Issue 13

THE AMHERST

THE INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER OF AMHERST COLLEGE SINCE 1868

STUDENT VOLUME CXLIV, ISSUE 13 l THURSDAY, JANUARY 29, 2015

Women’s Basketball Defeats Archrival Williams See Sports Page 9

AMHERSTSTUDENT.AMHERST.EDU

College Holds Day of Dialogue Dan Ahn ’17 Managing News Editor

Shirley Duquene ‘17 Staff Photographer

Amherst students enjoyed a day off from classes on Tuesday when a winter storm forced the college to cancel all classes and close all offices.

Winter Storm Juno Shuts Down Campus Sophie Murguia ‘17 Editor-in-Chief Amherst College resumed operations Wednesday after a winter storm prompted the college to cancel classes and shut down most buildings on Tuesday. Despite warnings from the National Weather Services of a “crippling and potentially historic” snowstorm, the storm proved to be milder than expected in the Pioneer Valley.

Chief of Campus Operations Jim Brassord announced the closure on Monday afternoon, after Massachusetts Governor declared a state of emergency and issued a travel ban for Tuesday. In addition to cancelling classes, the college chose to close all buildings except for Valentine Dining Hall, LeFrak Gynasium and the dormitories.

Normally when the college is closed, individual faculty members may opt to continue holding classes. However, Brassord said that because of

the extreme weather, senior administrative staff made the blanket decision to cancel all classes.

Because of the cancellation, the add/drop deadline for the spring semester has been extended two days, until Wednesday, Feb. 4 at 5 p.m.

Many staff members stayed on campus overnight in order to remove snow from the campus and respond to potential emergencies. Among those who stayed overnight were staff members from custodial, grounds, the trades, Dining Services and campus police.

Valentine remained open during regular hours, despite being short-staffed for the day. Director of Dining Services Charlie Thompson said that Valentine aimed to provide as much of its posted menu as possible during the storm.

“In anticipation of the storm, we brought it the first half of the week’s food supplies today instead of having Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday deliveries, in the event that distributors could not get to us,” Thompson said.

Approximately 12 Valentine employees stayed on campus overnight, and several Amherst students offered to work extra shifts in the dining hall on Tuesday.

Although Brassord alerted students on Monday about dangers from tree limbs falling or the college losing power, little damage was visible on Tuesday. Additional staff arrived on campus at 6 a.m. to relieve the overnight crew and finish clearing the snow from roadways on campus.

Despite warnings to stay indoors, many students could be found sledding and skiing down Memorial Hill as the storm petered out in the afternoon. At 3 p.m., Brassord announced that the college would reopen fully on Wednesday morning.

“The storm is trailing off and is less intense than some of the forecast predicted,” Brassord wrote in an email to The Student on Tuesday.

By Wednesday morning, much of the snow had been plowed, and classes resumed as usual.

Hundreds of Amherst students, faculty and staff gathered in LeFrak Gymnasium for the Day of Dialogue on Race and Racism last Friday. Classes were canceled and offices were closed for the event so that all members of the community could join in the discussion.

Following breakfast and opening remarks by president Biddy Martin, the events commenced with a panel discussion among four scholars who study race and ethnicity.

David Eng, a professor of English at the University of Pennsylvania, spoke on colorblindness as a problematic concept and argued that today’s culture lacks the critical vocabulary to properly discuss issues of race.

Shinhee Han, a psychologist and adjunct faculty member at Columbia University’s Center for the Study of Ethnicity and Race, discussed the process of developing identity among people of color and the psychological tensions that limit people’s ability to openly talk about race.

Rosina Lozano, assistant professor of history at Princeton University, spoke about challenging entrenched cultural narratives about racial and ethnic identity.

Finally, Melvin Rogers ’99, an associate professor of political science and African American studies at the University of California, Los Angeles, spoke on his life at Amherst in a different cultural climate from today and discussed the complications of engaging in political life for people of color.

The panel discussion ended with a brief question and answer session.

“My favorite segment was the panel because it was aimed toward expressing why and how race and racism are still a prominent component to our society,” said Briana Wiggins ’15, an organizer for the event. “It also attempted to assert that Amherst is not immune to social ills.”

After the panel, attendees broke into smaller groups to discuss the contents of the panel and their own experiences at the college. Amherst faculty and staff volunteers facilitated the discussion. In one part of the discussion, each group split into two circles. Those in the inner circle had a conversation while those in the out-

Continued on Page 3

Val Renovations Receive Mixed Reviews from Students Jingwen Zhang ‘18 Staff Writer Interior renovations to Valentine Dining Hall completed over interterm drew mixed responses from students returning to campus.

According to the Amherst Facilities’ website, the upgrade aimed to create a “relaxed café setting” in the college’s dining hall. Notable changes include booths with semi-canopic covering along several walls, low lounge-style sofas around the fireplace in the front room, colorful new chairs and bar-style seating.

In many places, long wooden tables have been replaced with smaller tables that seat up to six people comfortably. The new furnishings come in red, orange and green, a contrast from the previous brown tables and maroon chairs.

The functional motivation for the renova-

tion was to replace the deteriorating old furniture, some of which was over 40 years old.

“Our carpentry shop was beginning to have to spend a lot of time fixing the old furniture,” said Tom Davies, the director of design and construction.

Aesthetically, the new designs incorporated a range of inspirations and contributors. The design process involved “researching what our peer institutions have recently done in their dining halls, design recommendations from an award-winning architecture firm specializing in dining hall design, student input and input from the administration especially Student Affairs and, of course, Dining Services,” Davies said.

Davies emphasized the importance of student involvement and opinion in the design and construction process. Throughout the design phase in 2014, students had the op-

portunity to voice their opinions and make suggestions for change during student forums in Fayerweather and Valentine. In September 2014, a “pop-up” showcase in Val featured actual candidate furniture samples for students to try out.

Students “conveyed enthusiasm for more colorful furniture and more cafe type settings, which also influenced the design,” Davies said. “Most of the feedback was quite positive … in particular, students were very excited about having booths in the design. As a result, the number of booths was increased in the final design.”

Beyond initial surprise and adjustment to Val’s new look, student responses have been mixed. Many students have praised the newer, more modern, lounge-like look of the new furnishings, as well as the opportunity for more privacy and small-group conversations.

According to Dean of Students Alex Vasquez, students have given positive feedback about the visual change as well as the soft seating. “[The renovations] allow you to have more intimate conversations with friends because you’re more sheltered,” Tasha Kim ’18 said. “I generally think that new Val is good — it definitely looks nicer inside.”

Lousie Atadja ’16 also had positive things to say about the new furniture.

“I definitely like the new colors that are in Val and the new format,” she said. “I like that the new tables in the back room encourage more different kinds of people sitting in the back room. The colors are a lot warmer and more inviting.”

“I think it looks more student-friendly, like a college dining hall. It’s easier to sit by

Continued on Page 3

3

News

Leah Schmalzbauer Dec. 9, 2014 - Jan. 26, 2015

>>Dec. 9, 2014 11:54 a.m., Valentine Dining Hall A student reported his umbrella was taken from the coatroom. The person who took the umbrella was identified on video. He was contacted by an officer and the umbrella was returned. >>Dec. 11, 2014 12:15 a.m., Stone Dormitory An officer responded to a noise complaint and found a loud television on at a first floor suite. After speaking with a resident, the television was shut off.

9:06 p.m., Stone Dormitory A student reported the theft of a coat from Stone while visiting there the previous night. Her personal identification was in a pocket. As a result of an investigation, the student’s Amherst College ID was found in the possession of another student. It was recovered and the matter was referred to Student Affairs. >>Dec. 12, 2014 10:50 a.m., Converse Hall An officer retrieved a mailing that was received at an office which was suspicious in nature. >>Dec. 17, 2014 12:49 p.m., Dakin House An officer investigated an intrusion alarm and found three students had illegally entered the building. They were identified and the matter was referred to the Student Affairs office.

3:06 p.m., Stearns Dormitory An officer and the Fire Department responded to an alarm and discovered a smoldering fire in a recycling barrel.

8:04 p.m., Valentine Dining Hall A student reported the theft of a bicycle from a bike rack at Valentine Hall. >>Dec. 24, 2014 1:09 p.m., Cohan An employee reported the theft of food and several boxes of kitchen utensils from the first floor common area. >>Dec. 25, 2014 11:56 p.m., Seligman House Officers investigated a smoke detector sounding in the kitchen and discovered the odor of burnt popcorn. No one was in the area. >>Jan. 6, 2015 7:54 a.m., Converse Lot An officer responded to a report of two men sitting in a parked car. They were identified a workers for a construction company doing work at Frost Library. >>Jan. 7, 2015 11:59 p.m., Pond Dormitory Officers responded to a report of people yelling and breaking glass outside of Pond Annex. Upon arrival, no one was found outside but loud noise was coming from a first-floor room. Officers spoke to the resident and issued a warning. >>Jan. 14, 2015 1:15 p.m., Converse Hall A representative from an office in Converse Hall reported a suspicious email.

The matter is under investigation.

5:27 p.m., Stone Dormitory

Officers and the Fire Department responded to an alarm which appear to have been activated by marijuana smoke.

The responsible person could not be identified. >>Jan. 17, 2015 11:43 p.m., Coolidge Dormitory Officers responded to a complaint of people gathered in a stairway due to a party in a second-floor suite. The people were cleared out and the residents of the suite were advised to shut off the music.

11:48 p.m., Railroad Right of Way An officer stopped several people who were attempting to climb a fence to cross the railroad tracks near the facilities complex. They were identified as Five College students and were warned about their actions. >>Jan. 20, 2015 10:17 a.m., Merrill Science Officers responded to an animal complaint. Assistance provided. >>Jan. 21, 2015 2:05 a.m., Morrow Dormitory Officers responded to a noise complaint at a first-floor room and had the music shut off. The resident was fined $100 for creating an endangering condition by having lit candles in the room.

2:24 a.m., Morrow Dormitory While responding to a noise complaint at a first-floor room, an officer discovered the resident was in possession of drug paraphernalia with marijuana residue. The resident admitted to having smoked in his room and was fined $100 for the smoking violation. The matter was referred to Student Affairs. >>Jan. 23, 2015 12:09 a.m., Charles Pratt Dormitory Officers responded to a report of a possible overcrowded party in a second floor room and located about a dozen people. Non-residents were directed to leave and officers confiscated alcohol as the residents were underage. The matter was referred to Student Affairs.

12:10 a.m., College St. An officer checked on two people who were in the woods near a college-owned residence. After identifying them, no further action was taken.

10:27 p.m., Orr Rink A student called to report a disturbance at Orr Rink during a hockey game. Officers responded and determined the student made a false report. The matter was referred to the Student Affairs office.

10:34 p.m., Pond Dormitory While at a first-floor room, an officer discovered the resident was in possession of alcohol and underage. A lit candle was also found in the room and the resident was fined $100 for creating an endangering condition. The matter was referred to the Student Affairs office. >>Jan. 25, 2015 12:29 a.m., Coolidge Dormitory Officers responded to a complaint of a loud party that was causing a stairway to become crowded and shut down a party in a second-floor suite.

Fresh Faculty Department of American Studies, Sociology

Associate Professor of American Studies and Sociology Leah Schmalzbauer received her bachelor’s degree from the University of New Hampshire, master’s from London School of Economics and Political Science and doctorate from Boston College. Her research focuses on immigration and U.S.-Central American relations. She is currently studying the migration of the elite in the U.S. from major cities to rural areas.

Q: How did you become interested in sociology?

A: My first formal sociology class was as a Ph.D. student, so it was later, but I entered sociology from a community organization background. I studied economics and international relations in college, and I worked for a while, doing community organizing and human rights work after undergrad. Then, I studied international development in grad school and thought maybe I would go that route and work for an NGO, but realized that I was really interested in teaching.

I worked for another year and then applied to Ph.D. programs. Sociology really attracted me because of its partnering of rigorous intellectual work and practice of working on social justice issues.

Q: What type of work did you do before coming to Amherst?

A: I was a professor at a different university for 10 years. I was at Montana State University in Bozeman, Montana. A very different institution [from Amherst]: large land grant, open enrollment institution in the Rocky Mountains, in a ski town — it was great. I had a wonderful experience, but I always dreamt of teaching at a liberal arts school that also really had a strong research emphasis and an engagement emphasis.

This was a dream job, and I was lucky enough to come in with tenure and start as an associate professor.

Q: How do you like Amherst so far?

A: It’s been wonderful. My students have been great and I knew they would be and they have just surpassed my expectations. I have really enjoyed my classroom experience. I have wonderful colleagues. I am in two departments: American Studies and Anthropology and Sociology, and both departments are really strong, collegial, great departments. So that has been wonderful, and it’s a great area. I was very sad leaving Bozeman, but this is a great place to live and I feel lucky to be here. I feel like I hit the jackpot when I got this job. When I say it is a dream job, well, it really was for me, and I just know how lucky I am to be here.

Q: Have you been surprised by anything thus far at Amherst?

A: I was pleasantly surprised that my students don’t want to text in class. At Montana State, I would have to tell my students no texting in class and put your phones away, but students here are like, “Why would we do that? We’re engaged in the material.” I am pleasantly surprised how engaged my students have been. Coming from a land grant public university to an elite institution, I was warned that I would have very entitled students, and I haven’t felt that. I have really felt just wonderful human beings and thoughtful and critical thinkers and very warm and open students.

Q: What classes did you teach last semester and what classes are you teaching this semester?

A: Last semester, I taught a class called Globalization, Inequality and Social Change and a class called Latino Migration. This semester, I am coteaching the American Studies class Building Community, and I am teaching a class called Gender Migration and Power: Latinos in the Americas.

Q: Why are you interested in the United States and Latin America?

A: I have been working mostly on U.S.-Central American relations since I was in college. When I was an undergrad, there were many civil wars in Central America, and the United States was very involved militarily in Latin America, especially Central America. I became involved in the discussions and the debates surrounding that, and that has really followed me. I got to work in Central America and began to follow the immigration of folks to the United States from Central America at the beginning, fleeing those civil wars and later leaving because of different economic policies. So I am really interested in the economic relationship between the U.S. and Latin America and how immigration is a part of that, and also the economic inequalities that exist and how immigration is connected to those.

I see Latin America as really our closest partner and ally, and also probably the region that we have the most complicated relationship with in terms of immigration.

Q: What research are you currently working on?

A: I just finished a book project. I had a book come out in the fall that focused on Latino immigration to new destinations, specifically rural destinations in the Mountain West. This is really a new direction for me, but I am also very interested in migration of the elite within the United States, and specifically lifestyle migrations from places like New York and Los Angeles and cities to rural areas and the Mountain West. I am really interested in the West and I am looking at why people are moving their lives to Bozeman, Montana, for example, and leaving the corporate rush of New York City; what they are escaping and what they are searching for and the gender dynamics of that demographic shift because the west is growing really rapidly, and it’s growing in small towns and mountain areas and there is a lot of wealth moving into these areas. That’s my new project, but I am open and interested in figuring out what is going on here locally. I have always worked locally and researched where I live and I’m still not sure what that looks like here.

Q: What do you hope to contribute to the Amherst community while you are here?

A: I really hope that, as a faculty member and a community member, I can help us build community across differences. I think that’s one of the reasons I was hired and something I am committed to in my classes: talking honestly about how it is to be part of a community where we come from such different backgrounds in terms of race, class, gender, nationality, religion, and I am really committed to doing that. I want to bring those conversations into the classroom and into what we are studying.

Q: What do you like to do in your spare time?

A: I have two children, so I don’t have that much spare time, because I have 6 1/2-year-old and an 8-year-old. They take up a lot of my spare time.

I am a runner. I love running and that’s kind of how I have explored this area. I also love dinner parties. And red wine — not too much — but I love good food, and I love good wine and gathering friends.

— Ryan Cenek ’18

The Amherst Student • January 29, 2015

News

3

Day of Dialogue Continued from Page 1

er circle listened, and participants could switch between circles at any time. Several participants said they liked this discussion format.

“The effectiveness of the dialogue owed much to the model we were given to use and a shared sense of ‘buy in’ by the participants,” said Professor Trent Maxey of the Asian Languages and Civilizations Department, who facilitated one of the group discussions. “The group was clearly very committed to listening and those who shared their experiences were honest and open.”

However, Maxey said he saw some flaws in the discussion.

“My one regret was that not everyone shared their experiences, and I sense that much remained unspoken … I think most wanted to do the right thing during the Day of Dialogue, even if many of us were uncertain just what that might look and feel like,” he said.

Following the small group discussions, attendees broke for lunch, after which they gathered back in LeFrak Gymnasium for a segment called “Envisioning Conversations.” Attendees were invited to close their eyes and envision Amherst College in 2020 as a more inclusive and diverse community. They then discussed their experience with those around them, in an effort to think about the concrete steps necessary to achieve this vision of the community.

The events concluded with a final gathering at the Powerhouse, during which members of the community were invited to share their experiences of the day as well at the college more generally at an open mic session.

A group of student activists who were engaged in the Black Lives Matter Awareness Week originally proposed the idea of a Day of Dialogue to the administration in late 2014.

Administrators joined together with students to facilitate the event.

“Provost Uvin assembled a diverse advisory group consisting of staff, faculty and students.

We met several times to discuss and plan everything from the schedule of the day to facilitator training to how to structure the panel format,” said Mariana Cruz, assistant to the provost for diversity initiatives, director of the Multicultural Resource Center and an organizer of the event.

Those who were involved in the planning of the Day of Dialogue hoped to encourage conversation throughout the college community.

“Black Lives Matter wanted that day to be the catalyst for some major change in attitude on campus regarding how we think about and express our different identities and in turn react to others’ identities,” Wiggins said. “We wanted to rip off the Band-Aid, so to speak, and talk about what’s wrong now in order to imagine what can be different later.”

They also said that the event was intended as a point of departure for continuing efforts.

“The aim was for community members to begin the process of sharing, listening, and learning from one another. I say begin because it is my hope and plan to continue these conversations in diverse settings and structures,” Cruz said.

Others expressed satisfaction with the results of the event, but also noted its limitations.

“I thought the day did a decent job integrating staff and faculty voices into the conversation, and that there should be more such times when staff and faculty can candidly voice their opinions on topics of campus life,” said Athri Ranganathan ’16, an organizer. “I think that it’s too early, however, to call the day a ‘success,’ because a big part of the day’s success depends on its follow-up. Only if real actions are taken Photo courtesy of Levi Lee’17, The Amherst Olio to continue conversations and push them into initiatives that impact campus life would I call Students passed out flyers and buttons in Keefe Campus Center last week the day a success.” in an effort to raise awareness for the Black Lives Matter campaign.

Dining Hall Renovations Receive Mixed Responses Continued from Page 1

yourself,” Chelsea Pan ’18 added.

However, the upgrade has also faced student criticism. Some students believe that Valentine now seems more crowded. The booths have also become subjects of criticism.

“It’s bizarre with the coverings over the booths — you can’t see who’s around you and it’s difficult to find friends in Val,” Zack Stern ’18 said.

Toward the end of the fall semester, one prominent concern among students was how the change would affect the social dynamics of the dining hall, especially what some consider a divide between athletes and nonathletes. With the previous Valentine set up, the back seating area became associated with athletes, mostly due to the popularity of the long tables among teams that wanted to sit and eat together.

Many students wondered whether the new

seating would change this dynamic. However, some students said that the renovation does not seem to have impacted seating patterns in a notable way.

“For the track team, we still find ways to sit with one another,” Atadja said. “Some will sit in a booth, some will sit at the tables, [and] we’ll put tables together.It’s not necessary for all of us to sit together at one table, but I don’t think it’s a huge negative thing. I’m slowly getting used to it, and I’m surprised that I

don’t miss the long tables as much as I used to.”

Jesse Chou ’15 agreed that students’ seating habits do not seem to have changed significantly.

“While I don’t think there were any substantial changes for the better, I appreciate the administration’s good faith effort to address social divides on campus — reforming the most frequented space on campus,” Chou said.

Finalists Chosen in Search for New Athletic Director Sophie Chung ’17 Managing News Editor The college has identified five finalists in its search for a new athletic director and will be bringing those finalists to campus over the course of the next two weeks. Amherst has been searching for a new athletic director since last February, when former athletic director Suzanne Coffey left her role in order to become the college’s first-ever Chief Student Affairs Officer.

Traditionally, the athletic director works directly with the dean of faculty and the president to steer a broad program of recreational and competitive opportunities made available for the Amherst College community. The athletic director’s responsibilities include evaluating athletic department personnel, overseeing facility maintenance, balancing budgets, fundraising and recruiting student athletes.

The athletic director’s role also entails overseeing the college’s 27-sport intercollegiate athletic program, which competes regularly in the NCAA Div. III and the New England Small College Athletic Conference.

The athletic director search committee is comprised of a diverse group of professors, coaches and student athletes. Psychology

Professor Catherine Sanderson is chairing the 10-person committee.

The committee includes the following members: Professor of Mineralogy and Geology and Associate Dean of the Faculty Jack Cheney, Professor of Sociology Ron Lembo, Professor of Mathematics and Computer Science and Dean of the Class of 2017 Lyle McGeoch, senior coach E.J. Mills, Nicolas Pascual-Leone ’16, Cheyenne Pritchard ’16, Director of Sports Medicine Maria Rello, Assistant Professor of Chemistry Elizabeth Young, Dean of Admission Cate Zolkos and Professor of Psychology and Chair of Committee Catherine Sanderson.

With the assistance of a search firm, the committee reviewed all the submitted applications and interviewed semi-finalists before deciding to bring five final candidates to the campus.

Sanderson sent a campus-wide email last Thursday inviting members of the community to a series of open meeting swith the finalists. During these open meetings, candidates will give brief statements introducing themselves and then take questions from the audience.

The open meetings are designed so that students and faculty who are not members of

the committee can give feedback and so that the candidates can learn more about the Amherst community.

“Fulfilling this position is important because of the large issues that are going on on campus right now,” said Nicolas Pascual-Leon ’16, a member of the committee. “With the student athlete vs. student non-athlete divide that is very prominent on campus, we need to fulfill this position so that we can really start to tackle these issues and create a long term goal for the college.”

As one of two student athletes on the committee, Pascual-Leone said he was “able to bring up some issues or explain issues that were going on on campus that the faculty and staff may not understand as well.”

Through the open meetings, the committee hopes to gain a greater understanding of what the campus needs in the role of an athletic director.

With feedback from the larger community of Amherst students, faculty, staff and administrators, the committee will write summary reports of each candidate. President Biddy Martin and Dean of Faculty Catherine Epstein will review then review these reports in early February in order to make a final decision.

Interested in getting the scoop on the latest developments on Interested in getting campus?

the scoop on the late developments on campus?

Join s w e Join n e th

news

If you want to write for If you want to us, email us at djeon17@ sixu16@amherst.ed amherst.edu to get started!

or

Opinion

THE AMHERST

Missing the Opportunity to Have Honest Dialogue

STUDENT

Editorial Academics are a big deal at Amherst. The school does everything in its power to make sure the academic calendar suits faculty needs so that they can squeeze in every single reading, lecture and essay they see fit to assign. Last semester, a student wrote an opinion article in this very newspaper testifying to how the administration’s high and potentially unhealthy emphasis on schoolwork left other parts of our lives — intellectual, social, emotional — unsatisfied.

This norm of prioritizing academics above student life or even well-being is why the Day of Dialogue was such an important opportunity for our campus community. The canceling of Friday classes demonstrated that the administration was ready to take issues of race and racism seriously and address them with the whole student body. All in all, more than a thousand people — students, faculty and staff — woke up early and packed into LeFrak Gymnasium last Friday morning to engage in a dialogue about pressing issues within our community.

After Biddy’s opening remarks and expression of gratitude for showing up, students were ready to make good on the mutual promise to participate in dialogue. Unfortunately, the very structure of the Day of Dialogue actually hindered real dialogue within the community and instead placed its priority on the type of academic-ized lecture that one might see in the classroom. For the first two

hours of the event, a panel of five lecturers — scholars from a mix of disciplines across the country — spoke at length about the broad historical and cultural context of race in America today. Several of the panelists exceeded their allotted time, speaking for so long that the time when they were to discuss race at Amherst specifically was cut off. Although many students lined up at the microphones provided to ask questions of the panelists, only one lengthy question was answered. The Q&A session was shut down just as a student brought up the contentious issue of the mascot, and although Biddy nervously joked that that wasn’t purposeful, there is a cruel irony to the fact that our community didn’t have time to discuss one of the most relevant racial issues on campus today.

The planning behind the Day of Dialogue either struggled to know its audience or simply didn’t care to. Many students left after lunch having learned nothing about their fellow students’ struggles on this campus or simply frustrated at being talked down to by a panel of experts. A historical and cultural understanding of racial issues in America is certainly important, but what’s crucial about such an understanding is that it be actually applied to real, concrete issues present on campus today. While there were certainly some great experiences during the subsequent small group discussions, we really missed out on a fantastic opportunity to collectively hear the voices of the whole community — students, faculty and staff.

Letter to the Editor: Replace Lord Jeff David Temin ’10 Alumnus As an alum of the college, I’m heartened that students have reset the institutional momentum to get rid of the Lord Jeff mascot. I’m still puzzled, though, by the responses of those who hang their support for keeping the mascot on a saccharine notion of the college’s traditions that withstands little scrutiny. For example, in his op-ed for the Dec. 10 edition of The Student, Michael Johnson ’16 asks us to contextualize Lord Jeffery Amherst and his documented support of biological warfare against the Delaware and insists that we not “judge … his actions by today’s standards.”

If we go by Johnson’s account, Amherst’s actions and attitudes are mere relics of a sordid past no longer with us. Johnson also argues that such actions should be treated as the choices of an agent operating in an uncertain moral world. He is wrong on both counts. His appeal to the intrinsic fogginess of war faced by Amherst obscures broad continuities in U.S. history: British colonials like Amherst foreshadowed the 19th century U.S. wars of conquest aimed at eliminating Native communities from their own lands, violence which elites justified ideologically as the inevitable disappearance of “savage” or “primitive” peoples whom they viewed as subhuman. Am-

herst was not operating in the fog of war but in the vice-grip of a powerful and enduring ideology of Euroamerican imperialism. This discourse of civilizational supremacy gave cover to no-holds-barred military practice against Indigenous peoples, including the biological warfare Amherst advocated. What’s more, that discourse has stayed fairly consistent from the colonial period and into the 21st century, where it remains the stuff of U.S. counter-insurgency jargon — with terms like “Indian country” and “Operation Geronimo” sprinkled liberally as reminders of the continuities between Anglo-American militarism then and now.

Johnson seems especially concerned that changing the name is merely symbolic, and in one respect, I agree: Any more-than-symbolic move to rename Amherst would have to be addressed not as an easy disavowal of a racist bogeyman of the distant past but by reckoning with our own complicity in these continuing histories of U.S. imperialism. The problem with Amherst is not that he no longer represents “our values” but that he unfortunately represents them much better than we’re willing to acknowledge as a nation.

Furthermore, Johnson fails to distinguish between contextualizing a given individual — again, a fair burden for historians — and the serious moral

choice before the college now as to whether he properly represents the diverse community the college aspires to build. There is little evidence to indicate that Amherst’s subordinate officers in fact carried out his suggestion to give smallpox blankets to the Delaware. But why should this fact redeem him? I would ask those intent on keeping Lord Jeffery around: What are the positive values you believe he represents as an historical figure? British imperial vigor? Genocidal intent? Why call, as Johnson does, for the facile relativism of historical distance when the name so clearly invokes the violence of colonialism for colonized communities? Johnson’s appeals to the “common ground” connecting past and present students carry little weight when these supposed commonalities become the very source of contention to begin with.

He is correct to point out that such a standard for collective symbols is a high one to meet, but that’s a good thing. The fact that the college took the name from the town proper, as Johnson mentions, is a superficial way of deflecting responsibility; it became the college’s moral burden to bear as soon as we took the name as our own.

Johnson invites us to appreciate the intergenerational community and tradition created by rallying around Lord Jeff.

For those like Johnson still bound to the idea

that this tradition might be worth holding onto, I would note that Amherst is not the first university in the U.S. to question its own connections to racism and colonialism: For example, on the strength of a commissioned study of David Nichols’ role in the horrific massacre of nearly 200 Cheyenne and Arapaho people in 1864 at Sand Creek, Colorado, the University of Colorado at Boulder changed the name of Nichols Hall to Cheyenne Arapaho Hall in the late ’80s. More recently, the University of Denver and Northwestern University — institutions both claiming John Evans, then-governor of Colorado territory, as a founder — have created committees to investigate and acknowledge Evans’ role in the same massacre and are looking to expand their Native American studies programs. Each of these institutions has decided — contrary to Johnson’s suggestion — that we can and ought to judge these historical figures and reject tradition.

Finally, Johnson asks the college community why we can’t instead pursue other meaningful initiatives, such as efforts to increase the number of Native American applicants to the college. While I applaud and support Johnson’s suggestion that the college do more to recruit Native American students, symbols also matter in tangible ways. Mascots are

material: We build statues, contrive holidays, and sing songs to celebrate these figures. The line in the fight song — that Lord Jeff didn’t do “a thing” to the Indians — serves as an egregious example. In singing that song, we create material spaces and institutional memories that honor Lord Jeff and we forgo opportunities to celebrate and build on alternative, anti-colonial legacies. I’d suggest as an alternate starting point to Lord Jeff the Abenaki, Mashpee and other Native nations’ practices of cultural and political reclamation eloquently narrated

by American Studies Professor Lisa Brooks in “The Common Pot.” By enabling communities of fans, students, alumni and administrators to suppress these histories, racist mascots embolden institutional racism and colonialism and give tacit shelter to the rampant ignorance of and vitriol often directed towards Native American communities in the present. Whatever the ultimate outcome of such a debate at the college, it is all the more important that it be sparked in the Northeast, where the very presence of American Indian nations has only recently — and very tenuously — been acknowledged by the federal government. Replace Lord Jeff now. Let’s begin the work of constructing an anti-colonial and genuinely democratic vision linking the college’s past and future.

E X E C U T I V E B OA R D Editor-in-Chief Sophie Murguia Executive Adviser Brendan Hsu Managing News Dan Ahn, Sophie Chung, Elaine Jeon Managing Opinion Johnathan Appel, Marie Lambert Managing Arts and Living Marquez Cummings, Gabby Edzie, Evan Paul Managing Sports Lauren Tuiskula S TA F F Design Editors Gabby Bishop, Megan Do, William Harvey, Sunna Juhn, Chloe Tausk Assistant News Editor Ryan Cenek Assistant Sports Editors Kiana Herold, Jeremy Kesselhaut, Jason Stein Publishers Emily Ratte, Tia Robinson Photography Editor Olivia Tarantino

Letters Policy The opinion pages of The Amherst Student are intended as an open forum for the Amherst community.

The Student will print letters under 450 words in length if they are submitted to The Student offices in the Campus Center or to the paper’s e-mail account (astudent@amherst.edu) by 12 p.m. on Sunday, after which they will not be accepted.

The editors reserve the right to edit any letters exceeding the 450-word limit or to withhold any letter because of considerations of space or content.

Letters must bear the names of all contributors and a phone number where the author or authors may be reached.

Letters and columns may be edited for clarity and Student style.

Publication Standards The Amherst Student is published weekly except during College vacations. The subscription rate is $75 per year or $40 per semester. Subscription requests and address changes should be sent to: Subscriptions, The Amherst Student Box 1912, Amherst College Amherst, MA 01002-5000 The offices of The Amherst Student are located on the second floor of the Keefe Campus Center, Amherst College. Phone: (413) 542-2304. All contents copyright © 2015 by The Amherst Student, Inc. All rights reserved. The Amherst Student logo is a trademark of The Amherst Student, Inc. Additionally, The Amherst Student does not discriminate on the basis of gender, race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation or age. The views expressed in this publication do not reflect the views of The Amherst Student.

Connect to Us Email: amherststudent.amherst.edu Twitter: @amherststudent Instagram: @theamherststudent Like The Amherst Student on Facebook

Web Version The Amherst Student is available to read online at amherststudent.amherst.edu.

The Amherst Student • January 29, 2015

Opinion

5

Actually, It’s Not About Ethics in Video Game Journalism: A Reconsideration of Gamergate Sam Keaser ’17E Ott Lindstrom ’16 Contributing Writers The purpose of this article twofold: first, to correct and respond to the piece published in the December issue of The Amherst Student on the Gamergate controversy and second, to dispel notions of the movement as a positive force for any greater good. Bluntly, the Gamergate movement is not actually about ethics in games journalism. Because the movement is still unfolding, it is difficult to tell an accurate story of both what has occurred and what is occurring; nevertheless, if The Student’s retraction of the piece tells us anything, it is that the previously reported “facts” were nothing of the sort. The purpose of this piece is not to attack the author of the previous article, but serious interrogation of his claims is in no way off limits — we do not consider the author’s brushing aside of the death threats, harassment and pervasive misogyny associated with Gamergate to be acceptable.

Below its veneer of ethical concerns, the Gamergate movement is a disorganized and deeply conservative campaign of misogynistic harassment, a panicked lashing out by a predominantly straight white male subset of video game culture toward an industry that is leaving them behind.

Though a comprehensive historical reconstruction and factual analysis of Gamergate would fill several volumes, there are key facts which must be made clear. Foremost is the origin of the hashtag: the first use of #GamerGate was by actor Adam Baldwin, a staunch conservative with a corresponding history of Twitter harassment. The hashtag was in reference to a pair of (now removed) YouTube videos analyzing the personal life of Zoe Quinn, a little-known indie game developer whose alleged relationships with several members of the gaming press were detailed in an angry blog screed by an ex-boyfriend. From day

one, tweet one, Gamergate has been inextricable from sexism and problematic conservatism.

As far as Gamergate’s alleged focus on journalism goes, a cursory glance at the majority of the movement’s targets is enough to raise dozens of red flags.

The majority of high profile victims of Gamergate death threats, doxxing (the Internet practice of researching and releasing an individual’s personal information) and the like have been women and, most damning, not members of the gaming press. Zoe Quinn is an independent developer; Brianna Wu, who reported she was forced out of her house after her home address was posted online alongside violent threats, is likewise an independent developer; Felicia Day, whose personal information was leaked after she publicly condemned the movement, is an actress; Anita Sarkeesian, whose speaking engagement at Utah State University was cancelled due to a shooting threat possibly associated with Gamergate, is an academic theorist.

This is not to imply that journalists are not targeted, quite the contrary. Yet the profiling pattern continues: the most high-profile journalists attacked are predominantly female and progressive.

Leigh Alexander, a contributor to enthusiast site Gamasutra, was the victim of relentless online abuse in the wake of an op-ed condemning pernicious gamer culture, while Jenn Frank, a notable freelancer and regular contributor to The Guardian, quit gaming journalism altogether after a torrent of social media harassment. These assaults are not the actions of enthusiasts concerned about the state of gaming journalism; this is the impotent outrage of a conservatively normative and hyper-masculine subculture, fighting tooth and nail against its inevitable irrelevance.

It is telling how irredeemable Gamergate is that this misogynistic harassment barely scratches the surface of the reprehensible acts carried out under the Gamergate banner. From “swatting”

(a practice where misinformation is given to law enforcement in order to send a SWAT team to a victim’s house) to hacking and directed denial of service attacks, Gamergate is the Internet pariah to end all pariahs. The movement is so poisonous that 4chan, one of the Internet’s most notorious lawless forums, banned all discussion of the topic within days of the movement’s genesis, kicking its proponents to the metaphorical curb.

One might object to almost any conversation on the “ethos” of Gamergate because such conversation assumes a monolithic movement: as there is no single banner under which Gamergaters operate, an argument, at most, can target only segments of the movement. There is no unified set of demands or opinions, no mission statement; however, this in no way precludes a discussion on Gamergate taken in its entirety. It is possible to tease out argumentative trends in the movement from both grassroots discussion (found on NeoGaf, 8chan, Reddit, etc.) and professional articles (from sources as disparate as The New York Times and Kotaku), which, considered together, sketch a general outline of the opinions fundamentally associated with the movement.

Though masquerading as apolitical — ostensibly the movement takes issues not just with “progressive” gaming websites but with any outwardly political gaming journalism — Gamergate is staunchly conservative. For most Gamergate supporters, video games ought to be a non-political space. This majority of the movement tries to distance itself from the more radical members and their explicitly conservative politics, but they fail to recognize that their own stance, their opposition to “politicizing” video games, does nothing more than enforce an implicit conservatism in gaming culture. Like most popular media, video games are racist, sexist, and homophobic. They often

reinforce white supremacist narratives, patriarchal structures, and heteronormative frameworks, and by ignoring this and arguing against political and cultural considerations in video game reviews and culture, Gamergate only perpetuates the conservative state of contemporary gaming.

Along with a general apoliticism, Gamergaters have pushed specifically for “objective” video game reviews.

What exactly an objective review might consist of is left up to the imagination of the reader. As with all art and entertainment, engaging with a video game is a subjective experience. There is no art style inherently better than another, no gameplay type with a legitimate claim to the best, no genre necessarily more fun than all others. Gaming is a deeply personal experience that speaks to players at their moment of play. It is an individualized experience insofar as no playthrough of a game is the same as another and as such, an objective review is impossible.

The call for objectivity in reviews then is nothing more than another manifestation of political conservatism masquerading as ethical concern. A review is unacceptable to Gamergaters if the reviewer’s subjective experience with the game takes into account lived experiences or politics different from their own. An “objective review” is, in reality, a subjective review that conforms to the Gamergater’s own subjectivity; anything else is decried as biased or unethical. Or what is unethical about subjective reviews is their refusal to pander to the conservatism and immaturity of Gamergate’s demographic.

Amidst this quagmire of vitriol, harassment and hypocrisy, it is worth noting that there are legitimate concerns regarding the state of video game journalism. The relationship between the press and publishers can be questionable, even shamelessly corrupt at its worst. For example in 2007, GameSpot writer Jeff Gerstmann was fired for

publishing a negative review of Kane & Lynch amidst pressure from the game’s publisher. Or consider Famitsu, Japan’s largest gaming magazine, which awarded a rare perfect score to Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker, while its presdient appeared in the game’s advertising campaign and a copy of the magazine showed up in the game itself. Make no mistake, the credibility of the gaming press is very tenuous. However, while certainly worth discussing, no matter how concerning these ethical transgressions may be, Gamergate is not the place to have that conversation, and it never was. Even if there are members of the movement who believe they are fighting for press reforms, the well has been poisoned from the start by the heinous actions of the visible majority waving the Gamergate flag. A few questionable charity drives notwithstanding, nothing positive has come of the disorganized movement. Developers have been chased from their homes by death threats, countless people have had their personal information compromised, hate speech has spread across social media like wildfire and nothing has been gained. Plain and simple, Gamergate is a petulant campaign of harassment, a witch hunt born of flimsy sexist conspiracy theories, wrapped in a paper thin disguise of ethical concerns. No good has come of it, and no good ever will ever come of it or the toxic mentalities from which it spawned.

At its core, Gamergate is sexist, conservative and deeply disconcerting. It is an embarrassment to the little cultural and artistic credibility that the medium has managed to find in recent years. It is a troubling but not inaccurate snapshot of a largely white, male and adolescent American subculture and it is a reaction to the fear of cultural assimilation to the mainstream. As the December article notes, there are no winners in Gamergate. But there are losers, who, like ourselves, participate in and personally identify with gaming culture.

The State of the Union: Progress and Problems Ukogu Adrian Obinna ’18 Staff Writer Following President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address at the United States Capitol on Jan. 20, 2015, there has been much speculation about the implications of his plans and policies and about his ability to deliver on these proposals. During his hour-long speech, the president touched on issues from unemployment to foreign policy and made a show of pointing out all the great strides his administration has made towards creating a better America. He made good use of statistics to show how effectively many of his policies have worked, paying special attention to the Affordable Care Act. With unemployment levels and gas prices both on the decline in the United States, the president said that the American economy hadn’t been stronger in years. He touted his policy of middle-class economics as the main catalyst in the recent upturn of the country’s economy.

Regarding America’s involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, Obama said that his administration had made a lot of progress. He declared that the number of American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan had decreased from about 180,000

to fewer than 15,000 in the six years of his tenure. According to him, “for the first time since 9/11, [the] combat mission in Afghanistan is over [...], [the] shadow of crisis has passed, and the state of the union is strong.”

I find myself in a difficult position with regards to President Obama’s speech. I think it was very well written and equally well executed, and while critics think it might have been too informal, I think his casual demeanor while presenting his speech only made his speech more palatable to the American majority. What I can’t reconcile myself with, however, are Obama’s words on foreign policy. I found that Obama took on the role of leader of the world’s watchdog nation, an attitude that has become more closely tied to U.S. leadership in recent years. Obama took pride in his continuous efforts to avoid misusing the power of American strength and diplomacy, saying the U.S. has always done justly, but recent events suggest otherwise.

In the last two months of 2014, news headlines worldwide were riddled with reports on the North Korean attack on Sony. In the wake of that attack, President Obama issued a statement that the United States government would not

hesitate in retaliating against North Korea. As a result, on Dec. 22, the northeast Asian country lost its connection to the Internet for 10 hours. Earlier that same year, in March, reports had been disclosed by the New York Times based on documents leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden that the NSA had been hacking Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei Technologies for years. All these events occurred in the wake of the United States’ call for China to reduce its use of cyber-conflict and industrial cyber-espionage. But perhaps even worse than these are President Obama’s comments about Russia during his speech.

Most economists will tell you that the worst thing about economic sanctions is that they don’t really work if the desired outcome is political change.

While they might cripple a country’s economy, they don’t do much towards changing the resolve of that country’s leader. In the end it is ordinary people who suffer. As imports become more expensive and inflation rises, it is everyday citizens — people like you and me — who suffer. They are the ones who have to watch their money devalue day by day, not their government — certainly not their leaders.

In his address, President Obama prided himself on being the “bully-slayer” and referred to his triumph against the Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin (through the sanctioning of Russia) as a fine example of the United States upholding its “principle that bigger nations can’t bully the small.” The sanctions put in place against Russia have led to a shrinking Russian economy with decreases in GDP as the major effect. Furthermore, according to an article on ABC News, the rouble suffered a crippling 43 percent decrease at the end of 2014. To all this, President Obama had this to say: “Well, today, it is America that stands strong and united with our allies, while Russia is isolated, with its economy in tatters.” So in a sense maybe the sanctions are working, and while Russia plunges into economic meltdown President Obama gloats in his speech.

My point is not that I am fundamentally against the decisions the American government makes, or with the Obama administration for that matter. What really rankles me is that the tone of President Obama’s speech with regards to these issues is insensitive. I cannot deny that the United States has found itself in a position of increasing prominence

since the close of the World War II, and that she is arguably the most powerful nation in the world today, but leadership is not a game, and whether or not Obama won both his campaigns, he has no reason to forget that. However, one point I agree with President Obama on is that “the question is not whether America leads in the world, but how.”

If that leadership is one of blatant hypocrisy, then it is unacceptable. President Obama has done a wonderful job of rehabilitating the American economy, and the statistics serve as evidence of his success. But if Obama — even after six years in office — does not have the political maturity to realize that his role in bringing about the collapse of the Russian economy and the consequent suffering of millions of middle-class and poor Russians isn’t really boasting material, then I think there is something wrong with him as a leader. His speech was witty and funny, but at a time when the world is looking up to him to set the standard for leadership, it falls short of my expectations.

In the president’s words, “That’s how America leads: not with bluster, but with persistent, steady resolve.” But for his sake and that of the world, I hope he is wrong.

Arts&Living

Image courtesy of Lions Gate

Despite some pacing issues, Kevin Smith’s quirky horror-comedy is an intriguing film that could only be born from the ramblings of two friends in a studio.

In Case You Missed It: Smith Delivers With His Horror-Comdey, “Tusk” Marquez Cummings ’16 Arts & Living Managing Editor Once upon a time, in a recording studio far away, Kevin Smith and his producing partner Scott Mosier settled into episode 259 of their weekly podcast, SModCast.

As the session began, Smith began to read and discuss a fake, yet hilariously intriguing, sublet ad that was posted on a website called Gumtree on June 6, 2013.

The advertisement described an older man looking to rent a bedroom within his house to an individual or a party of two. The notice takes a turn for the strange when the advertisement states that this man has lived a “long and interesting life” during which he spent three years in complete isolation on St. Lawrence island off of the Canadian coast with a single companion: Gregory the Walrus. As Smith struggles to maintain composure throughout the rest of the post, he and Scott do something extraordinary: they run with the idea.

Then, after an hour of banter and laughter, “Tusk” is born.

I included this preface to my review of Kevin Smith’s “Tusk” as a sort of caveat that will allow anyone to enjoy the beautiful absurdity of this work of horrific hilarity. With that said, “Tusk” is neither a conventional horror film nor a typical comedy; in fact, it rides the line between these two genres with a tactfully awkward grace that brilliantly subscribes to Smith and Mosier’s inception of the film. I will

also say something else: If the idea of “The Human Centipede” tickles your gag reflex or makes you cry, watch this film anyway.

As the old saying goes: no pain, no gain.

“Tusk” follows a cheeky podcaster named Wallace Bryton (Justin Long) who ventures to the land of Canada to follow up on a YouTube video akin to that of the real life viral sensations “Lightsaber guy” and “Tron Guy.” Yet, when Wallace discovers that the young Internet sensation has committed suicide as a result of his infamous video, the self-absorbed podcaster fears the worst for his next show. Then, in a chance encounter with a sublet ad placed in the bathroom of a Canadian bar, Wallace uncovers the lead of a lifetime. Or, so he thinks.

Although I cringe at the thought of a spoiler-ridden review, I will be upfront about the twist of “Tusk:” The ad is a trap.

Enter Howard Howe (played brilliantly

by Michael Parks): a man who has lived a long and eventful life that almost came to an end when he shipwrecked in the middle of Arctic waters. When all hope was lost, a blur of blubber and strength came to the rescue, securing Howe and depositing him on a remote island where he was later discovered and rescued. As you have probably guessed, Howe’s savior was a walrus. With a newfound obsession for the creature that saved his life, Howe vows to recreate his kinship with the walrus: a companionship that he has not felt with any other humans or otherwise. In order to realize his dream,

Howe must create it. Sorry Wally: Wrong place, wrong time. That’s it! No more spoilers.

Right off the bat, Smith displays — although sometimes a little too self-consciously — his attention to detail, specifically with his lead character. Known for his implementation of heavily verbose conversation pieces within his earlier works, Smith approaches “Tusk” in the way that we have come to expect (see “Clerks” if you haven’t already. It’s absolutely fantastic).

Throughout the film, Wallace openly airs out his arrogance towards his own celebrity and the success of his podcast during conversations with his girlfriend (played

by Genesis Rodriguez) and the swathe of Canadian residents that he encounters as he chases his next big lead. To many viewers, these exchanges may seem over the top or lengthy at times, but Smith uses these moments to not only poke fun at the vapidity of his lead, but to also place a microscope on himself as a successful podcaster that openly laughs at his own jokes and most likely enjoys hearing himself talk.

Smith also crafts Wallace as the embodiment of a walrus (sound it out), complete with an absurdly prominent mustache that resembles large tusks. This far from subtle tongue-in-cheek character design begs to be laughed at, an intention that I deem worthy of applause.

Aside from Wallace, Howard receives an equally impressive characterization.

Although his dialogue with Wallace, espe-

cially across an absurdly long dinner table early on in the film, I would sing most of the praise to Michael Parks. Immediately, the viewer can simply feel the danger lurking behind Howard’s glasses and piercing gaze (even though Wallace is completely oblivious), adding a level of dramatic irony that permeates the entire first act.

Below the surface of the film’s quirky narrative, Smith balances some pretty incredible reflexive thought on the process of story telling and what it means to be human. Podcasts represent the new generation of storytelling that has come to be known as far more raw and explicit than that of traditional radio. Within this diagram, Wallace acts as the irreverent embodiment of this new wave of spoken word that objectifies the people he speaks to as well as the human subjects that he profiles on his show. Then, when his captor puts his humanity to the test, Wallace loses his ability to speak as Howe forcibly transforms him into a beast. When the dust of the grisly third act settles, Smith delivers a poignant moment that surprisingly ends the film on a heavy note, one that calls into question what constitutes the human spirit.

Overall, “Tusk” delivers exactly what one would expect from the synopsis while also demanding some profound thought from the viewer. Anyone with an appetite for laughs, gore, and overall absurdity will undoubtedly find at least a few things to love about this film.

Rent “Tusk” on Google Play or Amazon.

Fall Out Boy’s “American Beauty/American Psycho” Falls a Bit Short Evan Paul ’18 Arts & Living Managing Editor In the fall of 2009 when Fall Out Boy announced their impending hiatus, fans of the nearly decade-old band were devastated. Not to be deterred, Fall Out Boy put out “Believers Never Die,” a greatest hits album, and played what many feared would be their last show ever. During what became a four-year hiatus,which the band’s bassist Pete Wentz called a “decompressing period”, the members of Fall Out Boy went their separate ways and pursued jobs outside of the former band. Patrick Stump, Fall Out Boy’s lead vocalist and guitarist, attempted a solo music career.

The singer even went so far as to produce, write and play every instrument for every song on his solo project: “Soul Punk.”

While Stump’s solo effort was vastly different from the pop punk/alternative rock that Fall Out Boy is known for, “Soul Punk” did not do well commercially. Pete Wentz also attempted a music career outside of Fall Out Boy. His attempt was a duo with Bebe Rexha called Black Cards.

Black Cards did release a couple of songs in both 2011 and 2012 however, they never actually released a full album. Mainly known for their remixes of popular artist’s songs, Black Cards only ever released a handful of original material. Since Fall Out Boy’s reunion and subsequent release of their first album in nearly four years, Black Cards has both gone through lineup changes and taken a hiatus.

With nothing involving the music industry to show for, Fall Out Boy secretly began meeting again as a band in 2012.

During these meetings, the quartet started to write and record what would become their highly anticipated comeback album, “Save Rock and Roll.” “Save Rock and Roll,” released in 2013, went on to place in the top spot in both the United States and the United Kingdom and placed within the top 50 in over 10 other countries within the first week of its release. Along with the new album, Fall Out Boy also announced to their numerous fans that they would be taking part in a four month long tour with Paramore called the “Monumentour.” While ticket sales for the tour have not been discussed as of yet, based on the large and highly dedicated fan bases that both Paramore and Fall Out Boy have, it can be pretty fairly assumed that the tour did well.

While on the Monumentour, Fall Out

Boy began recording and writing their most recent studio effort, entitled “American Beauty/American Psycho.” Whereas “Save Rock and Roll” featured lyrics written by the entire band, Pete Wentz penned a majority of “American Beauty/American Psycho’s” lyrics. Despite the fact that many of the band’s older works also feature Wentz as the main songwriter, “American Beauty/American Psycho” does not sound like the band’s earlier “emo rock” work. Instead, this newest effort sounds very similar to “Save Rock and Roll.” That is to say that the album is chock full of big, loud, stadium filling rock. While the band’s earlier work is closer to pop punk, these past few efforts are closer to pop rock and alternative rock.

Continued on next page

Arts & Living 7

The Amherst Student • January 29, 2014

“The Kid’s Aren’t Alright” Highlights Fall Out Boy’s Latest Album Continued from previous page So how does “American Beauty/American Psycho” hold up? Honestly, the album falls a bit short. Whereas “Save Rock and Roll” was large and loud with anthem type songs that all managed to sound unique, the songs on “American Beauty/American Psycho” all mesh together to become an unfocused and confusing album. The lead single on the album, “Centuries” very closely resembles “My Songs Know What You Did In the Dark (Light Em Up)” in the sense that both tracks heavily feature Stump’s signature belt as well as an overall anthem-like feeling behind them. However, while the older single was a new sound for the band, “Centuries” just feels like an extended version of the last album, and not in a good way. That is not to say that the songs on “American Beauty/American Psycho” do not offer anything new musically to the band’s discography. There are however a few tracks that really stand out: “Centuries”: Any lead single for any album has to be good enough to both keep longstanding fans happy and attract new listeners and “Centuries” does just that.

Not only is “Centuries” a fun track to listen to, but it is also has lyrics and a melody that make it easy to sing along to.

“The Kids Aren’t Alright”: “Don’t you know that the kids aren’t alright?” That’s the question that Stump croons to listeners. A slower track on the album, “The Kids Aren’t Alright” is the perfect blend of the emo pop punk sound that Fall Out Boy became famous for and their newer, anthem-like sound.

“Uma Thurman”: This track uses a sample of the theme song from “The Munsters”, a 1960s television show. Centered on both of Thurman’s roles in the Tarantino films “Pulp Fiction” and “Kill Bill,” “Uma Thurman” is all over the place in a good way. Featuring fast piano riffs and aggressive drums, the song is truly dance worthy.

“Novocaine”: “Novocaine” starts out quick, and never really slows down. If anyone ever doubted vocalist Patrick Stump’s vocal prowess, this is where those doubts should cease. Stump hits both really high and really low notes, all the while managing to keep the listener entertained.

“American Beauty/American Psycho” contains some standout tracks, but lacks consistency and focus throughout.

Overall, “American Beauty/American Psycho” is not the best effort from Fall Out Boy, but it’s still pretty good and will suffice until they can put out more mate-

rial. If Fall Out Boy wishes to continue to put out more albums and embark on more tours then they will have to keep their fans entertained, and I can almost guarantee

Image courtesy of DCD2

that “American Beauty/American Psycho” will only do that for so long. Perhaps returning to their angsty background would fare better.

Sia Music Video Pushes Boundaries and Sparks Outrage Gabby Edzie ’17 Arts & Living Managing Editor

Australian singer and songwriter Sia owes her success to her decision to play into the peculiar. Her growing collection of songs is created through a manipulation of raw emotion. Like with most performers of the time, a variety of visual art accompanies Sia’s music. The Sia brand includes her boxy platinum blonde hair, a variety of veils that cover her face, and most notably, a series of bizarre music videos. Released in October of 2013 as a part of the “Catching Fire” soundtrack, the track “Elastic Heart” was quick to tug at the heartstrings of listeners.

In early January, Sia released a music video for the song, starring actor Shia LaBeouf and the 12-year-old dancer Maddie Ziegler. Ziegler appeared in Sia’s previous music video for “Chandelier,” so it was no surprise when she appeared in the dance piece, sporting the same nude suit and Sia wig. Ziegler’s familiar face did not stop the video from shock-

ing viewers. Sia’s video, consisting of a cage match themed interpretive dance between LaBeouf and Ziegler, has actually left fans and critics alike rather disturbed. The video, intended to simply interpret the lyrics of “Elastic Heart,” has received a plethora of pedophilia complaints. Complaints have even arisen from Ziegler’s costars on the show “Dance Moms.” Guest star coach Cathy Nesbitt-Stein declared the video to be “vile,” claiming that she “nearly threw up” when she watched it. The complaints have piled high enough to elicit an apology from Sia. Sia’s apology was unnecessary, as were the complaints. If you’ve seen the video, I’m sure some question marks were planted in your mind, but why are we acting as if this is a new phenomenon? This is the very nature of art. Sia, like all artists, aims to communicate the human experience.

Unless your life is an episode of Barney, the 80 or so years you’re around are messy and raw. Art, stemming from the subject matter of life itself, deserves to be equally

untidy; it should provoke thoughts and questions. “Elastic Heart,” aimed at the experience of heartbreak and rebound, deserves a video that can grasp the very emotions that accompany that part of life.

The trend of questioning art which breaks from the norm or makes us comfortable, is far from new. I don’t know if you’ve heard of that dude Picasso, but audiences were initially pretty freaked out by his stuff. I’m not claiming Sia belongs alongside the ranks of the great modernist writers or painters, but maybe we should hold off on dubbing her work “pedophilic.”

Maybe viewers are simply shocked to see what Shia LaBeouf has been up to ever since he got out of that juvenile detention center where he was forced to dig holes in search of treasure. Regardless, I think the video was a gripping embodiment of Sia’s mindset. First of all, the video blatantly calls for an abstract interpretation. Most notably, the video is a continuation of Sia’s “Chandelier” video in which Ziegler performs similar avant-

Image courtesy of rollingstone.com

Australian singer and songwriter Sia battles complaints surrounding pedophilia, following the release of her “Elastic Heart” video, starring Shia LaBeouf and Maddie Zeigler.

garde choreography. The animalistic choreography removes the sense that this is supposed to be a depiction of human action. It’s rather a personification of human emotion. We’re not witnessing a relationship unfold between LaBeouf and Ziegler; we’re watching Sia’s dichotomized states of feeling. The lyrics say, “And another one bites the dust. Oh why can I not conquer love?” The cage match is simply mirroring this trial and error period of feeling secure, and then again experiencing failure. The choice to use a grown man and a young girl was simply to emphasize the stark difference between these phases of security and failure.

In Sia’s apologetic tweets she said, “All I can say is Maddie and Shia are two of the only actors I felt could play these two warring ‘sia’ states ... my intention was to create some emotional content.” Ziegler’s only complaint was that LaBeouf had poor hygiene. In an interview with ET she confessed that Shia’s smell led her to say, “I’m sorry, but you’re kind of dirty.”

The 12-year-old went on to defend the content of the video, explaining, “It wasn’t like we were actually dancing together because we were fighting each other. We were battling.”

Sia appeared on the Jan. 17 episode of Saturday Night Live, singing alongside a live performance of the video. She remained still with her face veiled, as the choreography was the focus of attention. Sia made the interesting choice of replacing the absent Shia LaBeouf with a slender, older female. This was a clever move on Sia’s part; the gender of the dancer doesn’t necessarily matter, as they are simply representing a genderless idea.

LaBeouf was simply the strongest choice to represent an opposition to the state of being personified by Ziegler.

Artists are always going to push boundaries, and audiences will therefore continue to be forced to look at the human condition. Sia is just another example an interesting example of someone trying to desensitize viewers. We eventually accepted the Lady Gaga phenomenon and we even got over Miley Cyrus’ twerking (sort of ). Modern artists are simply reinterpreting the “wow factor” that artists have always wielded.

Arts & Living 8

The Amherst Student • January 29, 2014

Dark and Tense, “A Most Violent Year” is an Early Hit for 2015 Sophie Currin ’17 Contributing Writer A title like “A Most Violent Year,” without further information, might lead you to expect (as I did) raging war scenes, intense,

Image courtesy of blogspot.com

Jessica Chastain and Oscar Isaac (above) anchor the film’s intensity.

blaring shootouts and cacophonous dialogue. Yet, the violence that existed was so silent and so subdued that it felt real, very far from your average action-packed blockbuster. Set in New York in 1981, “A Most Violent Year” carefully depicts failure of the American Dream by following the life of a poor-immigrant-turned-rich-oil-guy as he protects his family and business during New York’s most violent year.

Successful business man Abel Morales (played by Oscar Isaac) believes he is living proof of the rags-to-riches narrative, the good man, the moral character so deeply invested in the idea that one can come from nothing and achieve it all without breaking the rules. He lives up to his first name, and last names as a serious, straight character convinced good will always win. But in his quest to acquire an especially critical and expensive piece of land for his company, his truckers and salesmen become increasingly vulnerable to hijacking and attacks, the D.A. begins investigating his company, and money begins to be a problem. Morales takes it upon himself to find those that were stealing from him and attacking his workers, and while he believes he is well in control of the legality of his company’s actions, his femme-fatale-like wife and secretary (played by Jessica Chastain) and business partner (played by Albert Brooks)

disregard the rules and go behind his back to ensure the success of the company.

As a self-envisioned hero of the immigrant community, Morales projects his belief in the American Dream onto those around him. A young immigrant truck driver named Julian looks up to Morales, his boss, as the model of a man he may one day become. However, after being ushered back to driving post-recovery of a violent attack, Julian loses the faith he once had of “making it.” Morales’s story progresses with Julian’s; as the plot evolves, they both recognize that maybe the American Dream might not be true. As the name “Abel,” might predict, just moments after Morales realizes the fraud in his company and still obtains the property, the tangibility of the pure American Dream for Morales dies with Julian’s suicide.

Except for a shoot-out scene on a trafficjammed freeway, the film remains quietly intense, with sparse dialogue and conversations in dark, shadowed settings. It’s one of the few films I’ve seen recently that relies on the composition of the frame just as much as dialogue, just as much as action — the frame shots match the stark, powerful mood. Though the director used a variety of shots, camera movement during a scene is minimal, and except for small spurts of action, actors often walk out of the frame

before the scene changes. For me, the cinematography and sparse, isolated incidences of action are what make the film powerful and the content relevant.

I’ve now seen “A Most Violent Year” twice.

Out of the many movies I have watched lately, I would very much recommend this one, especially if you are feeling pensive.

I see it as a polar opposite from ”Chef,” a light-hearted comedy and family drama about food trucks, and very different (less heavy and depressing) than ”Whild”, the story of an ex-heroin addict hiking her way to coming to terms with her mother’s early death. “A Most Violent Year” lies somewhere between the two. What the film lacks in direct, fast-paced, entertaining action, it makes up for by making the viewer think.

Some lines might make you chuckle, and one scene in particular (as Chastain ushers children out of a birthday party held at her house, handing each a party favor, she lets investigative police in) adds some dark humor. Each scene of the film is not exactly exciting or engaging, but as a whole, it may reveal a common struggle — that it may be impossible to righteously pull yourself up by your bootstraps and make it out on top without help. Good might win — if bad is on your side. Overall, I appreciate the stark realism of the film, and I predict it’ll be one I watch a few more times.

Rogen and Goldberg Miss the Mark With “The Interview” Claire Jia ’15 Staff Writer Seth Rogen and James Franco are back with “The Interview,” another one of their infamous “circle-jerks” with a twist: Arrogant talk show host Dave Skylark (Franco) and his producer Aaron Rapoport (Rogen) get the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to interview the dictator of North Korea, Kim Jong-un (Randall Park). With all the controversy surrounding the film’s release, I expected something uproariously clever or at least intelligently offensive. Sadly, “The Interview” ended up being very average.

“The Interview,” directed by Rogen and Evan Goldberg, attempts to satirize American mainstream media and the North Korean government. It juxtaposes a very flippant Franco with a more serious Rogen. Skylark makes millions off questioning celebrities about their drug habits and sex lives — the best point of the movie is when Eminem declares that he’s gay five minutes in — while Rapoport simply wants to be a “real journalist.” When they land an exclusive interview with Kim Jongun, who is a longtime fan of Skylark’s show, they are asked by the CIA to assassinate Kim. Rapoport wants to follow the rules, while Skylark decides to ditch the CIA-approved poison-carrying-case for a Gucci bag. When Skylark befriends Kim and bails on the plan, Rapoport takes on the mission himself. In addition to following a predictable plot, the film uses predictable jokes: You’ve got Seth Rogen laughing over the word “dong,” you’ve got your gratuitous Asian girl fantasy scene, you’ve got your dog-eating jokes, you’ve got your Koreans who can’t speak English well.

It’s all very rudimentary comedy, poking fun at overused Asian stereotypes. James Franco’s

character is clearly the one to roll your eyes at: He says “Konnichiwa” to the Korean welcoming committee, he asks out loud if everyone in North Korea is “starving and dying,” and he tries to karate-chop Rapoport’s crush (Kim’s Chief Propagandist Sook Yung Park played by Diana Bang). Obviously, Skylark represents every bigoted white male American wrapped up in a handsome satirical package, ready for us to critique. That is, if we ever stop pulling at the corners of our eyes. We’re supposed to like Aaron Rapoport, who is sensitive, sees an Asian woman as the multi-faceted human being that she is, and only sometimes makes fun of Korean accents. He’s supposed to represent some sort of ideal, whatever that is.

I have one question: What is “The Interview” trying to do? Is it trying to humanize Kim Jong-un? Is it trying to criticize American imperialism? Is it trying to expose the injustice occurring inside North Korea?

Or is it simply a story about how Skylark goes from being a completely sorry excuse for a journalist to an almost-competent excuse for a journalist? I’ll admit it’s a well-researched movie; for instance, as someone who has spent many a long hour travelling through China, I appreciated the movie’s depiction of a Chinese sleeper train. But the political message it conveys, if any, wildly misses the point.

In a bizarre turn of events, Sook switches sides, telling Skylark and Rapoport that in order to topple the regime, they must depict Kim as a vulnerable, flawed human being and force him to answer for his crimes.

“The people need to be shown that he is not a god, that he is a man. Then they will be ready for change,” Sook says. Yes, since two-thirds of North Koreans starve because they’re not ready for change.

I’m surprised the North Korean govern-

Want to be the voice behind The Amherst Student’s Twitter, Facebook and Instagram pages?

Image courtesy of time.com

Despite the occasional laughs, the antics of Rogen and Franco could not lift “The Interview” beyond its crude attempt at political satire. ment had such a problem with this movie.

It doesn’t show us the everyday suffering of North Koreans; it doesn’t inspire any sort of rage or indignation. We see that Kim Jongun owns a large collection of luxury cars, but couldn’t we have predicted that anyway?

The utter lack of political punch in “The Interview” only seems to support rumors that the North Korean government wasn’t involved in the hack on Sony. We get glimpses of the lived realities of the people — through a fake grocery store selling fake fruit and shots of what appears to be a poor North Korean family — but the extent of inequality and political oppression is completely ignored. Randall Park is a funny Kim Jongun, but is an inadequate villain, appearing more insecure than truly evil. In Rogen and Goldenberg’s ambivalent treatment of Kim, the audience does not receive a clear critique of the regime.

Franco is appropriately bombastic, though

Be a Social Media Editor!

If you are interested, email: smurguia17@amherst.edu

as always a little too over-the-top, but Rogen pulls off a surprisingly sympathetic performance. If you want real laughs, go watch “This is the End,” Rogen and Goldberg’s superior collaboration. If you want to actually learn something about North Korea, scroll through the country’s Wikipedia page.

“The Interview” tries to critique the white man’s conquest: Two American men go to an underdeveloped nation for a weekend, do literally nothing of value, and are deemed heroes who have saved the “little people.”

It’s supposed to be satire, yes, but it’s easy to misinterpret the film, and as a result it misses its chance to become consequential political commentary.

“How many times will the U.S. make the same mistake?” Sook asks. “The Interview” does make one good point: Americans really aren’t the answer to North Korea’s problems.

You can find “The Interview” on Netflix for a limited time.

The Amherst Student • January 29, 2015

Sports 9

Men’s Hockey Plays Strong Through Interterm, Now 11-3-2 Jason Stein ’16 Sports Section Editor The men’s ice hockey team has started 2015 on a hot streak, losing one game in the new year. Following two ties after winter break, the Jeffs rattled off three victories in a row before falling to Connecticut College 6-4, but since then they have won their past two games and maintained their momentum.

Despite scoring four goals, Amherst was unable to top the Camels in their first meeting this year, back on Friday, Jan. 16. First-year David White notched the first goal of the game, with assists from Brendan Burke ’16 and Mike Cashman ’15, but Conn. College responded just over a minute later to tie it up just before the end of the first. The second period was quiet, until Conor Brown ’16 broke away from the defenders to notch a short-handed goal, the only goal of the period, giving the Jeffs a 2-1 advantage.

Both offenses exploded in the third period.

The Camels rattled off two goals in the first two minutes of the frame, but after some penalties on both sides it was the Jeff power play that tied it up, with a goal from Burke off of assists from Thomas Lindstrom ’18 and Aaron Deutsch ’15.

Despite this important goal, it was once again all Conn. College as they went on a three-goal streak to put Amherst away.

Andrew Fenwick ’15 recorded a late goal off an Austin Ho ’17 pass, but the lead was too much to surmount. The Camels held a slight edge on the shot totals 27-26, and also had one more power play opportunity in this tight matchup.

Amherst’s next game was again held at Orr Rink, this time versus Tufts. It was White again with the first score of the contest thanks to great passing from Brown and senior captain Jake Turrin. This goal gave the Jeffs a 1-0 lead

heading into the second. The first half of the middle period was quiet, aside from penalties for both sides, but at 10:22 it was Tufts who sparked some life and tied the game up.

Amherst responded quickly with a goal from Lindstrom, with the assists credited to Burke and Mike Rowbotham ’15. Tufts wasn’t done yet, though, as they managed to tie the game up once again two and a half minutes later, to send the game into the final frame at a 2-2 tie.

The game remained tied for the next 19 1/2 minutes. The Jeffs never quit, and it was White with his second goal of the game, assisted

by Deutsch and Kevin Ryder ’16, that sent Amherst into the winner’s circle. Danny Vitale ’15, the NESCAC player of the week back on Jan. 5, recorded 30 saves in the outing.

Amherst’s most recent matchup was on Friday, Jan. 23 against Hamilton College and proved to be another tightly contested game.

Dan Merenich ’15 opened up the scoring towards the end of the first with a goal coming off of assists from Fenwick and Xavier Louis Reed ’16.

The second period was equally competitive, until with 22 seconds remaining Rowbotham found the back of the net to give Amherst a 2-0 lead heading into the final period. Hamilton didn’t quit, and they managed to get on the scoreboard a bit over halfway into the third, but it was not enough to overcome the Jeffs’ strong defense. Burke recorded the insurance emptynetter to continue his solid point streak. Vitale recorded 24 saves in another solid outing.

Amherst will continue their home stand this Friday against Trinity, the top team in the NESCAC at the moment. Amherst is 7-3-0 inconference and 11-3-2 on the season, and will look to continue to build on its solid start to the year. Last year, Amherst handed Trinity a 3-2 loss, a win for the Jeffs that featured 43 saves by Dave Cunningham ’16.

Photo courtesy of Rob Mattson

First-year David White leads Amherst with twelve in conference points.

Photo courtesy of Rob Mattson

Senior goalie Danny Vitale has a .929 save percentage on the season.

Swimming and Diving Falls Women’s Basketball Rolls, in Meet Against Williams Extends Three-Game Win Streak Sarah Zuckerman ’17 Staff Writer Amherst men’s and women’s swim and dive both traveled to Williams on Jan. 10.

Unfortunately, neither team could pull out a win. The losses drop the men to 4-1 and the women to 3-2 on their seasons.

The men suffered a hard 156-78 loss against their archrivals. Amherst’s lone diver Asher Lichtig ’16 won the 1-meter with a score of 312.67 and earned second place in the 3-meter with a 285.00. Senior captain Connor Sholtis finished first and second for the Jeffs in the 100-yard and 200-yard freestyles respectively.

Greg Han ’17 had second place finishes in both the 200 individual medley and the 200 breast stroke while Connor Haley ’17 and Michael Rochford ’15 each tacked on another second-place finish in the 1000 freestyle and the 200 backstroke.

Amherst’s Jeff Anderson ’16, Sam Spurrell ’18 and John Janezich took second, third and fourth in the 200 fly. The Jeffs ended on a high note with the 400-yard freestyle relay team of Tyler Hampton ’15, Alex Dreiscbach ’17, Anderson and Sholtis earning the win.

“While the score of the William’s meet wasn’t as close as we had hoped, it’s important for us as a team to remember that we still had some really good swims,” Sholtis said.

“Coming back from a break and having two weeks of really hard practice makes it difficult to drop decent times. With that, it’s promising that we swam as well as we did and we are looking forward to some strong NESCAC performances.”

On the women’s side, junior Emily Hyde had two solo wins, but the purple and white eventually fell to the Ephs 216-72. Hyde’s two

wins were the only of the day for the Jeffs and came in the form of the 100- and 200-yard breaststroke. The junior then backed up her wins with a third-place finish in the 200 IM and a second-place in the 200-medley relay.

Her relay teammates included Stephanie Moriarty ’18, Sarah Conklin ’16 and Sabrina Lee ’15.

Conklin also took second in the 100 and 200 fly and in the 400 free relay. Lee joined Conklin on the 400 free relay squad and earned a third-place finish in the 100 free. Others to make the podium for the Jeffs included junior Charlotte Chudy’s second-place finish in the 1,000 free, senior Stephanie Ternullo’s thirdplace finish in the 200 free, and first-year Geralyn Lam’s third-place finish in the 200 fly.

Both the men and the women will travel to MIT on Saturday, Jan. 31 for an 11 a.m. meet.

Photo courtesy of Rob Mattson

Asher Lichtig came in first in the 1-meter with a score of 312.67.

Photo courtesy of Rob Mattson

Sophomore Ali Doswell is contributing an average of 13.2 points per game this year.

Ashlyn Heller ’17 Staff Writer With school back in session, the women’s basketball team got right back on track after suffering its first loss of the season to Tufts, who is currently ranked first in NESCAC standings. The Jeffs dug their heels in and bounced back with three NESCAC wins over Bates, Trinity and, most notably, Williams this past Wednesday. The win in Williamstown marks the second for Amherst over their archrival this season and improves Amherst’s record to 16-1 overall.

On the way to a 65-51 victory, sophomore Jamie Renner led the charge on offense with 19 points and four assists. Her classmate Meredith Doswell took control on defense, pulling down 10 defensive rebounds and 11 overall. Additionally, she chipped in ten points on offense to earn her first double-double of the season. Their efforts were supplemented by senior Megan Robertson’s 14 points and sophomore Hannah Peterson’s 11.

The game was a tale of two halves. At the end of the first, the Jeffs lead 26-14 and went in to the locker room confident and spirited. In the second, the Ephs would give the Jeffs a run for their money, as Amherst would outscore Williams by just two points in the half.

Williams’ Oge Uwanaka scored all of her 13 points in the second half while also chipping in seven rebounds and two steals. However, Uwanaka’s added spark was not enough for the Ephs to chip away at Amherst’s lead. Late second half points by Renner and Doswell would ultimately ensure the win for the Jeffs.

Amherst got back to work the following Saturday against Trinity, defeating them 72-38 in Hartford to improve to a record of 16-1. The Jeffs are currently ranked third in the nation behind FDU-Florham and Thomas More. The team looks to move up in the national rankings and take back the No. 1 NESCAC spot from Tufts this upcoming week as they travel to Maine, playing Colby and Bowdoin back to back on Saturday, Jan. 31 and Sunday, Feb. 1.

10

Sports

The Amherst Student • January 29, 2015

Amherst Athletics Hosts 3-on-3 Basketball Tourney Lauren Tuiskula ’17 Managing Sports Editor Amherst Athletics hosted an open threeon-three-basketball tournament for the entire campus last Friday after the Day of Dialogue. The event was an effort to bring the community together, as well as to promote the intramural sports program for this upcoming semester.

“This tournament was the brainchild of Athletics Director Don Faulstick, Coach Gregg DiNardo, AAS President Tomi Williams and myself,” said Assistant Football and Women’s Basketball Coach Kevin Callahan ’14. “We wanted to host an event that was fun, brought Amherst students together, and kick off new programming from the Athletics Department. We wanted to do something different, something that had never really been done before, something that students could get excited about, and we came up with this idea.”

The newly revamped intramural program will feature volleyball, basketball and extreme dodgeball. “We want to broaden our programming as a means to get more students involved,” Callahan said.

Joyce Wamala ’17E, one of the commissioners of the intramural league, described the Athletic Department’s to revamp intramural sports.

“We want to make sure that all students

have access to a wider selection of sporting activities regardless of their level of sporting availability,” she said. “Since the league only begins next Tuesday, we are looking forward to hearing a response from more students who are still interested in signing up.”

Pike Goldschmidt ’16 detailed his vision in offering “extreme” dodgeball as a new intramural sport for the year.

“In trying to keep the spirit of making athletics inclusive for the whole campus, we thought of dodgeball as the ideal sport,” Goldschmidt, one of the league commissioners, said. “It brings back the schoolyard days where everyone gets a chance to play.”

The tournament brought in many students of varying basketball ability. Some teams were pre-made, and those students who did not come in with a team all found homes with other pre-made teams, or grouped together. Ultimately, the team composed of Mike Odenwaelder ‘16, Andrew Vandini ’16 and Harry Roberson ’18 proved to be victorious and took home the coveted inaugural three-on-three- basketball tournament trophy.

“The feedback from this event was overwhelmingly positive, and Athletics will be hosting events like this in the near future,” Callahan said. “We already have some ideas for the spring, and I would encourage anyone who has an idea to reach out to me and fire away with suggestions.”

ATHLETE SPOTLIGHT

David White ’18

Taylor Summers ’16

Favorite Team Memory: Winning the Plattsburgh Hockey tournament over new years in two shootouts Favorite Pro Athlete: Tom Brady Dream Job: Navy Seal Pet Peeve: New Val Favorite Vacation Spot: Anywhere warm Something on Your Bucket List: Skydive Guilty Pleasure: Nothing, I like what I like Favorite Food: Homemade cookies and apple cider donuts from Atkins Farm Favorite Thing About Amherst: John Cross

Favorite Team Memory: Going to Nationals and placing tenth in the 4 x 100 m relay Favorite Pro Athlete: Derek Jeter Dream Job: Broadway (if only I could sing, act and dance) Pet Peeve: When things are messy Favorite Vacation Spot: Steamboat Springs, Colorado Something on Your Bucket List: Skydiving Guilty Pleasure: “Criminal Minds” Favorite Food: Sausage bread Favorite Thing About Amherst: The sense of community

The Amherst Student • January 29, 2015

Sports

Deflategate: Media Ploy?

The Darell Deal

Jason Darell ’18 Columnist

The New England Patriots have gained significant media attention for their role in “deflategate”, a controversy which charges them with deflating 11 of 12 footballs in their AFC Championship win over the Colts. But, is the NFL taking advantage of Deflategate to drum up buzz surrounding the upcoming Super Bowl?

This year’s NFL Conference Championship weekend was more exciting than most, with a thrilling comeback by the Seahawks and an emphatic blowout by the Patriots.

Unfortunately, this weekend will also be remembered by yet another controversy. During the Colts-Patriots game, linebacker D’Qwell Jackson intercepted Tom Brady and handed the ball to his equipment manager. Soon afterwards, officials noticed that the Patriots’ footballs did not seem to be properly inflated and opted to use the Colts’ footballs for the rest of the game. A further investigation by the NFL found that 11 of the 12 Patriot game balls were underinflated by up to two pounds per square inch. Tom Brady and Bill Belichick have denied any and all involvement with the underinflated balls, and there is still no indication as to who altered them, if anybody. As there is no denying that the balls were under-inflated, the focus is now on whether these balls provided a substantial competitive advantage, and if so, how the Patriots should be punished for this transgression. The greater issue at hand, however, concerns the Patriots’ willingness to cheat in order to win.

The Patriots are hardly new to cheating scandals. In 2007, the NFL found Belichick guilty of videotaping the Jets’ defensive signals during a game. As a result, the NFL fined Belichick $500,000, fined the Patriots $250,000 and docked them their first round draft pick in the 2008 draft. This newest scandal indicates that the Patriots could be embroiled in a culture of cheating, no doubt spearheaded by Bill Belichick. Should this incident result in the firing or suspension of Bill Belichick?

While there is no doubt that this slight deflation of the ball would not have changed the outcome of the game, intentionally altering the football would still be a clear violation of the NFL rules. For a coach like Belichick, whose career is marked by several scandals, this could result in a crushing punishment.

Furthermore, an asterisk could forever accompany the Patriots’ dynasty. However, so far there is no evidence that any intentional deflation occurred, and even some evidence that it didn’t. If it turns out that Deflategate is entirely a fabrication, it is the NFL, rather than the Patriots, that must be punished, as it would have once again turned a relative non-issue into a media firestorm. There are several reasons why “Deflategate” is very likely a bogus story.

First of all, there is little indication that the slightly deflated balls provide any competitive advantage. ESPN’s “Sport Science” conducted experiments on the deflated balls, and found that they traveled slower than fully inflated balls, and only weighed 1.5 grams less than fully inflated balls. The slower travel time would give defenders more time to make a play on the ball, rather than help the offense complete a pass.

They also found that the average person could only press their fingers 1 millimeter deeper into the deflated balls. This is a minuscule difference, and one that could not make throwing or catching easier to an appreciable extent. Finally, “Sport Science” found that the rain added more than 10 times the amount of weight that the ball lost because of under-inflation. Thus, the deflation of the football only had one tenth of the effect that the rain did.

When combined, these findings show that the slight deflation of the Patriots’ footballs did not and could not have had drastic effects on the gameplay. Soon after releasing this video, ESPN pulled it, presumably because it took the air right out of Deflategate. By exaggerating the effects that a slightly deflated ball would

have, the NFL played a huge part in making this a story warranting national news coverage.

Another reason why Deflategate is not an important issue is that there is evidence that other teams also engage in the practice. Aaron Rodgers, star quarterback of the Green Bay Packers, has stated that his team overinflates his footballs, as that is how he prefers them.

Different quarterbacks like their footballs inflated to different levels.

During the games however, referees occasionally take air out the Packers’ footballs.

Rodgers disagrees with this practice, as he believes that taking air out of the football is a disadvantage for him. He does, however, recognize that many quarterbacks prefer to throw flatter footballs. If the Packers aren’t punished for overinflating their footballs, there is no way the Patriots should be punished for deflating theirs. The NFL has to be fair in this situation, despite its attempts to catch the Patriots red-handed. The league executives must also consider the possibility that over or under inflating the game footballs is a widespread league practice.

In an effort to prove their innocence, the Patriots conducted a few experiments themselves. Bill Belichick presented these experiments during an unscheduled availability on Saturday afternoon. After stating that “at no time was there any intent whatsoever to try to compromise the integrity of the game or to gain an advantage,” Belichick offered his own explanation as to why the footballs came in underweight.

He explained that the rubbing process that each football undergoes before the game was shown to increase the PSI, and that the weather and climate decreased the balls’ pressures by up to 1.5 PSI. In another effort to prove their innocence, the Patriots’ staff members had Tom Brady and Jimmy Garoppolo test footballs of varying pressures. Both had difficulty discerning whether the football was correctly pressurized or not, even with differences of up to 2 PSI. These experiments indicate not only that the Patriots likely did nothing wrong, but also that the slight change in PSI would not make an appreciable difference in quarterback comfort. Once again, all signs point to Deflategate being just another NFL witch hunt.

Unfortunately, no matter what the NFL finds as a result of its investigation, the Patriots are already guilty by public opinion. This is no doubt a result of the NFL’s actions. If the Patriots are found innocent, the NFL must issue a formal apology, as the league executives responsible have further tarnished the Patriots’ reputation without evidence. Sources have confirmed that the Colts originally contacted the league about the Patriots under-inflating their balls as far back as this past November. If true, then the league’s recent actions must be considered much differently. Instead of warning the Patriots, the NFL decided it would be better to attempt to catch them red-handed.

This is unacceptable, and unproductive. The purpose of the NFL executives is to fairly and efficiently run the most lucrative sports league in the world. Their recent actions have, however, indicated that they are more inclined to act as toddlers would in order to prove their points. While this situation has not been resolved, and may not be until the Superbowl is over, it is clear that once again, the NFL must examine and revise its priorities. While purposefully deflating footballs in order to obtain a competitive advantage cannot be condoned, the NFL has made it a much larger issue than it should be.

11

Men’s Basketball Goes 2-2 on Week Jason Stein ’16 Assistant Editor This past week, Amherst men’s basketball played two conference games within the NESCAC Conference, which is proving to be extremely competitive in the 2014-2015 season. After defeating Williams in overtime at LeFrak Gymnasium and falling to a talented Trinity Bantams squad at home a few days later, the Jeffs now stand at 12-5 overall and 2-3 in the NESCAC. Less than two weeks after a devastating loss at the buzzer to the Ephs, Amherst was able to avenge their defeat with an exciting overtime victory over Williams in front of a full house at LeFrak Gymnasium last Wednesday. The Jeffs gave students a treat the evening before classes started for the spring 2015 semester.

Amherst grabbed the early advantage over Williams, as they held a 13-6 lead less than five minutes into the game. Guard/forward Connor Green’s point total (six) equaled the Ephs’ total scoring output in these first few minutes. In response, Williams fought their way back into the game and managed to take its first lead of the game on a three-pointer from Mike Greenman with 10:49 remaining in the half.

The Jeffs and Ephs were tied at 29 at the threeminute mark of the first half, but a solid end to the half from Williams gave the Ephs a 38-34 lead going into the break.

Green had 12 points for the Jeffs at the half, while Daniel Wohl posted 13 points with a pair of three-pointers for Williams.

While the Ephs held a lead against Amherst for most of the second half, the Jeffs once again demonstrated the resilience and tenacity that has begun to characterize this year’s squad.

With just over nine minutes remaining in the second half, Williams led Amherst by nine points at 60-51. Yet, the Jeffs managed to pull even at 69 on a layup by sophomore guard Reid Berman, who was fouled on the made basket. Berman successfully completed the and-one opportunity by converting the foul shot to give the Jeffs a 70-69 lead with 1:46 to play. After a layup from forward David George ’17 and another basket by Berman, Williams trailed by three points at 74-71.

However, the Ephs tied the game and sent it to overtime on a three-pointer from Daniel Aronowitz with less than 30 seconds to play.

Green and George both were key contributors in the second half, but guard Reid Berman (who scored five points over the final two minutes of play) and first-year guard Michael Riopel each turned in clutch performances in the second half to send the game into overtime.

In the second half for Williams, Wohl continued to be a key offensive contributor for the Ephs, but Aronowitz led the way in the second period with 13 points, including going 2-3 on three-pointers and converting five free throw attempts.

During the overtime period, the Jeffs dominated Williams and sent the LeFrak crowd home happy, as the Jeffs outscored Williams 12-2 in overtime to give Amherst an 86-76 victory.

Green scored 10 points in overtime to finish with 30 points overall. In addition to his 30 points, Green also secured a double-double with 11 rebounds. Three other Jeffs joined Green in double figures, as George had 16 points and five blocks, while sophomore forward Jacob Nabatoff and Riopel each scored 10 points. Berman, who was

extremely clutch with time winding down in the second half, scored seven points and dished out nine assists.

Junior captain and forward Ben Pollack was pleased with the team’s performance during the win over Williams.

“I think one of our biggest problems over the past few months has been not getting into the game right when the tip off starts, as it sometimes takes a while to adjust and get into game mode,” he said.

“Against Williams, we had a lot of support from the crowd, which is huge. It was so exciting to have the whole campus back, cheering us on and representing well. Once the crowd started getting into it, Green was hitting some threes, [George] was rolling, and we had all the momentum going into overtime. It was a really fun win and we wanted to get back at Williams.”

Pollack said that Green is “really coming on as a leader” and that Berman “had the game pace under control down the stretch, which is big for a sophomore point guard.”

Following Wednesday’s excitement, on Saturday afternoon, a talented Trinity team (which entered play with a 13-5 overall record and a 3-1 conference mark) proved to be too much for the Jeffs at home.

The Jeffs did erase an early Bantams’ lead, but Trinity then took another lead over the Jeffs later in the first half. Amherst eventually trailed the Bantams 34-32 to close the first half of play.

In the second half, the Jeffs were able to keep the game close over the first seven minutes of play, but the Bantams then pulled away en route to a 7054 victory. Over the final 13 minutes after Trinity was leading 39-37 over Amherst, the Bantams outscored the Jeffs 31-17 to secure the win.

Overall in the game, the Bantams had three players post double figures in scoring, as George Papadeas led the way with 15 points (all coming in the first half of play), Andrew Hurd posted 13 points (all coming in the second half without missing a shot), and Jaquann Starks had 12 points (all in the second half). Ed Ogundeko posted an impressive line with nine points and a whopping 16 rebounds for the Bantams.

For Amherst, four players were significant contributors on the offensive end, as George had 12 points and 10 rebounds (including four offensive rebounds) and Green scored 11, while sophomore forward Eric Conklin and Nabatoff both had eight points.

“This year, Trinity is really good,” Pollack said.

“Against Trinity, we did not shoot well, which is tough to begin with. Also, we were hanging around in the game for a while, but then Trinity hit a few threes in a row and it was difficult to change the momentum. The game was a step back, but we’ve accepted it and are focusing on how we can improve following the disappointment.”

Looking to the week ahead, the Jeffs have a key pair of weekend conference games at home before travelling to Rhode Island College for a 7 p.m. road matchup on Tuesday, Feb. 3. On Friday night, the Jeffs will take on the Mules of Colby at 7 p.m. The following afternoon at 3 p.m., Amherst will host the Polar Bears of Bowdoin.

Last season, Amherst’s only conference loss came against Colby. In the 2013-2014 season against Bowdoin, the Jeffs managed to narrowly defeat the Polar Bears, 70-67. Amherst also earned a convincing, 80-60 victory over Rhode Island during the 2013-2014 season.

Photo courtesy of Rob Mattson

Sophomore point guard Reid Berman continues to lead the Jeffs.

Sports

Photo courtesy of Rob Mattson

Amherst women’s ice hockey continues to dominate, going without a loss since their small stumble to Norwich back on Friday, Dec. 5.

Women’s Ice Hockey Goes Undefeated Over Interterm, Will Host Third Annual “Pink the Rink” Game Nell Patterson ’15 Staff Writer Although campus was fairly quiet over interterm, the women’s ice hockey team remained loud and on fire during the three-week break.

The Jeffs went 5-0-2 over interterm, bringing their season record to 11-1-3. The break moved Amherst up to the top of the NESCAC rankings ahead of opponents Middlebury and Connecticut College. The Jeffs’ impressive run has also caught the attention of national rankings. The last D3hockey.com poll had Amherst ranked at No. 8, while the USCHO.com ranking has the Jeffs at No. 6. If their interterm record was not impressive enough, the Jeffs were able to win all of their games on the road throughout the winter break.The Jeffs opened up interterm right after ringing in the new year by playing two nonconference opponents, Holy Cross and Southern Maine. The Jeffs beat Holy Cross on Jan. 3 with a score of 3-1 and Southern Maine on Jan. 4 with a score of 3-2.

The following weekend, the team engaged in NESCAC competition with two away games against the Colby College Mules. The trio of Erin Martin ’16, Emily Flom ’15 and Brenna Sullivan ’18 were potent in the first game. Flom scored the first goal in the first period assisted by Martin and Sullivan, while Martin found the back of the net minutes later with Flom and Sullivan assist-

GAME SCHE DULE

ing. Sophomore Caitlyn Ryan also scored in the second period to lift the Jeffs to a 3-1 win in the first game. In the second game against Colby, senior captain Tori Salmon scored both goals in a 2-1 victory for the Jeffs.

The team’s strong play continued into the weekend of Jan. 16 in back-to-back games against NESCAC rival Middlebury. Middlebury had ranked higher than Amherst in both national polls. In the opening game on Friday night, Middlebury had a 1-0 lead moving into the second period. Flom evened the score in the second period off the right post. The score remained tied into the third period. On a power play midway through the third, Lynndy Smith ’17 broke through a crowd to put the Jeffs up by one. Middlebury answered quickly with another goal.

The game moved to overtime where neither team could manage a score. The story looked much the same the next night at Middlebury.

Martin put the Jeffs on the board first, but a third period goal by the Panthers put the game in overtime once again. Shots were hard to come by, and the Jeffs left the game with another tie.

Smith commented on her team’s play against a tough Middlebury opponent. “Games against competitive teams like Middlebury are the reason why hockey is such an incredible sport,” the sophomore said. “Walking into the locker room Friday afternoon, I knew we were ready to play.

The game was fast, aggressive and suspenseful.

While we may not have come home with two

FRI

Men’s Basketball vs. Colby, 7 p.m.

Men’s Hockey vs. Trinity, 7 p.m.

Women’s Basketball @ Colby, 7 p.m.

wins like we were hoping to, we ended up with two well earned ties. Every second of the game was action packed. Not once did I feel like there was a lull.”

Looking to rebound after two tough matchups against Middlebury, Amherst faced another out-of-conference opponent on the road. Amherst took on Nichols College on Jan. 20, and rebound they did. The Jeffs notched eight goals, propelling them to a 8-1 victory. Amherst took little time getting onto the scoreboard, finding the net three times in the opening period.

However, they did not stop to rest on their laurels. The second period featured three more goals. Finally, the Jeffs scored another two in the

SAT

Men’s Indoor Track Women’s Swim@ Terrier Classic, 10 a.m. ming and Diving @ MIT, 11 a.m.

Men’s Indoor Track @ Springfield InvitaMen’s Squash tional, 10 a.m. vs. Middlebury, 1 p.m.

Women’s Indoor Women’s Squash Track vs. Middlebury, 1 p.m. @ Terrier Classic, 10 a.m.

final period. Many of the Jeffs key players factored into the goals including Salmon with two goals and an assist, Flom with a goal and an assist, Martin with one goal and three assists and Smith with a goal and an assist. Eileen Harris ’16 also scored her second goal of the season off an assist by Audrey Duquette ’17.

Due to Winter Storm Juno, the Jeffs will not return to their home ice of Orr Rink until Saturday, Jan. 31 at 7:30 p.m., hosting Conn. College for a two game set this weekend. The teams will play again on Sunday at 3 p.m. This will be Amherst’s third annual “Pink The Rink” game, with proceeds benefitting the Cancer Connection of Northampton.

Photo courtesy of Rob Mattson

Men’s Basketball vs. Bowdoin, 3 p.m.

Men’s Hockey vs. Wesleyan, 3 p.m.

Women’s Basketball @ Bowdoin, 3 p.m.

Men’s Swimming and Diving @ MIT, 5 p.m.

Women’s Hockey vs. Conn. College, 7:30 p.m.

SUN

Men’s Squash Women’s Swimvs. Wesleyan, 10:30 a.m. ming and Diving @ Springfield, 1 p.m.

Women’s Squash vs. Wesleyan, 10:30 a.m. Women’s Hockey Men’s Swimming vs. Conn. College and Diving @ Springfield, 1 p.m.