me smile even bigger back

I know now

I can finally heal

CREATIVE WRITING

Partout et nulle part

CHARLOTTE RENAUD

ARTS & CULTURE EDITOR

Ma chérie, tu es partout et nulle part.

Tu te faufiles dans le noir

Tu dors dans ton char

Je te cherche mais je ne te trouve pas

Tu es partie

Tu es ici sans être ici

Ta voix rebondit sans se faire entendre

Ton odeur s’efface dans le vent

Ta silhouette s’étale et s’embrouille

Tu t’évades du présent

Tu voles si haut

Tu rayonnes tellement, tu brûles

Tu vis si rapidement, tu es essoufflée

Ma chérie, en voulant vivre, tu as oublié de respirer

On joue toujours à cache-cache

Mais maintenant toi aussi tu ne sais pas où tu t’es caché

Tu te cherches mais tu ne te trouves pas

Tu es partie

Tu es ici sans être ici

Ma chérie, l’amour ne se retrouve pas en s'échappant

L’amour ne se retrouve pas seulement dans un bar à 3h du matin ou dans un shot de tequila

L’amour, ce n’est pas une épreuve

L’amour, ce n’est pas à conditions

L’amour, ce n’est pas quand tu oublies

L’amour, c’est quand tu es reconduite saine et sauve dans ton lit

L’amour, c’est se respecter

L’amour, ma chérie, c’est pouvoir respirer.

Mais tu couches avec un fantôme parce que tu as peur de te faire voir

Tu te sens vivante à jouer avec la mort

Tu te caches dans le noir

Tu dors dans ton char

Tu es partout et nulle part.

CREATIVE CREATIVE CREATIVE

The Forest INÈS MONTEL CONTRIBUTOR

At the edge of the forest, They sing to me.

All I can see are

The bruised bark of the trees, Their falling leaves.

The darkness between

The foliage moves, alive.

The darkness sings.

I wish I were scared,

So I could escape,

But my feet are stuck

To the ground, In a trance.

The darkness continues

To seduce me

And I give in.

The figures glide, Wicked women

With gaping mouths

And broken teeth.

It gets closer, They get closer,

So I pray to a god

They don’t believe in

And I wait.

Untitled

MIKA SAUVAGEAU COPY EDITOR

She stood on stage

And shared her soul

And all they recognized

Was how pretty she looked

And she wished

She could clothe herself

In all that was inside her mind

Le Ballon d’Or a-t-il vraiment raison d’être?

ALAA ETTAOUTH STAFF WRITER

Le 22 septembre dernier, la cérémonie très attendue du Ballon d’Or s’est déroulée au théâtre du Châtelet à Paris, récompensant ceux ayant brillé dans les plus grandes ligues du monde au courant de la saison 2024-2025 de soccer. Les nombreux fans ont pris plaisir à spéculer sur le gagnant de cette 69ème édition, même si, pour plusieurs, l’annonce n’était pas aussi surprenante que l'année dernière, où c’est Rodri, joueur de Manchester City, qui a empoché le grand prix Pour ma part, cela reste un mystère complet, à ce jour. Bien que j’avais toujours quelques poussières d’espoir en moi de voir Raphinha du club catalan FC Barcelone soulever le trophée cette année, c’est Ousmane Dembélé, attaquant clé du Paris Saint-Germain, qui s’est mérité l’honneur du côté des hommes. Pour ce qui est des femmes, Aitana Bonmatí, joueuse du FC Barcelone, a de nouveau raflé le trophée pour une 3ième année consécutive.

Écouter, regarder et lire toutes ses prédictions m’ont amenée à me poser plusieurs questions : pourquoi accordet-on tant d’importance à ce prix, d’où provient-il et surtout, est-il légitime ?

L’histoire du Ballon d’Or

Tout d’abord, le Ballon d’or a été introduit en 1956 par le magazine France Football, à l’initiative de quatre journalistes : Gabriel Hanot, Jacques Ferran, sous la supervision de Jacques Goddet et Jacques de Ryswick. Il était originellement destiné à récompenser le meilleur joueur détenant une nationalité européenne, excluant donc des légendes du sport comme Maradona et Pelé, respectivement argentin et brésilien. Ce n’est qu’en 1995 que la compétition ouvre ses portes aux joueurs de toute nationalité évoluant dans un championnat européen, et qu’en 2007, que le Ballon d’or abandonne toutes restrictions, offrant la chance à n’importe quel footballeur dans le monde de le remporter.

Ce n’est qu’à partir de 2018 que la cérémonie évolue enfin, en introduisant un Ballon D’or féminin (assez en retard pour une organisation d’une telle ampleur!), le trophée Kopa, récompensant le meilleur jeune joueur et la meilleure jeune joueuse de l’année. Un an plus tard, le trophée Yachine honore le meilleur gardien et la meilleure gardienne de but. Enfin, depuis 2021, le trophée Gerd Müller décore les meilleurs buteurs masculins et féminins en sélection, ainsi qu’en club.

Plusieurs autres prix ont été attribués comme le Club de l’année, le Prix Sócrates (pour mettre en lumière l’engagement social exceptionnel d’un joueur), le trophée Cruyff (le/la meilleur(e) entraîneur/euse d'une équipe masculine et d'une équipe féminine). Finalement, deux ballons d'or d'honneur furent attribués en 1995 et 2014 reconnaissant respectivement les incroyables saisons précédentes de Maradona et Pelé n'ayant pas été récompensées dû aux lois arbitraires de l’époque.

Pourquoi le Ballon d’or fait-il tant parler de lui?

Cette récompense d’envergure a souvent été remise en question par le public et les analystes sportifs, et cela pour des raisons qui touchent directement la procédure de sélection des gagnants. Durant un premier processus de sélection, les journalistes de France Football et de L’Équipe, deux magazines sportifs français, collaborent pour établir une liste de 30 nominés selon 3 critères : la performance individuelle, la performance collective (incluant les trophées d’équipe remportés) et la classe ainsi que le « fair-play » du joueur.

Ensuite, une délégation de 100 journalistes sportifs représentant les cent premiers pays au classement mondial de la FIFA sont retenus pour désigner un top 10, en se basant sur les mêmes critères.Ainsi, un certain nombre de points est attribué pour chaque position. Une procédure semblable désigne la lauréate du Ballon d’or féminin avec la seule différence étant le nombre de journalistes qui descend à 50. Finalement, le joueur et la joueuse ayant récolté le

plus de points remportent le Ballon d’or.

L’interprétation des différents critères peut être vague et différer grandement d’un journaliste à l’autre. Plusieurs estiment que le fait même de donner la responsabilité d’élire les meilleurs joueurs de l’année à des journalistes, et non à des entraîneurs, anciens joueurs et autres professionnels, retire une part de légitimité à cette récompense. Lors de l’édition de 2018 ayant comme grand gagnant Luka Modric, joueur star du Réal Madrid à l’époque, un faux journaliste opérant sur un site journalistique inactif depuis six ans a même réussi à ajouter son vote, n’influençant cependant pas le résultat final. D’autre part, certains estiment que les performances collectives ne devraient pas avoir autant d'incidence sur le vote, allant jusqu’à exclure un joueur de la course dû à une équipe moins performante.

Et l’Oscar revient à…

On reproche souvent à cette compétition son manque d’objectivité, se reposant donc sur les vastes campagnes de publicité auxquelles les clubs peuvent participer pour mettre de l’avant un joueur spécifique, à la manière des Oscars, et laissant donc de côté les performances subjectives et les statistiques qui parlent souvent d’elles-mêmes. De plus, ce sont les joueurs attaquants et évoluant en milieux offensifs qui sont souvent favorisés au détriment de joueurs plus défensifs. Malheureusement, marquer des buts a un impact plus important sur l’imaginaire collectif que le travail monstre auquel les défenseurs s’adonnent constamment. Petite pensée à Achraf Hakimi, défenseur du Paris Saint-Germain, qui a mené son équipe tout droit vers la coupe de la Ligue des Champions, mais qui n’a pas été aussi reconnu qu’il le méritait…

Bien que la légitimité du Ballon d’Or puisse être remise en question, il reste un des prix les plus prestigieux du football. Espérons seulement que, dans les prochaines années, un vote du public soit instauré, donnant ainsi l’opportunité au gagnant d’être beaucoup plus représentatif et faisant bien plus d’heureux…

Rugby at Dawson

Women’s D3 upcoming game:

October 24, 2025 — D3 WRUG - Dawson at John Abbott — 7:00 pm — John Abbott College

Men’s D3 upcoming game:

October 24, 2025 — D3 MRUG - Dawson at John Abbott — 8:45 pm — John Abbott College

Excerpt from the Co-Captains of Dawson’s Women’s Rugby Team:

Hey,

we’re Pascale McEwen and Marilou Bourdua, Co-Captains of Dawson women’s rugby team. Last season, we took home the championship title, and now we’re working hard to do it again. Rugby is not just angry players running into each other, it is a sport founded on respect, passion and resilience, and we are trying to show that to the world. Knowing people are cheering us and rooting for us drives us to work harder and makes us want to win even more. It’s an exciting sport to watch and a beautiful community to be involved in, and we would love your support in our fight for a second title!!

Are Science Students Overworked Or Do They Overwork Themselves?

CLAIRE MIZUKI RODHAM SCIENCE AND ENVIRONMENT EDITOR

With the staggering workload and difficult concepts, science programs can feel like a never ending hamster wheel of increasingly complicated homework problems. In these programs, it is not uncommon for students to dedicate all of their free time and sacrifice their sleeping schedules, only to fail and have to retake the classes that they had worked so hard at. Yet oftentimes, this is not the fault of the students for not being organized enough or overworking themselves; it is simply a result of having to take large amounts of difficult classes in a short semester with a heavy workload.

Are These Programs Really The Root Cause?

While it’s easy to argue that it’s not necessary for students to sacrifice all of their time studying, and that it is up to them to maintain their work-life balance, this is a lot easier said than done. For regular students who aren’t remarkably gifted and don’t have a tremendous amount of prior knowledge, an intensive studying regimen is often required in order to maintain a sufficient R-score, particularly for students who aim to apply for competitive university programs.

In an interview with a Health Science student with plans to apply for Pre-Med, they revealed that their studying schedule consists of leaving their house for the library at 6 am everyday and returning home at 10 pm. Despite this grueling schedule, the student states that “somehow it's still not enough. I don't necessarily consider myself as burnt out, not because I'm not tired all the time, but because I know that it can get much, much worse.”

What Counts As Burnout?

As described by Psychology Today, “burnout is a state of emotional, mental, and often physical exhaustion brought on by prolonged or repeated stress.”

The cause of this burnout stems from the culture in scientific spheres that promotes the idea that getting a higher education “should be hard”. This outlook can lead to students developing mental health-related disorders or result in them taking medication to enhance performance or manage stress, according to The National Library Of Medicine.

Are Competition And Perfectionism Other Factors At Play?

Despite there existing obvious expectation for students to sacrifice many hours to dedicate them to studying the complex topics within science, many students can unfortunately become partially responsible for their own burnout. Since science programs can be difficult to get into, they attract many high achieving students who can wind up working harder than their programs require or who push themselves to the limits to remain at the same level as their highly intelligent peers. In an interview with a Pure and Applied Science Student, she reflects on the difficulties of constantly being surrounded by increasingly smart and hardworking students, expressing that

“being in an environment full of competitive students is almost degrading when you get lower grades than them.”

She goes on to mention that she believes science attracts a lot of overachieving students because “it is a toxic way to prove that you’re capable and what better way is there to do that by picking a path that is known to be challenging.”

When the student in Health Science was asked about feelings of perfectionism and lack of motivation, she reflected that she felt the need to study really hard all the time in order to meet her own standards and “there's the feeling that if you don't meet these standards,

then there's no point, which makes motivation really difficult.”

Is Overwork Normalized?

While many science students report mental, physical, and social impacts of these programs, being an “academic weapon” by dedicating increasing time and effort to these programs continues to be glorified. Many students can end up hitting a “brick wall” as eventually the results of sacrificing sleep or other spheres of their life can catch up with them, leading to possible mental health disorders. Despite this, from an outsider’s perspective, the mental health of science students does not seem to be considered as a severe issue as to them it seems perfectly understandable to be stressed in a stressful environment. The implications of this expectation on the mental and overall health of students isn’t sufficiently considered.

Should Science Programs Do Better?

In the age of artificial intelligence and an everchanging society, the sphere of science is no stranger to adaptability. While science programs are not the only programs that may end up causing their students to become overworked, it has a notably unforgiving study culture that promises to worsen as students leave for university and go onto higher education. As stated best by the same Health Science Student, “I feel like this needs to be talked about as a real issue and not just something that we have to put up with.”

VIA

CLAIRE ZHANG

Is There Life on Mars? Perseverance Uncovers Potential Biosignatures

JULIA AZZOUZ CREATIVE WRITING EDITOR

Launched in 2020, the NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) Perseverance rover has been tasked with collecting samples from Mars to send back to Earth with the aim of detecting microbial life on the planet’s surface. In 2024, Perseverance discovered a rock unlike any other observed, pockmarked with a cluster of small, darkened rings that scientists likened to “leopard spots” and “poppy seeds.” The “Cheyava Falls” rock, named after a Grand Canyon waterfall, was extracted by the rover into sample 25, also known as “Sapphire Canyon.” This core is considered one of the mission’s most promising specimens from the Red Planet.

On September 10th, 2025, a peer-reviewed paper titled “Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars” was published by NASA planetary scientists, astrobiologists, and geologists. They concluded that the Cheyava Falls sample offers some of the most compelling evidence to date for potential biosignatures on Mars, while emphasizing that definitive proof of past life remains unconfirmed. Although no conclusive claims can yet be made, many alternative hypotheses have been carefully evaluated and found less likely, with biosignatures remaining the leading explanation.

Although the sample is not expected to be returned to Earth for many years, Perseverance is equipped with analytical tools that can probe its findings from Mars until laboratory work is made possible. The rover uses PIXL (Planetary Instrument for X-Ray Lithochemistry), an x-ray fluorescence spectrometer, to identify the elemental composition of Martian surface materials on a tiny scale. Perseverance also uses SHERLOC (Scanning Habitable Environments with Raman & Luminescence for Organics & Chemicals), a device mounted on the rover’s arm that uses cameras, spectrometers, and a laser to detect organic particles and certain minerals. SHERLOC is aided by the aptly-named WATSON (Wide Angle Topographic Sensor for Operations

and eNgineering), a colour camera that takes close-up images of rock grains and textures.

For the Perseverance mission, scientists at NASA strategically selected the rover’s landing location. Just north of the Martian equator, the Jezero Crater was chosen because it once held a lake and delta system that thrived billions of years ago, making it a prime candidate for preserving ancient life. Thanks to PIXL and SHERLOC, Perseverance was able to analyse various samples from the crater, including Cheyava Falls’ leopard spots and poppy seeds where it detected carbon-based compounds i.e. organic carbon. The rover also identified traces of iron, phosphorus, sulfur, and most notably, vivianite (hydrated iron phosphate) and greigite (iron sulfide), which on Earth are associated with biological processes, including the decay of animal and plant matter. While microbial life is one possible explanation, scientists continue to explore alternatives.

One hypothesis posits that similar results could arise if the rock were subjected to prolonged heating. The presence of carbon-based compounds could be explained by high temperature chemistry in the Martian soil without the involvement of living organisms. Olivine, found on Cheyava Falls’ surface, is a mineral that primarily forms through the crystallization of magma, supporting such a theory. However, vivianite typically forms under low-temperature conditions and cannot withstand extreme heat. The Jezero Crater ranges from approximately -22ºC to -83ºC, and no current data suggests that the high temperatures required for such chemical reactions can be naturally generated on Mars. The presence of vivianite in the sample thus makes high-temperature chemical formation an unlikely explanation.

Scientists also hypothesize that acidic water interactions could have formed the same minerals. Acid can dissolve certain rock types like carbonates and silicates which can change their redox state (reduction-oxidation reaction) and alter the rock’s chemical properties. If acid water flowed through the rock, a chemical reaction could have gen-

erated vivianite and greigite through abiotic means. However, for this to be consistent, olivine would have to have formed after the acid interaction because olivine dissolves in acid. Since olivine crystallizes from magma and intense heat would destroy vivianite, it is unlikely olivine formed after acid flow, and it is also improbable it formed before acid flow because it would have dissolved during acid exposure.

Therefore, the prevailing hypothesis— though not established as a scientific theory— involves organic material. In this scenario, the microbes act as a catalyst for mineral formation, meaning that they accelerate the chemical reaction without themselves being consumed, unlike heat or acid. Microbes use minerals like iron, sulfur, and phosphorus to obtain energy, releasing or transforming these elements. This metabolic process can cause minerals like vivianite or greigite to form in specific

spots with low oxygen and high nutrients like carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, sulfur, and other trace elements like magnesium, calcium, and potassium. During NASA’s press release, NASA’s current acting administrator, Sean Duffy, stated that Cheyava Falls could “very well be the clearest sign of life that we have ever found on Mars,” noting that scientists “couldn’t find another explanation.” While confidence in the presence of biosignatures grows, researchers remain cautious. No definitive claims can be made until the samples are returned to Earth and thoroughly analyzed in laboratory conditions. As former NASA administrator Bill Nelson explained in a 2025 CNN interview, the Mars Sample Return program is undergoing major redesign to “reduce complexity, cost, and mission duration.” Until then, the scientific community continues to weigh the evidence carefully, remaining mindful of Carl Sagan’s dictum: “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”

You Are Funding the Militarization of AI

MIKA SAUVAGEAU COPY EDITOR

On June 13, 2025, the U.S. Army swore in senior employees from OpenAI, Meta, Palantir, and Thinking Machines Lab—pillars of the modern tech industry—as U.S. Army Reserve officers. Their induction coincided with the launch of Detachment 201, a new Reserve unit designed to inject cutting-edge tech into national defense.

Just months earlier, companies like Google quietly removed previously stated commitments to ethical boundaries in AI development. Language promising not to pursue “technologies that cause or are likely to cause overall harm” or those “whose purpose contravenes widely accepted principles of international law and human rights” vanished from public documentation in early 2025.

Since these removals, tech giants that once denounced militarized applications of AI are now developing virtual reality training systems for soldiers, drone targeting algorithms, facial recognition tools, and battlefield logistics software. While official messaging frames this shift as an effort to “bridge the commercial-military tech gap,” its implications are deeper and more alarming.

The global adoption of AI by military and law enforcement agencies risks reinforcing the status quo instead of adapting to the evolving needs of communities. This could result in the expansion of control-oriented practices,: such as heightened surveillance of protesters, journalists, and dissidents; predictive policing systems that entrench racial bias; and algorithm-driven censorship that suppresses activist content under the guise of anti-terrorism.

One of the most controversial examples of AI’s militarization is Project Nimbus—a $1.2 billion contract launched in 2021 between Google, Amazon, and the Israeli military. According to training materials accessed by users and obtained by The Intercept, Google is supplying the Israeli government with the full suite of machine learning and AI tools available through

its Google Cloud Platform. Employees at both Google and Amazon have spoken out against the project, fearing AI’s potential inaccuracy and how they might be used for surveillance or other militarized purposes, citing its role in enabling surveillance and military operations during Israel's 2024 assault on Gaza.

Once imagined as a tool for human empowerment, artificial intelligence is being used more and more for ethically ambiguous purposes. In fact, Silicon Valley’s integration within the military-industrial complex raises significant concerns on the increasing profitability of war for major corporations, as well as the ways we may be indirectly funding these initiatives.

Many of us don’t think of ourselves as participants in military-industrial tech, but every time we stream on Spotify, use Google Cloud, or rely on services from Amazon, Meta, or OpenAI, we participate. With every click, subscription, or stream, we help fund their expansion.

“Every time you order from Amazon, or use Google as your search engine, you may indirectly be funding the AI militarization used to harm and injure the people whom you love. ”

However, the convergence of AI, militarism, and profit exposes a deeper failure: our political, legal, and social institutions are unequipped to govern the speed and scale of technological power. Corporations are shaping the world faster than democracies can respond. However, when traditional levers of change, (such as government, regulation, and internal corporate pressure,) fail or move too slowly, culture often speaks first. Spotify CEO Daniel Ek’s investment in Helsing, (a defense startup building AI-powered weapons systems), might seem distant from the music on Spotify, but artists are mak-

ing the connection. If their creative labor indirectly funds surveillance or autonomous weapons, they want out.

Musicians like Godspeed You! Black Emperor, Deerhoof, Xiu Xiu, King Gizzard, Lizard Wizard, and Massive Attack have started leaving Spotify after revelations on the $700 million investment into Helsing.

“We don’t want our music killing people,” Deerhoof said bluntly in a statement to The RollingStones

These exits are part of a growing movement to disconnect from platforms and corporations aligned with the military-industrial complex. They are material actions rooted in principle.

This also coincides with the resurgence of physical media—tapes, CDs, vinyl—not just for nostalgia, but as a way to bypass platforms entirely and rebuild community around media that isn't data-mined or monetized. From musicians leaving exploitative platforms to users choosing open-source alternatives and local, offline action— there’s a movement forming. It’s a rejection of techno-determinism, and a call to reclaim agency.

We can use Mastodon instead of Twitter/X, Signal over WhatsApp, Linux instead of Mac or Windows, DuckDuck Go instead of Google— technologies that serve users instead of exploiting them. Alternative platforms—like Resonate, Ampwall, Faircamp, and community-owned initiatives—are gaining traction by centering artists and rejecting profit-driven systems.

Most of all, it’s time we show up. Not just with clicks or outrage, but with our voices, and our physical presence.

VIA SNOPES

Word Search

ANSWER TO LAST MONTH’S WORDSEARCH:

Quiz : What cocktail are you?

Hi, reader :)

This is your Curiosities Editor. I hope you enjoy this silly quiz. And, always, drink responsibly!

What instrument best suits your vibe?

A. Acoustic guitar

B. Saxophone

C. Drums

D. Piano

What’s your favourite romance trope?

A. Childhood friends

B. Love at first sight

C. Enemies to lovers

D. Soulmates

What’s your ideal morning scenario?

A. Bed rotting

B. A refreshing shower and a coffee

C. Sleeping in

D. Early morning run and a healthy breakfast

What’s your main goal when choosing a Halloween costume?

A. Look as hot as possible

B. Cosplay like it’s Comic Con

C. Make it funny

D. Scare the crap out of everyone

Which team are you on?

A. Team Jacob

B. Team Edward

C. Team Alice

D. Team Carlisle

Majority of A - Aperol Spritz

Maybe some think you’re basic, but no one thinks you’re wrong – you belong in any party you join. The simplicity of this bubbly drink is what makes it charming.

Majority of B – Sangria

You’re a fun time no matter when and where. The fruitiness and dryness bring joy to the body and the mind on a hot summer day by the pool or a chill, friendly gathering in the backyard.

Majority of C – Mojito

You were the cool kid in school. Now you’re the coolest person at the bar. A dash of sour lime and a piece of fresh mint make for an unforgettable experience.

Majority of D – Espresso Martini

If the occasion calls for it, you will doll up in the most elegant attire you own. This intense combination of hard liquor and caffeine radiates expensive and fancy energy at any gathering.

Horoscopes

ARIES (MAR 21 – APR 19)

Ooh la la, Aries, there’s love in the air. Watch out for your heart, or you’ll have to plan a last-minute matching couple Halloween costume! And if you’re taken, don’t forget to share your truth with your partner. You’ll find the right words once you start the conversation. Don’t overthink it.

Movie rec: The Princess Bride, 1987

TAURUS (APR 20 – MAY 20)

Work is piling up, and people are reaching out. This is all overwhelming, yet you’re thriving because you love feeling needed. This month will get busy, Taurus, so get your calendar out and plan ahead. Don’t miss out on the opportunities.

Movie rec: The Three Bogatyrs, 2004

GEMINI (MAY 21 – JUNE 20)

It’s great to have ambitions, but not all ideas are great. Weigh your options. Take your time. Ask for feedback and, actually, apply it. As writers say, sometimes, you have to “kill your darlings”.

Movie rec: Parasite, 2019

CANCER (JUNE 21 – JULY 21)

Spring cleaning? More like autumn declutter. Your personal space needs attention, and your mind needs some peace. Maybe you need a routine if you’ve noticed a slump in your work. Maybe you need a deep conversation with a friend to appease your tormented soul.

Movie rec: Dungeons & Dragons, 2023

LEO (JULY 23 – AUG 22)

It’s cuff season, Leo, so land your shoulder carefully. Many want to bask in your bright and warm light of pride. However, don’t let them steal it. You know your friends from your foes.

Movie rec: Kubo and the Two Strings, 2016

VIRGO (AUG 23 – SEPT 22)

Ka-ching! The leprechaun just dropped his pot of gold at your doorstep. Take it and spend it, save it, give it, whatever you believe is best. Your hard work is paying off. Projects never stop coming your way; you only need to direct your mind towards them.

Movie rec: 9, 2009

LIBRA (SEPT 23 – OCT 22)

Exploring new places, trying out new hobbies, and making new friends are great ways to break out of the mundane. Maybe you’ll discover a new facet of yourself. Giving it a good old try is never wrong.

Movie rec: Life of Pi, 2012

SCORPIO (OCT 23 – NOV 21)

Happy birthday, Scorpio! Your social circle cherishes you, so let them show off their love towards you. You are more than worth it. And do not feel bad about asking for presents. Those who care will come through.

Movie rec: Before Sunrise, 1995

SAGITTARIUS (NOV 22 – DEC 21)

It’s time to make some apples fall, Sag. You’re an archer after all – pick up your bow confidently and aim skillfully. Some decisions are hard to make, but you must choose sooner or later. Whether it is in love or work, you have to put your foot down sometimes.

Movie rec: The Book of Life, 2014

CAPRICORN (DEC 22 – JAN 19)

Even high achievers have their limits. Your skillset is grand but not bottomless. And that’s alright. Focus on what matters, and the right doors will open for you.

Movie rec: Sinbad, 2003

AQUARIUS (JAN 20 – FEB 18)

They call you crazy, but crazy people do not know they’re crazy. You know you are crazy, therefore you are not. Your ideas are beyond this world. So, bring them here, in your gravitational pull. Present them proudly so they all hear it loud and clear.

Movie rec: The Emperor’s New Groove, 2000

PISCES (FEB 19 – MAR 20)

This month, Pisces, you’re taking it easy. You don’t need big events to feel like everything is changing. Some growth is slow, intimate, gradual and tranquil.

Movie rec: Song of the Sea, 2014

theplantnews.com theplantnewspaper@gmail.com @theplantdawson

MASTHEAD