September 26, 2017

Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Tuesday September 26, 2017 vol. CXLI no. 73

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } CAMPUS

::

MARCIA BROWN :: HEAD NEWS EDITOR

Peter Baker, Chief White House Correspondent, The New York Times; author, “Obama: The Call of History”

Baker talks Obama, White House head news editor

“He’s a smart guy, and he knows he’s a smart guy,” said journalist Peter Baker about former President Barack Obama in a talk at the Woodrow Wilson School on Monday, Sept. 25.

Baker, Chief White House Correspondent for The New York Times, came out with a new book in June, “Obama: The Call of History.” Baker covered the Obama administration extensively, but explained that even within this relationship, Obama was somewhat of an enigma – “to us, and even to himself.”

Many Americans saw Obama as a new John F. Kennedy – young, hip, and cool, Baker said. However, as the Obama administration’s honeymoon

period wound down, the media likewise shifted its tone, comparing Obama to Lyndon Johnson instead. For his drone strikes, Obama was compared to George W. Bush; for his handling of Syria, to Jimmy Carter.

According to Baker, Obama said the only president he hasn’t been compared to in the media is Franklin Pierce, which, Baker added, is probably a good thing, since Pierce was a drunk.

Baker emphasized that, even now, no one has been able to figure out exactly who Barack Obama is. Indeed, that legacy is what Baker’s book attempts to explore.

In the course of his work as a White House correspondent, Baker explained that he has been privy to countless authentic moments with now-former

CAMPUS

staff writer

As one of the most prominent environmental problems facing humanity, climate change has been the basis of debate among scientific researchers, professors, and politicians, Professor Emeritus of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Robert Socolow said.

On Monday, a panel of five University professors, accompanied by a crowd of undergraduates, graduates, and professors from the University, as well as other universities, assembled to shed light on the social and physical effects of climate change and the concept of a “tipping point.”

“While the physical effects of climate change have been heavily explored, a less commonly understood concept is its influence on culture and economics,” professor Stephen Pacala of the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology said. “In many instances, the social effects are of greater importance than the physical changes.”

According to Pacala, the “tipping point” in climate change is the theoretical instance at which sudden and drastic changes to the Earth’s ecological system dramatically impact the world. Since the

In Opinion

Baker went on to explain that President Obama was unusual in many more ways. Most notably, Baker said that Obama was vulnerable and open in ways other presidents had never, or only rarely, been before.

For example, after the Sandy Hook shooting, Obama was infamous for allowing tears to stream down his face on live television – imitating the way millions of Americans also felt.

“He [Obama] literally stopped speaking for eight – ten – 12 seconds, and there was complete silence,” Baker said.

“While watching a president, having complete silence – that’s very rare.”

“It’s a real side of him that we often missed,” Baker continued.

According to Baker, Obama was not just difficult to un-

U . A F FA I R S

Climate change panel takes on tipping points

By Victor Hua

presidents. According to Baker, Obama was never as open as some of his predecessors had been.

Whereas former President Bill Clinton probably could have stayed on the rope line for hours, Baker said, and still come away rejuvenated, Obama would find that energy in other ways. Instead, Obama was said to watch ESPN in the evenings while reading briefings, and that he would only allow himself seven almonds, Baker said.

After this almond anecdote was made public, Obama denied that it was exactly seven – though that had been a joke between his wife Michelle Obama ’85 and their White House chef.

“The fact that he [Obama] felt the need to publicly deny something like that tells you a lot about the guy,” Baker said.

rhetoric associated with a tipping point in climate change often frames the irreversibility of global damage as a distant problem, the general public tends to take less action, Pacala explained.

Melissa Lane, Class of 1943 Professor of Politics and Director of the University Center for Human Values, agreed with Pacala.

“The confidence trap caused by the notion of tipping points causes many to perceive that we have more time than we really do to act upon climate change,” Lane said.

Lane noted that individuals are also likely to believe their own contributions to the climate problem are negligible, analogous to voters’ perceptions on their impact in elections. Contrary to this instinct, she stressed that it it indeed beneficial for citizens to take initiative in the face of possible failure rather than attempt nothing to stem planetary damage.

Marc Fleurbaey, the Robert E. Kuenne Professor in Economics and Humanistic Studies, seemed to disagree.

Introducing practicality and economics into the discussion, Fleurbaey discussed the concept of ambiguity aversion, in which a known risk is faSee CLIMATE page 2

New columnist Madeleine Marr decries free food and Columnist Ryan Born discusses free speech. PAGE 4

derstand as a person but as a politician – as he had a lot less political experience than many of his predecessors. In jest, Baker noted that, to conservatives, Obama was “the second coming of Karl Marx or Bernie Sanders” coming to “take over health care and taxing us too much and bringing in too much regulation.”

Baker continued by noting that, even to his supporters, Obama was not quite what their ambitious hopes for him had conceived during his meteoric rise in the 2008 election. Because he had promised so much – saving the climate, uniting the country and other major promises for a politician to make – people on the left found Obama’s compromises See BAKER page 2

U . A F FA I R S

Lewis Center opens to CPUC U. with four-day festival discusses prison divestment

By Audrey Spensley senior writer

base at the former Lewis Center on 185 Nassau Street and the Music Department will still remain in the Woolworth Center for Musical Studies, the two will also have a presence in the new Lewis Center for the Arts complex by way of an art gallery and new rehearsal spaces, respectively.

“It’s a rare opportunity to have a project to work on that is both transformative on a kind of campus level and also transformative for the departments and programs housed within,” said Noah Yaffe, who has worked on the project with Steven Holl Architects since 2007.

Yaffe noted three fundamental goals that guided the construction of the buildings: to maximize

Divestment from private prisons and upcoming programming by campus resource centers were the two main topics discussed at the first Council of the Princeton University Community meeting of the 2017-2018 academic year this Monday.

The meeting began with a brief question-and-answer period moderated by University President Christopher Eisgruber ‘83. To kick off this discussion stream, a student from Puerto Rico asked how Counseling and Psychological Services and other campus resources have undertaken outreach to students impacted by Hurricane Maria and other recent natural disasters.

Vice President for Campus Life W. Rochelle Calhoun explained that the Office of the Dean of Undergraduate Students [ODUS] coordinates through the DSLs [Directors of Student Life] in all of the

See LCA page 3

See CPUC page 3

PHOTO COURTESY OF PRINCETON.EDU

New Lewis Center on Alexander St.

By Marcia Brown head news writer

Following four years of construction, the new Lewis Center for the Arts complex will celebrate its grand opening in a four-day festival from Oct. 5-8. The building has already been put to use for University activities and classes, and representatives from the Lewis Center for the Arts and the Department of Music, as well as architects involved in the project, gave an introductory tour of the new facilities on Sept. 25.

The new building complex will primarily house the Programs in Theatre and Dance, the Princeton Atelier, administrative offices, and rehearsal spaces for the Music Department. While the Program in Visual Arts will maintain its

Today on Campus

8 p.m.: Seuls en Séine 2017 presents Unwanted Address: 185 Nassau Street

WEATHER

By Marcia Brown

HIGH

83˚

LOW

66˚

Partly Cloudy chance of rain:

10 percent

page 2

The Daily Princetonian

Tuesday September 26, 2017

Global tipping points are imminent, panel CLIMATE Continued from page 1

.............

vored over unknown risks. He extended this economic theory into the context of climate change.

“Almost all tipping points have deep uncertainty, meaning their consequences and probability distributions vary,” Fleurbaey said. “We should focus our efforts onto affairs that we’re certain about rather than concerning ourselves with unpredictable events.”

Pivoting from Fleurbaey’s point, Robert Nixon, professor of English and Thomas A. and Currie C. Barron Family Professor in Humanities and the Environment, discussed the cultural impact of climate change. He explained that common phrases, referred to as “metaphoric meltdowns,” have been the result of society’s acknowledgement of climate change. Such phrases include “skating on thin ice” and “the tip of the iceberg.”

The effect of climate change extends to narratives and the literary world as well, according to Nixon.

“Speculative nonfiction of recent years, such as ‘The World Without Us’ by Alan Weisman, is the product of a growing concern of our planet’s future,” Nixon said.

Charles Copeland ‘19, a Geosciences major and attendee at the lecture, was particularly pleased with the discussion panel.

“I love [Climate Futures Initiative] events even though they’re not primarily targeted towards undergraduates because I always learn a lot from them,” Copeland said. “It’s great to learn from interdisciplinary perspectives, and there’s a lot of research and thought at Princeton that goes on outside of the classroom.”

Monday’s lecture even attracted professors from other universities, such as professor Rachael Shwom of the Department of Human Ecology at Rutgers University.

“It [the panel’s content] was very innovative thinking from a range of disciplines on the implications of using tipping points as a way to think about our climate system,” Shwom said. Shwom explained that she also works in the field of climate change, specifically in integrating tipping points in modeling economic and social damages.

Rather than think of climate change as a tipping point in the near future, Pacala concluded, society should begin to view it as a current crisis.

The panel took place on Monday, September 25, at 4:30 p.m. in the Louis A. Simpson International Building.

Baker bakes up an image of divisive time BAKER

Continued from page 1

.............

frustrating and disappointing.

Yet, what makes this analysis of his presidency so important is not just what it tells us about the first black president, Baker explained. The fact that Obama was too left and yet too right “tells us about ourselves.”

“We are at this moment a polarized country,” Baker acknowledged. He explained that the last four to five presidents promised to unite the country once they take office, and all have failed. Obama won 98 percent of the densest populated counties in 2008, but Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney won 98 percent of the sparest populated counties in 2012.

“Politicians do have a responsibility [for political polarization] but we also have to look in the mirror,” Baker said.

Furthermore, while American polarization is nothing new, it has manifested itself in a new form.

The new element in elections is that Americans are no longer starting from the same foundation of information and facts, noted Baker. Instead of deriving all information from around three TV networks and a handful of newspapers, Americans are now able to garner information from thousands of websites and news outlets – many of which have a distinct bias, or aren’t even based in facts.

“People live in their own factual worlds,” Baker said. “No wonder we don’t get along well; we don’t even live in the same environment.”

In some ways, Baker said, President Donald Trump might be a better fit and indeed a parallel for the current political moment of a divided nation.

Trump is at heart, Baker explained, a divider – not a uniter, as so many previous presidents have strived for. In this sense, Trump may very well be, according to Baker, an accurate reflection of the American public’s present political pulse.

Under the Obama administration, however, try as Obama did to build compromises and a legislative middle ground, there was not a single month

during his eight years where a majority of Americans thought the country was on the right track, Baker explained. While part of that might have been due to Obama’s struggle to perfect his politicking skills, part might instead be due to the times - where people may indeed crave extremes.

Baker noted that, in the latter part of his presidency, Obama attempted less and less to reach across the aisle. After setting a precedent by passing the Affordable Care Act and the stimulus bill without a single Republican vote, Obama was in some ways left to govern with executive orders.

“When you live and die by executive orders, that means the next guy can undo it,” Baker said, noting that this was exactly what Trump has done with the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. The skew towards policy change stemming from executive orders has left Obama’s legacy more unsettled than any other president’s in recent memory.

While presidential legacies are often debated and discussed for 10 or 20 or 30 years, Baker said, what’s unusual in Obama’s case is that his successor has “make it a mission in life to undo so much of what his predecessor has done.”

Baker explained that, while most new presidents promise “new directions” when they take office, they don’t usually spend time actively undoing what the previous person has done - as has been the case with President Trump in his early administration.

Covering the current political moment is indeed a challenge, Baker said, noting that the New York Times particularly has received a fair amount of criticism. In response to criticism of his own bias, Baker explained that analysis is different from opinion. Importantly, he said, it’s based in facts. And facts, said Baker, are what Americans should - despite its recent criticism - continue to expect from The Times.

“If you want to go to the other sides and listen to the partisan website that’s fine, but when you’re done, come back to us [The New York Times] and we’ll help you sort through it,” he said. “That’s our job.”

The talk took place at 7 p.m.

The Daily Princetonian

Tuesday September 26, 2017

CPUC pro- Cadden: LCA is not an “Arts Death Star” LCA gramming to tackle certificate programs Continued from page 1

.............

CPUC

Continued from page 1

.............

colleges to reach out to students who were in any affected areas. She noted that the colleges are currently working to finish outreach to all affected students.

Another student asked about the status of the University’s plan to incorporate Latino Studies and Asian American Studies into the American Studies department.

Dean of the College Jill Dolan noted her office is currently working with Professor Hendrik Hartog of the Department of History and Professor Anne Chen ‘85 of the Department of English to revitalize the American Studies curriculum to incorporate Latino Studies as well as Asian American Studies in the hopes of creating certificate and concentration programs.

The meeting then shifted to focus on the committee’s review of last year’s proposal by campus group Princeton Private Prison Divest (PPPD), which called for “divestment from corporations that run and contract exclusively with private prisons.”

Done reading your ‘Prince’?

Recycle

the presence of the arts, increase the visibility of the arts, and create the possibility for collaborative exchange among the arts.

The complex is accessible from multiple points of entry. Additionally, its size of 145,000 square feet makes it easy to spot from many parts of campus. Yaffe discussed the reason behind the decision to make the complex seep into campus in this way, explaining his hope that “along campus networks and paths, students would have a glimpse of the arts, and the arts in action. And that that chance encounter would peak their curiosity and possibly be a life-transformative experience.”

The complex is comprised of three major buildings: the Wallace Dance Building and Theater, the New Music Building, and the Arts Tower. Within these spaces are a host of performance and rehearsal venues, including dance studios, practice rooms, and a black box theater.

Wendy Heller, chair of the University Department of Music, and Michael Cadden, chair of the Lewis Center for the Arts, both emphasized the notion that the complex is above all an expansion of the arts on campus.

“We weren’t looking to relocate

the arts,” said Cadden. “The idea is that the arts happen on this campus from one edge to the other edge, in all sorts of spaces, some specifically designed for the arts and some not.”

Cadden is especially proud of the collaborative nature that the new complex will allow its inhabitants.

“We did not want to build the ‘Arts Death Star,’” he said. Cadden went on to use the forum of the complex — an expansive, open lobby space that connects each of the buildings — as an example of how the new space seeks to encourage a vibrant, collaborative environment. “All of the performance spaces, practice spaces, pour into the forum, and of course it’s our hope that that’s where students from different arts will encounter one another and be motivated towards collaboration,” he explained.

Cadden also stressed the idea that much of the complex will be shaped by the students and the work that goes on in the buildings in years to come.

“We’ll know what we built five years from now, ten years from now,” he explained. “We have some ideas of what we built and how it might be used, but it’s our students and our colleagues who are going to actually tell us what we built by using it in creative ways.”

Heller added that the complex is “the result of the University making a profound commitment to

the arts and the notion that this is something that is not always extracurricular, and sometimes can actually be curricular.”

Heller also explained what the new space will mean for students of music.

“This building for us is in some ways this melding between scholarship and performance, and we want our students to break down those boundaries,” she noted.

One of the major features of the New Music Building is the Lee Music Performance and Rehearsal Room, which will be used by the Princeton University Orchestra, among other groups. According to Heller, being inside of the room, which has adjustable acoustics and wooden panels, makes you “[feel] like you are in an instrument.”

Heller expressed her excitement for the opportunities that students will have to practice in this space.

“In some ways, the experience of playing in an orchestra, in a large ensemble, is such a lesson in life.

How to get along with people, how to collaborate,” said Heller. “The experience [students] are going to have in this room is extraordinary.”

“This is not the experience you will have in a school of music … in some ways it’s so much better because our students are really able to do the arts. We now have the space for them … to do more in both of our buildings, and to marry that with their academic work and see connections that you might not

page 3

have if you are in theatre school or drama school or dance school or music school,” Heller explained.

The Wallace Theater offers an innovative take on the traditional black box theater, with the “back” of the theater sitting on a curve.

The space’s 150 seats are able to be configured in numerous patterns, offering great artistic freedom for each show that takes place there.

According to Cadden, this black box has been considered “the best outfitted black box theatre in the United States.”

“There are things possible here that ... might not be possible anywhere else,” Cadden noted.

Yaffe touched on some recurring themes of the complex, including the “deep musical expressions within the building,” such as the musically-inspired carpets, lights, and even window features, and the dubbed “dancing staircase” in the Wallace Dance Building that features ballet notation within its perforated design.

Keeping in line with the University’s focus on sustainability, the complex boasts an array of sustainable features, including LED theatrical lighting, geothermal heating and cooling, green rooftops, and a LEED Silver certification.

The upcoming Festival of the Arts will mark the opening of the new space, offering over 100 performances, most free of charge, to members of the University community and the general public.

Opinion

Tuesday September 26, 2017

page 4

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Speech is free Ryan Born

columnist

I

t seems that, nowadays, cries for “free speech” ring from campus to campus. The term has become quite famous and quite popular. Perhaps it owes its popularity to how vague it is. It generally comes from conservatives in response to some sort of censoring of ideas. In its own way, “free speech” as a rhetorical term has become the rhetorical weapon of choice.

It has been defended by conservative groups and thinkers both on and off campus.

Recently, Professor John Londregan and some of his fellows wrote a letter calling for an end to the “shared and pervasive reality of growing hostility to free expression on college campuses across the country and around the world.” But what exactly is free expression, or “free speech? ”

Conservatives would have you believe that their insistence on free speech is related to a desire for intellectual diversity and openness of discussion. When conservatives appeal to “free speech,” it is actually a calculated political move, designed to open up avenues of political discourse while shaming others from moving in active political opposition. I argue that when conservatives resort to this move, they can be safely ignored, as they are appealing to a right that does not exist. [GR: I don’t think this makes sense, so can we add: In my belief,] when conservative ideas are opposed, there is no right that is being infringed.

We must begin with a fact: speech is intensely political. Speech is biased, opinionated. Anything we say, anything we don’t say, has political content and weighs on the scale of politics. Be aware then, that a call for “free speech” is as political as all speech is, because it ref lects an opinion of what speech ought to be.

And opinions are politics.

Because “free speech” is a cornerstone of our rights under the Constitution, it can appear that conservatives’ socially free speech has this constitutional tradition as its backbone.

However, this speech is something much different.

As seen with many conser-

Madeleine Marr

have been weighed, and that they have been rejected. If conservative arguments were strong, they would be convincing, and if they were convincing, they would not meet political opposition. If conservative arguments were strong, they would stand without desperate appeals to the idea of “free speech.”

If the only justification conservatives can offer for their ideas is that they merely exist, then let me say as Trotsky did: “You are miserable bankrupts, your role is played out; go where you ought to go — into the dustbin of history!”

When dealing with ultra-conservative factions (those on the alternative right, such as Nazis or white supremacists), “free speech,” or speech without fierce and unrelenting opposition, must be rejected entirely. There is no need to hear the arguments of hate, to engage in a “dialogue,” or to “hear the other side.”

These arguments have been heard, and they were smashed at Gettysburg, resisted at Charlottesville, undone at Normandy, condemned at Nuremburg, and laid to rest at Dachau. Anyone who enjoys living in a democracy or a republic or appreciates human rights should be in political opposition to the alternative right, Republicans and Democrats alike. Fascists cannot appeal to the very principles of freedom they aim to dismantle, and no human is under the obligation to listen to what has already been refuted.

For conservatives, I honestly believe they are better off evaluating and reshaping their arguments rather than resorting to the argument of “free speech.” They are better off without it.

Many conservative ideas are still valuable in moderation or require their fair day in court. As I have argued before, plurality and diversity of opinion is useful and valuable. Nothing is more advantageous to an argument than resistance, and intellectual diversity is useful. But, some ideas will be opposed, whether they can be justifiably offered or not, and this opposition may come in the form of political opposition. But some ideas will already

have been judged wanting.

Conservatives ought to question why some ideas are so stringently opposed and then adapt their arguments, instead of begging for “free speech.”

Just like conservatives, liberals and progressives do owe it to themselves to think critically about what is said and to pay attention to their arguments, both within their factions and when appealing to conservatives.

I should not be considered to be arguing for a type of political groupthink, or a type of rabid crusaderdom. The ability to think critically ought to be praised and ought to play a role in campus discourse and in any political group, internally and externally. As I have suggested, liberals should aim to reach out to conservatives and moderates by appealing to how they think, which can require a critical approach. Liberals do benefit from being able to engage conservatives, to bring them around to new opinions through an understanding of their views. Certainly this is a fine argument for intellectual free speech. But, it does not make intellectual free speech a moral necessity. It is merely a pragmatic aid, just like any other sort of thought exercise.

Conservatives are not heroes for calling for people to exercise their critical thinking, to entertain their arguments; I have no fear that in a country and a campus of intelligent and independent people, voices will be heard. A voice is a political thing, and to raise it is a political action that can be opposed by political means.

There is no such thing as “social free speech,” where “free” refers to a right to speak free from obstinate opposition. And if conservatives disagree, they are welcome to it. I, and others, are happy to respond accordingly. Really, that’s the problem, what conservatives can’t stand, what they can’t imagine could be true: speech is free.

Ryan Born is a junior in Philosophy from Washington, Mich. He can be reached at rcborn@princeton.edu.

Too much of a good thing

columnist

D

vative groups, such as the Princeton Open Campus Coalition, conservatives are interested in being able to propose their ideas without any political opposition to their right to speech. I am not arguing that conservatives do not expect intellectual opposition to their content; instead, I am arguing against their right to be heard and accepted.

I should clarify that I use “conservative” broadly to mean both those politically opposed to progressive aims, but also in particular to refer to those who invoke “free speech” to defend their access to political debate and to forestall political opposition to their viewpoints. I understand that some conservatives may disagree with their fellows. Finally, I want to make clear that “opposition” in this case refers to political opposition, which includes disinvitations, protests, and boycotts.

Yet, that has never been a right in private, nor at a university. If one presents an idea, one must be prepared to receive some type of response. Agreement is a possibility as much as outrage is. When conservatives propose this idea, they are demanding a private political right vis-à-vis other citizens to declare their views without opposition.

But, opposition is not only allowed, but morally required, whether by pen, by protest, by boycott, or by disinvitation. Speech is political, and it is therefore within the realm of politics to oppose speech by any acceptable political means. I am not condoning violence; violence is unacceptable.

To speak politically and demand that your political opponents hold back, however — this is not a right that society provides.

Indeed, there is something insulting and condescending about conservative appeals to free speech, and appeals to “free speech” make conservative arguments sound weak. It is as if they think, “If only the poor children listened to our ideas! If they didn’t simply reject our ideas out of hand, they would be listened to! We are right!”

This, of course, ignores an obvious possibility: that conservative ideas have been listened to, that they

vol. cxli

uring orientation week, Princeton administrators emphasized the importance of a balanced lifestyle. They pressed the Class of 2021 to sleep seven hours a night, participate in extracurriculars, and seek out resources to manage stress. Many Princeton students struggle to balance the different facets of their lives, so this advice seemed well-meaning.

But, I lost faith in the variously-acronymed adults standing in front of me when I heard them advocate for healthy eating habits. I looked down at my phone — “Free cupcakes! Free boba!

Free pizza!” my emails taunted. I looked back up and remembered my pre-frosh dream of eating healthy in college. The walls of Dillon Gym would have f lashed in my mind, too, had I actually made it inside. It was in that moment that I realized I had adopted an unpopular, and

possibly sacrilegious, opinion among college students: I dislike free food.

Don’t get me wrong — I go to the study breaks and club meetings and fill my paper plate to capacity. But, as I sit eating my third baked good of the afternoon, I realize how the Freshman Fifteen became a trope. It’s nearly impossible to resist the siren call of high-calorie, low-nutrition foods after walking on average seven miles a day and spending six hours in Firestone on my second day of classes. As I trudge back to my dorm after ascending from the stacks, my phone buzzes and I look down at another listserv email. “Hey guys!! Free [literally any food substance that isn’t salad] in [most convenient place for you to walk] at [time when you should be doing work]!”

I basically have no choice.

Club participation creates another trap for those trying to practice healthy eating habits. To lure apathetic freshmen to their meetings, clubs often rely on free food — so, the snacks are pur-

chased. I have walked into dozens of rooms laid out with chairs in a circle and the snack table in the middle, tempting me despite the fact that I ate dinner 20 minutes prior. How can I be an active member of the community and still stay healthy?

I appreciate the gesture, and free food taken on its own constitutes a major part of my utopia. But the obstacle course of snacks thrown at you from every group, organization, and leader on campus makes attempting to stay in decent shape near impossible. I can’t resist when it’s offered, but I feel guilty when I turn it down, ashamed of wasting the opportunity.

Free food is also a social vehicle, which makes it even harder to resist. On one occasion, my roommates pleaded with me to join them on a trip to Studio ’34 for a study break. “It’s free!” they insisted. When that ploy to push me into joining them failed, my roommates turned to a more social argument. “It’s roommate bonding!” they

told me. They ended up heading to the study break without me, but I felt as though I had violated a sacred code — or worse, the roommate contract.

The omnipresence of free food, and the pressing obligation I feel to take advantage of it, has cast a pall over my first weeks at Princeton.

How am I supposed to address this Herculean task? I am either doomed to a lonely life as a social outcast, banned from club meetings and friend outings alike, or I will have to be cut out of my dorm by Public Safety at the end of the semester. The free food epidemic at Princeton needs to be addressed. There must be a better way. However, my ability to propose a solution to this glaring problem is currently limited by the fact that there is a donut food truck on Prospect Avenue, and everyone’s going.

Madeleine Marr is firstyear student from Newtown Square, Pa. She can be reached at mmarr@princeton.edu.

Sarah Sakha ’18

editor-in-chief

Matthew McKinlay ’18 business manager

BOARD OF TRUSTEES president Thomas E. Weber ’89 vice president Craig Bloom ’88 secretary Betsy L. Minkin ’77 treasurer Douglas J. Widmann ’90 Kathleen Crown William R. Elfers ’71 Stephen Fuzesi ’00 Zachary A. Goldfarb ’05 John Horan ’74 Joshua Katz Kathleen Kiely ’77 Rick Klein ’98 James T. MacGregor ’66 Alexia Quadrani Marcelo Rochabrun ’15 Randall Rothenberg ’78 Richard W. Thaler, Jr. ’73 trustees emeriti Gregory L. Diskant ’70 Jerry Raymond ’73 Michael E. Seger ’71 Annalyn Swan ’73

141ST MANAGING BOARD managing editors Samuel Garfinkle ’19 Grace Rehaut ’18 Christina Vosbikian ’18 head news editor Marcia Brown ’19 associate news editors Kristin Qian ’18 Claire Lee ‘19 head opinion editor Nicholas Wu ’18 associate opinion editors Samuel Parsons ’19 head sports editor David Xin ’19 associate sports editors Miranda Hasty ’19 Claire Coughlin ’19 head street editor Jianing Zhao ’20 associate street editors Lyric Perot ’20 Danielle Hoffman ’20 web editor Sarah Bowen ’20 head copy editors Isabel Hsu ’19 Omkar Shende ’18 associate copy editors Caroline Lippman ’19 Megan Laubach ’18 chief design editor Quinn Donohue ’20 cartoons editor Tashi Treadway ’19

NIGHT STAFF Design Jake Brzowsky ’21 Copy Alexandra Wilson ’20 Hannah Freid ’21 Rachel Brill ’19 Zaymn Clay-Hubbard ’21

The Daily Princetonian

Tuesday September 26, 2017

Cockroaches

tashi treadway ’19 ..................................................

(if(equal? web love) (join the ‘Prince’ now) (join anyway))

Join the ‘Prince’ web and multimedia team.

Email join@dailyprincetonian.com

You could be this guy.

Write for the ‘Prince.’

Email join@dailyprincetonian.com

page 5

Sports

Tuesday September 26, 2017

page 6

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } WOMEN’S TENNIS

Women’s tennis lead by freshmen at Cissie Leary Invitational at Penn

By Claire Coughlin Associate Sports Editor

The Princeton women’s tennis team competed in the 20th annual Cissie Leary Invitational this weekend (Sept. 30-Oct. 2) at the University of Pennsylvania. In November 1996, the head women’s tennis coach at Penn, Cissie Leary, passed away after a long battle with scleroderma.

Leary coached the Quakers to 16 winning seasons, compiling a career record of 229-119 from 1977-96. In her final spring coaching season in 1995, her team was 16-7 overall, 6-1 in the Ivy League and progressed to the NCAA East Regional. Beginning in 1997, this tournament has been held every year to honor her memory and legacy.

Twelve teams played in the Friday, Saturday, and Sunday event held at the Hecht Tennis Center in Philadelphia, Pa. The tournament was organized into two 32-player Flight A and B singles draws, a 16-player Flight C singles draw, a 16-player Flight A doubles draw, and a 32-player Flight B doubles draw. Teams that competed in the event included host Penn, as well as Columbia, Cornell, Delaware, Drexel, Maryland,

Penn State, Princeton, St. John’s, Temple, William & Mary, and Yale.

In Friday’s play, Tiger freshman Nathalie Rodilosso won both of her matches and followed up with a third win on Saturday against Columbia’s Sarah Rahman 6-4, 2-6, (10-6).

This level of play to set her up to compete in a semifinal Sunday match against another Lion, Adi Milstein, who was Flight B’s top seed.

Milstien defeated Rodilosso’s teammate, senior Sara Goodwin, in the quarterfinals Saturday. Rodilosso beat out Milstien, but lost in her in the final in a third Lion-Tiger battle against Andrea Kevakian, 6-3, 7-5, in the Flight B final. This was Nathalie’s first tournament sporting the Orange and Black and was a great showing for the future of the team.

After spending two long weekends elsewhere in the country, the Tigers get to return home next weekend for the Princeton Invitational. The Tigers will host tournament play Friday, Saturday, and Sunday at the Lenz Tennis Center.

Princeton will match up against Cornell, Penn, and Temple in both doubles and singles matches.

COURTESY OF GOPRINCETONTIGERS.COM

Women’s tennis competed in the Cissie Leary Invitational at Penn this past weekend.

Fresh off thrilling victory, No. 12 Princeton preps for No. 11 Harvard this Saturday

By Chris Murphy Associate Sports Editor

For the men’s water polo team, Harvard week has officially begun.

Returning home from the Mountain Pacific Tournament this past weekend, the Tigers have a few days without matches before taking on No. 11 Harvard this weekend at DeNunzio Pool. Princeton comes into the matchup having split its four games played out in Los Angeles. The Mountain Pacific Tournament was the most brutal stretch of games the Tigers will face all season, as Princeton played four games in three days against teams with rankings in the top 20 of the latest NCAA poll. While Princeton avoided some of the even stronger teams in the tournament, including No. 1 ranked U.C., Berkeley, the Tigers had their hands full with some tough competition and now get some muchneeded time off before taking on their rivals.

There was never a dull moment in the weekend tournament as the Tigers played four thrilling games, capped off by a 15-14 comeback win

against No. 13 U.C., San Diego. During their tournament run, the Tigers scored 42 goals, continuing their trend of impressive offense this season. Senior attackman Jordan Colina continued his outstanding individual season with another three goals in the final game, including the winning goal with 12 seconds left. Also posting an impressive performance this weekend was junior driver Matt Payne, who scored seven goals during the second day of play against Pomona-Pitzer and U.C., Santa Barbara. The two – along with the other individual efforts on display in the tournament – helped lead the Tigers to a 2-2 performance over the weekend in one of the toughest fields in which the Tigers have ever participated.

But with the weekend behind them, the stage is set for the team to take on Harvard this Saturday at 7 p.m. This will be the first of two definite matchups against the Crimson, with a third possibly coming in the NWPC Championships, depending on how both teams perform. Currently, the No. 12 Tigers sit

Tweet of the Day “The #Tigers Win! With another game ending interception by CJ Wall, @PUTigerFootball moves to 2-0! ” Prnceton Football (@ PUTigerFootball)

one spot behind the No. 11 Crimson in the latest NCAA poll. Both teams know that the stakes of this game are very high; despite all of the highly ranked teams Princeton has already faced, this may be their most important match yet. This matchup will also help define the elite team in the northeast; currently the two teams are the highest and second highest ranked teams on the East Coast.

Looking to assert themselves over a bitter rival, the Tigers will rely on continued impressive offense to storm the Crimson early and often.

Colina, Payne, and others will be called upon to demonstrate their skill and try to make scoring against Harvard as effortless as it has seemed in the past. Similarly, the defense will look to contain the three-headed attack by Harvard, comprised of sophomore Austin Sechrest (with 24 goals), junior Nick Bunn (21 goals) and freshman Dennis Blyashov (21 goals). The three have helped Harvard to their current eight game winning streak after starting the season with back-toback losses to Stanford

COURTESY OF GOPRINCETONTIGERS.COM

Princeton Men’s Waterpolo shines in weekend before Harvard face-off.

and Pepperdine. The Tigers – who have played and beaten more ranked teams this season than Harvard – may have the advantage when it comes to big game experience.

As is tradition with any Princeton-Harvard matchup, this game is bound to get bitter and gritty. With the current state of both teams, there

Stat of the Day

No. 5 Princeton Men’s Ice Hockey has been ranked No. 5 in the ECAC Preseason Coaches Poll.

is much more than usual on the line this year. This year’s Princeton-Harvard game is about more than just starting the NWPC slate off with a win. The game is about determining who will be the team to beat this year.

Get ready for one of the most wild, exciting, and important games of the season.

Follow us Check us out on Twitter @princesports for live news and reports, and on Instagram @princetoniansports for photos!