The Daily Princetonian: September 10, 2021

Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Friday September 10, 2021 vol. CXLV no. 49

Twitter: @princetonian Facebook: The Daily Princetonian YouTube: The Daily Princetonian Instagram: @dailyprincetonian

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Your Weekly Recap THE PROSPECT

JOSÉ PABLO FERNÁNDEZ GARCÍA / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

9/11 Memorial on Princeton’s campus.

Visiting Princeton’s 9/11 memorial, 20 years after the towers fell

By José Pablo Fernández García Associate Prospect Editor

A walk across the Princeton campus with attentive-enough eyes reveals it as a collection of monu-

ments and memorials. Every stone laid, every piece of wood fitted, and every last bit that makes up this campus seems to carry with it a name or story of some sort. As students,

we live and learn among arches, towers, and halls spotted with engravings, plaques, and other markers that both embody and perpetuate the history of this nation and univer-

sity.

The history embodied by this campus reaches as far back as its colonial years, yet also already holds the events of the past year. From Cannon

Green, I have seen in recent days both statues of those who signed the nation’s founding documents and signs for a silent vigil honoring memSee 9/11 page 11

ON CAMPUS

USG to spend 160K on lawnparties, budget tripled for semester

By Andrew Somerville Staff News Writer

ANDREW SOMERVILLE / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

The first in-person USG meeting since Spring 2020.

The Undergraduate Student Government (USG) met on Sept. 5 for its first meeting this fall and its first inperson meeting since the spring of 2020.

USG Treasurer Turquoise Brewington ’22 submitted for review the $600,000 budget outline for this semester.

Typically, the USG budget is funded by around

$200,000 collected in student activities fees. During the 2020-21 academic year, however, the University aided the undergraduate student body and allocated approximately $200,000 in funds to USG, so they did not have to charge the undergraduate body directly.

This semester, USG has funds from three sources: about $200,000 in student activities fees, about $200,000 in surplus funds See LAWNPARTIES page 3

ON CAMPUS

U. receives external report on handling of MOVE bombing victims

By Sam Pathak Staff Writer

On Aug. 31, the University received a 56-page report detailing the nature of its involvement in the handling of the remains of victims of the 1985 MOVE bombing.

The University appointed Ballard Spahr LLP, an outside counsel, to investigate the University’s role in the mistreatment of the physical remains of members of the Africa family in the bombing of the MOVE organization by

In This Issue

Philadelphia’s police department.

In April 2021, The Daily Princetonian reported on the University’s response to a piece from a Philadelphia newspaper that revealed that the remains of the MOVE bombing victims were housed in the University of Pennsylvania museum and were in the custody of Professor Emeritus of Anthropology Alan Mann and former visiting professor Janet Monge.

The bombing occurred on

May 13, 1985, when the Philadelphia Police Department bombed a residential building occupied by MOVE, a predominantly Black communal organization founded in 1972 that promoted naturalistic living and protested police brutality. The radical lifestyle embraced by MOVE members was criticized by some in the community, and tensions with police escalated dramatically throughout the 1970s.

As a result of the 1985 bombing, 11 people were

MARK DODICI / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

See MOVE page 3

OPINION | PAGE 6 “It’s easy to feel protected by the Orange Bubble. But if Hurricane Ida showed us anything, it is that the climate crisis is at our doorstep and time is a luxury we no longer have.”

THE PROSPECT | PAGE 11

MOVE rally in front of Nassau Hall.

SPORTS | PAGE 12 No. 13 Princeton fell on Friday to No. 1 UNC with a score of 4–1, and on Sunday to No. 5 University of Louisville with a score of 3–2.

“Remembering is something so deeply ingrained into the physical campus in which we make our lives as Princeton students. Still, it’s so easy to walk through its arches and towers and halls without ever taking the time to really contemplate the people and stories the campus embodies.”

The Daily Princetonian

page 2

Friday September 10, 2021

BEYOND THE BUBBLE

Andrew Bruck ’05 named Acting New Jersey Attorney General, first LGBTQ+ person to hold position

By Katherine Dailey

Assistant News Editor

In June 2021, Andrew Bruck ’05 was named acting Attorney General for the state of New Jersey — the first member of the LGBTQ+ community to hold the position.

Reflecting on this milestone in an interview with The Daily Princetonian, Bruck remembers being “a closeted gay kid in a dorm, in a freshman dorm at Princeton, who never imagined that I would have a husband, that I would have a kid, that I would be able to tell my family that I was gay, that I would be able to live or work openly. I certainly never thought that if I came out that I would be able to have a job in government, and all of that is possible.”

“People say it all the time, that representation matters,” Bruck told the ‘Prince,’ hoping to inspire LGBTQ+ youth with his story. He added, “I feel incredibly lucky that I get to do this, and I hope that is a signal to others that if I can do it, others can as well.”

Eric Anglero, assistant director of the Gender + Sexuality Resource Center, commented on this representation, telling the ‘Prince’ in an email, “my hope is that this representation helps them feel like their voices and perspectives are being heard and valued.”

They added, “Having representation by LGBTQIA+ individuals in all facets of public life also lets our community know that their identity is being represented when it

comes to policy issues that may affect them.”

While at Princeton, Bruck was a student in the School of Public and International Affairs (SPIA), at the time called the Woodrow Wilson School. As a senior, Bruck’s thesis advisor was now-President Christopher L. Eisgruber ’83, then a professor in SPIA and, starting in the middle of Bruck’s senior year, the University’s provost.

Eisgruber fondly remembered his time working with Bruck, telling the ‘Prince’ in an email, “even as a student, he demonstrated the strengths that make him an excellent lawyer: analytic precision, clear and forceful writing, pragmatic insight, and a commitment to the public good.”

Eisgruber also commented on the content of Bruck’s thesis, which he stated, “delved into issues about the fair treatment of accused terrorists. It required the kind of procedural sophistication about law that is essential for attorneys but rare for undergraduates. He did well with those issues, and even his drafts were well written.”

Bruck similarly recalled having a positive experience working with Eisgruber.

“It was so great to work with him. He’s just such an extraordinary mind how quickly he processes information … So it was great to have the opportunity to sit down and talk through with him the problems I was working on.”

He also felt that Eisgruber excelled at being a

HEADLINE FROM HISTORY

“

CAMPUS, COUNTRY SHOCKED BY ATTACK ON U.S. SOIL

BY JESSICA LAUTIN AND MICHAEL GRABELL

SEP 12, 2001

”

COURTESY OF THE NEW JERSEY OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WEBSITE.

Andrew Bruck, Acting Attorney General of New Jersey.

thesis advisor while also taking on the responsibilities of provost.

“What was great was, he became provost right as I started working on the thesis, and you would not have guessed he had a million other administrative responsibilities while also being a thesis advisor,” Bruck said.

Eisgruber also remembered this, stating, “I counted on them [my thesis students] to get in touch when they needed to speak with me. Andrew, as I recall, made sure that we had regularly calendared meetings during the spring term.”

Prior to being named Acting Attorney General, Bruck previously held several Attorney General roles with the U.S. Department of Justice and the New Jersey Attorney General’s Office.

Bruck reflected that his favorite career experience up to this point was working for Sally Yates, then-Deputy US Attorney General, at the end of the Obama administration.

“She was a really deeply good person and an incredibly thoughtful leader, and I had the chance to work with her on issues that we both cared a lot about, such as criminal justice reform,” he said.

Recently, Bruck and his husband became fathers to a young girl, but looking to the future, Bruck says that he has “no idea”

where he sees himself going from here.

“I don’t think there’s ever been a point during the last fifteen years since I graduated college where I could have clearly articulated what it was I wanted to do next. I always try just to do a good job, work hard, act with integrity, and things seem to work themselves out, so I’m just going to keep doing whatever job I have as best I can, and if opportunities arise, they arise,” he said.

His favorite part of the job is meeting individuals affected by his work, such as sitting down with law enforcement officers who had just gone through training to reform how police officers use force.

However, he says his least favorite part of the job is that “it is not uncommon for folks in the political world to put a political spin on the work that we are doing, and it is frustrating when you’re trying to do a good job and people will mischaracterize it, either intentionally or unintentionally, for political purposes.”

Bruck also discussed the University Department of Public Safety officer who was recently named on a list of majorly disciplined law enforcement officers in the state of New Jersey, as well as the role of policing in New Jersey and at Princeton.

All your Princeton news All your global news In one place Daily.

“There’s a lot that we need to do a lot in New Jersey and across the country in order to build and rebuild trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve,” he noted.

He added, “Transparency is the start, not the end of the conversation.

The mere fact that an officer engaged in misconduct, it does not end the inquiry ... We have to ask, what is this police department doing, what is this public safety department doing, to make sure that they’re holding accountable officers for engaging in misconduct.”

Bruck closed his conversation with the ‘Prince’ with advice for current Princeton students.

“Don’t spend too much time worrying right now about what the rest of your life is going to look like,” he said.

“One of the great things about having a Princeton education and having Princeton on your resume is you will have a lot of incredible opportunities during your career, so you don’t need to worry about it too much while you’re a student,” Bruck added.

Katherine Dailey is an assistant news editor who often covers University affairs and breaking news. She can be reached at kdailey@ princeton.edu or on Twitter at @kmdailey7.

The Daily Princetonian

Friday September 10, 2021

page 3

Report outlines results of ‘fact-finding effort’ to uncover the nature of the U.’s role in handling the remains MOVE

Continued from page 1

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

killed, including five children, and over 60 homes were burned to the ground.

Amid controversy and backlash from students, University President Christopher L. Eisgruber ’83 announced the University would undergo a “fact-finding effort” to uncover the nature of the University’s role in handling the remains.

The outside counsel’s report, among many other key takeaways, found that the remains of the MOVE bombing victims were never held in storage on Princeton’s campus, that then-professors Mann and Monge never consulted any of the families of the MOVE bombing victims regarding the use of the remains in their classes, and that Princeton did not have any concrete policies governing ethical usage of human remains by faculty in Princeton’s teaching, research, and premises.

Even though the remains were never stored at the University, the remains were used and displayed in two Princeton courses. One was an in-person graduate-level course, ANT 522A: Topics in

Theory and Practice, taught in 2015 by Mann, Monge, and Professor Carolyn Rouse, current head of the Anthropology department. The other was a recorded undergraduate Coursera course, ANT 309: Forensic Anthropology and Urban Bodies, which was taught by Monge and Jeffrey Himpele in the fall of 2019.

According to the Ballard Spahr report, Rouse was unaware of her colleagues’ use of the remains in the earlier course.

“Dr. Rouse was not present the day that Dr. Monge used the MOVE Victim Remains, and did not know that they would be – or had been – used.

Drs. Mann and Monge do not recall whether Dr. Mann was present,” according to the report.

The video for the online course was filmed at the Penn Museum, and the remains were not brought to Princeton for use in the course. The remains, which included a femur and pelvic fragments, were first given to Mann in 1986 by the Philadelphia Medical Examiner’s office to identify the victim. After the remains were released to Mann, they were stored at the Penn Museum.

However, the remains were also brought to Princeton’s

campus on several occasions between 2001 and 2015

by Monge. When brought to campus, the remains were used in the Department of Anthropology’s laboratory as experts sought to continue efforts to identify the remains.

The report states that Mann and Monge “believed they had no duty to return the MOVE victim remains to the Medical Examiner’s Office until they successfully identified them.”

Over the 35 years that Mann and Monge were in the possession of the remains, they never sought further direction or oversight for the remains. The Africa family first learned about the remains being in the custody of Mann and Monge from an op-ed published in the Philadelphia Inquirer on April 21, 2021.

The remains were also kept at Mann’s private residence for 12 days following initial questioning on the subject from journalists in April 2021, at the discretion of a Penn Museum official, where they were later retrieved by Terry Funeral Home.

In reaching the conclusions made in the report, the counsel interviewed 23 individuals including Mann, Monge, Princeton University’s Anthropology Department members, MOVE members,

and members of the Africa family. The report also reviewed, among many other documents, the Coursera videos, more than 2,500 Princeton emails relating to the remains of the bombing, and 230 pages of documents about the remains of the bombing provided by Monge.

Mann was tasked with handling some of the human remains from the bombing, and he enlisted the help of his then-doctoral student Monge.

Reporting done in April by the ‘Prince’ found that Mann retired in 2015. According to University Spokesperson Michael Hotchkiss, Monge has not been affiliated with the University since 2020.

Monge declined to provide comment to the ‘Prince’.

In a statement to the ‘Prince’, Hotchkiss discussed the University’s plans to implement some of the recommendations from the report.

“The University has already undertaken a number of steps that are in alignment with the report’s recommendations,” he wrote.

“A University working group is considering Princeton’s policies and protocols for ownership and use of human remains for research and scholarly purposes and is developing recommendations

for the University,” he added.

Hotchkiss also cited the Department of Anthropology’s new policy on the use of human remains in the research department.

The policy, released last spring, outlined that the department “is not in possession of, and has no plans to create, a human osteological collection or to acquire human remains in any form.”

The University of Pennsylvania received a similar report in late August, authored by the Tucker Law Group.

This report involved “​​ interviewing more than 40 people, including members of MOVE; current and former Museum employees, Penn faculty, students, and alumni, elected officials, anthropologists, and community members,” as well as reviewing other previous records and reports.

Associate News Editor Marissa Michaels and Assistant News Editors Katherine Dailey and Kalena Blake contributed reporting to this piece.

Sam Pathak is a staff writer who has covered University administrative affairs and eating clubs. He can be reached at srpathak@princeton.edu.

The Projects Board budget was also increased LAWNPARTIES Continued from page 1

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

from previous years’ USG budgets, and approximately $200,000 of surplus from last year’s University aid for pandemic-related costs. “[This surplus] is specifically for initiatives that are related to issues surrounding the pandemic,” said Senate President Christian Potter ’22.

The total budget for the fall is thus approximately $600,000, a three-fold increase from the typical $200,000.

Within the budget were details regarding spending allocations for specific committees and projects for the semester. Significant spending areas included Tigers in Town, Lawnparties, and the renovation of the USG office located in Frist Campus Center, with budget allocations of $150,000, $160,000, and $120,000 respectively.

“We want students to

come into the office and get to know everyone,” said Communications Director Hannah Kapoor ’23, regarding the renovation to the office space.

Lawnparties will take place on Oct. 3, hosted by the Inter-Club Council (ICC) and the USG Senate Social Committee.

The budget for the Projects Board was also increased to provide support for clubs sponsored by the Office of the Dean of Undergraduate Students (ODUS) to host more Tigers in Town programming.

The budget was unanimously approved by the Senate.

Sustainability Chair Mayu Takeuchi ’23 raised the question of whether or not Tigers in Town, an initiative which provides free items to students from local businesses, will continue to be categorized as a pandemic-related initiative. Deputy Dean of Undergraduate Students Thomas Dunne clari-

THE MINI CROSSWORD

By Gabriel Robare

SAM KAGAN / DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Scudder Plaza during Fall Lawnparties 2019.

fied that it does fall under this category and will continue to be funded by the pandemic funds.

Senate President Christian Potter ’22 also gave his first report of the school year in which he discussed the Involvement Fest that took place on Sept. 6, as well as various initiatives that took place this past summer and working committees within the Senate.

During the summer, the Senate prioritized the se-

mester budget, fall Lawnparties, and the Virtual Academic Expo.

Chair of Campus and Community Affairs Lehman Montgomery ’22 submitted for approval three clubs to be formally recognized under ODUS, including the Princeton D&D [Dungeons and Dragons] Club, Princeton Impact Capital, and Princeton NeuroTech. All three were unanimously approved by a Senate vote.

Cheyenne Zhang ’22 was

also unanimously confirmed as the chair of the Movies Committee for the fall semester.

USG Senate meetings are held in Robertson Hall 016 at 8 p.m. on Sunday evenings and are open to all.

Andrew Somerville is a staff writer who corresponds with and covers USG happenings and other campus news. He can be reached at jas19@princeton. edu.

Co-Head Puzzles Editor

MINI #1

ACROSS 1 6 7 8 9

Morning-after pill Alphabetic quintet Giveaways Recommendation for a bruise “For sure!”

DOWN

1 2 3 4 5

Place to sit out?

It really sucks Famed choreographer Alvin “Honest!”

Things that don’t live up to their potential

See page 5 for more

CHECK OUT OUR WEBSITE FOR MORE COVERAGE ON 9/11

page 4

The Daily Princetonian

Friday September 10, 2021

BEYOND THE BUBBLE

So far, U.’s contact tracing reveals no on-campus transmission

By Marie-Rose Sheinerman Senior Writer and News Editor Emerita

With a return to in-person residential life, some community members are looking to Princeton’s promise of rigorous COVID-19 safety measures for an assurance of safety — including the University’s pledge in late August to maintain a “robust contact tracing protocol” this fall.

One week into classes, some students have already gone through that contact tracing process.

Isabel Rodrigues ’23 was contacted by a University contact tracer via email and voicemail less than 24 hours after her arrival to campus on Aug. 19 while she was training to be an Outdoor Action leader.

With the subject line “Immunization Verified,” the email informed her that University Health Services (UHS) had been “made aware that you have either traveled to a high-risk location or been in close contact with an individual suspected of having COVID-19.”

Rodrigues is a Co-Head Copy Editor for The Daily Princetonian.

Knowing that she had not traveled beyond Mercer County, Rodrigues said she assumed someone in her training pod had tested positive for the virus — but the email did not name the individual, citing confidentiality rules.

“It was definitely kind of alarming to come to campus and immediately be contact-traced,” Rodrigues said in an interview with the ‘Prince’. “You just don’t expect it to be literally the first day that you’re back.”

Because Rodrigues is vaccinated, she was told in the email obtained by the ‘Prince’ that while she did not have to quarantine and could “access campus as scheduled,” she did have to adhere to certain additional restrictions and “self-monitor” any symptoms.

The restrictions were set for a 10-day period and required her to complete the daily symptom tracker on the TigerSafe App, “keep six feet of distance from others at all times,” wear a face covering “at all times” on campus, and “avoid common areas.”

But those guidelines have felt confusing and malleable at times, said one senior who the ‘Prince’ verified had been contact-traced by the University.

The senior requested to remain anonymous due to medical privacy concerns.

A day after arriving to campus, the senior hosted a close friend in their dorm room un-

ZACHARY SHEVIN / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

A COVID-19 saliva test taken on campus.

masked, assuming the friend had already tested negative.

The following morning, the friend contacted them to say they had tested positive, and by 2 p.m. that afternoon, the senior had received an email from the University nearly identical to the one Rodrigues had received over a week earlier. The senior said that from the subject line, “I probably wouldn’t have realized it’s a contact tracing email.”

“I remember being really freaked out,” the senior told the ‘Prince.’ Out of an abundance of concern, they submitted two additional COVID-19 tests, though they were not required to do so, and tested negative on both. The senior said a massive point of relief has been the University’s quick turnaround in test results, usually less than 24 hours.

“I can’t tell if their guidelines are strict rules or not,” the senior said of the contact tracing email in a phone interview, saying they were currently sitting outdoors on campus, with no one nearby, with their mask half-off — technically a violation. “The guidelines for every aspect of our lives right now are very vague.”

So far, “based on contact tracing and analysis,” viral transmission at the University does not seem to be an issue, according to Deputy University Spokesperson Michael Hotchkiss in a statement on Sep. 2.

“None of the COVID cases identified on campus thus far has resulted from transmission on campus,” he previously told the ‘Prince’ in a statement on Aug. 31.

Still, the University’s COVID-19 dashboard showed a shift between Aug. 25 and Sept. 1 from “low” to “moderate” risk status.

Hotchkiss said in an email on Sep. 2 that the change will not affect campus COVID-19 policies

at this time.

According to Hotchkiss, the case rate on campus is “well within the anticipated range,” but “remains high in the surrounding area.” The shift to “moderate” risk, he said, can be explained by the increase in campus population and the number of in-person activities that have taken place.

Sixteen percent of the dorms allocated for students who are isolating after a positive test result are full as of Sept. 2, according to the University COVID-19 dashboard. Vaccination rates, meanwhile, reached approximately 98 percent for the undergraduate student body and approximately 96 percent for employees as of Sept. 5.

As of Sep. 2, the University’s “analysis team” — the team of scientists and health professionals working to assess transmission risk on a weekly basis — recommends “emphasizing compliance with the face coverings and testing policies,” according to Hotchkiss.

How does contact tracing by the University work?

A positive test by a University community member, either through the University’s asymptomatic testing system or one conducted off-campus, immediately triggers the UHS contact tracing protocol.

The team’s goal, per Hotchkiss, is to contact-trace every case within 24 hours of the result release. The team is “successful in doing so in more than 99 percent of cases,” he said.

In the contact tracing process, the person who tested positive for COVID-19 is interviewed and asked to identify close contacts from the 48 hours before symptom onset or the 48 hours before the test date of the asymptomatic positive result, depending

on the situation.

“Close contacts” are defined as “those who have been within 6 feet of the positive case for more than 15 cumulative minutes in a 24 hour period.”

These criteria are determined by the UHS Global and Community Health team on behalf of the Princeton Municipal Health Department, in accordance with guidance and definitions from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the New Jersey Department of Health.

“Our experienced contact tracers guide the person who tested positive through a series of questions to boost their memory and identify all close contacts,” Hotchkiss wrote.

UHS then contacts all those “close contacts” and informs them that they have been exposed to an ill community member.

“All the personal information about the positive case is kept confidential,” Hotchkiss said.

The University mandates “close contacts’’ who are unvaccinated quarantine and contact UHS if they develop any symptoms. Those who are vaccinated “can still circulate on campus without restrictions,” but must participate in twice-weekly testing for the week after the exposure and “increased masking and self-monitoring for 10 days after their exposure.”

University policy seems to indicate that individuals who learn independently of the University that they had been in contact with someone who tested positive for COVID-19 — but are not classified as a “close contact”

by UHS criteria or did not wind up on a list of “close contacts” due to inaccurate or incomplete information — need not selfquarantine or self-isolate.

“Individuals who are not con-

tacted do not need to self-quarantine or self-isolate because they do not meet the criteria for close contacts,” Hotchkiss explained.

Addressing questions about the University’s decision to limit sharing information about a positive test to “close contacts” only — as opposed to the entire zee group, for instance, of a student who tested positive — Hotchkiss said that “medical privacy rules limit the sharing of this information.”

“Sharing information about a positive case with people and groups who are not close contacts as defined by federal and state guidance would not provide actionable information and could create confusion,” he said.

Students who wish to learn more about the contact tracing process can contact Dr. Irini Daskalaki, who leads the contact tracing team. Daskalaki is an infectious disease physician and public health expert who designed the University’s contact tracing, isolation, and quarantine program from the beginning of the pandemic, Hotchkiss explained.

Daskalaki “provides training to all team members and leads daily case discussions with the contact tracers to improve their skills” and stays in “constant communication and collaboration” with state and local health officials.

Marie-Rose Sheinerman is a senior writer who has reported on COVID-19 policy, faculty controversy, sexual harassment allegations, major donors, campus protests, and more. She can be reached at ms78@ princeton.edu or on Twitter at @ rosesheinerman.

Keep yourself informed on the go!

Follow us on Instagram: @dailyprincetonian

The Daily Princetonian

Friday September 10, 2021

page 5

‘It’s Raining Cats and Dogs’

By Emily Della Pietra and Kevin Yeung Staff Constructors

1 6 10 14 15 16 17 18 19

20 22 24 27 29 30 31 32 33 35 37 40 41 42 43 44 45

ACROSS

Head covering Cousin of stew Dance percussively Brand name for ibuprofen “Give or take” Employee on the Hill Pilot on the road?

Stink Restaurant chain with the famous greeting “Welcome to ___!”

Rock band with “electric” energy?

Harbors bitterness ___-El (Superman’s Kryptonian name) Medieval stronghold Preceder of “Bless you!”

Poet’s “before” Modern day colonial name for some land of the Incan Empire Prefix with graph Ruth who starred in the AMC series “Preacher” Omelet main ingredient Prime times?

Lust ___balls (marshmallow snack from Hostess) Singer Styles, famous for his fashion and 2019 album “Fine Line” Allocate Cry out loud PC key similar to «return»

46 48 50 51 53 54 55 57 59 60 62 66 67 68 69 70 71

on a Mac Aesthetic of an alternative lifestyle, for short Evening, in French Bird with two sets of eyelids What___ (to any extent) Oklahoma city Opp. of a withdrawal Held a position on a board of directors, maybe Hershey offering “It’s all the ___” Mock ___ dot Links, for short Fragrance The title of this puzzle, for one Come together on Zoom, maybe Silently assents “Screw you!”

DOWN

1 LOL alternative 2 Words that mark the end of an engagement?

3 Inits. of a famous hairdresser, gymnast, and activist, best known for their role on Queer Eye 4 Musical with songs by Elton John 5 ___ Party, political organization founded

by Bobby Seale and Huey

MINI #2

ACROSS

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 21 23 24 25 26 28

P. Newton Morgan le Fay, for one Buried treasure App customer Play with, maybe, as food Confessed Brave Start of a tribute poem Primer used in medieval and renaissance paintings Bad ending?

Baked lamb dish with mashed potatoes Birthplace of Eliud Kipchoge Wildly dizzy Skillful lawyer, slangily Sniffer with an upturned tip

The Minis MINI #3

ACROSS

1 Fat Man or Little Boy: Abbr.

1 Helps

6 Jungle animal with a distinctive snout

5 Burning again, as a candle

7 Amazon assistant 8 Stories

7 Prickly patch 8 Type of question 9 Momentum, informally

9 Onuses

DOWN

1 In any way

2 Cartoon character who sings “The Bare Necessities” 3 Word after soap or rock 4 Like some reviews, emotions, or drinks 5 Leadership

DOWN

1 They “have the meats,” in a slogan 2 French hat 3 Beethoven’s “Für ___” 4 First Black Disney princess 6 Former congressman Thurmond who held the longest speaking filibuster ever by a single senator (over 24 hours)

34 Most far out, as some dance moves 36 Lose one’s marbles 38 Krispy ___ 39 “Simple” ingredient in some cocktails 47 State north of California 49 Three 51 Way to restart play in rugby 52 Airport nicknamed “the busiest square mile in the world” 56 Queen who laments over Aeneas’ betrayal 58 Poppy drink?

61 Dad ___ 63 Turnt 64 Large ornamental fish 65 Qty.

By Gabriel Robare Co-Head Puzzles Editor

Scan to check your answers and try more of our puzzles online!

Friday September 10, 2021

Opinion

page 6

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Hurricane Ida made clear that the Orange Bubble is not invincible. Now what?

Claudia Frykberg

O

Columnist

n Wednesday, while I sat in my second class of the academic year — a course titled Cities, Sea Level Rise and the Environmental Humanities — an emergency alert buzzed on my phone. It read, “Tornado Warning,” and outlined the steps I should take to protect myself. Don’t go outside. Stay away from windows. Await further warning.

The warning was almost a novelty. My classmates and I chuckled at the irony of being issued a tornado warning amid a class on sea-level rise and climate change.

The moment felt surreal — I come from Australia, where the chance of a tornado occurring was about as likely as a mid-summer snowstorm. But soon the sense of uncanniness began to subside, and we were all called back into class. As we discussed the theoretical in the classroom, the realities of the climate crisis were materializing above and around us.

It’s easy to feel protected by the Orange Bubble. Even COVID-19 seems to have wreaked little havoc within the confines of campus.

Protected by our vaccinated status and the weekly testing regimen, cases are few and far between, and seldom heard of. When we do hear of a classmate, teammate, friend, or acquaintance confined in isolation, we murmur some sympathies about their circumstances and move on, feeling thankful that it isn’t us in that position.

But the truth is, the protection we experience in the bubble is tenuous. We

are merely a few dozen cases away from an outbreak.

Hurricanes are also capable of penetrating the orange bubble, as we witnessed with Hurricane Ida just a few nights ago.

It is easy for the sense of security to lapse into complacency. It is easy to get caught up in campus life — much easier than it was in the “real world” last year. But I challenge you to resist that urge. If anything, the freak storm that swept through Princeton the other day, which left dorms flooded, water pouring out of light fixtures, and turned courtyards into swampy marshes, should be a reminder that in Princeton, we are anything but immune to the realities of what we learn about in class.

While Princeton may seem like a haven, we can push its boundaries. We can spur it to open itself up to the outside and to realize the solutions we discuss in classrooms. We can support the movement for fossil fuel divestment and dissociation and urge the University to reflect the problem-solving mindset it so fervently advocates.

Princeton has agreed to divest from certain fossil fuels (specifically coal and tar sand oil) and companies that spread climate disinformation, and has promised to pursue a net-zero endowment; however, the timeframes and deadlines for these goals are non-existent.

The lack of urgency is similarly apparent in Princeton’s Sustainability Action Plan, which pledges netzero Greenhouse Gas Emissions by 2046, a time-frame bested by all but about one other Ivy League Univer-

sity. The pathway to this net-zero emissions goal is also murky, with the plan citing the implementation of “known and unknown strategies” and “the potential purchase of new renewable electricity generation off-site” to reach this target.

Further, the University only promises to “track” Scope 3 emissions and reduce “where feasible”.

While the commitment to divestment and the Sustainability Action Plan shows a drive to solve these issues, the urgency required to tackle them effectively seems lacking. The deadline for a solution has passed and the effects of radical changes in climate have already been felt in the wider community and have begun to even infringe upon the seemingly impregnable orange bubble.

If Hurricane Ida showed us anything, it is that the issue is at our doorstep and time is a luxury we no longer have. As a result of climate change, hurricanes like Ida will only become stronger and more frequent, posing greater infrastructural challenges to urban landscapes like New York City and threatening New Jersey (and our very own campus) with higher levels of flooding and greater storm damage.

I urge you to shrug off complacency and recognize the fragility of our position, understand the realities beyond the theoretical of classroom learning, and take action to protect and preserve the luxuries and safeties we enjoy within the boundaries of our campus.

Claudia Frykberg is a junior in the English department. She can be reached at frykberg@ princeton.edu.

vol. cxlv

editor-in-chief Emma Treadway ’22 business manager Louis Aaron ’23

BOARD OF TRUSTEES president Thomas E. Weber ’89 vice president Craig Bloom ’88 second vice president David Baumgarten ’06 secretary Chanakya A. Sethi ’07 treasurer Douglas Widmann ’90 assistant treasurer Kavita Saini ’09

trustees Francesca Barber Kathleen Crown Gabriel Debenedetti ’12 Stephen Fuzesi ’00 Zachary A. Goldfarb ’05 Michael Grabell ’03 John G. Horan ’74 Rick Klein ’98 James T. MacGregor ’66 Abigail Williams ’14 Tyler Woulfe ’07 trustees ex officio Emma Treadway ’22 Louis Aaron ’23

145TH MANAGING BOARD managing editors Harsimran Makkad ’22 AG McGee ’22 Kenny Peng ’22 Zachary Shevin ’22 content strategist Omar Farah ’23 Sections listed in alphabetical order. head cartoon editors Sydney Peng ’22 Akaneh Wang ’24 associate cartoon editors Inci Karaaslan ’24 Ambri Ma ’24 head copy editors Celia Buchband ’22 Isabel Rodrigues ’23 associate copy editors Catie Parker ’23 Cecilia Zubler ’23 digital news design editor Anika Maskara ’23 associate digital news design editor Brian Tieu ’23 graphics editor Ashley Chung ’23 instagram design editor Helen So ’22 print design editor Abby Nishiwaki ’23 newsletter editor Rooya Rahin ’23 head features editor Alex Gjaja ’23 Rachel Sturley ’23 associate features editors Annabelle Duval ’23 Ellen Li ’22 Tanvi Nibhanupudi ’23 multimedia liason Mark Dodici ’22 head photo editor Candace Do ’24 head podcast editor Isabel Rodrigues ’23

associate podcast editors Jack Anderson ’23 Francesca Block ’22 Katie Heinzer ’22 head video editor Mindy Burton ’23 associte video editors Uanne Chang ’24 Daniel Drake ’24 Marko Petrovic ’24 head news editors Evelyn Doskoch ’23 Caitlin Limestahl ’23 associte news editors Bharvi Chavre ’23 Naomi Hess ’22 Marissa Michaels ’22 head opinion editor Shannon Chaffers ’22 associte opinion editors Won-Jae Chang ’24 Kristal Grant ’24 Mollika Singh ’24 head prospect editors Cameron Lee ’22 Auhjanae McGee ’23 associte prospect editors José Pablo Fernández García ’23 Aster Zhang ’24 head puzzles editors Gabriel Robare ’24 Owen Travis ’24 head sports editor Emily Philippides ’22 associte sports editors Ben Burns ’23 Sreesha Ghosh ’23

145TH BUSINESS BOARD chief technology officer Anthony Hein ’22 assistant business manager Benjamin Cai ’24 business directors Gloria Wang ’24 Shirley Ren ’24 Samantha Lee ’24 David Akpokiere ’24 lead software engineer, system architect Areeq Hasan ’24

project manager Ananya Parashar ’24 software engineers Pranav Avva ’24 Rishi Mago ’23 Joanna Tang ’24 Dwaipayan Saha ’24 business associates Jasmine Zhang ’24 Jonathan Lee ’24 Caroline Zhao ’25

THIS PRINT ISSUE WAS DESIGNED BY Abby Nishiwaki ’23 Juliana Wojtenko ’23

AND COPIED BY Genele Hua ’23

COURTESY OF ALEX MOOSBRUGGER

Flooding in Joline Hall.

Done reading your ‘Prince’?

Recycle

Opinion

Friday September 10, 2021

page 7

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

As we return to in person instruction, let’s not take it for granted Ava Milberg Columnist

W

hile the first day of class is always exciting, this year felt different for obvious reasons. Most students had not stepped foot in a classroom in nearly 18 months, instead facing the challenges of Zoom from all different corners of the world. After juggling technology difficulties, Zoom

fatigue, time differences, and the other myriad of challenges that accompanied remote learning, there was an evident sense of relief throughout campus as students and faculty were finally able to return to physical learning spaces.

This heightened eagerness propelled students to seize the opportunity to engage with their classes on a deeper level — we should harness this momentum as the semester

continues and the novelty of in-person classes wears off.

On September 1, for the first time in my college career, I had the chance to walk to class with a friend and then sit next to her in lecture. Thus, the day marked not only the start of a new academic year, but also the relinquishment of many of last year’s social distancing rules and the resumption of being physically closer to our peers

JON ORT / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Cartoon Directions

and other members of the Princeton community.

As I have learned throughout the past year and a half, physical proximity plays an important role in connecting with others. We are finally able to grab dinner with multiple friends without having to worry about sitting so far apart that we have trouble hearing each other.

We can talk to our professors and classmates in person, alleviating much of the confusion that accompanied online learning.

While I had previously been grateful for my education and in-person classes, this appreciation was limited and often curbed by the stress and dread I associated with schoolwork.

I rarely, if ever, recognized the privilege I had — being able to physically attend classes, being surrounded by my peers, chatting with my teachers after class, and having a bona fide community at school. Throughout the past year and a half, however, I became keenly aware of the trivial components of my education that I had previously taken for granted.

So as I returned to school this year, my enthusiasm for the year ahead was much greater than years before as I had developed a deeper appreciation for

Left Hanging

By Sydney Peng ’22

By Elizabeth Medina ’24

The Harder They Fall

By Sydney Peng ’22

the everyday pleasures of school that we had to sacrifice due to the pandemic.

Over these past few days, I found myself turning to Joni Mitchell’s lyrics from “Big Yellow Taxi,” where she imparts, “Don’t it always seem to go that you don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone.”

Fortunately, in-person school is no longer “gone,” but for quite some time it was. Only after losing the ability to go to school and all of the enjoyments that come with it was I able to truly develop gratitude for it.

I hope that I, as well as my peers and teachers, can harness this newfound gratitude and use it to propel us — not only in these first few weeks but throughout our lives — reminding ourselves how lucky we are to once again be learning in each other’s midst. While this year may be accompanied with more guidelines than past years, let the past year and a half motivate us to follow these rules that remain in place in order to maintain the privilege of attending school in person.

Ava Milberg is a sophomore from New York City. She can be reached at amilberg@ princeton.edu.

Friday September 10, 2021

Opinion

page 8

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

The privilege of indifference: Commonalities between national forest management, Divest Princeton Hannah Reynolds Columnist

M

y first column for the ‘Prince,’ written in the summer of 2020, detailed the importance of protecting the Tongass National Forest in Southeast Alaska. The Tongass acts not only as one of the world’s best carbon sinks, a place of economic potential through tourism and outdoor recreation, and an abundant source of wild foods, but has also been the traditional homelands of the Tlingit, Haida, and Tsimshian peoples for over 10,000 years.

When I wrote the column, the Trump administration had proposed a rollback of the Roadless Rule, which protects over nine million acres of land in the Tongass, despite 96 percent of public commenters opposing the rollback of these protections.

This summer, I had the opportunity to work with Sitka Conservation Society on forest management policy. Being on the ground in the Tongass, I was able to witness the Biden administration’s efforts to restore protections to the forest and mitigate climate change firsthand.

In observing the merits and downfalls of Biden’s approach to forest and climate policy, I was reminded of a similar situation from much closer to home: the case for fossil fuel divestment.

When we consider the similar obstacles faced in both federal forest management and a student-run college divestment campaign, one can see that resilience in the face of the climate crisis is entirely attainable. The problem? The decision makers positioned to take action are privileged with wealth and power, and thus, a false sense of security as they dictate the future of our planet from the comfort of Washington D.C., where the impacts of climate change are not yet felt so severely as in Alaska.

Some of the policies implemented by these decision makers are successful. This summer, for example, in addition to beginning a process to restore the Roadless Rule, the USDA announced plans for a holistic approach to their new Southeast Alaska Sustainability Strategy, beginning with a ban on old growth logging. At the same time, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Ala.) was closely involved with Biden’s infrastructure bill, which offered the opportunity to electrify much of Southeast Alaska. These wins

HANNAH REYNOLDS / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

for the Tongass show just how possible it is to address the climate crisis with ambitious and decisive climate policies, with proper leadership from public officials.

Other federal land management efforts in the Tongass fell short, however, with partisan conflicts jeopardizing our best shot at addressing climate change. For one, the Forest Service’s metrics for success in the Tongass remain predominantly focused on timber sales and wildfire management, rather than clean energy and carbon sequestration. By continuing to focus their efforts on a dying (and mismanaged) industry, the Forest Service demonstrates a preference to “business as usual” over ambitious climate action. At the same time, the national infrastructure budget was cut from $2.25 trillion to $1.7 trillion as a result of partisan negotiations. This prioritization of party politics over an opportunity to advance the economic and ecological wellbeing of Americans demonstrates yet another failure of our public leaders to take climate action, despite being so well-equipped to do so.

Still, none of the forest management strategies employed by the Biden administration are ambitious enough to address the ever-present and escalating threat of cli-

View of Mt. Edgecumbe in Southeast Alaska from Harbor Mountain on Baranoff Island.

mate change. Why? Those in positions of power — whether senators, presidents, or wealthy lobbyists — have the luxury of focusing on money because they feel there will always be ways to escape the existential threat posed by climate change.

The people with the power to do something about climate change are not our youngest generations with their entire lives ahead of them. They’re not the marginalized and low income populations often significantly more vulnerable to climate change. They’re not people living in coastal communities threatened by sea level rise and tropical storms, or in the West with drought and wildfires threatening their homes and communities, or in Arctic villages sinking into the ground due to thawing permafrost. These are people with the resources to keep sitting comfortably on Capitol Hill while the rest of us are fighting for our lives and our futures.

Here at Princeton, we see the same thing happening.

Over 2,300 Princetonians have signed Divest Princeton’s Open Letter to the University, calling for urgent divestment and dissociation from the fossil fuel industry.

Princeton’s response? An embarrassingly vague and un-

ambitious plan to partially divest from an industry that has publicly spread climate disinformation and profited off of climate change for decades, only after decades of student organizing around the issue.

Since then, there have been no public updates on the progress on divestment and very minimal engagement between the divestment committee and student organizers. Similar to federal public officials, Princeton’s leaders continue to delay progress and fail to sufficiently address their culpability in the climate crisis. These leaders are privileged in their ability to concern themselves more with maintaining research funding from egregious polluters like ExxonMobil and BP than listening to the voices of students, alumni, and faculty whose futures are at stake.

What Princeton’s leadership fails to acknowledge is that their resistance to immediate climate action directly impacts the lives of its students and alumni all over the world. Many of us have already felt the impacts of climate change in our home communities. In fact, just last week, as we took shelter from a tornado and flash flooding in Princeton, Hurricane Ida caused mass devas-

tation across the country and the deaths of over 80 Americans. What caused these destructive storms? None other than climate change, which Princeton remains complicit in so long as it continues to invest and partner with an industry that is actively destroying our futures.

Our leaders, whether USDA officials, or legislators, or Trustees at Princeton, must listen to those most affected.

Our leaders must listen to those in frontline communities where severe and disproportionate impacts of climate change are already being felt.

They must listen to Indigenous peoples who have lived upon and stewarded these lands for thousands of years.

They must listen to the young people who lack the political power to take climate action, but will have to live with the consequences of corporate greed and irresponsibility.

Our leaders must listen and take decisive action now.

We can’t afford to wait any longer. 2046 is too late.

Hannah Reynolds is a senior in the anthropology department from the Finger Lakes, N.Y. She is also the co-coordinator of Divest Princeton and works for Sitka Conservation Society on Tongass policy. She can be reached at hannahr@princeton.edu.

HANNAH REYNOLDS / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

HANNAH REYNOLDS / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

The old growth of the Tongass near Sitka, Alaska.

Receding Mendenhall Glacier in Juneau, Alaska.

the PROSPECT. The Daily Princetonian

Friday September 10, 2021

page 9

ARTS & CULTURE

After hiatus, how ‘Survivor’ returns is critical

The reality competition show “Survivor” has frequently been praised as the “greatest social experiment ever” by the media, its host Jeff Probst, and its contestants. I’ve been watching “Survivor” since I was seven years old, and I’m excited for it to return this month after a yearlong hiatus. My primary method of procrastination for a while has been catching up on older seasons, doing deep dives into obscure analyses of voting patterns, and waking my sister up with 3 a.m. texts about funny moments.

But as I’ve gotten older I’ve also been watching critically, and find myself disturbed by the producers’ poor treatment of contestants from marginalized groups. With CBS announcing that all future seasons of its reality shows will have casts that are at least 50 percent people of color, this is a crucial time to amplify ongoing conversations about what “Survivor” does right, what it does grievously wrong, and where it should go from here.

The show is premised on a group of “castaways” marooned and split into “tribes” that compete to win protection from being voted out. Players negotiate ways to target their opponents and backstab their allies without getting outsmarted. Meanwhile, they’re living out in the open, with little to eat, managing the social stress of spending 39 days with strangers.

This past year, two groups of Black “Survivor” players, the Black Survivor Alliance and the Soul Survivors Organization, expressed their displeasure with how many Black contestants are treated: the narratives created around them were based on racist stereotypes, such as being “sassy,” “lazy,” “crazy,” or “angry.” Black women especially have been stereotyped as aggressive — Crystal Cox-Walker of “Survivor: Gabon,” for example, has said that her positive interactions and personality traits were omitted, leaving her depicted with no nuance.

Additionally, women of various races are often stereotyped on “Survivor,” depicted as bossy or conniving for making the same cutthroat moves that are lauded as game-changing when performed by men. All-women alliances are portrayed as uniquely dangerous, but as competitor Kellee Kim mentioned on “Survivor: Island of the Idols,” the same is never said of all-men alliances.

In one instance, the wardrobe department sent Kelly Shinn onto “Survivor: Nicaragua,” with only a bikini and a sundress in the middle of Nicaragua’s rainy season, while other

players had jackets and warmer clothing. Shinn was evidently cast as the “attractive young woman” character without regard for her well-being. But she found her actual circumstances too harsh to continue, so she quit — and then received virtually no screen time in the season.

Shinn isn’t the only example of “Survivor” under-editing women. Confessional interviews are a window into a player’s perspective and a large source of their overall share of airtime. But by one fan’s accounting, in only eight of the 40 seasons did women have more interviews than men. The highest percentage of women’s interviews was only 57.33 percent, reached on two seasons. In comparison, in the 32 seasons where men spoke in more interviews than women, there were 14 seasons where men spoke in over 60 percent of interviews.

By the same fan’s tally, “Survivor: Guatemala,” had no Black people in its cast. 10 seasons did not have any Hispanic or Latinx cast members, and 13

mal. Spilo should have been removed the moment that Kim and others became concerned about his behavior — which was documented on camera.

Kim should have received more support, and the production team should have been more clear in their warnings and check-ins with the players, which several described as vague and confusing. Though Probst has said that policies have been instituted going forward to better handle misconduct, it is baffling that they hadn’t been in place from the show’s inception.

Unfortunately, though, season 39 was not the first time sexual assault or harassment occured on the show, and those previous instances were handled poorly as well. Ghandia Johnson told other competitors in “Survivor: Thailand” that fellow player Ted Rogers, Jr. had touched her inappropriately without her consent, and some cast members responded in ways that suggested they didn’t believe her. When she became — rightfully — upset by

had no Asian contestants. And there have only ever been four “Survivor” contestants who were Native American. This imbalance is striking and concerning.

These are serious issues with the treatment of “Survivor” players by the show’s production. But there are equally serious issues regarding the treatment of players by their castmates, and the production team’s mishandling of the aftermaths of such situations.

In the 2019 season, contestant Dan Spilo frequently touched women in ways they were not comfortable with.

Kellee Kim was especially affected

by Spilo’s harassment. Early on, she asked Spilo to stop. Later, after Kim expressed in a confessional interview her distress that Spilo’s actions had continued, the production team gave him a warning but he still did not stop. He was eventually ejected from the game “after a report of another incident, which happened off-camera and did not involve a player,” according to the card displayed on-screen after his removal.

To be blunt, the way production handled this harassment was abys-

this, others called her a “crazy lady” and “childish,” and Johnson was stereotyped as the “angry Black woman.”

Later, in “Survivor: All-Stars,” Susan Hawk endured unwanted contact from former winner Richard Hatch and decided to quit the game. Some of the remaining contestants even celebrated her departure. The production team did not step in in either Hawk’s case or Johnson’s.

So what needs to change looking ahead to season 41? The new policy of having people of color compose fifty percent of each cast is a good start and will hopefully help to alleviate some problems, including the unfortunate trend of people of color being ostracized and alienated from majority white teams. But it doesn’t fully remove possibilities for harm.

For one thing, women have always made up roughly fifty percent of each cast, which has never stopped misogyny by other players or in the edit, so the situation might not improve for people of color either, even if they’re more present on the show. Numbers alone won’t accomplish much if white players continue to mistreat people of color and the production team continues to represent them poorly.

As the Black Survivor Alliance and the Soul Survivors Organization have advocated, there needs to be a more diverse crew behind the cameras that’s better trained in how to tell stories about people from marginalized communities. There needs to be more active support for players from production — the fourth wall can and should be sacrificed for the sake of stopping bigoted harassment.

And there needs to be a more rigorous vetting process for casts. As Gabby Pascuzzi of “Survivor: David vs. Goliath” said, “Just because crappy people exist in real life doesn’t mean that the cast has to contain crappy people.” Villainy can be appealing and interesting without it being racist and misogynist; compelling conflict can occur without one party being traumatized by the other.

The most basic strategy in “Survivor” is to eliminate people who stand in the way of your path to victory.

Although not making too many enemies is important to winning, it’s

By Molly Cutler Assistant Editor

still not a “nice” game where competitors always get along, and that fact has been largely accepted for most of the show’s tenure. There will and should be conflict in the show, for it to maintain both narrative interest for the audience and social challenge for the players.

There is absolutely no reason, however, that that conflict has to victimize someone based on their membership to a particular identity group with the potential for lasting trauma, particularly given that this is a reality show where that trauma lands on the shoulders of a real person rather than a fictional character. Some of the most iconic moments in “Survivor” history have involved conflicts based on personality clashes, camp life, betrayals of out-of-game friendships, and deliberately chaotic behavior. Casts can easily include players who audiences will love to root against without any bigoted vitriol being involved.

Another necessary change is improved psychological aftercare for contestants, including aftercare that caters to the specific needs of women, people of color, and LGBTQ+ people, who face additional difficulties during and after filming.

Two-time competitor Zeke Smith has spoken about this issue. On “Survivor: Game Changers,” Smith was outed as transgender by Jeff Varner (Varner was then unanimously eliminated). As a result, Smith received additional care from the show’s psychologists, and says he “needed every second of it.” But he realized that many other competitors came home with their own trauma from the show, and didn’t receive the same support.

For example, he said, when he played in 2016, the resources given to players about reacclimating to real life after “Survivor” referenced seasons filmed in 2001 and 2002. Much has changed in “Survivor,” in the world, and in mental health treatment since then — and it’s unacceptable for the care players receive not to evolve as well.

None of this is to say that the show should ignore or sanitize social issues if they arise. But it should not be provoking and relishing in racism, or sitting idly by while sexual harassment goes unchecked. In Pascuzzi’s words, “We’ve seen 40 seasons of a microcosm of society ... Society can be racist and sexist and random and unfair and ugly. I don’t need the game to be those things ... A season can be dramatic without being nasty or contrived.”

If CBS has made significant changes during the show’s hiatus, the coming seasons could shine. With more support for competitors, it could mitigate its recent over-reliance on surprise twists and hidden advantages, by instead driving the narrative through interesting personalities from a more diverse array of people, who can play better when they aren’t being severely mistreated. It could have more surprising seasons by giving balanced edits so stereotypes don’t control the narrative.

But if it hasn’t made those changes, watching social and strategic intrigue play out isn’t worth the price of the health and dignity of marginalized individuals. Numerous writers and players have spoken up before, and “Survivor” has had too many chances already.

“There needs to be more active support for players from production — the fourth wall can and should be sacrificed for the sake of stopping bigoted harassment.”

SYDNEY PENG / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Molly Cutler is an Assistant Editor for The Prospect and a TV & Shows Critic who often covers podcasts and internet art. She can be reached at mcutler@princeton.edu, or on Twitter at @clarinautilus.

The Daily Princetonian

page 10

Friday September 10, 2021

‘Solar Power’: Predictable to a fault Lorde released her third studio album, “Solar Power,” on Aug. 20.

“Solar Power” is a marked shift from the musical identity Lorde has cultivated among her following in years past with her critically-acclaimed albums “Pure Heroine” (2013) and “Melodrama” (2017).

“Solar Power,” according to Lorde herself, is an album indelibly shaped by the COVID-19 pandemic. “[L]ockdowns were a big part of Solar Power,” Lorde said in a recent email bulletin. “At home I’d feel emo, trapped, bad about my body, but on...long aimless walks I could feel the sun on my face.”

It doesn’t embody the polish, the confidence, and the vocal virtuosity of “Pure Heroine.” Simultaneously, it drops the gripping, everyman melancholy of “Melodrama.” Faced with all this, then, the listener might be forced to ask: what does, precisely, “Solar Power” have?

Well, in a word — nothing.

The real fault of “Solar Power,” in truth, is not any sort of self-contained shortcoming. The album is well-produced, musically pleasing, and certainly as summery as its title would have listeners believe. Particularly sunny elements, including an emphatic use of percussion and relatively sparse instrumentation that allows Lorde’s voice to penetrate the songs’ entireties, lend the album a

distinctive sound palette and atmospheric tone.

It is merely in that “Solar Power” follows on the heels of albums which can reasonably be said to have fundamentally defined pop music during the 2010s that it falls short. “Pure Heroine” takes pop expectations of the era and subverts them like no other, combining unexpected percussive elements, like the cowbell, with the poise and aloofness of Lorde’s distinctively, gorgeously rough-around-the-edges tone. “Melodrama” chafes at itself, reaching the listener with a heartrending personability that does away with conventional schema — here crafting conventional radiopop hits with lyrics that scream of loss, there speaking in “Liability” with a frankness that feels incomparably conversational.

These albums, sometimes credited with the rise of a semi-alternative “whisperpop” in the late 2010s, which was itself ascribed to artists like Halsey, late-era Taylor Swift, Troye Sivan, and others, enjoy a level of prestige unseen even by artists who are better-known. They draw on jazzy modes, extended cadences, and the generation of tension through delayed resolution, especially at the ends of phrases. Ideologically, there is a courage endemic to Lorde’s work in “Pure Heroine” and “Melodrama,”

without which it would have been impossible to push the limits of three-minute pop singles to the extent they were.

Compared to Lorde’s past work, then, “Solar Power” is disappointingly mediocre. Phrases are roundly crafted, cadencing on the tonic more than ever before. Lorde’s singing takes on the largely singular role of being uniformly choral and melismatic.

More than anything, songs in “Solar Power” lack forward motion.

The descending line of the chorus in the song “Solar Power” is frankly exhausting, and “California,” for example, relies on the oscillating motion of just a few chords ad nauseam. Perhaps most concerningly, no song immediately stands out: in my hours and hours of listening to this album, I can pick out very few songs by their melody only and identify them by name without some real, concentrated effort.

Most discouragingly, hints of what make Lorde’s past work so exceptional show through in “Solar Power” as well. So much of “The Path” makes use of mixed-modal writing, including major chords that linger over the piece’s somber introduction with a nuanced, melancholy flavor. When Lorde tells the listener to “Blink three times when you feel it kicking in” in the title track, the

On handwriting Recently I was in McCosh Hall 10 for the first lecture of PHI 202: Introduction to Moral Philosophy. It’s a large class with around 300 students. The lecture hall is large, with a balcony. I sat near the front — one has to be choosy in looking for a lefthanded desk. I set up my notebook and pen, wrote a heading, and began taking notes.

The professor moved through his lecture, sliding through his stylish powerpoint presentation. He described the nature of ethics (in rather interesting terms, I might add) for about 10 minutes. The room was in rapt — or maybe bored — silence. Then, he tapped his keyboard and the definition of “metaethics” shone on the large projector screen.

Immediately it was as if a large flock of birds took off into the sky behind me. Hundreds of students moved to copy down the definition. The flutter of hundreds of typing fingers challenged the professor’s amplified voice. After a year of Zoom classes and lectures, relatively silent in my bedroom, the sound shook the room.

By the sound, the vast majority of the class typed their notes. Typed notes, especially in large lecture classes, are de rigueur these days.

But many professors scoff at them, preferring handwritten notes — this is from personal experience. Many prohibit screens from their classes altogether. Should they?

There are plenty of studies arguing that handwriting is better for notetaking than typing. Professors reference these studies often, arguing that students ought to handwrite their notes so they will remember their notes better. The explanation is that moving one’s hand helps to retain the information, as multiple parts of the brain are firing at once. Handwriting also inclines the student toward synthesis of information, and typing inclines toward transcribing of words. The literature backs up these claims.

There are plenty more studies, however, suggesting that handwriting does not have that many advantages over typing. Many professors ignore the issues of accessibility.

Some students can’t handwrite easily, and even still, others have handwriting so poor they might as well type. Typing is far faster than handwriting: the average American can type 40 words per minute, but can only handwrite 13 words per minute.

And it’s easier to organize, edit, and synthesize notes when they exist on a hard drive rather than on paper.

Handwriting and typing both have their advantages. People will advocate for both. But I’m not an opinion writer or a scientist, and this article is not a scientific study.

My technically-grounded discus-

sion ends here — I’m much more skilled in the realm of anecdotal than empirical evidence.

For a long time, I was a steadfast typist of notes. I had pages and pages of notes in Google Docs, meticulously edited, with pictures, for all sorts of classes. I typed all my notes, I typed my essays, I typed my thoughts, nearly every last last one of them. In high school and my first year of college, I would go weeks without handwriting more than a few words at a time.

There was one place I did handwrite, and still do. Each night, work done for the day, I retreat to my bed, settle in, and write one page in a notebook. I write about my day, pitch a thought and follow it to its conclusion, or just practice some writing — whatever. I write my thoughts. I write in cursive, which takes me a long time. It can be a slow, arduous task, especially at a late hour. But it’s a valuable ordeal — because I write at the pace I think.

I can type faster than I can think.

I’m not even a particularly fast typer, but my cursor can still fly through

a thought before I’ve even seen the end of it. Typing allows flighty thoughts, ones perhaps better fit to our Twitter-infected society. When I write by hand, I force each sentence’s thought to mature in my mind. The words don’t spill out, scattered all over the floor: they’re laid down one by one like bricks.

It’s far from a perfect process. No one’s a great speller when they’re tired, so I scratch out a lot of errors.

I’m left-handed and I write in pen, so my pages are smudged often. And typing allows word-choice changes on the fly — that’s much harder by hand. It’s full of errors, but thoughts are full of errors, too.

Whether you type or handwrite is important. What you write with affects how you write. How you write affects how you think. In other words, as the great Canadian communication theorist Marshall McLuhan said, “the medium is the message.”

These days, the majority of my professors ask for handwritten notes, while a few still allow laptops in class. I’m not sure whether that’s a

By Aster Zhang Associate Editor

synchronization of the line’s lyricism to the percussion of Lorde’s diction feels like a punch to the gut in the best way. “Leader of a New Regime” is particularly beautiful: it delicately blossoms upon itself, first introspectively, then growing into a chorus of sorts that is buttressed by bold chords affirming the multidimensionality towards which Lorde aims to speak.

But before these moments can come into their own, the music actually matching the mood which Lorde seems to want to project, they end.

By her own description, “Solar Power” is all about “devotion to the sun.” Nevertheless, it feels more like watching the sun through the lens of a television screen, where its rays are seen but not felt. Over her oeuvre’s course, it’s always when Lorde is at her most unpredictable, her most quixotic, that she is at her best.

It’s simply a shame that, in “Solar Power,” such occasions are few and far between.

Aster Zhang is an Associate Editor for The Prospect who writes about music and food, often specific to the Princeton community. They can be reached at brentonz@princeton.edu, or on Twitter at @aster_zh.

By Gabriel Robare Senior Writer

reaction to a year of online learning or something else; it’s far too soon to say what the effects of the pandemic on pedagogy are. But for now, I’m choosing to write all my notes by hand this year.

Should you do it too? I can’t say.

Like I said above, there are lots of great reasons to type your notes. I’m not going to, but not because of what the science says. I remembered my notes just fine when I typed them.

Given the choice, I’m going to reach for the vintage. I’m going to take notes by hand because I want to take notes slowly and thoroughly. I want to lay down words at the pace I can think, creating sturdy stepping stones of thought that lead toward knowledge. My Moleskines and I will take a slow walk through the thick forest, hacking a path through the trees.

Gabriel Robare is a senior writer for The Prospect, co-Head Editor of the Puzzles section, and a news contributor at the ‘Prince,’ who often covers literature and the self. He can be reached at grobare@princeton.edu.

CAMMIE LEE / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Friday September 10, 2021

The Daily Princetonian

page 11

‘I’ve spent close to 20 years remembering in a way totally foreign to most American adults: by imagining what that day and life before it was like’ 9/11

Continued from page 1

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

bers of the community lost to COVID-19. It all leaves the campus as a rich place to contemplate our history and our memory, as well as the lives of those who once walked this same campus.

On the second day of classes this semester, I took such a walk, stopping by the University’s 9/11 Memorial, which is nestled between East Pyne Hall and Chancellor Green. Facing Nassau Hall, yet partially shrouded in beautiful plants and delicate white flowers, the memorial is not one that often catches my attention as I walk across campus. With some free time before my next class, however, I paused for a moment to walk past the bell marking the memorial’s entrance and take it in.

Under the bright summer sun, some of the 14 stars carrying the names of Princeton alumni who died on 9/11 gleamed a deep golden hue, while others stayed in the shadows. All, however, formed a circle on the ground, around which I slowly walked as I read each name and class year.

As I did this, I thought the same thing my mind inevitably goes to when thinking about 9/11: How can I ever forget if I never remem-

bered?

Unlike the statues of former president John Witherspoon and James Madison Class of 1771 on East Pyne, these 14 stars honor 14 people whose closest friends and family are, more than likely, mostly still alive. For them, I imagine visiting this memorial is more like visiting a gravesite.

But for me, someone born only 18 months before the attacks, these 14 stars feel almost as historically and emotionally distant in my memory as the aforementioned statues. Yes, I may have already been alive that September morning, but my earliest memories aren’t from until a couple years after the towers fell.

In all honesty, this distance I feel from 9/11 has kept me from ever fully, viscerally understanding what that day was like. I have no story of where I was when I first heard or saw the news. I have no story of how my life changed that day. Instead, I’ve spent close to 20 years remembering in a way totally foreign to most American adults: by imagining what that day and life before it was like. By coming of age with no sense of a pre- and post-9/11 world — just the world as it is.

In fact, the yearly commemorations come and go with so much attention — and even political tension — in a way that will

never fully make sense to me.

Of course, I feel a sense of deep sadness, and even confusion, at people committing such heinous acts. Still, I never seem to reach the place older adults do, where they feel an intense gut reaction of shock, terror, grief — or sometimes even hatred — that can build up around such a defining moment as 9/11. But 9/11 wasn’t a defining moment like that for me, and I’d be willing to say that’s true for the many other Princeton undergraduates also too young to remember or even have been alive at the time.

All these thoughts f loated around in my mind as I walked around those 14 stars, reading names and class years yet again.

They’re thoughts I revisit every time 9/11 comes up. And then they always lead me to the one 9/11 story I do have and will never forget.

I was 17 years old when I first visited Ground Zero. Touring the museum, I eventually entered the hall with pictures and names of all who died. Immediately to my right as I entered was a very young girl held in the right arm of a man I assumed to be her dad.

With his other arm, the man was pointing out one of the pictures on the wall, whispering something to the little girl. Then, she reached out with her own arm to the picture as well. My imag-

ination overwhelmed me as I thought of the grandparent or uncle or aunt or whoever else the girl would never meet. I rushed to find the nearest exit — too overcome to see the rest of the museum.

I thought of this story as I was getting ready to leave Princeton’s memorial. And as I circled the 14 stars one last time, I thought of the “little girls” of those 14 alumni — the folks who would grow up hearing stories and seeing pictures of them, but never meeting or talking or remembering.

Remembering is something so deeply ingrained into the physical campus in which we make our lives as Princeton students.

Still, it’s so easy to walk through its arches and towers and halls without ever taking the time to really contemplate the people and stories the campus embodies.

However, having taken the time to do so, as I walked past the memorial’s bell again on the way to my class, I now carried with me those 14 people so tragically killed 20 years ago.

José Pablo Fernández García is a junior from Ohio and Associate Prospect Editor at the ‘Prince.’ He can be reached at jpgarcia@princeton.edu.

Friday September 10, 2021

Sports

page 12

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } WOMEN’S FIELD HOCKEY

Field hockey suffers tough losses against No. 1 UNC, No. 5 Louisville

COURTESY OF GREG CARRCCIO / GOPRINCETONTIGERS.COM

Sophomore forward Grace Schulze scored a goal during the second period.

By Julia Nguyen

Staff Sports Writer

No. 13 Princeton field hockey (0–2 overall) fell 4–1 on Friday to No.1 University of North Carolina (2–2 overall) at the Tigers’ season opener. The last time the two teams competed against each other in 2019, the Tar Heels took home the NCAA trophy, defending their position as national champions.

UNC scored early in the first period, giving them a 1–0 advantage against Princeton. Determined to even the score, Princeton tried to keep the ball on their offensive side of the field, but their five shots on goal and two penalty corners were saved by UNC. By the second period, the bleachers of Bedford Field were packed with Princeton students and families. Feeding off the energy of the crowd, sophomore forward Grace Schulze tied the game with about seven minutes left in the pe-

riod.

“I was just trying to do anything and everything I could to get the ball on the net and create a scoring opportunity. Our team always says a goal doesn’t need to be pretty, it just needs to count. After the goal I was excited but also knew the game was far from over so we had to keep putting pressure on them,” Schulze reflects.

Shortly after, the Tar Heels added another tally to the score, entering half-time with a 2–1 lead.

Princeton came out strong in the second half, shooting at the goal in the first two minutes. Shots on goal by first-year midfielder Beth Yeager and junior striker Ali McCarthy were saved by UNC’s goalie. With four minutes left in the third period, the Tar Heels managed to slip past Princeton’s defense, scoring once again.

Down by two, the Tigers shot at goal before the end of the period

but were unable to add to the scoreboard.

At the start of fourth period, UNC dominated the field, keeping the ball in their offensive possession. Within the span of five minutes, the Tar Heels had four shots on goal and two penalty corners. UNC’s Hannah Griggs managed to slip one in at 51:40, securing a 4–1 lead. With eight minutes left, the Tigers shot on goal twice more, attempting to close the gap in the score. Both shots were saved by UNC’s defense.

Despite a tough game against the reigning national champions, sophomore goalkeeper Robyn Thompson had seven total saves.

Just two days after taking on UNC, the Tigers fell 3–2 in a close game against the No. 5 University of Louisville Cardinals (4–0 overall). Princeton came out onto the field strong, dominating the game with a skillful offense.

In the first ten minutes, the Tigers were able to

pressure the Cardinals’ goalie with five shots on goal and two penalty corners. On a penalty stroke play, Yeager scored the first goal of the game.

After Princeton’s goal, Louisville managed to earn a corner, and subsequently a goal, with less than thirty seconds left in the first period, bringing the game to a 1–1 tie.

The Cardinals scored quickly in the second quarter, giving them a one point lead. For the remainder of the game, Princeton maintained possession. There were multiple efforts by the Tigers to eliminate the gap, but their efforts were not met with success until the end of the period. With thirty seconds left on the clock, Princeton earned a penalty corner. Yeager once again scored for the Tigers, bringing the score to 2–2 at halftime.

The game remained tied throughout the second half. While both teams had multiple shots on goal and

opportunities to score with penalty corners, neither found the net.

In seven-a-side overtime play, the Cardinals maintained strong possession of the ball.

About five minutes in, the Cardinals received a penalty corner. Their shot was deflected off a Princeton stick, going high in the circle. The Cardinals consequently earned another penalty corner and scored. The play was reviewed due to the possibility of a high/dangerous ball but the referees ultimately stayed with the original call, giving the Cardinals a 3–2 win.

In another home game at Bedford Field, Princeton will play against No. 12 Duke University (1–3) on Saturday, Sept.

11 at noon.

Julia Nguyen is a staff writer for the News and Sports sections at the ‘Prince.’ She can be reached at trucn@princeton.edu or on instagram at @jt.nguyen.