Issue 16

THE AMHERST

THE INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER OF AMHERST COLLEGE SINCE 1868

STUDENT VOLUME CXLVI, ISSUE 16 l WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2017

Women’s Basketball Ranked No. 1 in the Country See Sports, Page 9 AMHERSTSTUDENT.AMHERST.EDU

College Releases Report on State of Athletics Program Isabel Tessier ’19 Managing News Editor

Photo courtesy of Alura Chung-Mehdi ’18

Following the release of President Donald Trump’s executive order on Friday, Jan. 27, students participated in a campus walkout on Wednesday, Feb. 1 to protest the order and also staged a sit-in in President Biddy Martin’s office.

Amherst Responds to Executive Order

Kathleen Maeder ’20 & Emma Swislow ’20 Staff Writers

The Amherst College community has responded to President Donald Trump’s Jan. 27 executive in various ways over the past week, with students leading protests and organizing a phone bank and the college offering legal consultation resources.

The order halts the entry of nationals from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen into the United States for 90 days, stops the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program for 120 days and bans Syrian refugees from resettling in the U.S. indefinitely. In addition, it gives the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security the ability to add more countries to the original list. On Friday, Feb. 3, a temporary nationwide restraining order on the ban was issued by Seattle federal judge James Robart, in response to a lawsuit from Washington and Minnesota states.

The order also states that once the refugee program resumes, priority will be given to refugees fleeing religious persecution if “the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality.” The restricted countries are all predominantly Muslim countries, excluding Muslim refugees from this special class.

Several hundred students, faculty and community members marched from Valentine Hall

to the steps of Converse Hall on Feb. 1 to protest the executive order and criticize a perceived lack of meaningful support from President Biddy Martin and the college administration.

The protesters presented a list of demands to President Martin, as well as two letters of solidarity from alumni and faculty members. Several students delivered speeches, providing personal accounts of the effect that the Trump administration’s order would have on their lives and families.

Student protesters also held a sit-in in Martin’s office during the Feb. 1 protest, with organizers stating they would continue until Martin conceded to their demands. Martin eventually left her office to address the protesters, calling for unified action against the president’s executive order.

According to protest organizer Aubrey Grube ’18E, a group of students “frustrated by the news and by the college’s response” met soon after Martin’s initial email to the community. The group discussed the logistics of the protest as well as the unmet needs of affected students.

“I find the executive order to be cruel, baseless and unconstitutional,” Grube wrote in an email interview. “As far as the administration’s response, I think there was an attempt to delegitimize the concerns of the demonstration, but I am very happy that concrete steps are being taken to support the financial and legal needs of those affected in our community.”

The sit-in continued after the initial protest until Martin’s second statement, which demonstrated “clear commitments that align with the demands presented by organizers,” Grube said.

Harith Khawaja ’19, an international student from Pakistan who spoke about his father’s dreams for his children at the protest, said that “it was just shocking that something like [the order] could come into existence at this point in the world.”

“For me, the U.S. had always epitomized the perfect values, and it always seemed to be that one place that granted equality to everyone,” he said. “Across the world, there’s this crazy illusion of perfection that encapsulates the identity of the U.S. For me … on the eighth of November, when Trump was elected … the facade first began to shatter.”

Though not directly affected, Khawaja said the order does stand as a warning to anyone from a Muslim-majority country.

“Immigration attorneys, for the moment, are recommending for us not to travel internationally anywhere, just because it’s a risk that the order poses to other Muslim-majority countries as well,” he said. “So, even though the effect is indirect, it’s a very emotional and visceral one because it sets the tone for the Trump administration in regards to his dealings with even innocent people from this

Continued on Page 3

President Biddy Martin released a report on the status of athletics at the college in an email to the college community on Jan. 31. The special committee that assembled the report was co-chaired by college trustee and Princeton University president emerita Shirley Tilghman and Amherst biology professor Patrick Williamson and studied the place of athletics within the college’s social life, academic mission and admissions policies.

“The Place of Athletics at Amherst College,” commissioned in the fall of 2014 by Martin, is preceded by the 2002 Diver report, the college’s first in-depth study of athletics. The original report recommended that the college continue to review its athletic program every three to five years. “[It] is important to step back periodically and take a careful look at our athletics programs to ensure their strength, integrity, and contribution to Amherst’s overall educational mission,” Martin wrote in the email. The report, she said, found the athletic program to be “strong, even exemplary” and that it “contributes positively to the life of the college.” However, she also said that the report found areas of concern within athletics and provides recommendations to the college to make changes in the future.

The committee was composed of Dean of Students Alex Vasquez, history professor Monica Ringer, mathematics and statistics professor Gregory Call, a trustee and former Amherst athlete, men’s soccer coach Justin Serpone and several students.

Diversity, Social Life and Housing The committee found that though the college’s athletics program offers multiple positive benefits to the college and the students who participate in athletics, there were several areas of concern regarding the place of athletics in students’ social lives. The two main social issues addressed by the report are the perceived divide between athletes and non-athletes and the lack of racial and socioeconomic diversity on varsity teams.

The committee expressed concern that the number of varsity athletes since 2002 has grown at a larger rate than that of the general student body.

It cited the high percentage of varsity athletes within the student body — 35 to 38 percent — as an exacerbating factor on the divide between athletes and non-athletes. “Differences between groups of Amherst students, based on their participation

Continued on Page 3

Head Cross Country Coach Resigns After 20 Seasons Shawna Chen ’20 Managing News Editor Head coach of men’s cross country and track Erik Nedeau resigned on Jan. 25 after 20 seasons with the team due to “personal and family reasons,” according to Director of Athletics Don Faulstick.

Since joining the college’s athletics department in 1995, Nedeau has led the college’s men’s and women’s teams to four NCAA championships, 73 All-American performances, two Junior National medals and a number of New England, NESCAC and ECAC championships. He was first named the

head coach of the men’s cross country program for the 1997-1998 season and was named the 2007 New England Regional Coach of the Year. Nedeau also coached the team to its first NCAA regional championship title in 2007.

Faulstick said in an email interview that he first informed assistant coaches and cross country and track team members at a team meeting and then shared Nedeau’s resignation with other teams’ head coaches via email.

The athletics department will conduct a national search later this spring to fill the head coach position, said Faulstick. As of now, assistant coaches Luke Maher and Selwyn Maxwell continue to

lead the team.

No further information was publicized, according to Faulstick, because “disseminating such news beyond an employee’s department is very rarely done. On those few occasions when it does happen, it involves a member of the president’s senior staff or an employee who has served the college for many decades.”

Senior Associate Athletics Director David Hixon, Assistant Athletic Director Billy McBride and Chief Student Affairs Officer and former Director of Athletics Suzanne Coffey declined to comment for the story.

Team members and co-captains Raymond

Meijer ’17 and Kevin Connors ’17 also declined to comment, citing lack of knowledge about the circumstances of Nedeau’s resignation.

Nedeau’s resignation comes nearly a month after The Indicator, a student publication, reported on a chain of offensive emails exchanged between members of the men’s cross country team.

The administration responded by launching an investigation of the team. After the investigation’s conclusion, the team was placed on athletic probation for four seasons, and members who were personally involved in the email incident were suspended from the team for varying durations depending on level of involvement.

News

Nancy Nzeyimana Thoughts on Theses

Jan. 30, 2017 - Feb. 6, 2017

>>Jan. 30, 2017 11:17 a.m., Hitchcock House A student reported that her black North Face parka, valued at $350, was stolen during a party at Hitchcock. She also discovered that her college ID, which was in the pocket of the parka, had been fraudulently used: nearly $50 was charged to her account at a vending machine. After an investigation, the responsible person was identified. Restitution was made and the matter was referred to Student Affairs.

6:58 p.m., Morris Pratt Dormitory An officer investigated a fire alarm and found it had been activated when a hair dryer was used too close to a smoke detector. >>Feb. 3, 2017 10:45 a.m., Greenway Buildings An officer investigated a property damage accident.

3:00 p.m., Wilson Admissions Office An employee reported unwanted attention by a male person at a business in town. Investigation is ongoing.

6:24 p.m., Greenway Building A An officer responded to a report of a racist word on a scrabble board.

The responsible person, who was a visitor, was identified. >>Feb. 4, 2017 2:00 a.m., Plimpton House An officer discovered alcohol, including hard alcohol, unattended in a basement common room. It was disposed of.

2:35 a.m., Hitchcock House An officer found unattended alcohol in the first-floor common room.

It was disposed of.

2:35 a.m., Mayo Smith House While checking the building, an officer found evidence that an excessive amount of alcohol, including hard alcohol, had been available at a registered party. There was also evidence of drinking games. The matter was referred to Student Affairs.

2:52 a.m., O’Connell Lot An officer found a man walking along Dickinson Street with a traffic sign. The man was identified as a local resident and the sign was confiscated.

2:58 a.m., Morris Pratt Dormitory Officers and the fire department responded to an alarm that was activated by a basement pull station for no apparent reason.

3:18 a.m., Stearns Dormitory Officers responded to a complaint of people yelling on the fourth floor. A group of students was found in the common room and advised of the complaint.

9:53 p.m., South College Dormitory An officer encountered a resident

using incense and advised him that such use was not allowed under the college housing regulations.

11:05 p.m., Seligman House Officers responded to a complaint about a registered party and that people were attempting to open doors to private rooms. Contact was made with the party sponsor who took responsibility for monitoring the situation.

11:24 p.m., Campus Grounds An officer encountered an underage student with alcohol. It was disposed of and the matter was referred to Student Affairs.

11:30 p.m., Mayo Smith House Three complaints, including calls from town residents, were received about a registered party that was scheduled to end at midnight. Officers responded and the gathering was ended. >>Feb. 5, 2017 1:03 a.m., Hitchcock House Officers responded to a report of four uninvited people. They were identified as students from the Five College area and left upon request.

1:41 a.m., Lipton House Officers responded to a report of a male student yelling in the firstfloor common room and located an intoxicated student. After they evaluated him, he left with a sober friend.

3:05 a.m., Mayo Smith House While checking the building, an officer found evidence that an excessive amount of alcohol, including hard alcohol, had been available at a registered party. There was also evidence of drinking games. The matter was referred to Student Affairs.

2:05 p.m., Campus Grounds Officers responded to a report of a group of students playing a drinking game near Keefe Health Center and found a beer pong table set up. The activity was stopped.

5:40 p.m., Newport House An officer and the Fire Department responded to an alarm and found it was due to cooking in the basement kitchen.

7:23 p.m., Newport House An officer and the Fire Department responded to an alarm and found it was due to cooking in the basement kitchen.

9:59 p.m., Mayo Smith House An officer responded to a complaint of people screaming in the first-floor common room. A group of students watching television was advised to quiet down.

11:34 p.m., Charles Pratt Dormitory An officer responded to a noise complaint and found approximately 18 people in a second-floor room.

After speaking with a resident, the majority of people left the room.

Department of Political Science

Nancy Nzeyimana ’17 is a political science major. Her thesis examines three different pieces of legislation that were passed in France. Her thesis advisors are Ruxandra Paul and Pavel Machala from the political science department.

Q: What is your thesis about?

A: It’s about three different pieces of legislation that were passed … Two of them were laws and one was a law proposal. Two of them were passed and one was not passed.

Their common point was that the first two were passed by the same person at different points in her career. But this person named Christiane Taubira ended up being the minister of justice. The third law, which was the proposal, was the proposal that made her quit from the government. So that is their common point, even though they have way more points in common in theory.

you are writing too much or not enough. I think my thesis needs a ton of work. I think now I am better at conceptualizing it and figuring out how I am going to organize it, but it does need a lot of editing. Plus I need to add some content. Ideally I would have every day some thesis and every day some work … one day a week probably Saturday or Sunday entirely thesis … but it has not really been this way … I know this is what I am trying to implement this semester.

Q: What has been your favorite part of writing your thesis?

A: I think it is just to Just find the topic of your confirm instincts that Q: Why did you dreams now ... I had a topic I had or just learning decide to write that I really liked, but as I was things I never thought on this particular starting the process, I realized I would read about my topic? What about topic or see connecthat I did not like it enough to tions I had never seen it interests you?

A: I noticed that dedicate … enough intellectu- before … it’s really just this particular al energy ... So find a topic that the investigative part person was a very you know you could spend five that is really cool. It polarizing char- years writing about. takes a lot of time, and acter in politics it is really hard for me in France. People to stay focused because would often quote I will often start readthe laws … the two ing something that is laws that are basically named after her … but really interesting and is not related. those laws pertain to very different fields of life. The first one is a law passed in 2001, in Q: What has been the most difficult or surwhich the French government recognizes the prising part of writing a thesis? slave trade … in the Atlantic and the Indian A: It is that regardless of how unique or how Ocean as a crime against humanity. The sec- different your topic is, people have written ond law is the deregulation of civil same-sex about it before — not necessarily in the way marriage … The third proposal was a pro- that you think it should be written about posal … last year or in the way that you to strip binational expect it to be written citizens [of ] their about. Someone has French citizenship done work on either the I think [my favorite part of the- main topic or a major if they had been convicted of ter- sis work] is just to confirm in- branch of the topic. It rorism. Christiane stincts that I had or just learn- is hard to be original, Taubira was op- ing things I never thought I but at the same time it posed to it, so she would read about my topic or is also really helpful, left the governbecause as undergradusee connections I had never ates, there is only so ment. I was wondering, … these seen before … It takes a lot much we can do. It is three laws are so of time, and it is really hard for really reassuring to see different, but … me to stay focused because I that there is better work they have to be will often start reading some- out there, which we can somehow repreuse as a starting point. thing that is really interesting sentative of similar things for her and is not related.

Q: What advice would to champion those you give to the current two first laws or juniors about writing a oppose the third thesis? law.

A: Just find the topic of your dreams now.

Because for me I had a topic that I really Q: How has the thesis writing process been liked, but as I was starting the process, I realfor you so far? When did you start and ized that I did not like it enough to dedicate where in the process are you now? … enough intellectual energy. I was reading, A: It is super hard, because in political sci- but I did not like the topic enough to be that ence, we have to submit … a full draft … I excited about it. I ended up picking a new did not submit the full draft by Jan. 9. We one pretty late in the semester. At that point, only typically get one thesis course … so we you are already late...so it is hard … so find have only one thesis course … [as well as] a topic that you know you could spend five three other courses to take and we are sup- years writing about. posed to submit so it was just so much work especially at the end of last semester. It is really hard too … because [a thesis] is so much bigger — it is really hard to say when you — Ariana Lee ’20 are reading too much or not enough or when

“

”

“

”

The Amherst Student • February 8, 2017

News

3

Report Analyzes Influence of Athletics on Campus Life Continued from Page 1 in varsity sports, would have less impact on the student body as a whole if athletes were a smaller percentage of the student body,” the report stated.

Housing is another factor the committee cited as deepening the divide. The report found that athletes tend to live together, especially in the former social dorms, creating a general culture in which teams appear to dominate the college’s party scene. In the first semester of the 2014-15 school year, social dorms Pond and Stone consisted of 85 and 80 percent athletes, respectively. The committee did note that student housing patterns for the 2016-2017 school year showed a greater distribution of athletes across campus, likely due to the decommissioning of social dorms and the opening of the Greenway dorms.

The report also emphasized the notable difference in athlete and non-athlete demographics.

Although the number of varsity athletes of color has nearly doubled since 2002, low-income and first-generation students are still “strikingly underrepresented.” From 2011 to 2015, white students made up 73-74 percent of athletic teams, compared to 47 percent of all students.

“These striking overall disparities in the ethnicity and socioeconomic backgrounds of athletes and non-athletes, combined with the substantial fraction of students who are athletes, contribute in significant measure to the sense on campus that there is a ‘divide’ between the two student populations,” the report stated.

Athletics and Academics In its analysis of athletics within academic study, the committee found that athletes are almost twice as likely to major in economics than non-athletes are — nearly 22 percent of athletes from the graduating classes of 2010 to 2014 were economics majors. Though this applies generally to all athletes, the report noted that the difference is most noticeable in men’s football, basketball, baseball and lacrosse. These four teams, jointly composing around 12 percent of the student body, make up around a third of economics, political science and history majors from 2011 to 2016.

The report also found that athletes are much less likely to write a senior thesis than are nonathletes. While 49 percent of non-athletes write a thesis, only 16 percent of athletes do.

Varsity athletes postgraduate outcomes look different than those of non-athlete alumni. From

1938 to 2008, a higher proportion of athletes pursued careers in business than did non-athletes.

Athletes were half as likely as non-athletes to pursue art careers. Overall, however, the report found that “participation in athletics does not compromise the ability of athletes to excel academically at Amherst.”

Influence on Admissions Every incoming class totals 125 to 150 athletes.

Varsity athletes are classified in three different ways during the admissions process. “Athletic factor” athletes are identified as potentially providing “a significant impact on the success of the teams.”

These applicants’ athletic status provides “substantial” benefit in the application process. Each year, 67 of the incoming class of approximately 450 students are “athletic factor” athletes. “Coded” athletes, academically high-achieving and skilled athletes, make up 60 to 90 students in every incoming class. The remaining athletes are classified as “priorities for admissions to the college for other reasons.” This includes first-generation, legacy and low socioeconomic background students, students of color and students with extremely high academic qualifications.

Safety and Well-Being of Athletes The influence of the increased professionalization of college sports in the U.S. was one of the committee’s and Martin’s top concerns. The report said that the college is shielded from the most negative impacts of this trend because of NESCAC regulations which ban athletic scholarships and restrict recruitment activities and playing season lengths. It still noted certain potentially harmful practices that have increased since 2002.

The volume of post-season games, travel and game time and off-season practices have all increased since the original Diver report. Although the committee attributes much of this to athletic teams’ success in reaching NESCAC and NCAA championships, they caution that “[with] that success comes greater time commitment from students, and the possibility of more frequent conflicts with classes and other academic activities.”

Since the 2002 report, a “growing and alarming body of scientific evidence” has shown the damaging and potentially life-threatening effects of concussions on athletes, especially on young people such as college students.

Currently the college uses the head injury protocol guidelines that all other NESCAC schools

follow, which allow athletes who have received three concussions to participate again once all symptoms have disappeared. The report, however, questioned if they should ever be allowed to play again. The committee also expressed concern about the rising number of concussions and subconcussions in men’s and women’s club rugby, especially because club sports do not always have access to the same sports medicine staff and facilities as do varsity teams.

Conclusions and Recommendations The report stressed that there was a clear “opportunity cost” to the college when a large proportion of the student body is participating in a single extracurricular. The committee strongly recommended no further increase in the number of varsity athletes in the future, even if the general student body continues to grow in size. It also recommended further research into roster sizes to see if any unnecessarily large teams can be reduced.

Another recommendation, which the committee acknowledged as controversial, is to reduce the number of student athletes by eliminating teams that are “chronically unsuccessful,” have a high rate of injuries or “contribute very little to engendering interest in or loyalty to the college.”

The report’s conclusion reemphasized the importance of student living spaces in creating a well-balanced mix of athletes and non-athletes. Increasing the diversity of athletes and coaching staff should be a priority of the athletics and admissions departments, stated the report.

A panel should be formed to evaluate concussions in athletics, the committee also recommended. In the meantime, club sports teams should have the same safety standards as those of varsity teams. Rugby, in particular, should receive more resources for head injuries or be discontinued.

Kiana Herold ’17 and Sophie Murguia ’17 contributed reporting for this article.

Admin, Students and Faculty Organize Against Executive Order Continued from Page 1 country. This is going to be the norm for us in the next four years.”

Khawaja believes the college and community can still take greater steps to provide resources for students who are directly and indirectly affected.

He said the International Students Office needs to work on facilitating better relations with students and called on the college to commit itself to improvement.

On Monday, Feb. 6, a phone bank event cohosted by the Amherst College Democrats, the Amherst Political Union and the Association of Amherst Students took place in Converse Hall and the Alumni House. Students used a script, calling on congressmen and representatives to speak out against the order. The college supported their efforts by providing phones for the event.

Alexander Deatrick ’20, president of the Amherst College Democrats, worked alongside AAS President Karen Blake ’17 and Vice President Chico Kosber ’17 to organize the event.

“As long as Trump’s in office, this is going to be an issue,” said Deatrick. “So we feel it’s more important than ever that ordinary students, millennials and people all around the country are getting in touch with their representatives and letting them know how they feel about discriminating against people just based off where they were born.”

“The College Democrats are absolutely going to work to continue reaching out to our representatives, and make sure they hear that students support progressive ideas and a better future for our country,” said Deatrick.

The college brought in immigration attorney Dan Berger on Friday, Feb. 3 to discuss the specifics of the order, answer questions and meet with affected students on an individual basis. Berger was previously invited to meet with students regarding undocumented immigration and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) in November.

According to Berger, the language of the ban has led to confusion regarding visa status, dual nationalities and green cards.

“There’s a lot of stuff in these executive orders that is just very vague,” Berger said. “The executive orders were just very badly written. They say anybody who is ‘from’ one of these countries can’t enter. Any lawyer knows that every word matters.

So does from mean that you’re born in Iran? Does it mean that you are a dual citizen of Iran and the Netherlands? Does from mean that your parents are from Iran? What does it mean? We’re still in the middle of confusion.”

As of now, Berger recommends that people from one of the seven specified countries do not leave the country unless necessary, but can travel domestically within the continental United States.

He emphasized that the fluidity of the ban and its changing nature leads to an unpredictable future for those affected.

Martin published a letter on Feb. 3 addressed to Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly, urging him to rescind the executive order. In it, she called the order an “overreaction” that “undermines America’s ability to attract exceptionally ambitious students, scientists, engineers and others.”

Dean of Admission and Financial Aid Katie Fretwell ’81 said that the Office of Admission does

expect a decrease in the number of students from specified countries that will be able to enroll in Amherst and other American universities in the fall of 2017.

“Current applicants to Amherst impacted by the ban submitted their applications before the executive order was signed,” Fretwell said. “It’s uncertain if any who may be offered admission will have the ability to remain in or enter the country by the fall.”

According to Fretwell, Amherst would support the indefinite deferment of enrollment by affected students. She also said the number of applications from international students unexpectedly increased this year.

“Frankly, I was surprised to see increases in both our early decision and regular decision pools of non-U.S. citizens following the presidential election,” Fretwell said. “While an American higher education remains in demand for students around the world, I might have anticipated that Trump’s election would deter some students from seeking admission at U.S. institutions.”

On Tuesday, Feb. 7, Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer Norm Jones sent a community-wide email providing “a clear, simple summary of our key initiatives and resources.” The email specified emergency resources such as 24/7 phone lines to counselors and on-call administrators and legal assistance for affected students for which the college would pay. In addition, it pledged the reorganization of the International Students Office, the appointment of a new director of international student services and the creation of a dedicated confidential space in Keefe Campus Center for in-

ternational students.

“Amherst is committed to providing any resource or service we legally can to protect the well-being of students who are affected or may be affected by the government’s immigration actions,” wrote Jones. “We are always open to suggestions and comments about what we are providing and what more could be done.”

Chief Student Affairs Officer Suzanne Coffey said that her office and the college as a whole are committed to helping affected students in the short and long term. “We will continue to support those students who are most directly affected by immigration orders, but also those who want to come in and talk and think about what’s happening with their families [and] what’s happening around the world,” said Coffey.

The college, she added, would provide affected students with internships and summer housing if necessary.

When considering the possibility of future obstacles from the Trump administration, she said that she could “imagine threats that go beyond immigration.”

“Whatever the landscape is, we have got to be able to say we are bringing the best and brightest students to this institution, and we will support them thoroughly,” Coffey said. “That’s the basis on which democracy continues to thrive. It’s these colleges and universities that have got to stand up in this time and make it possible for scholars to continue to do their work.”

Shawna Chen ’20 contributed reporting for this article.

Opinion

THE AMHERST

STUDENT

Our Shared Privilege

E X E C U T I V E B OA R D

Editorial Amherst is often described as an elite institution, a label that typically carries positive connotations. Specifically, “elite” invokes prestige and rigor, framing Amherst as a beacon of achievement in higher education. To a large degree, our campus community embodies these ideals through the various academic, athletic and personal accomplishments on which The Student reports each week.

While The Editorial Board is certainly proud of our college, we also wish to investigate the uglier side of the “elite” label. With the caliber of the institution on which we pride ourselves, Amherst also runs the risk of becoming an intellectually exclusive space. How do we express our thoughts without reinforcing hierarchies? How do we bolster intellectual conversation while maintaining inclusivity and accessibility?

Arriving at Amherst, a student faces high expectations for immediate success from the campus community. We, as students and faculty, intentionally and unintentionally pressure each other to perform and present the best versions of ourselves. We have little patience for people to make mistakes, inside and outside of the classroom. In an English class, perhaps someone will throw out an obscure reference to an author they know no one else will recognize without providing context. It is not the act of referencing that is necessarily problematic, but more so the motivation behind it. Sometimes jargon or obscure references can be unintentionally exclusive, but sometimes it can be an intentional move to build up an image or to feed one’s own pride. Exclusivity and elitism can also emerge in even the most well-intentioned circumstances, especially when it comes to calling out instances of bias or stereotyping. Of course, problematic behavior should always be addressed in some way, but the way in which it is addressed must be intentional. Of course, we should not compromise our values or our voice. However, we must be conscious of pretentiousness that can seep into our language. There are ways to be tough on people and take a hardline stance on injustice without being condescending. In doing so, our voices might be more connected to our hearts. And the heart produces a more readable language.

As time passes, we all accumulate more and more educational privilege as students here. This is not to say that Amherst makes us all equal — legacies of our own personal histories and positionality

will continue to play out for the rest of our lives. However, it is true that we all leave this place with a diploma. For some, it might be just that — nothing more than a piece of paper. For others, it will be about the knowledge shared and collected from intimate friendships and in classrooms. Most likely it will be a mix of the two, but no matter what we identify as the value of our Amherst education, we all will leave marked by this institution, for better or for worse. The Editorial Board wishes to emphasize how critical it is to acknowledge the privilege that a college education grants us. We need to remind ourselves of what it means to then go out into communities where college education is not the norm.

Moreover, our introspection must be nuanced. In acknowledging our privilege, we should avoid equating it to authority. Holding educational privilege is not about being better or having more moral authority than those who hold less of it. We should recall that all people have their own specific set of lived experiences. Having the resources to analyze those experiences with academic language should not prevent us from remembering the original life that is the subject of our analysis. Intellectualizing conversations about racism, ableism, sexism and other issues has its place. But using excessive jargon, especially in spaces where people do not have access to the definitions of specific terms, prevents people from engaging in conversation.

In today’s political environment, it is critical that we continue to engage in conversation. We must continue to call out cases of injustice and cut to the heart of these issues. But it is important to remember that there are more inclusive ways for us to continue holding conversations about the topics we care about. These conversations are imperative, but they require some acknowledgement of the innate privilege that each of us holds. In this same vein, the Editorial Board wishes to acknowledge its own privilege: the very nature of this editorial contributes to the same educational privilege that we hope to combat. This very article is constructed with frameworks and vocabulary that we have learned in the elite halls of our college. This relationship is obviously a precarious one, but a nuanced approach will serve us well, and hopefully create the inclusive Amherst that we all believe in — a place where conversations are approached with intention.

If I May: I Hate the New England Patriots Jake May ’19 Columnist I am not an Atlanta Falcons fan. Before this year’s Super Bowl, I’d never cared about the outcome of a Falcons game before. However, when Atlanta jumped out to a 21-3 first half lead, I was ecstatic. The Falcons had brought me more sports-related happiness in just one half of football than my actual favorite team, the New York Jets, had brought me all season.

This is because the Falcons were playing the New England Patriots.

Now, I have a lot of strong opinions about sports. Pedro Martinez, at his peak, was the greatest pitcher who has ever lived. There has never been a more dominant athlete in any sport than Tiger Woods in golf from 19992007. Barry Bonds should absolutely be in baseball’s Hall of Fame. I love Rafael Nadal (for no good reason). I hate Novak Djokovic (for no good reason). I love Kyrie Irving (for no good reason). I hate Kevin Durant (because he went to the Warriors this summer to chase a championship instead of trying to dethrone the Warriors in the Western Conference, which his Thunder team proved they could achieve, therefore sacrificing his entire legacy just for a championship … so basically for no good reason). But I hold no greater and more prevailing opinion than the fact that I, with every ounce of my body and soul, despise the New England Patriots.

Of course, there are obvious reasons why everyone should — and largely does — hate the Patriots. Firstly, many people in sports dislike teams or players that win all the time. The

Patriots fit this mold as well as any team. They have the most Super Bowl appearances with nine, and they are tied for the second most wins with five. Furthermore, all five of their wins have come relatively recently, with their first coming in 2002, at the end of the 2001 NFL season. Also, all of their Super Bowl wins, and seven of their nine appearances, have been helmed by the same two people: head coach Bill Belichick and quarterback Tom Brady. So, not only do fans have a franchise to hate, they also have a personification of that franchise in Belichick and Brady to detest as well. Additionally, both Belichick and Brady as well as New England’s long-time owner Robert Kraft have fairly public friendships with Donald Trump, which of course only adds fuel to the Patriots-hatred fire.

All of these reasons certainly inform my personal hatred of the Patriots, but for a New York Jets fan like myself, the hate goes even deeper. Firstly, being a New York sports fan, hating all New England-based teams is something taught from birth. Watching the Red Sox, Bruins, Celtics and Patriots have so much success in recent years has brought me a great deal of sports-related anguish. But it is specifically my love of the Jets that makes the Patriots’ success the most sickening.

In 2000, both the Patriots and Jets were looking for a new head coach. The Jets selected a relatively experienced candidate who had bounced around the league as both a defensive coordinator and a head coach. His name was Bill Belichick. After one day on the job — one day — Belichick resigned and accepted an offer to coach the New England Patriots. He be-

trayed us! He’s a dirty, back-stabbing, traitor!

Sorry, I get worked up when I talk about this.

Anyway, in the sixth round of the 2000 draft, the Patriots and their new coach selected a relatively unknown quarterback from Michigan. His name was Tom Brady. Brady didn’t see the field his entire first season, as the Patriots already had an established starting quarterback, Drew Bledsoe. Then, in Brady’s second season, Bledsoe sustained an injury after a particularly forceful hit. After that, Brady replaced Bledsoe as the starter and led the Patriots to their first-ever Super Bowl championship.

This marked the beginning of his path to becoming the greatest quarterback ever to play.

“Why does this injury matter?” you might ask.

Well, guess what team the Patriots were playing when Bledsoe went down with an injury?

Which team, by extension, is directly responsible for giving Tom Brady his opportunity to achieve greatness? Seriously, guess. Yup, it’s the godforsaken New York Jets.

So as I watched the Super Bowl this past Sunday, I was not so much rooting for the Falcons as I was rooting against the Patriots.

Nothing would have made me happier than to watch Tom Brady, Bill Belichick and the rest of the New England Patriots lose in the Super Bowl. I felt some guilt with this as my mindset.

The point of sports fandom should be to root for victory and glory, not to hope for a team to lose just because you can’t stand to watch them win again. But for a bitter Jets fan like me, I had way too much on the line to let sports morality inform my rooting. I simply could not bear to watch the Patriots win, but yet again, I was forced to.

Editors-in-Chief Drew Kiley Jingwen Zhang Executive Advisers Lauren Tuiskula Sophie Murguia Managing News Shawna Chen, Isabel Tessier Managing Opinion Diane Lee, Spencer Quong Managing Arts and Living Julia Pretsfelder, Paola Garcia-Prieto, Evan Paul Managing Sports Nathaniel Quigley, Julia Turner Managing Design Justin Barry S TA F F Head Publisher Tia Robinson Head Marketer Sophie Currin Design Editors Zehra Madhavan, Isabel Park, Chloe Tausk, Yrenly Yuan

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 email account (astudent@amherst.edu) by noon 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 2291, 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: astudent@amherst.edu Twitter: @amherststudent Instagram: @theamherststudent Like The Amherst Student on Facebook

Web Version

The Amherst Student is available online at amherststudent.amherst.edu.

The Amherst Student • February 8, 2017

Opinion

5

The Liberal Arts in Illiberal Times Amrita Basu, Judith Frank, Adam Sitze & Martha Umphrey Contributing Writers Hypersensitive spoiled brats who prefer safe spaces to free speech. Dishonest scientists who cook up rigged studies of climate change. Elitist humanists who study books no one reads using words no one can understand. Humorless social scientists who indoctrinate their students with politically correct sanctimony. Administrators who pander to students’ unreasonable demands and refuse to address reasonable ones. Self-righteous bastions that profess to protect free speech but censor those they don’t wish to hear.

The particular positions may vary, but they create a common discourse of attack. Even at a time when public opinion is bitterly divided, most voices oddly seem to converge on a fundamental point: something is rotten in higher education.

This discourse predates the 2016 election, but given the presidential administration’s reckless compulsion to dismantle governmental and civic institutions, to disparage the press and truth itself, the stakes have become urgent. It is time to return to a basic question: what is the point of higher education? More exactly, what justifies the existence of the liberal arts college as distinct from other forms of higher education?

What is the value of a place like Amherst College today?

American colleges and universities have often posed self-critical questions to themselves during times of crisis. One hundred years ago, after a number of professors around the country were fired for religious nonconformity and political dissent, the very integrity of higher education seemed to be in question. Professors from over 60 colleges and universities came together to state the first principles of American higher learning in the form of the 1915 Declaration of Principles that articulated the meaning of “academic freedom” in the U.S. They asked our very question — “What is the point of higher education?” — and replied that it included a threefold calling, a threefold vocation. First, “to promote inquiry and advance the sum of human knowledge” through research that could be independently verified by peers whose authority derives from years of disciplined training and study. Second, to teach a younger generation not only the best of what had been thought and said, but also to instill the

courage to search for new truths. And third, to develop a generation of young leaders who were dedicated to serving the public interest.

Importantly, those who wrote a century ago drew a distinction between the public interest and public opinion. On this view, public opinion was changing, fleeting and sometimes tyrannical. It might prefer war one decade and peace another. Public interest, meanwhile, is the public at its best: decent and fair, just and equal, generous and thoughtful, self-critical and self-restrained. To say that the purpose of higher education is to serve the public interest is therefore to say that it serves the public we strive to create and join, even and especially when conditions of war, economic scarcity, jealousy or fear cause us to fall short of our aspirations.

This formulation, however, entails a curious paradox. Because higher education serves the public interest and not public opinion — because, essentially, it is an incubator of desirable futures — it may be out of step with its present.

Stated in the words of the 1915 Declaration of Principles, higher education is “an intellectual experiment station, where new ideas may germinate and where their fruit, though still distasteful to the community as a whole, may be allowed to ripen until finally, perchance, it may become part of the accepted food of the nation or of the world.”

You could also put it this way: because higher education may need to be out of step with public opinion in order to serve the public interest, it is bound to taste rotten — or at least bitter — to the very public whose support is necessary for it to pursue its mission, and which it ultimately serves. Because higher education is a place where ideal publics grow slowly and gradually, at a pace that is often unrecognizable, it always will be vulnerable to accusations of rot — and this vulnerability will persist not despite its mission, but because of its mission, to the exact extent that it fulfills its mission.

What imagining of the future do liberal arts colleges and universities strive to incubate today? Our vision of the public interest is that people from vastly different backgrounds can live and learn together, form friendships together and engage in self-examination together. To say that this is rare in the United States would be an enormous understatement. Correlatively, we embrace the proposition that Socratic self-scrutiny — the idea that we should be courageous enough to be humble, that we should not hide

our shortcomings but debate them openly — is the central principle and lifeblood of intelligent discourse.

We imagine this strong and vibrant democratic space to be more than simply a winnertake-all vote. Democracy is a habit, a way of making your way through the day. It’s a way of asking who you are and to whom you are speaking, how we can speak respectfully to each other and why we should try. It involves speaking openly and honestly with both courage and humility. It involves an acute awareness of the blues mentality, the tragicomic consciousness that to speak with another person is often to speak with someone who silently carries pain and sorrow.

And it involves a prophetic wager, a leap of faith: imagining together a livable future, even at a moment when that may seem impossible.

Amherst in particular has, in recent years, insisted on this democratic vision, one that embraces rather than avoids the racial, gendered and socioeconomic contradictions in this country. When other institutions in our country are running away from the problem in denial, we are one of the few running directly at it. So it is not surprising, even if it is painful and humbling, when divisions flare up on campus. It would be a mistake, however, always to interpret these moments of division as symptoms of crisis rather than moments for reflection and growth.

Today, public opinion is governed by cable news networks, social media platforms and online news aggregators that feed consumers a constant drip of outrageous anecdotes that are designed to be easily quoted and quickly circulated. The resulting sense of unending scandal, in the world of higher education and beyond, is little more than a sugar high for the mind. To interpret our campus on these terms certainly may come with a rush of energy and excitement. But it also runs the risk of forgetting our institution’s most basic obligation: to serve the public interest, not public opinion.

Here is some hardier food for thought: to insist on a long-term democratic vision today, at this point in the history of the United States, is to insist on a need for an intellectual experiment that is as vital as it is fragile. Without fully knowing the way forward, we should hold fast to our vision; asking who “we” are, and how and why we speak to each other, is fundamental to the project of a liberal arts education.

Nothing in this vision implies or allows self-congratulation. Institutions of higher edu-

cation are in fact sometimes swayed by external political and economic pressures; they are, after all, embedded in our economy and social structures, and it would be naïve to claim that they never replicate those structures’ inequalities, exclusions and demands. In turn, changes in higher educational institutions’ policies on admissions, the curriculum, hiring and investment have all resulted in part from student protest.

But we believe protest and critique must always be tethered to deliberation about the place of colleges and universities in the broader society and an appreciation of both how far we have come and how far we still have to go. Before we lend our voices to the chorus of public opinion that declares our institutions to be irrevocably rotten, let us not fail to notice how strangely easy this criticism has become today, and let us always hesitate before taking the path of least resistance — this or any other. At a moment when norms of open debate and shared principles of governance are threatened, we must remain curious, inform ourselves well and remember the inestimable value in future-oriented thought and long-term imagination.

This is a challenging project in these times, but it is also precious and worth preserving. We can and should engage in vibrant debate about our institutional practices and commitments.

We set high standards for ourselves, and when we fall short of them, we need open and honest self-criticism. But we must tether resistance to affirmation in order to protect the conditions of possibility for our self-criticism because ironically, it is those very conditions — so fundamental to the project of the liberal arts — that make us vulnerable when illiberal forces converge from all sides.

Critics may see our self-questioning as a sign of the worthlessness of the experiment itself. We could not disagree more. At a moment when democratic habits are in decline, we affirm the importance of our experiment. Any errors we make along the way offer a valuable opportunity for continued reflection and redoubled effort in service of the public interest. That is the proposition to which we have dedicated our professional lives, and we intend to defend it with conviction and pride, now more than ever.

Professor Amrita Basu Professor Judith Frank Professor Adam Sitze Professor Martha Umphrey

Investigating Ourselves and Our Language Evelyn Ting ’17 Contributing Writer My high school was 48 percent black, 40 percent white, 12 percent other and completely segregated — students were put too early into tracks that seldom came together again. Since I grew up in such a racially segregated environment, Amherst shocked me upon arrival. The first time I entered Valentine Dining Hall was the first time I believed in diverse community instead of wishing for it.

However, I soon found that Amherst had its own issues. It had its own prejudices — ones that each of us carries. The most problematic are ones rooted in history and perpetuated by majority powers in society. These include sexism, classism, homophobia, racism, ableism and transphobia.

Yet all prejudices, even those unnamed, are problematic, for they prevent us from seeing each other as whole people. To come together in community, I believe we must try to understand each other in the complexity of backgrounds and experiences that have shaped us. In his farewell address, Barack Obama asked white Americans to understand the experiences of black Americans under the legacy of Jim Crow laws. He asked racial minorities to understand that “privileged” white men may feel shocked and scared because they see their world upended by change. Striving for these understandings combats prejudice, for it defies reducing a population to a single thought or set of labels. Yet, it is not enough to understand others. We must also see the complexities within ourselves — understanding what

forces have shaped us and the beliefs that we hold.

In the beginning of this piece, I talked about where I came from. I came from a place where whites sat in the highest academic track and blacks in the lowest. This shaped me. I am embarrassed to say that when I first came to Amherst, I was surprised to find so many black and brown people who were well-educated, who had read the same works I did and who understood computer science better than I did. I was not hindered by socioeconomic poverty or by a lack of education, and yet, my background shaped a worldview that was harmful. I don’t think I am unique. I think that we all hold frameworks about people that we must work to dismantle — dismantling as a process rather than a goal that can be completed.

I believe that someday we will all see the value in dismantling our stereotypes. I believe because I must, because this hope is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Yet, right now, we are not at that state. And those who have not yet realized their stereotypes have brought oppression into office. I believe in protest because we must protect civil liberties and stop those who threaten them and us. I believe in supporting my classmates in my heart and with my body. I believe in striking down oppression. I believe we must do everything that we can.

In this process, I think it is important that we take care with our language, the language we use with each other, especially when discussing our differences. Performative language is action. Language aimed angrily against another is violence.

We should never violently discriminate against

another. However, we shouldn’t speak violently to discriminators, either. If we strike those who directly or indirectly support discrimination, it will hurt them, badly, without making them understand our hurt or systematic oppression. There is no gain in using violent language. There is simply injury, another wound, becoming defensive in the process of closing itself. And without intellectual or emotional understanding of our message, we will all continue supporting powers that enable this oppression. This is why I do not believe in violent language, language of contempt or language that ridicules. (These forms of language shut someone out before they can even enter the conversation).

I believe in opening language so that people can receive and understand what we say. I believe in language that respects and cares — language such as, “Dear [Classmate], I loved marching with you in this fight for women’s rights. But I noticed your sign today only applied to female-bodied women and I think we must also march for the rights of trans women. Is this something you have considered?” Or language that hands over poetry, like that of Langston Hughes: Droning a drowsy syncopated tune, Rocking back and forth to a mellow croon, I heard a Negro play.

Down on Lenox Avenue the other night By the pale dull pallor of an old gas light He did a lazy sway…

He did a lazy sway…

To the tune o’ those Weary Blues…

Or perhaps language that encourages reading a book, viewing an art piece or watching a show that conveys our experiences and how we feel.

Maybe they will send a different poem, TV show or piece of music back. And that is exhilarating, because it means they trust us enough to be vulnerable. And that trust is a fragile, beautiful object. It is the trust that exists between two instruments improvising and that enables great actors to create scenes on stage. This trust allows us to respond to another’s emotions and teaches us to give in a way that will be received.

Thus, caring language is the mechanism through which shared understanding begins.

I don’t think every person is obliged to have these conversations. Some students are too traumatized. Some are exhausted. However, when we do choose to discuss issues of diversity either privately or publicly, I think we should try speaking in language that opens. I think we should speak in a way that trusts and protects trust, that allows others to grasp the intent behind our arguments and that encourages rich conversation in recognition of each other’s complexities.

Creating community at Amherst is so important, both for the college itself and as a starting point for healing divisions in the country.

This project cannot only be left to the administration or to certain student groups and structures. As individuals, we must all decide to join this cause, and we must create the community in which we live.

Arts&Living

Photo courtesy of Amherst Music Department

The evening started with Jamie Sandel’s original instrumental composition, which complemented Rebecca Ruescher’s choral conducting piece that followed.

Music Department Presents Two Emotive Thesis Performances Alina Burke ’17 & Brandon Medina ’19 Contributing Writers What keeps people coming back to live performances — even when there’s a good recording that you could sit comfortably and listen to at home — is catharsis. Witnessing an outburst of emotion, even when it is not your own, provides release. I was accustomed to this philosophy as a reflection on theatre, but a piece of music I saw performed this weekend made me consider how the action of playing an instrument can have just as much emotional energy as spoken words in a scene. Jamie Sandel’s senior thesis, “and we all play,” — a seven-movement jazz suite that incorporated elements of post-bop, fusion, modern classical and Brazilian samba inspired by the life and death of his father — eloquently brought the audience through a process of pain and release, and it is rare that a musical performance will achieve this emotional transition as successfully as Sandel’s did.

Sandel described his thesis as “a musical exploration of experiences in my life and experiences in the life of my father” and provided his audience a generous offer in his program notes. “Narrative in instrumental music is a tricky thing. This music derives from very specific experiences, but as soon as it leaves the stage and reaches your ears, it’s as much yours as mine, and I encourage you to treat it that way. If you can hear people or stories in the music, it doesn’t matter which they are.”

Reading this after seeing the performance made perfect sense. The emotion Sandel put into the music translates into the different lives of each audience member. His awareness of this musical power made the whole experience more meaningful. Ultimately there is so much selflessness in letting go of your own experiences and opening the door for others to explore theirs, thereby encouraging your audience to connect with your creation in the same way that you do.

The intimacy of this experience was not only in the relationship the audience had with the music but also between the performers themselves. Sandel played so passionately that

his music had a confessional quality. He made it clear during the performance that the music arose from personally painful events, so witnessing this outpour was incredibly poignant.

If it had not been for the program note, I, as an audience member, probably would have felt intrusive. The musicians who performed with Sandel in his thesis formed a high-functioning team with him, as if they were all sharing in this intimate moment and they all had their own emotional stakes in the performance.

The piece consisted of five movements played by a combination of strings, wind instruments and brass with Sandel playing the electric violin. Sandel spoke about the process of constructing the piece.“The compositional process usually starts with a seed, one musical idea that I really like,” he said. “It’s like a papier-mache thing, you take one thing that it’s centered around and you add layers on top of it. You create structure around the seed and then that becomes a song. For one movement, I would create a melody one day, and then I would add chords and a groove and form around that melody. For others, it was a chord progression … Basically I construct these scores for 11 different instruments just based on what one instrument is doing. And it spirals out from there.”

Each movement was followed by an interlude played by a different part of the ensemble, and it was in these interludes that some of the most unique parts of the piece occurred. In the fourth interlude, Sandel played a solo that, for me, was the most amazing display of skill both in composition and performance as well as emotional expression. It was the beautiful and painful climax of the piece, so to speak.

The progression of the piece from movement to movement was well crafted. After the solo in the fourth interlude, the performers exhibited sorrow and then a melancholy release in the fifth movement, comprised of sections titled Goodbye and Breathe. It was an exquisite demonstration of a difficult grieving process that I would like to thank Sandel for sharing and letting the audience play a part in such an emotional process.

When asked what he hoped the audience

walked away with, Sandel said, “I hope that I was able to provide an experience for people that allowed them to take a deep breath and understand themselves more fully in that moment. I think there is a lot of power to instrumental music, and I think people don’t give it enough of a chance to mean something to them, just because words are more accessible, and instrumental music can be weird. I hope people can discover just how much instrumental music can say to them.”

Rebecca Ruescher’s senior thesis in choral conducting, titled “The Heart’s Reflection,” followed Sandel’s on Friday night. Her performance had a completely different feel, but it was equally wonderful. Ruescher demonstrated refined skill and conducted her choir of 16 students on nine pieces in six different languages. She drew from a diverse selection of choral music, beginning with a South African folk song in which the singers used the synchronized movement of their bodies as a percussive force. It was exciting to see her explore many time periods, musical styles, and cultures throughout the whole performance.

She titled her piece after one of the songs she conducted — a fairly contemporary piece written by Daniel Elder in 1986. Ruescher was right to name her thesis after this piece, for it was both incredibly beautiful and a great accomplishment in terms of conducting. Ruescher glided effortlessly through the song’s ethereal moments and delicately led her choir through the ebb and flow of the piece, never making the transitions rocky or awkward — which would be easy to do in such a piece.

Ruescher learned how to lead a 16-piece choir over the course of a few months, “I showed up at Amherst in July to start exploring repertoire, and choosing rep was the very first part of the process. After that it involved recruiting singers. It also involved historical research and above all, so much language learning. And it’s a lot of teaching. My biggest job was to teach all this to the choir, we only met once a week, and we had a tremendous amount of music to learn with just 2-hour rehearsals. I had to keep their drive as well and come up with ways to convey the vision I had

in mind. It’s not just words on a page, it’s a lot more than that … Sometimes it would feel like we made a ton of progress one week and then the next we would have to work harder. So coming up with creative ways to combat that was really difficult and also I didn’t want anyone to feel bad if they forgot their part from the last week. So it was a real balancing act keeping up morale but also keeping everyone on the same page.”

If not just from the title, it was clear that this piece meant a lot to Ruescher, and that kind of emotional stake is necessary for a conductor to transfer their energy into their choir.

If they do not put enough of themselves in, the performance will fall flat. Ruescher overall did an excellent job in relating her own emotional energy to her choir. Her gestures were graceful and confident as well as expressive. When asked what she hopes the audience gained from her thesis, she said, “I think choral music is the most beautiful and most powerful thing in the world, but a lot of people who came on Friday, for instance my parents, it’s not their passion. For them, it’s something to enjoy. So even with all levels of interest and appreciation, I hope that they enjoyed it in some way, whether it relaxed them or took their mind off some stuff that happened to them earlier in the week. A lot of my pieces were more complex and emotional, so if some of the audience felt a little bit touched by one of our performances, that would be a nice bonus. My goal was to make somebody cry. I heard one person cry. Just any kind of breakthrough, whether it was closing your eyes and having a moment of peace, or just getting into the music deeply. Either would have been satisfying to me.”

In her program notes, Ruescher wrote, “If I believe anything, it is the healing, productive and spiritually connective powers of choral singing.”

Through these two performances the audience witnessed several ways in which music unites groups of people through the process of feeling. Great artists, regardless of how they do it, invest their own emotions into their work to form visceral connections with other performers and audience members.

The Amherst Student • February 8, 2017

Arts & Living 7

Sampha Reaffirms His Talent With Latest Release “Process”

Photos courtesy of Youtube.com

“Blood on Me” and “(No One Knows Me) Like the Piano” are examples of imaginative music videos that reflect Samphra’s ethereal genre-bending sound.

Hugh Ford ’19 Contributing Writer On Feb. 3, British singer Sampha released his highly anticipated debut album “Process.”

The album comes after years of collaboration with some of the biggest names in the music industry across multiple genres. Sampha first received recognition working closely with electro-pop producer SBTRK, appearing multiple times on the artist’s popular 2011 album “SBTRKT” and his 2014 album “Wonder Where We Land.” He has also branched into hip-hop, receiving co-signs from major artists such as Drake and Kanye West and appearing on Drake’s “Nothing Was the Same” (2013) and Kanye’s “The Life of Pablo” (2016).

More recently, Sampha was featured on Solange’s highly acclaimed R&B album “A Seat at the Table” this fall. Despite all of these major accomplishments, Sampha’s lengthy period as

an exclusively featured artist put into question whether or not he could create a compelling solo album. This debate, however, should be put to rest with “Process.” Sampha demonstrates that he can hold his own by crafting one of the best albums of the year so far.

“Process” is one of the most unique albums to come out of pop music in a while. Sampha has a distinctive sound that cannot be found in any other artist. On “Process,” he combines his beautiful voice with excellent production to create an auditory odyssey. Listeners should be prepared to experience a powerful emotion throughout the album. On songs like opening track “Plastic 100˚C” and “Blood On Me” the anguish and torment in Sampha’s voice is haunting. Perhaps the most moving moment on the album, however, is “(No One Knows Me) Like the Piano.” The song, unsurprisingly, is accompanied by a piano, which plays a slow and simple but powerful melody.

Sampha sings about his loneliness, his love for his mother and music as an outlet for personal expression. The track’s melancholy is so tangible that it cannot help but rub off. The following piece, “Take Me Inside,” is almost equally as tender and emotional. It builds on “(No One Knows Me) Like the Piano” by layering on electronic production to the piano.

Another interesting element on “Process” is “Kora Sings.” The track is one of the more upbeat parts of the album, with its lively production and empowering lyrics. “Under,” the 7th track of the album, also moves its listeners. The electronic production work here is incredible, and Sampha once again delivers vocally. Perhaps my favorite track on the album, however, is “Timmy’s Prayer,” which was released in 2016 as a single. “Timmy’s Prayer” appears towards the end of the album as the eighth track out of 10. The song is a slowpaced love ballad that is incredibly touching.

My one complaint with the album is probably the concluding track, “What Shouldn’t I Be?” The song is very ethereal, and while the theme lacks assurance, I think the album would have been better served to end on a strong song like “Timmy’s Prayer.”

Despite this last complaint, the album is well done overall. Sampha finds strength in simplicity. “Process” is 10 tracks long and only has a runtime of about 40 minutes. As such, Sampha’s voice doesn’t become boring or too repetitive. The album features very little filler, superfluous elements do not distract from Sampha’s ideas. Sampha tells incredibly personal and emotional stories through his amazing and unique voice over tight production.

In short, “Process” has lived up to all and surpassed the expectation of what a solo Sampha album should be, and it will be interesting to see what he does from here.

Overall rating: 8.5/10

iBoy: An Average Movie Doomed To Be Lost In a Crowded Netflix

Photos courtesy of filmcombatsyndicate.blogspot.be

Netflix’s most recent original film stars Bill Milner as Tom and Maisie Williams from Game of Thrones as Lucy in science fiction thriller with a modern twist.

Mark Simonitis ’19 Staff Writer Over the past few years, Netflix has offered extremely high-quality entertainment such as “Beasts of No Nation,” “House of Cards” and more. Then again, it’s also given us “The Ridiculous Six.” “iBoy” lands somewhere in the middle of these two extremes, a movie that remains exceptionally average throughout its hour and a half run time. To be honest, I am not looking forward to writing this review, because there just isn’t a lot worth mentioning.

The film revolves around Tom (Bill Milner), a teenager who comes face to face with a gang of thugs breaking into the home of his friend Lucy (Maisie Williams). Things get

violent, and Tom is shot in the head while attempting to dial the police. After waking up from a coma, Tom discovers that the pieces of his phone embedded into his head have granted him the ability to interact with and manipulate electronics. With these powers, Tom seeks vengeance on the gang and eventually launches a war on the criminal underworld as the vigilante “iBoy.” Yes, Lucy brings up how stupid the name “iBoy” is.

Like most of the movie, the performances are acceptable, but not really anything to write home about. Milner plays Tom like basically any other slightly awkward teenage protagonist, but that’s almost to be expected given the story. Williams does all she can with what she has, but the bland script severely limits the talent that she has been able to show off in both

Game of Thrones and Doctor Who. The one performance that really seems like a standout is Rory Kinnear’s portrayal of a charmingly evil gangster, but that’s only because he is the highpoint of a fairly disappointing third act.

The plot itself is nothing you haven’t seen before, another revenge story against those that have wronged our main characters. Don’t get me wrong, I love a good revenge flick as much as the next guy. It’s just that not only has this story been told so many times, and many of those other stories are far better in their execution. It seems that “iBoy” is well aware of that as it tries to transition into a broader story, but that leads into problems of its own. The movie writes itself into the trap of having Tom learn fighting techniques and how to break into bank accounts by watching YouTube tutorials. This seems especially frustrating when you consider that there are plenty of ways to explain this, like chalking up his newfound hacking skills to his supernatural connection with electronics. As for the fighting, Tom’s powers seem to have no defined range, so why would he even need to be on location for his attacks when he could simply blow up cell phones from the comfort of his own home?

I have to admit, the concept of “iBoy” is fairly intriguing on its own. The movie makes use of some impressive visuals as Tom accesses and then uses cell phones as improvised microphones, spies on criminals through webcams and sees the electronic connections that permeate our society. Unfortunately, his power set begins to grow in a way that seems

cheesy and unwarranted given the (relatively) realistic setting of the movie.

Perhaps my biggest problem with the movie is how it never knows what kind of story it wants to be. It struggles between embracing the inherent goofiness of a superhero origin and going for the grounded “cape-punk” aesthetic that movies such as “Chronicle” helped bring into the mainstream consciousness. It’s particularly jarring to see Tom enact vengeance on a gang member by broadcasting a video of him in an … intimate moment and then later locking him in a burning car. One moment he’s trashing a gang boss’ apartment to an admittedly catchy soundtrack, and then bodies start being strung up from the roof tops. These shifts from mischievous pranks to acts of brutality give the film a sense of major tonal whiplash, especially as Tom treats it like no big deal. Similarly, there’s no believable justification for Tom’s later decision to take on the broader criminal underworld.

If I had paid to see this movie in theaters, I would have been angry. In fact, I am still a little disappointed that I spent an hour and a half of my life on this. Let me make one thing clear: “iBoy” is not a bad movie. It just happens to exist in what is probably a golden age of entertainment. This situation is compounded even further by the fact that it is a Netflix exclusive. This is the type of movie that you watch when you lie in bed flipping through channels because nothing else is on. You do not explicitly seek out an average movie on a platform with plenty of other superior choices.

Arts & Living 8

The Amherst Student • February 8, 2017

From Val to Converse: Amherst Students’ Push for Political Action

Photo courtesy of ebay.com

In 1966, months before the Valentine Hall sit-in that blocked a U.S. Army recruiter, many students walked out on Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara.

Sophie Currin ’17 Staff Writer Sit-ins and protests are not new to the College. Following the recent dialogue between students, faculty and the administration during the walk-out last week in solidarity with those affected by the Executive Order that targets nationals of Muslim-majority countries, I’ve decided to recover a past instance, about half a century ago, in which students also urged the administration to respond to politics. In the November 2, 1967 issue of The Student, Tim Hardy ’69 covered the Val sitin to block a U.S. Army recruiter during the Vietnam War: “Thirty-four Amherst, Smith and University of Massachusetts students blocked the entrance of a U.S. Army Officers’ Candidate School recruiter into Valentine Hall yesterday morning.

“The students, seventeen from Amherst, sat with arms linked in front of the north door of the downstairs lobby of Valentine annex from 9:15 to 10:35 a.m., making it impossible for the recruiter to move into the lobby and set up a display table.

“Assistant Dean of Students Robert Ward, who accompanied recruiter Lt. Richard Plante, confronted the protesting group at the door. When they denied access, he did not attempt to force entry, but did warn the group that they faced possible disciplinary actions.

He, however, did not elaborate on what those penalties might be...

“The demonstrators, Dean Ward, other

student bystanders and several professors engaged in discussion both outside and in the Valentine entrance for over an hour. Arguments were repeated over and over in normally conversational voices which occasionally became heated exchanges.

“The demonstrators and Ward debated the nature of the Army representative’s visit to campus, Hardy noted in his article, “the question [was] of the College’s complicity with the war effort by allowing the recruiter on campus…”

In the same issue, the Staff published both the demonstrators’ position and the administration’s response: “The Official Demonstrators’ Position Statement: To End Complicity We protest the presence here of job recruiters who wage the Vietnamese War. The College Administration says these recruiters can be here because, they say, any recruiter may come. But by approving their presence, the Administration is supporting the war effort by legitimizing recruitment of more personnel.

“The Administration has taken this action in the name of the entire institution in the name of all the students and faculty.

“However, many members of the college community feel the war is outrageous to legal, moral and other human sensibilities. Yet, even if some disagree with this position, all can agree that the Administration’s action is not representative of the Amherst College community.

“Having these recruiters use our facilities,

Photo courtesy of Alura Chung-Medhi ‘18

Student gather outside Converse Hall in response to Trump’s Muslim Ban.

regardless of its convenience, is complicity with their aims and actions in Vietnam. We call for neutrality, not a complicity in the war which implicates every member of the institution. Neutrality means the school should neither hinder these recruiters off campus nor allow them on campus.

“We call on all students, faculty and administrators of Amherst College to protest the presence of Army Recruiters Wednesday, Nov. 1 from 9 a.m. on, in Valentine Hall.

“The Official Administration Position Statement: As part of the total program of student counseling at Amherst College, permission is granted from time to time for campus visits by representatives from graduate and professional schools, businesses, industries, military services, government agencies and others.

These representatives become the guests of the College, though no endorsement of any such group is thereby implied. They have never failed to conduct their business in a dignified and professional manner. They, and Amherst College, expect that everyone will conduct himself in a similar manner.

“Amherst College recognizes the full range of opinion which exists among its students, faculty and staff, and the College has been specifically concerned that rights of all parties be protected and supported. Various student groups and individuals have traditionally been granted ‘equal time’ to express support or opposition to various organizations by equally peaceful means exhibits, displays, printed literature, etc. Our guests understand

and respect this evidence of free speech and dissent. For the guidance of all parties concerned, however, the right of free speech and dissent does not extend to obstruction of the legitimate activities of any visiting group. Neither should the exercise of this right by some be used to inhibit the free access of other students to any visiting individual or group.

“Amherst College assumes that all of its students, faculty and staff share this expectation and appreciate the importance of this policy in assuring that the rights of all members of the community shall be recognized and honored. The college further assumes that all members shall take appropriate steps through their own action to assure that these rights and privileges are not abused by others.”

A few weeks later, an official statement by the college was quoted again as a response to the repercussions of the sit-in, “The College will adopt whatever steps and whatever penalties may become necessary to preserve the freedom of private discourse, the freedom and orderliness of public discussion, and the rights of peaceful, non-coercive protest. It will employ the mildest measures sufficient to those ends…”

And here we are, almost fifty years later, after protests outside of Converse calling for greater representation of black students in 1970, after last year’s Amherst Uprising. Amherst students have consistently shown that they want the administration to do more than recognize politics but to engage in major global events in a way that reflects our values as a community.

Hitchcock Fellowship

The Department of Physical Education and Athletics invites applications for the Hitchcock Fellowship for the 2017-2018 academic year. The Hitchcock Fellowship is awarded to a graduating senior who wishes to pursue a career in the field of athletics, primarily teaching and coaching. The Hitchcock Fellow will be an Assistant Coach in at least two intercollegiate programs and may be assigned/elect other duties. Individuals interested in the position should send a letter of application and current resume no later than February 17, 2017 to:

Jen Hughes Assistant Athletic Director Women’s Soccer Coach jhughes@amherst.edu

The Amherst Student • February 8, 2017

Sports 9

Women’s Squash Claims Fifth Place at NESCAC Championships

Photo courtesy of Clarus Studios

Jenna Finkelstein ‘20 impressed this week, winning all three of her matches.

Nate Quigley ’19 Managing Sports Editor The Amherst women’s squash team opened postseason play this past weekend, taking on a trio of opponents at the NESCAC Championships. Playing host to the tournament, the purple and white bounced back from an early defeat to go 2-1 and claim fifth place out of the ten participating schools.

Amherst, seeded fifth for the tournament, commenced action on Saturday, when the team took on No. 4 seed Bates in quarterfinal action after both programs received a first round bye. Although the purple and white put up a spirited effort, with six of the nine courts requiring at least four sets, the Bobcats ultimately prevailed 7-2.

Amherst’s talented first-year class continued its remarkable success this season, with Caroline Conway ’20 and Jenna Finkelstein ’20 posting the team’s lone wins on courts five and seven, respectively. While Finkelstein needed only four sets to close out her Bates foe, Conway managed to one-up her fellow first-year, sweeping her opponent by a score of 12-10, 11-6, 11-9.

The closest the purple and white came to picking up a third win was on court five, where Mae Cromwell ’18 fell to the Bobcats’ Molly Brooks in a five set heartbreaker. After falling behind two sets to none, Cromwell battled back to knot the affair at 2-2, only to lose the fifth set 11-3.

With the loss, Amherst moved on to the consolation side of the bracket. As the high-

est ranked of the four teams in the consolation bracket, the purple and white were drawn with ninth-seeded Colby, whom they handily dispatched on Saturday afternoon.

The lower half of Amherst’s lineup led the way in their win over the Mules. Although Colby managed to capture the first two courts, the purple and white dominated their remaining opponents, taking every other court apart from eight.

Especially stellar in their efforts were Priya Sinha ’19, Haley McAtee ’18, Conway and Katy Sabina Correia ’20, all of whom managed to tally three set sweeps on the third through sixth courts, respectively.

The other two wins for Amherst came courtesy of Finkelstein, who notched her second consecutive four set victory, and Cromwell, who redeemed her earlier defeat to Bates by eking out a five set win on court nine, taking the match 11-9, 13-15, 12-14, 11-5, 11-7.

With the win over Colby, the purple and white guaranteed themselves a spot in the fifth place game on Sunday against No. 6 seed Bowdoin. The Polar Bears were one of the few NESCAC squads that Amherst had not faced during the regular season. The match proved to be an exciting one, and the purple and white needed a Herculean effort to narrowly overcome Bowdoin, 5-4.

The purple and white again faced a stiff test at the top of the lineup, losing each of the second through fifth courts. However, Amherst’s depth once again proved the difference in the match, with the team taking each court below number five in three sets, including Emma Crowe ’19 on the exhibition court.

Finkelstein continued her dominant tournament showing, tallying her third win of the weekend, while both Correia and Cromwell managed to win for the second time. The

fourth member of the remarkable first-year class, Jenni Brown, also put up a point for the purple and white on the eighth court.

Ultimately, however, the match came down to court one, where Kimberly Krayacich ’18 secured fifth place for Amherst with a closely contested 11-3, 12-10, 11-9 victory over the Polar Bears’ Sarah Nelson.

This weekend’s contests doubled as the penultimate matches of the season for the purple and white, and the team now awaits word of their postseason future. If selected, Amherst will next compete on the weekend of Feb. 2426 at the CSA Team Championships, hosted by Princeton University.

Photo courtesy of Clarus Studios

Rachel Ang ‘19 suffered three tough matches at NESCACs, losing twice in five sets and once in four sets.

Women’s Basketball Claims No. 1 Men’s Squash Goes 1-2, Places Ranking After Win Over No. 3 Tufts Sixth at Conference Tourney Talia Land ’20 Staff Writer The Amherst women’s basketball team had an exciting weekend of NESCAC play. The team first traveled to Bates on Friday, Feb. 3.

Against the Bobcats, senior Ali Doswell became the program’s overall leading scorer as well as the purple and white’s career leader in made three-pointers.

The purple and white jumped out to an early lead in an impressive first quarter, tallying 33 points in just ten minutes of play. Leading the way for Amherst in this offensive explosion was senior Medith Doswell, who notched 14 points and four assists in the frame.

With the help of 12 points each from Jackie Nagle ’18 and Maeve McNamara ’19, Amherst used this early cushion to cruise to an easy 7537 win.

Photo courtesy of Clarus Studios

Jenna Schumacher ‘18 tallied two points in 14 minutes against Bates.

The team then traveled to No. 1 Tufts on Saturday, Feb. 4. Amherst and the Jumbos both entered the game undefeated, with each team’s record standing at 21-0.

Last season’s two matches between these nationally ranked squads were split and each was decided by just one point, a trend that continued this game.

The opening quarter saw the Jumbos jump out to an early 12-3 lead, a margin that was extended to 18-8 at the end of the first.

In the second quarter, Amherst tightened up their defense. Tufts scored just three points in the quarter and shot 1-14 from the floor.

This stingy defense helped the purple and white reduce the deficit to three; they entered the half trailing 21-18.

In the third, four players from Amherst contributed two points each, leaving the purple and white with a 30-26 deficit going into the final quarter of play.

Trailing 35-31 late in the fourth, two Amherst players hit free throws to make it 35-33.

Jamie Renner ’17 came up clutch with a steal during Tufts’ next possession and hit Hannah Hackley ’18 for a layup. In the process, Hackley was fouled and converted the free throw to make it 36-35 Amherst with just 1:18 on the clock.

With less than one minute to play, both teams had scoreless possessions before Renner sealed the win for Amherst by forcing a turnover with just one second left on the clock.

With this victory, Amherst gave Tufts their first loss, while the purple and white stay undefeated, boasting a 22-0 record with just two regular season games left to play.

Additionally, Amherst now holds the No. 1 ranking in both the country and the conference. Amherst plays Middlebury at home on Friday, Feb. 10, at 7 p.m., before hosting Hamilton the following day, Feb. 11, at 3 p.m. in what will be the purple and white’s senior game.

Julia Turner ’19 Managing Sports Editor The Amherst men’s squash team hosted one of the most competitive conference championship tournament in the country this weekend Feb. 3-5. With six out of the 11 total teams ranked in the top 25, No. 24 purple and white had their work cut out for them.

The sixth-seeded Amherst team took the first match of the tournament handily, sweeping eleventh-seeded Connecticut College. The purple and white posted an impressive five sweeps on courts two, three, five, seven and eight. Standout sophomore Harith Khawaja took his set in comeback fashion after surrendering the first two sets to his opponent. Khawaja went on to win the final three sets by the skin of his teeth, pulling out 11-9 wins to secure the sweep for his team.

Beyond an exciting win by the host team, the first day of competition at the Davenport Squash Courts saw eighth-seeded Wesleyan defeat nineseed Tufts, and No. 7 Bowdoin take down the tenth-seeded Continentals of Hamilton. Both match-ups were won in 7-2 victories.

As Friday competition gave-way to Saturday, a seemingly predictable series of events transpired as the top four seeds won their matches to advance to the semifinals later that day. Three of those matches were sweeps, with Middlebury defeating Colby, top-ranked Trinity handling Wesleyan with ease and Bates taking down Bowdoin.

The perennial rivals Amherst and Williams were the only duo that gave the crowd suspenseful squash in the quarterfinal round, with the Ephs ultimately capturing the win from under the purple and white.

Although courts eight and nine saw five-set battles between the opponents, first-years Mitch Ford and Mateen Mills ultimately came up short for the purple and white. Amherst’s only two victories against Williams came from the third and seventh courts, as David Merkel ’19 and Chris Zimmerman ’20 defeated their opponents in

three and four sets, respectively. Brothers Carl and John Shuck of Williams took down purple and white senior captains Cameron Bahdori and Darian Ehsani on courts four and five, while the Ephs swept Amherst on courts one, two, and six.

The Ephs would go on to be edged by Bates in the semifinal round later that day. The first and second seeded Trinity and Bates faced off in the title match, but Trinity continued to prove their dominance as the No. 2 team in North America, taking down the Bobcats 8-1. The purple and white competed in two matchups in the consolation round of the tournament, defeating Bowdoin 6-3 and then losing the next day to the Mules of Colby.

Amherst still has plenty of squash to play, however, as they host No. 7 St. Lawrence and No. 21 MIT at home this weekend and try to improve their national ranking. The purple and white will face St. Lawrence at 7 p.m. on Friday, Feb. 10 and MIT the next afternoon at 1 p.m.

Photo courtesy of Clarus Studios

Playing on the fourth court, Cameron Bahadori ‘18 went 1-2 this weekend.

10

Sports

The Amherst Student • February 8, 2017

Men’s Hockey Winless Streak Hits Four After Two NESCAC Defeats Scout Boynton ’20 Staff Writer After a successful January that included eight wins and two ties, the Amherst men’s ice hockey team suffered two in-conference losses to start the month of February. These defeats came at the hands of Colby and Bowdoin, two foes that the purple and white had previously bested at home.

On Friday, Feb. 3, Amherst travelled to Bowdoin in hopes of recreating their earlier 7-3 dismantling of the Polar Bears, one of the team’s most impressive offensive showings of the season.

However, the purple and white could not match their earlier success, and the first period ended scoreless. Eight seconds into the second, Bowdoin’s Cody Todesco then opened up the scoring.

Pouncing on a puck in the slot after a string of shots blocked by Amherst, Todesco fired home over the pad of purple and white goalie Connor Girard ’18.

Captain Austin Ho ’17 was able to respond before the horn blew on the second, capitalizing on a pass by Max Roche ’19 to knot the game at one going into the locker room. With the next tally likely to be vital, each team scrapped for the edge, with the Polar Bears ultimately com-

ing up with the game-winning goal with 12:55 left to play. Bowdoin then extended their lead to 3-1 with an insurance goal through Todesco, and Amherst could not come back.

The next day, the purple and white returned to the ice, this time in Waterville to face a Colby team they had beaten 3-2 almost exactly one month prior. Unfortunately, Colby emerged victorious in the game 5-2, thanks to stellar third period play. The Mules took the lead twice in the first period, but Amherst fought back both times with goals from Joey Lupo ’20 and David White ’18. White’s goal came on an Amherst power play with only 13 seconds left in the stanza.

The purple and white then played a sloppy second period, taking four penalties, but successfully killed off each Colby power play, including a 5-on-3. The two teams ended the period with the score still knotted at 2-2. The Mules emerged from the second intermission energized, scoring three goals in the final period. Amherst’s lack of discipline ultimately cost them, with two of Colby’s third period goals coming on the power play.

The purple and white look to get its season back on track this Friday, Feb. 10, when it travels to Tufts to take on the Bantams, a team Amherst had dominated 4-1 earlier this year.

ATHLETE SPOTLIGHT

Johnny McCarthy ’18 Favorite Team Memory: Beating Tufts in their gym last year to go to the Final Four Favorite Pro Athlete: Larry Bird Dream Job: General Manager of an NBA team Pet Peeve: When people who have lost their voice try to talk Favorite Vacation Spot: Cape Cod Something on Your Bucket List: Watch an NFL game from the sideline Guilty Pleasure: Watching The Office Favorite Food: Chipotle burrito bowl Favorite Thing About Amherst: Being a part of the Amherst Basketball program How He Earned It: McCarthy added his name to Amherst basketball lore this weekend, becoming just the 29th player in school history to reach the 1,000-point mark in the team’s win against Bates. Nor was McCarthy’s output limited to scoring this weekend, as he notched consecutive double-doubles against the Bobcats and the Jumbos. With an average of 15.5 points and 13.5 boards in the contests, McCarthy collected conference player of the week honors for the first time in his collegiate career.

Ali Doswell ’17 Favorite Team Memory: Beating Tufts this year Favorite Pro Athlete: Gronk Dream Job: Ben & Jerry’s flavor taster Pet Peeve: When Meredith forgets her credit card Favorite Vacation Spot: My river house Something on Your Bucket List: Pet a tiger in Thailand Guilty Pleasure: Going to Insomnia by myself Favorite Food: Skillet cookie Favorite Thing About Amherst: Jenkins How She Earned It: Doswell cemented her case as one of the best players in the program’s history this past weekend, becoming both Amherst’s all-time leading scorer and taking the record for most made threes against Bates. She then went on to dazzle in the purple and white’s win over No. 1 Tufts, scoring 17 points, nearly half of Amherst’s total of 36. For her remarkable efforts over the weekend, Doswell also garnered NESCAC player of the week honors for the first time this season.

Women’s Hockey Dominates Out-OfConference Foe in Light Week of Action Mary Grace Cronin ’18 Staff Writer

Photo courtesy of Clarus Studios

Noah Gilreath ‘20 was one of the few bright spots for Amherst this weekend, tallying two assists and ending up with an even plus-minus.

Strong Individual Showings Highlight Non-Scoring Meet for Women’s Track Laura Greer ’20 Staff Writer The beginning of February saw the Amherst women’s track and field team extend what has been a strong winter showing. The team competed in non-scoring competition this weekend at the Wesleyan University Invitational. The purple and white had a strong showing with multiple first place finishes.

Extending her win streak to four, senior Kiana Herold won first place in the high jump with a leap of 1.62 meters. First-year Kaitlyn Siegel placed third in the event with a 1.57-meter jump. Abbey Asare-Bediako ’18 also secured the top spot for Amherst in the triple jump with a leap of 11.36 meters.

In her first season with Amherst women’s track and field, sophomore Rubii Tamen sprinted to a seventh place finish in the 200-meter dash with a time of 27.58 seconds, while Herold claimed ninth place in a time of 28.20 seconds.

Competing in the 400-meter dash, Julia Asin ’19 placed seventh with a time of 1:02.15 minutes. Junior Danielle Griffin secured second place in the 600-meter run with a time of 1:44.93.

Amherst continued to impress in the middistance events. Sylvia Frank ’20 finished fifth

in the 800-meter run with a time of 2:28.15.

The purple and white fared particularly well in the 1,000-meter run. Five Amherst runners placed in the top ten, with four finishing in the top five. Leonie Rauls ’18 won the event with a time of 3:07.26, while Kristin Ratliff ’20, Cat Lowdon ’17, Lela Walter ’19 and Adele Loomis ’18 finished third, fourth, fifth and tenth, respectively.

Amherst’s mid-distance prowess continued in the one-mile run, with the team capturing the first, third and fifth place spots. Senior Savanna Gornisiewicz won the one-mile run in a time of 5:16.00, while Katherine Treanor ’20 and Sophie Currin ’17 secured third and fifth places with times of 5:17.31 and 5:36.32, respectively.

First-year Lizzie Kobelski finished sixth in the 60-meter hurdles with a time of 9.85 seconds.

Amherst rounded out their strong showing at the meet with Ratliff, Frank, Rauls and Walter running into first place in the 4x800 relay with a time of 9:53.86.

The women will return to competition in the Valentine Invitational on Friday, Feb. 10 at Boston University. This will be the purple and white’s final meet before regional playoff action begins at the NCAA Division III New England meet in two weeks.

The Amherst women’s ice hockey team claimed a strong 4-0 win this past Wednesday, Feb. 1 against Salem State, and had the rest of the weekend off from play.

The purple and white came out strong on Wednesday, scoring three goals in the first period. Eight minutes into the game, Jocelyn Hunyadi ’19 took a pass from Anne Malloy ’20 and found the top corner of the goal to put Amherst up 1-0.

Just two minutes later, Molly Connolly ’17 one-timed another pass from Malloy to score her first goal of the season. The purple and white continued to dominate possession and with 1:31 remaining in the first period, Katelyn Pantera ’19 scored Amherst’s third goal off of a rebound courtesy of Caitlyn Ryan ’17. The second period was scoreless, although Amherst outshot Salem State 19-1.

Connolly found the back of the net again in the third period on an Amherst power play.

Sarah Melanson ’20 got the assist for her first collegiate point.

Caroline Booraem ’20 made her first collegiate start in goal, shutting out the Vikings with 12 saves on the game. The purple and white outshot Salem State 54-12.

The purple and white took the ice again on Tuesday, Feb. 7 on the road against NESCAC rival Trinity.

After two scoreless periods that saw Amherst dominate offensively, outshooting the Bantams by nearly double, Pantera found the back of the net with nine minutes left to play.

This goal opened the floodgates for the purple and white, as Brenna Sullivan ’18 scored three minutes later on an assist from Malloy. Amherst held off the Trinity offense through the final minutes of the game with two saved goals from Sabrina Dobbins ’18. With this win, the Amherst women move to 10-5-4 on the season and 5-3-4 in conference play.

The purple and white will return to the ice on Feb. 10-11, when Amherst will play two games away at NESCAC foes Hamilton.

Photo courtesy of Clarus Studios

Sophomore Miriam Eickhoff is part of an Amherst defense that has allowed only 28 goals in 19 games, good for an average of just 1.5 per game.

The Amherst Student • February 8, 2017

Sports

Men’s Track Clocks DIII New England Qualifying Times at Tufts Invitational

11

Forest’s Fast Take Forest Sisk ’17 Columnist Super Bowl LI will go down in history as one of the most exciting sporting affairs ever played. Forest is here to break down the Patriots’ historic comeback and the implications of ring number five for Brady, Belichick and company.

Photo courtesy of Clarus Studios

Cosmo Brossy ‘19 qualified for postseason action in the 5,000-meter run.

Veronica Rocco ’19 Staff Writer The men’s track and field team made the trip to Medford on Saturday, Feb. 4 to compete at the Tufts Cupid Challenge, hosted by NESCAC rival Tufts. The purple and white enjoyed a successful day, as many athletes secured qualifying standards for the New England DIII Championships, which will be held at Tufts in two weeks.

The meet began with the first section of the men’s 5,000-meter run, where Tucker Meijer ’19 placed fifth in a personal best time of 15:25 with teammate Justin Barry ’18 just a step behind him, also recording a personal best time of 15:25. With their performances, both qualified for the New England DIII Championships.

Theo Bates ’20 and Maxim Doiron ’19 both qualified for the 60-meter hurdles final for the second straight week, running times of 8.71 and 8.83 seconds, respectively. In the 60-meter dash, first-years Elijah Ngbokoli and Biafra Okoronkwo qualified for the finals, placing fourth and seventh, respectively. With a time of 7.17 seconds, Ngbokoli qualified for the New England DIII Championships.

Cosmo Brossy ’19 ran in the second and faster section of the men’s 5,000-meter run, finishing seventh in a competitive heat. Brossy ran a time of 15:05, which qualified him for the New England Division III Championships as well as Open New Englands. Brossy was only three seconds off his personal best time of 15:02, which he ran at the conclusion of his spring track season in 2016, indicating his stellar form going into the postseason.

Kristian Sogaard ’19 continued his strong season by placing second in the mile with a personal best time of 4:17. With this excellent run, he qualified for the New England DIII Championships as well as Open New Englands to join Brossy.

Juniors David Ingraham and Harrison Haigood placed fourth and fifth, respectively, in the 400-meter dash. Ingraham set a seasonal best with a time of 52.24 seconds and Haigood set a personal best with a time of 52.31 seconds.

The sophomore middle-distance duo of Vernon Espinoza and Ermias Kebede placed second and fifth in the 600-meter event, running times

of 1:23 and 1:25, respectively. While Open New England meet does not have the 600 meters as an event, Espinoza’s performance qualifies him for the 500-meter run at Open New Englands.

The purple and white first-years led the 1,000-meter run, as Ralph Skinner, Spencer Ferguson-Dryden and Estevan Velez placed fourth, fifth and eighth, respectively. Skinner and Ferguson-Dryden ran times of 2:32 and 2:33, respectively, qualifying both for the New England DIII Championships.

In the 200-meter dash, Ngbokoli placed fourth in a time of 23.27 seconds, his second qualifying performance for the New England DIII Championships of the day.

Senior Kevin Connors won the 3,000-meter run in a time of 8:34, continuing his successful indoor season. With his victory, Connors qualified for both the New England DIII Championships and Open New Englands.

The purple and white dominated the 4x400 and 4x800 meet-concluding relays. The 4x400meter relay, composed of Kebede, Espinoza, Ingraham and Jay Drain ’18, won with a time of 3:31. The Amherst middle-distance runners then returned for the 4x800-meter relay, a historically successful relay for the purple and white. Firstyears Skinner and Ferguson-Dryden ran the first two legs of the relay, and Connors and Sogaard extended the lead the first-years created to win the event in a time of 8:01 over the Jumbos of Tufts.

In the field events, Bates continued his successful day and long jumped 5.93 meters to place first in his flight and seventh overall. Sam Amaka ’19 had a stellar day in the throws, placing fourth in the shot put and third in the weight throw with a throw of 15.46 meters, qualifying him for the New England DIII Championships.

“It’s great seeing people step up in their respective events as we get closer to championship season,” Ermias Kebede ’19 said.

Next Saturday, Feb. 10, the purple and white will travel to Boston University to compete at the David Hemery Valentine Invitational, their last regular season meet of the season. The meet presents a great opportunity for the purple and white to secure qualifying marks to compete in postseason competitions and set personal best times.

Photo courtesy of Clarus Studios

Junior Jay Drain was part of the purple and white’s success in the 400-meter race, finishing tenth overall with a time of 53.40 seconds.

This past year of sports has truly been a blessing. Three out of the four major sports saw fireworks in their respective championship games.

First, the Cleveland Cavaliers came back from a three games to one deficit to beat the winningest single team in NBA history. Come autumn, the Chicago Cubs pulled off the same comeback to win their first World Series since 1908, ending the longest championship drought in MLB history.

Then, this past Sunday, the New England Patriots came out of a 25-point hole to mark the biggest comeback in the game’s history as well as the first overtime Super Bowl matchup. That’s a whole lot of history to be written in one year of sports. If the Penguins were to have made their Stanley Cup series more dramatic, then we could have the conversation arguing this year to be the best year in sporting history – alas, we’ll take it.

I would like to describe this game as a tale of two halves, but the cliché doesn’t quite fit the bill for Super Bowl LI. In fact, the largest lead of the game was found as the third quarter ran towards the fourth. Thanks to a Patriots extra point try that boinked off the upright in the third quarter, the Falcons’ 18-point lead going into halftime extended to 19 as the fourth quarter rolled around.

The first half saw the Falcons running the scoreboard up on the Patriots. New England was only able to rebut the three unanswered Atlanta touchdowns with a field goal as the first half dwindled to triple zero. However, Bill Belichick and the rest of the Patriots coaching staff must’ve seen the stat sheet on the way into the locker room for the halftime break and scratched their furrowed brows. At the break, the Patriots led the Falcons in total yards (215–189) and first downs (10–7), which usually serves as a barometer for which team should be winning the game.

So where did this massive lead come from?

Two pivotal plays. The first quarter started with the teams trading punts, likely feeling each other out with some Super Bowl jitters mixed in. On their third possession, the Patriots offense began to put together a drive that looked to have a score waiting at its end. Just as they entered field goal range, LeGarrette Blount coughed up a costly fumble. With wind in their sails, the Falcons stormed down the field for 71 yards in five plays to score the first points of the game on a Devonta Freeman touchdown run. The second play was more abrupt.

Once again the Patriots drove down the field, this time into the red zone. New England fans’ hearts sank and Atlanta fans’ arms rose when Falcons cornerback Robert Alford ran an interception 82 yards to the house as halftime approached. This play proved doubly devastating for TB12 and company because it took away a sure score and added a full touchdown in the other direction — a full ten or fourteen point swing in a single play. These two plays dictated the tide of the first half. After the game, Julian Edelman said, “We turned the ball over twice near the red area and that’s the formula to lose against a team like [the Falcons].” He and the Patriots knew that if these mistakes were to be nixed from the game, the score would treat them more favorably.

Hollywood has taught us that a comeback of this size and magnitude can only come about as a result of a dramatic speech or revelation. In a postgame interview, Martellus Bennett answered a classic question regarding the late turnaround after the halftime break with a less-than-dramatic answer: “The only thing said at halftime was just adjustments. There was nobody giving out team speeches.” That’s exactly why Hollywood isn’t real.

Real success isn’t achieved through grandiose miracles, but rather through a systematically prepared approach towards a goal. That methodology, applied to a talent, is how a franchise wins five Super Bowls in 15 seasons. However, if you must have your cinematic script written in reality, there was one player who reportedly rallied the troops out of the 25-point deficit. Backup safety Duron Harmon went from teammate to teammate, especially those

on the defensive side of the ball, and told them, “This is going to be the best comeback of all time!”

Maybe it was Harmon’s motivation, maybe it was Matt Patricia’s play calling, but the Falcons didn’t score for the last 20 minutes of the game.

This game was more complicated than an outright Falcons “choke-job,” but there were definitely moments where they could have put the game to bed. Looking at a third-and-one from their own 25-yard line, the Falcons elected to throw the ball.

The Patriots forced Matt Ryan into a turnover when a strong pass rush strip sacked the Falcons QB and gave the Patriots the ball deep in Falcons territory. This moment marked the first time Pats nation had uttered a word in almost two hours.

However, they were still murmurs growing in the distance. The second moment where Dan Quinn’s decision making and, even more so, the players’ performance came into question happened at the end of a drive that put the Falcons within scoring range. Because of a sack and a holding penalty, the Falcons moved back from the New England 23yard line all the way to the New England 46. Eerie calls from Super Bowl XLIX where the Seattle Seahawks elected to pass instead of run for the gamewinning touchdown echoed around the Super Bowl arena once again. In both cases, the Patriots capitalized and were crowned world champs.

Yes, those were bad decisions, but the capitulation that we all watched ran past coaching decisions. It’s hard for us viewers to pick up on this through a TV screen, but fatigue played a huge role in how this game unfolded. In the first half, the Falcons defensive front demolished the Patriots offensive line. The script totally flipped in the second half due in large part to two factors. For one, the Patriots dominated in time of possession, forcing the rampant Falcons defense to absorb 93 plays worth against the Falcons’ 46 offensive plays.

The Patriots controlled the ball for two-thirds of the game and that’s a tough ask for the high-200 to 300-plus pound fellas who have to go balls to the wall to reach Brady on every play.

If I were to be able to separate my prejudices and look at the Patriots objectively, I’d be the first.

Anyone who watches football names either their dog or their punching bag Tom Brady. There’s no in-between. A civil war of different opinions has dominated the narrative of the NFL because the Patriots have been in the Super Bowl conversation every year. This puts them in the spotlight to be either ridiculed or praised, so they are both. Many call the Patriots cheaters as a result of “spygate” and “deflategate.” Everyone, regardless of position on the pro-Pats to anti-Pats spectrum, would agree these scandals were blown out of proportion, but they did break the rules. I would argue that this is not the source, but rather, a symptom of Patriot outrage. People hate the Patriots because they win a lot, and they win by a lot. Belichick and the Patriots have been known to run the score up against teams in the past and play with an air of arrogance. It’s the ‘we’re better than you and we’re going to make you know it’ attitude that prevents millions of football fans from liking the Patriots.

When that attitude combines with a decade and a half of dominance, people sour on the achievement at hand.

So now what? How do we digest the amount of success this team has arrived at? With their victory on Sunday, Tom Brady and Bill Belichick surpassed their historic rivals Joe Montana and Chuck Knoll by winning their fifth ring. As I mentioned, the Patriots are not well liked and the Brady-Belichick duo are at the center of this scorn.

With that in mind, it’s hard to not call them the best head coach/quarterback combo in the history of the sport. It is also difficult to not call them the greatest individual of each other as well. A riveting year of sports seems to have been capped off by another historic milestone and in exciting fashion.

The final question is, does Brady get his fifth fitted for his thumb or does he embark on the other hand?

Sports

Photo courtesy of David Le ‘15

Michael Riopel ‘18 provided a much-needed offensive spark off the bench, contributing a team-high 19 points in the purple and white’s win over No. 1 Tufts.

Men’s Basketball Defeats Bates, Tufts Before Losing to Wesleyan in OT Thriller Delancey King ’18 Staff Writer Amherst men’s basketball has reestablished themselves as one of the best teams in the nation after a successful weekend, in LeFrak gymnasium.

With two conference wins against Bates and Tufts this weekend followed by a tough loss to Wesleyan, the purple and white improve to a NESCAC record of 6-3 and an overall record of 16-5. Saturday’s win against Tufts also marks Amherst’s 32nd straight win at home.

Amherst started off the weekend with a 74-65 win over Bates on Friday, Feb. 3 at home. It was a slow start for the purple and white, and they trailed the last-place Bobcats 38-33 at halftime.

Shooting a mere 11.1% from beyond the arc, the normally efficient Amherst offense seemed unable to hit its stride. It was their defensive effort, led by a game-high 13 boards from Johnny McCarthy ’18, that kept the purple and white in the game. Main-

taining their composure, Amherst came out hard in the second half and completely turned things around. Sparked by two clutch threes from Michael Riopel ’18, the purple and white went off for 41 points to secure the win. Jayde Dawson ’18 scored 19 of his team-leading 27 points in the second half, and McCarthy added 13 in the victory. With that contribution, McCarthy hit the 1,000-point milestone, becoming only the 29th player in program history to do so.

Saturday’s 84-71 win over Tufts was crucial for the purple and white. The Jumbos came into the game as the top team in the NESCAC, providing Amherst with the perfect opportunity to reassert themselves as number one in the conference. League rivalries aside, there was also a sibling rivalry between senior captain Jeff Racy and his younger brother Patrick, who is a first-year center for the Jumbos.

Riopel led the charge, shooting 5-for-7 from three-point range on his way to a game-high 19 points. Not far behind him was McCarthy with 18

Photo courtesy of David Le ‘15

GAME SCHE DULE

points and Dawson with 14 points. Facilitating the purple and white’s offense was playmaker Reid Berman ’17, who dished out eight assists in the winning effort.

In addition to their huge win, the purple and white celebrated seniors Berman, Racy, Jacob Nabatoff, Eric Conklin, Brady Holding, David George and Diego Magana for their contributions to the program over the past four years.

The plaudits continued to flow for Amherst after the successful weekend, with McCarthy being named NESCAC player of the week for his allaround dominance against both Tufts and Bates.

Aside from scoring his 1,000th point on Friday, McCarthy averaged 15.5 points and 13.5 rebounds in the purple and white’s wins.

The purple and white continued this busy stretch of the season with a home matchup against Wesleyan on Tuesday evening. The first half proved to be a tightly-contested affair, with the purple and white and the Cardinals alternating mini-runs. Although

Photo courtesy of David Le ‘15

Photo courtesy of David Le ‘15

SAT

WED FRI Women’s Squash Women’s Swim @ Mount Holyoke, 6 and Dive p.m.

NESCAC Championships @ Bowdoin, 10 a.m.

Amherst only managed to shoot 37% from the field, the team managed to keep the score close, going into the half only down 30-29.

Amherst’s shooting woes continued as the Cardinals started the second half on a 13-0 run, pushing their lead to 16 before Amherst battled back to tie the affair at 53-53 with five minutes left. After a back and forth next few minutes, Dawson gave Amherst its first lead of the second half with a clutch free throw in the last minute, before Wesleyan hit an off-balance game-tying three with no time left on the clock.

Overtime saw a continuation of the tight end to the second half, with neither team able to pull away. However, an inability to hit clutch free throws damned the purple and white to a 73-72 loss.

Amherst returns to action on Friday, Feb. 10, when they will travel to Vermont to face NESCAC rival Middlebury. The purple and white will play their final game of the regular season the next day, when they face the Hamilton Continentals on the road.

Women’s Ice Hockey @ Hamilton, 7 p.m.

Women’s Basketball vs. Middlebury, 7 p.m.

Men’s Ice Hockey

Men’s Squash vs. St. Lawrence, 7 p.m.

@ Tufts, 7 p.m.

Women’s Track and Field Men’s Basketball Valentine Invitational @ @ Middlebury, 7 p.m.

BU, 2 p.m.

Women’s Squash vs. St. Lawrence, 7 p.m.

Women’s Swim and Dive NESCAC Championships @ Bowdoin, 10 a.m.

Men’s Squash vs. MIT, 1 p.m.

Men’s Ice Hockey

Women’s Ice Hockey @ Hamilton, 3 p.m.

Women’s Basketball vs. Hamilton, 3 p.m.

Women’s Track and Field Men’s Basketball Valentine Invitational @ @ Hamilton, 3 p.m.

BU, TBD

@ Conn. College, 3 p.m.