The Daily Princetonian: Reunions 2023

Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Friday May 25, 2023 vol. CXLVII no. 12

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

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

A Campus Changing Past and Present

ZEHAO WU / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Special: 50 Years of Coeducation See coverage beginning on page 3

The Daily Princetonian

page 2

Friday May 25, 2023

Letter from the Editor Rohit Narayanan Editor-In-Chief

Dear Readers, 50 years ago today, the Class of 1973 graduated from Princeton, among them the first class of women to be admitted as first-years to the University. In this issue, we celebrate that historic class and hear from its alumni.

This issue also compiles some of the most significant moments from the past year. We tell the story of a campus under construction and one dealing with difficult questions about student mental health. We highlight significant student achievements and also significant student struggles.

Through this project, we can look at the past and present of the University and start to imagine the future. Coeducation, however long delayed, was a significant stride for Princeton and an important step towards better serving the student body and humanity as a whole.

That history should not be meaningless. We can use that lens to reflect on the debates that captivate Princeton today. Maybe it might help us decide how we should proceed to best meet that ideal.

Coming together as a whole community this Reunions season: as administrators, faculty, alumni, parents and students, we celebrate each other’s company. And we choose that future for Princeton together.

Best, Rohit Narayanan Rohit Narayanan is the 147th Editor-in-Chief of The Daily Princetonian; he can be reached at eic@dailyprincetonian.com.

50 Anniversary th

Friday May 25, 2023

page 3

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } NEWS

Former Dean Nancy Malkiel talks joining the faculty as first women were admitted in 1969

By Lia Opperman Associate News Editor

Nancy Weiss Malkiel joined the Princeton faculty as an assistant professor in history in 1969, the same year that women were first admitted to Princeton on track to graduate. From 1982 to 1986, she served as the founding master of Mathey College. From 1987 to 2011, she served as Dean of the College. She currently serves as a professor of history emeritus. Malkiel is the author most recently of “‘Keep the Damned Women Out’: The Struggle for Coeducation,” a study of the decisions that went into coeducation at elite institutions of higher education in the period from 1969 to 1974.

This interview has been edited for clarity and concision.

The Daily Princetonian: Can you tell me a little bit about yourself?

Nancy Malkiel: I joined the Princeton faculty in 1969, the same year that undergraduate women came to Princeton. I was a graduate student at Harvard — I was teaching sections of a course led by my thesis advisor — and at that point, the way people [and] the way institutions hired faculty was different from the way it works today. Today, of course, jobs are advertised and you apply and so on. At that point what happened was that the faculty members leading searches, in this case at Princeton, would call their friends at Harvard, Yale, a handful of other places and say, ‘this is what we’re looking for, who have you got?’

Frank Craven, who was leading the search for an assistant professor in modern American history at Princeton, called my advisor and said, ‘who have you got?’ They wanted to hire an assistant professor in modern American history who could also do some teaching in African American history — I was writing a dissertation in African American history. My advisor came to class and said to me, ‘I’ve recommended you for a job at Princeton’ and we both laughed because there were no women at Princeton. He said, ‘but it would be good for them to have to consider it.’ So I was invited to come for an interview. I wasn’t looking for a job but I figured ‘sure, I’ll go.’

The chair of the department, a formidable figure named Lawrence Stone, said, ‘it’s not that we have a policy against hiring women. It’s that nobody’s ever suggested it before.’ So I talked to practically everybody in the department. I did not realize then how difficult it is. When candidates for assistant professor appointments normally come, the search committee spends time with them, but getting other people to come and see them is really hard.

This time around, they’d never seen a candidate like this. Everybody in the department, all of the American historians, came to lunch. Everybody in the department of medieval history, African history, European history, you name it, came to talk to me in the faculty lounge because they wanted to know what this creature was all about.

I was offered the job and I was delighted to accept. And so when I arrived in the fall of 1969, there were three women in the professorial ranks in the University. There were women lecturers, but in the professorial length, that was it. We were asked to do everything, speak to this group, serve on that committee. My own view of that was ‘sure, I’ll try all of that out.’ If there are things I like, I’ll do them again. And if I don’t like them, I won’t do them again.

One could have taken the view that this was pure tokenism, which of course it was, but that wasn’t the way I looked at it. The history department was welcoming. When I walked into precepts, my students, literally all male would stand up and pull out my chair for me. That didn’t last very long. One of my junior advisees brought me an apple to office hours.

My course evaluation said things like ‘there’s less idle joking in your classes and you teach from a feminine point of view.’ I asked some students I came to know well whatever that meant, and they didn’t know. I was invited to the meals and eating clubs and I was only 25 years old, so

not much older than the juniors and seniors there — it was usually well into the meal before students at the table realized they were eating with a faculty member.

It was an adventure in the beginning, but that’s how I got here. And then I spent many years teaching 20th century American history. In 1982, I became the founding master of Mathey College. In 1987, President Bowen appointed me Dean of the College and I served as Dean of the College until 2011.

DP: What was your experience like being the first woman in the history department? How did the department evolve over time with you being there?

NM: Well, we all got used to each other. After I came, they began to hire more women. So I wasn’t the only woman for more than a year or two. My department was quite welcoming. I know there were people in the department who didn’t think I ought to be there, but they didn’t tell me that. Other departments were much tougher on women at the assistant professor level.

When we were doing a search for a new assistant professor, and they came up with a female candidate, one of my colleagues said, ‘well, what do you think?’ And he said, ‘I guess you’re in an impossible situation. If you say you don’t want to hire her, it’s because you want to be the only woman and if you say you do, it’s because she’s a woman.’ I wasn’t thinking there would be encounters like that, where it just sort of scratches your head.

I was teaching a Black History seminar in the department. Seminars in American Studies were often co-taught with other faculty members and a faculty committee in the Program in American Studies would meet and decide what the seminar would be for the next year. They had had religion in America and they had socialism in America. They decided that the next one would be women in America and they looked at me and they said, and ‘you’re the logical person to teach it,’ but I didn’t know anything about the history of women. So I co-taught it with a new faculty member in English who actually knew quite a lot about it. Situations like that came up all the time.

DP: I noticed that after four years in the history department, you were recommended for tenure, which first resulted in a negative departmental vote and then later resulted in a positive one. What was the process like for getting tenure? Do you think it was different to go through that process as a woman?

NM: I was in the fall of my sixth year, which is when people normally come up for tenure. You spent three years as an assistant professor, you were reappointed for another three years, and in the fall of year six, you got recommended for tenure. That was a time at Princeton when there were very tight budgetary constraints, and the Dean of Faculty had to issue what were called tenure slow plans, where he told each department based on the age and distribution of your faculty by rank, ‘this is the number of tenure appointments you’ll get in the next year and in the next five years.’ It was a very difficult time in terms of awarding tenure. At the same time, it was a time when the American historians were looking to hire ‘a star.’ Well, I wasn’t a star, though I was a serviceable faculty member, there was no way you would have said that I fit their definition of stardom.

They were afraid that if they spent the slot on me, that would preclude their being able to hire a star. And nobody ever did this before at Princeton. So the Dean of Faculty said to the department, ‘if you decide you want to tenure, Nancy, you’ll still have the spot to hire the star.’ The department interpreted that as the Dean of the Faculty interfering in department business and leading on the department to appoint me. That’s not what he was doing. He was trying in good faith to say, ‘I understand the constraints you’re under. I understand your aspirations and given that she’s a woman and we’ve never done this before, if you want to do it, we can do both.’ The climate was

PHOTO COURTESY OF NICK BARBERIO, OFFICE OF COMMUNICATIONS

Nancy Weiss Malkiel. very complicated. Nobody knew how to do it. The Dean of Faculty didn’t know that by trying to be helpful, he would be misinterpreted. The department didn’t know that the faculty was trying to be helpful and not lean on them.

So the decision was made to reconsider. And then the department voted positively. It was complicated.

I had good colleagues in the department who were very supportive. The President, the Provost, and the Dean of the Faculty were very supportive, so I was more bemused by it than upset by it.

DP: I want to move a little bit more into your role as Dean of the College because you were Dean of the College for a while and in your role, you developed the McGraw Center for Teaching and Learning, which is very popular even today and launched the college’s new fouryear system. Can you talk a bit about some of your initiatives?

NM: During my deanship, we instituted the Writing Program and the freshman writing seminars. We revamped the general education requirements. We really started up on greatly expanded study abroad, internships abroad. Many things happened during those 24 years. We didn’t finish any job but we got some things underway that I think have proven beneficial for undergraduates.

DP: I also noticed that you implemented what students call a ‘grade deflation’ policy that is talked about even today. I’m wondering what kind of feedback did you receive from students and faculty on this decision?

Was there any sort of backlash or did people agree with you?

NM: We didn’t call it grade deflation. That’s what students called it.

What happened? Grades were going up and up and up. Members of the faculty were saying to me, ‘you and the faculty committee on examinations have to do something about this. We’re getting to the point where grades are not meaningful.’ And I would say back, ‘what can be done can be done in the department?’ And I was told, ‘no, you have to have a policy that will apply across the University, because otherwise there’s no incentive for me and my colleagues in my department to grade more responsibly.’ I said, ‘but I would be laughed out of a faculty meeting if I brought forward a proposal for a university-wide grading standard,’ and they said ‘no, you absolutely have to do this.’ So I was pressured by the faculty.

The faculty committee on examinations of standing spent a long time studying these questions and came up with a proposal, which said that, on average over time, the percentage of A grades in each department ought to be no more than 35 percent. It didn’t say you can only give 35 percent of A grades. It didn’t say you must do anything. It just said that would be a good target to aim for. What we’re really trying to do in grading is to get faculty members to distinguish between students’ most outstanding work and their ordinarily good work, because we said right now they’re getting the same grade.

It would be more informative for students if there was some differentiation in grading, so that was a policy

that was adopted.

Of course, faculty members, when students complained about their grades, faculty members started saying ‘Dean Malkiel made me do it,’ which was really helpful. Which of course wasn’t true, and I never said anything. Students believed we were harming their chances for admission to graduate school and professional schools and for qualifying for interviews for prestigious internships. There’s all sorts of data demonstrating that was not true.

There was a meningitis B scare around that time and students created a meme, which had a picture of me and that headline was ‘Meningitis B?’ And then at the bottom, it said ‘would have been meningitis A at Harvard,’ which I thought was actually quite amusing. We thought we were doing some good, but students and parents did not think we were doing good. After President Eisgruber [’83] became president, given the onslaught of complaints, I think he decided it really wasn’t worth the fight.

DP: You wrote an article and book in regards to coeducation in American colleges. Can you tell me about it?

NM: I wrote a book published in 2016 called “Keep the Damned Women Out.” What I was trying to do in that book was to answer the question, ‘why was it in the very brief period 1969 to 1974 that so many colleges and universities in the United States as well as in the United Kingdom, decided to go coeducation all at once?’ Princeton, Yale, Dartmouth specifically. Harvard is a distinct case, so I don’t list Harvard. So many other men’s colleges and some of the women’s colleges that sort of, for example. And in the United Kingdom, the first men’s colleges that Oxford and Cambridge to admit women so what was going on was what I was trying to understand in writing this book. I have a lot of chapters about the advent of coeducation in Princeton, a lot about Yale, a lot about Harvard, even though it is a distinctive case. I wrote about the women’s colleges and how they handled it, [such as] Vassar, Smith, [and] Wellesley.

What I discovered is that at Princeton and Yale, you all were looking at each other and making moves, fully cognizant of what the other one was doing. By the end of the 1960s, the best boys wanted to go to school with girls. And so at Harvard and Radcliffe, men and women were in class together even though Harvard wasn’t coed, that made Harvard increasingly attractive up until the mid-1960s. Harvard, Yale, and Princeton essentially went head to head in admissions. By the end of the decade, Harvard was pulling away from Yale and Princeton, because more high school boys wanted to go to Harvard because there were women in close proximity.

To reverse the decline in applications and retain their previous hold on a fair share of these best boys, they thought that meeting women students would have the effect of attracting more of the best male applicants. That’s why they embarked on coeducation. It wasn’t some moral imperative to educate women. It wasn’t from an altruistic sense that they needed to make educational

opportunities available to women.

It was to restore their competitive position. In applications to college and everybody else, still was watching what we’re doing and came for various reasons. Essentially, copy what you set out to do. This was a time when the women’s movement, the scene movement, the civil rights movement, the notion that males and females who had protested together got to register voters together weren’t going to go to school together seems really anachronistic.

DP: Can you expand a bit on the process of coeducation at Princeton?

NM: It was April of 1969, late April, when the Princeton trustees decided on coeducation and that the women would come in September. Now, Princeton, in a very process-oriented way, would never in the abstract have made a major decision in late April to be implemented in September without more time to plan carefully. [They] had to do that because Yale had decided to admit women in the fall of 1969, and they weren’t going to let Yale get out ahead of Princeton.

It was fascinating to me to see the direct competition between Princeton and Yale and the reason that Yale decided in the fall of 1968, to go co-ed, was they received Princeton’s report on education, the Patterson report, in late September of 1968.

They realized that Princeton could be serious about this. And they had no intention of letting Princeton get out ahead of them. The PrincetonYale competition and all of this that determined so much of what happened to me and was a fascinating revelation that I had just not understood at all.

DP: What do you believe, if anything, that coeducation should be in 2023 and beyond?

NM: In [2009], President Tilghman appointed a group of faculty and students and administrators to study the question of undergraduate women’s leadership. Because we had observed that, in the early part of the 21st century, undergraduate women were hanging back from taking leadership positions. In the late 20th century, as we admitted more women, more women were well represented in leadership positions on campus.

And so we were trying to understand what had happened by the 21st century. Why was it that women were declining to put themselves forward for leadership positions at a rate? We did a lot of data collection — a lot of interviewing of students and young alumni — and issued a report, which I think has made some difference in the willingness of women students to put themselves forward and in their election as student government officers, as editors of [student papers], as club presidents, and so on.

My first question would be where we stand on women and leadership, and have we made gains and have those gains stuck? The second question we were exploring was the reticence of women to major in some of the departments that might be construed as less hospitable to women like math, physics, and economics.

Those are the questions on my mind.

Lia Opperman is an associate News editor for the ‘Prince.’

50 Anniversary th

page 4

Friday May 25, 2023

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } OPINION

How do I have it all? Women, careers, and Princeton’s blind spot

By Abigail Rabieh Head Opinion Editor

Last summer, as a fellow in his namesake program in government service through the Princeton Internships in Civic Service (PICS), I got to hear Leonard Schaeffer ’69, a businessman, speak about maintaining a good work-life balance. Schaeffer spoke about how trying to attend his children’s big games or shows — even jetting around the country for this purpose — often meant that he was the only father in a room full of mothers. This advice, while inaccessible to most of us without private jets, felt particularly meaningless for the women in the room. Schaeffer was able to make his contribution to his kids lives seem completely compatible with his career. Yet what about those mothers which he was the only father among? If those women in his story were all stay-at-home moms, what were we supposed to think about our career prospects? He left a persistent problem for the female participants to discuss post-lecture: how do highachieving women have it all?

The desire to maintain a balance between work and family is not only a women’s issue, nor does it necessitate having children. Yet when it comes to having a family with children, parenthood is generally more important to and more time consuming for women: mothers are more likely than fathers to say being a parent is the most important part of their identity (35 percent versus 24 percent), more likely to report parenting as tiring and stressful (47 percent and 33 percent versus 34 percent and 24 percent), and more likely to undertake more effort in managing and supporting children’s lives (only 1 in 10 fathers

report doing more than their partner in these roles).

Often, motherhood and maintaining a family life are placed at odds with a women’s ability to be focused on and successful in their careers, and for good reason. The stories of working women and current research all show that professions and motherhood are not easy to combine. Princeton, however, turns a blind eye to this alarming issue, and fails its women in the process of preparing students for successful and happy lives post-grad.

About 10 years ago, around the 40th anniversary of the graduation of the first class of women from Princeton, the tension between the two became a subject of discussion. In the summer of 2012, Politics professor emeritus Anne-Marie Slaughter ’80 wrote an article in the Atlantic explaining “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All” (this was the headline, in fact). Slaughter discussed her decision to leave her powerful role as the director of policy planning at the State Department, saying that her desire to be with her family outweighed the benefits of the job she held. Slaughter further argued that older women were lying to younger generations, “reinforcing a falsehood: that ‘having it all’ is … a function of personal determination.” Two shifts were necessary, she claimed: making all careers accommodating to and accessible for women who valued motherhood and family life, and, until that happened, recognizing and discussing the reality that women often experience difficulty and hardship in attempting to achieve that ideal.

A year later, Princeton’s first female President, Shirley Tilghman, stepped down from her position. She cited spending more time with her fam-

ily as one of the things she was most excited about: “I’m going to be an attentive grandmother,” she said. In 2013, even the most powerful woman at this University indicated that her work placed her in tension with her family. At a discussion between Tilghman and Slaughter earlier in the year, they agreed that American society had more to do to “support equality for women.” Slaughter noted that “we need the next wave of an equal rights revolution.”

Ten years later, this does not seem to have happened. A report released last month by the Bureau of Labor Statistics declares that employed fathers were more likely to work full-time than employed mothers, even though 77 percent of Americans report believing that children are better off when parents share working and homemaking equally. Moreover, Princeton does not seem to be supporting women to face this difficult reality either.

The Center for Career Development offers specific career resources for certain identities, but not for women. In a landscape where women face particular difficulties in their careers, this absence feels particularly prominent.

My female friends and I frequently discuss concerns about the timelines of our futures, with when to have children being a common difficulty.

While Princeton often begs us to think about the future, there are not enough offerings to realistically support women in this endeavor.

Indeed, Princeton no longer has a women’s center — it is now the Gender and Sexuality Resource Center, which offers no initiatives that support women in their academic or career goals nor any resources or educational materials for women who may struggle to create realistic plans that

ROHIT NARAYANAN / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Center for Career Development. address all facets of their future goals.

It’s so important to support all identities and offer intersectional resources, but that must include uplifting all individuals who have gender-specific struggles.

Ten years ago, Cameron Langford ’15 wrote in a column for the ‘Prince’ that “admitting a desire to be a working mother and a fear that you might not be able to make it work … means you’re that much closer to a solution.”

As a campus community, we have come no closer to acknowledging this conflict or to addressing solutions.

If Princetonians of the past have been able to openly discuss this struggle, there’s no reason why modern-day Tigers should shy away from it. Admitting that academic or career-based success is not your only desire can be difficult for any student at a University which prides itself on bettering humanity itself. It may seem selfish or small to have personal aspirations outside a traditional path to tangible accomplishments. Later this month, Slaughter will join Majka Burhardt ’98 in conversation about the intersec-

tion of motherhood and professional success. But anniversaries of female achievements and alumni events cannot be the only time Princeton faces this obstacle head on.

Generations of Princeton women have shown that these can coexist: many of Princeton’s most impressive alumni — from Wendy Kopp ’89 to Michelle Obama ’85 to Jodi Picoult ’87 — have children. Yet Princeton’s female trailblazers have also been open and honest about the difficulties in achieving this. Princeton today must not shy away from being realistic with its female students about the struggles they may face, and must offer better resources in preparation for the incredible and challenging future they will graduate into.

Abigail Rabieh is a history major and sophomore from Cambridge, Mass. She is the head Opinion editor at the ‘Prince’ and can be reached by email at arabieh@ princeton.edu or on Twitter at @AbigailRabieh.

OPINION

Lesbian and sapphic communities on campus: in need of revival

By Lucia Wetherill Community Opinion Editor

“The most striking thing about the lesbian community at Princeton,” one 1979 article in The Daily Princetonian noted, “is that it doesn’t exist.”

In 1979, lesbian students took to the ‘Prince’ to describe Princeton’s lesbian community, characterizing it as “informal,” “primitive,” and “very fragmented.” Nearly 45 years later, circumstances have changed drastically — both on campus and in the broader United States. The stigma of “coming out” has greatly diminished, especially with the legalization of gay marriage in 2015. Across the United States, despite recent legislative threats, public opinion of the queer community has continued to improve over the years and is higher than ever before. Public opinion on campus has similarly improved, and Princeton’s Gender + Sexuality Resource Center (GSRC) has worked tirelessly to create institutional support and programs for LGBTQ+ students, sponsoring events and fostering a community that would have been unthinkable in the past.

Despite advancement in LGBTQ+ acceptance throughout society, as a lesbian woman navigating Princeton’s campus in 2023, I find that the 1979 description of Princeton’s lesbian community still seems to apply: It still feels informal and fragmented.

But it could be so much more than that — in fact, it needs to be more.

While past projects have failed, now is the perfect time to give sapphic communities another chance.

In order to understand the current climate of lesbian representation and community on campus, we need to understand the historical organizational politics and structures that have led to where we are today.

Princeton has long struggled to foster a lesbian or sapphic community on campus. In the 1980s and 1990s, there was a surge in motivation to create sapphic spaces; however, these organizations ultimately died out due to the homophobia and gender politics

of the era, as well as a lack of institutional support.

Nearly a decade after the 1979 ‘Prince article,’ in 1987, an editorial asserted that “Lesbians have been one of the least visible groups on campus … there has been little cohesion within the lesbian community, which [has] prevented the formation of a muchneeded support system.” At the time, there was a great deal of prejudice and violence against LGBTQ+ students.

“Raising the general consciousness” became a priority as queer students drew together to create safe spaces.

Yet even within the queer community, there were issues of visibility and acceptance for queer women — spaces were overwhelmingly dominated by gay men. These issues pushed queer women to attempt to create new spaces.

In 1983, due to the male-dominated nature of the Gay Alliance of Princeton (GAP), queer women defected and created Gay Women of Princeton (GWOP) (through a complicated series of merges, the two would later fall under the same umbrella again — GWOP disbanded after only five years). In the late 1980s, there was also an effort to create the Bisexual and Lesbian Support System (BLSS), which aimed to “help lesbians meet others in order to discuss their common experiences and problems” and “bring to light lesbian issues on campus.” Yet that group also survived for only a few years.

Later, in the 1990s, both the Women-Oriented Women (WOW) group and Princeton’s Eagerly Awaited Radical Lesbians (PEARL) defected from the Gays and Lesbians at Princeton (GALAP, which had replaced GAP).

One 1991 ‘Prince’ article entitled “Lesbians and bisexuals seek visibility” described the WOW campaign, claiming that “the lack of officially recognized space for lesbian and bisexual women reflects their peripheral presence on campus.”

The very issues that prompted the formation of these groups prevented the creation of a strong and cohesive lesbian community. The homophobia

and prejudice against queer women meant that very few women were willing to be openly gay (thus, membership was low). Additionally, there was likely a severe lack of institutional support and funding — after all, these were simply student-led groups catering to the “peripheral” lesbians at a time when 55 percent of Americans believed gay sex was “morally wrong.”

As a result, these groups faded, leaving an absence of a lesbian community on campus that persists today.

When I stepped onto Princeton’s campus nearly 30 years later, I had no understanding of Princeton’s queer history — indeed, I was still coming to terms with my own queer identity.

In the two years since I passed through FitzRandolph Gate, I’ve found a kind, caring, and inclusive queer community. Yet I’ve never felt a real sense of lesbian or sapphic community on campus. This is not because of a lack lesbian or sapphic women on campus; I’ve made a number of lesbian and sapphic friends. That these beautiful and essential sapphic friendships do, in fact, exist, makes the absence of a community all the more noteworthy and painful. While organizations like the GSRC provide countless resources and ways for queer people as a whole to engage in the community, there are no clear sapphic spaces. Similarly, while there are activities that tend to

bring queer women together (e.g. theater groups), there is no clear sapphic space or group.

In my experience, being a lesbian can be incredibly isolating. We exist in a highly heteronormative and patriarchal society, with our very existence resisting both of these tenets — not only do we resist the ideal of heterosexuality, but we also defy the cultural centering of men. Our identity and sexuality are often diminished (the classic “you haven’t met the right man yet” mentality), fetishized, or villainized (the “predatory lesbian” trope).

These struggles do not detract from the struggles that any other queer individuals experience; rather, they’re simply a different set of issues that lesbians (and even other sapphics) understand.

Yet common struggles are not the only basis for sapphic communities.

There’s so much joy to be found in connecting with queer women. While romantic relationships are of course important, platonic friendships between queer women are often overlooked. In reality, my friendships with other women-loving-women have been some of my most fulfilling friendships. These relationships often provide me the space to be my most authentic queer self — there is a common basis and understanding of sapphic interests, culture, and emo-

tions that allows me to feel truly seen.

Groups like BLSS and WOW died out in the 1980s and 1990s. But it wasn’t because they weren’t necessary — it was because of the homophobia and gender politics of the era, as well as poor funding and support. There weren’t nearly as many women who felt comfortable being openly queer.

Now, we exist in an age where more women than ever identify as queer.

Princeton has larger institutions created to support the LGBTQ+ community, campus is far more accepting of queer identities, and the queer community itself has become far more diverse and inclusive.

The need for these spaces has not disappeared, but many of the barriers have. It’s time to give these projects another shot. Because I know the lesbian — and larger sapphic — community at Princeton does exist. And at least for the fleeting years of college, we should have the opportunity to experience such a community in its fullest and purest form.

Community Opinion Editor Lucia Wetherill is a sophomore from Newtown, Pa. She is studying in the School of Public and International Affairs (SPIA), with certificates in Global Health Policy and Latin American Studies. She can be reached at lw2158@princeton.edu.

MORE ONLINE One year of committees, nearly 50 years of women (May 2018)

How the Eating Clubs went co-ed (July 2020)

Thank you to the women Princeton history forgot (March 2022)

50 Anniversary th

Friday May 25, 2023

page 5

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } NEWS

50 years of coeducation: in the words of the women of the Class of 1973

By Lia Opperman & Louisa Gheorghita

Associate News Editor & News Contributor

Ellen Bernstein ’73, a psychology major, was a member of the first class of women admitted to Princeton in 1969. Though she had initially been interested in “more progressive [schools] ... Brandeis, Swarthmore, and some of the women’s colleges on the East Coast,” when she found out that Princeton was implementing coeducation, she sent in an application and was later accepted with some financial support.

“There wasn’t any question I was going to say yes,” she said in an interview with The Daily Princetonian.

Bernstein, from a “mediocre, working class, public high school,” was the only person from her school to attend Princeton that year. There was one alumnus from her high school at Princeton, and he invited her to reunions the year she was admitted. They wore buttons with their names and class years.

“It was like being dropped out of a spaceship onto an alien planet,” she said.

Bernstein remembered seeing a “little old man” wearing a striped jacket with tigers and a hat.

“He came up to me and looked at my buttons and he said ‘1873, your dad’s awfully old, isn’t it?’,” she said. “I said ‘no, sir. I’m coming here next year as a freshman.’ He said ‘you were one of those coeds,’ and he started to cry.”

“Coeducation was changing his old Princeton,” she added.

Bernstein and four other women from the Class of 1973 spoke with the ‘Prince’ about being a part of the first four-year class of women at the University and their experiences as students, which they described as generally positive. Victoria Bjorklund ’73, who joined the University a year later and graduated in three years due to advanced standing, also shared her experiences.

Princeton University became coeducational in the fall of 1969. Transfer students started to graduate as early as 1970, though the Class of 1973 was the first class to spend all four years at the University.

In 1967, President Robert Goheen ’40 led a study on the possibility of admitting women as full-time undergraduates. In a conversation with student reporter Robert Durkee ’69, Goheen said that “it is inevitable that, at some point in the future, Princeton is going to move into the education of women.” Additionally, he emphasized that the primary reason for adopting coeducation would be “what women could bring to the intellectual and entire life of Princeton.”

There was opposition, however. Founded in 1972, the Concerned Alumni of Princeton (CAP), which counted Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito ’72 and former Republican Senator William Frist ’74 among its membership, came out against coeducation. They believed that the administration lacked “an understanding of and respect for what it has meant to be a Princeton scholar and a Princeton gentleman.”

In 1969, 102 female first-years and 48 female transfer students enrolled. It took until 2004 for female enrollment to reach 50 percent despite admissions becoming genderblind in 1974.

Elaine Chan ’73, a biology major, was from a family of “modest means,” in her words, but when she got accepted to Princeton, she remembers her father saying, “It doesn’t matter how much it costs. You will go to Princeton.”

Susan Belman ’73, an English major, reflected on women coming to campus, and said that she and others were “busy trying to assimilate ... trying to get their foothold in the overall Princeton community.”

“One of the things that struck me when I got to Princeton was how almost everyone I met was so happy to be a student … there was a feeling of gratitude,” Belman said. “The fact that there were so few women at the time, for me, I think that made it that much more special. I felt as though I was part of the chosen few.”

All undergraduate women in the Class of ’73 lived in Pyne Hall as first-years. Bernstein remembered that this didn’t necessarily make a coherent community, as Pyne Hall is split into entryways that don’t connect indoors.

While shared residential spaces offered some proximity, several alumni noted that seeing so few women in the classroom often felt isolating.

“Most of us were the only woman or the one of the only one or two women in our small classes,” Bernstein explained.

“I never had a woman professor and I was rarely ever in a class with another woman,“ added Victoria Bjorklund ’73, a medieval studies major.

Joanna Cayford ’73, also a medieval studies major, was the only woman in her 100-person history class. “That was the only class I think I really noticed that I was the only woman,” she said. “The other ones, not so much.”

Nevertheless, the alumni shared that they derived a lot of value from being in the classroom.

“I think that bringing a woman’s perspective into some of the discussions really enriched [them],” Chan remarked.

Cayford described her professors as “entirely welcoming” and the Princeton experience as “one of the best things [she] ever did.”

Cayford also described her social circle as primarily men throughout her time at the University.

“I had always hung out with guys. I had brothers to play cards with and the guys in my high school and all this kind of stuff,” Cayford said. “So it was very easy for me to move into the Princeton social thing, and very quickly I was basically living up at Holder Hall.”

For some, however, elements of the transition to Princeton. were not quite so smooth.

Bjorklund is an athlete and was the captain of her basketball team throughout high school. She recalled walking over to the equipment room in Dillon Gym to play basketball.

“We don’t have any basketballs for girls,“ she was told.

She then connected with Merrily Baker, who came to Princeton the fall that Bjorklund joined the University, to help establish women’s athletics.

Baker encouraged her to walk back slowly and ask again, and once she did, they handed her a ball. Baker often watched her play.

Bjorklund was never allowed to be a part of a pickup game, but the next year, she received the first call from Baker that the University was going to start a basketball team.

“I’m the oldest woman basketball alum,“ she said. She mentioned that by time the team was created, the men who initially barred her from playing basketball were later happy to see her come back day after day.

Chan, Bernstein, and Cayford didn’t join eating clubs. Many were not yet coed. Bernstein remembered going to a meal with a friend and being seated in the middle of the table. She was the only woman eating there that night.

At the time, graduate student women were joining the campus community for the first time as well. Sandy Cope GS ’73, a graduate student in chemistry, became a graduate student and teaching assistant in 1969. She monitored an organic chemistry laboratory each week, which she described as “great fun.” As a graduate student, she said that her world revolved around the chemistry department. She lived in the Graduate College, where she wore “robes to dinner” at the dining hall and met students in a variety of departments.

The alumni also noted how their intersectional identities uniquely shaped their experience at the University.

As a first-generation woman at Princeton, Bernstein said that she didn’t know

how to “center [herself] in the Princeton narrative.”

“I didn’t know until my junior year how many of my classmates were millionaires or were from fancy families. And, I did also know a lot of other first-generation students, but I think I blamed all my insecurities on myself and internalized it,” she said.

At Princeton, Chan mentioned that she didn’t feel academically isolated, but did feel socially isolated as an Asian American woman from a public school. She said that the University tried really hard to bring students of color to the University and would often ask her to speak on panels. She didn’t feel “tokenized,” but rather enjoyed having a voice on the panels.

“I just feel honored that I will be able to represent and have an opinion that somebody would care about,” she said.

Chan also served as an assistant to Conrad Snowden, who was the master of the Third World Center, now the Carl A. Fields Center for Equality and Cultural Understanding, at Princeton. She was able to set up programs and intercultural events for students of color.

“We could get students out of their courses and out of the lab to come in and spend time together and just to meet students so that we wouldn’t feel isolated,” she said.

Chan reflected on her growing sense of self over the course of her time at Princeton.

“I learned to be confident and to not pay attention to the little things, like being a woman or being female scientists, young and Asian, where our stereotype is to be timid and retiring.”

“When you speak up, most of the male managers and people in charge are not accustomed to dealing with bold Asian women. So they wouldn’t know how to say no, so I would just take advantage of that,” she added.

When Chan’s mother passed away, she gave her inheritance to the University on one condition: that they use it “to start an Asian American studies program.” There is now a certificate in Asian American Studies.

All of the women mentioned that they do not regret their experiences and would come back to the University.

Bernstein emphasized the “great education” she received, studying in the psychology department and taking a variety of classes. She remembered a Shakespeare course in the English department, where she read a giant book of his work.

“If I could go back [to Princeton] now, I would go in a minute and I would study with [African American Studies Professor] Eddie Glaude [’97], [Sociology Professor] Matthew Desmond and [African American Studies

Professor] Imani Perry. I would want to take advantage of the resources there,” Bernstein said.

Cope expressed a similar sentiment.

“There’s so many things to do,” Cope said.

“Get involved. It’s overwhelming.”

Belman fondly remembered walking across campus through Prospect Garden, and reflecting on the feeling that she will “never be in a place as beautiful as this.”

Although she recalled having a “wonderful life,” she mentioned that “there was a magic about [her] experience at Princeton that has not been duplicated.” She summed her experience of Princeton as “really special” and has served as an alumni interviewer for the past 30 years.

Cayford expressed a similar sentiment, that “My freshman year at Princeton was the best year of my life.”

“I remember I finished a paper at seven in the morning, and I would go to the chapel and just watch the sunlight coming in through the windows,” she said. “That was so beautiful. I really enjoyed … things like that.”

Bjorklund later served on Princeton’s Board of Trustees as an Alumni Trustee, where she worked to make Princeton “a great place to go to school for everybody,” and hoped to increase diversity and resources for first-generation, low-income (FGLI) students.

She recalled attending her 40th reunion, where she was introduced to a woman who was hired by Princeton from Radcliffe to review women in the Class of ’73’s applications. The woman explained that among the things, she was told to look for included women who had a backbone and women who had brothers. Bjorklund explained that she has both.

“Going through the first class of Princeton ... I wasn’t going to let anybody indicate to me that I was less than any other student,” she said.

Chan is in charge of organizing the PRade experience for the Class of ’73. She has attended the vast majority of Reunions experiences and is excited to return to campus soon.

“There’s a lot to learn from the way Princeton brings people together,” she said. “I’m just thrilled every time I go to Reunions and I see all these women in the parade and the younger classes. My heart leaps in my chest.”

Lia Opperman is an associate News editor for the ‘Prince.’

Louisa Gheorghita is a News contributor for the ‘Prince.’

DATA

For the women of the Class of 1973, recruitment remained close to home

By Charlie Roth & Suthi Navaratnam-Tomayko

Head Data Editor & Assistant Data Editor

On April 20, 1969, Princeton’s Board of Trustees announced the first phase of the University’s coeducation: women would be allowed to enroll at the University as undergraduates for the first time in the fall.

That spring, Princeton began to matriculate 102 female first-year students and 48 female transfer students — though they planned to admit 90 first-years and 40 transfers — for the upcoming academic year. It was a fast turnaround recruitment process, and, according to statements by the admissions staff, focused on a few schools. The Daily Princetonian looked at the geographic distribution of the class to shed light on that extraordinary year in admissions.

In an interview with the ‘Prince,’ former Dean of the college Nancy Malkiel, who wrote a book on the history of coeducation at Princeton, said “Princeton, in a very processoriented way, would never in the abstract have made a major decision in late April to be implemented in September without more time to plan carefully.”

“They had to do that, because Yale had decided to admit women in the fall of 1969, and they weren’t going to let Yale get out ahead of Princeton,” Malkiel continued.

It was only months between the Board’s vote in favor of coeducation and the Class of 1973’s matriculation.

As described in a Princeton Alumni Weekly (PAW) in 1969, due to the trustee decision still pending, the Admissions Committee did not specifically recruit female students that year. Admissions officers would normally visit secondary schools to recruit prospective students, and University alumni would normally be instructed

to search for promising high schoolers, but for the Class of 1973, neither cohort recruited female applicants. Because of that, the University had “far less diversification in the female applicants than in the male applicants,” noted John Osander ’57, thenAdmission Director, in an interview with PAW in 1969.

Osander passed away earlier this year.

Osander discussed some of the effects of the speedy timeline: “Most of the girls are from what are considered ‘good’ schools; most are from the East; most are at least wellto-do. We had many excellent applications from 52 alumni daughters (22 were accepted), an unusually high percentage of the total.

It was apparent that many of the girls were applying because of their particular circumstances: either they were bright young women who heard of Princeton through their school, or they were alumni daughters kept informed by their fathers’ strong interests, or both,” he told PAW. The one caveat was that the Admissions Office was aware that applicants from minority and disadvantaged backgrounds would be less likely to know about the University’s shift to co-education. In light of this, then-admissions officer Spencer Reynolds ’61 told PAW that he made a specific effort to recruit applications from Black and underprivileged backgrounds, successfully receiving applications from 23 of them, 10 of whom were admitted.

Osander went on to state that he felt “that the quality of accepted women is exceptionally high” for the Class of 1973.

In 1969, female students made up roughly 15 percent of the incoming class. A PAW article, published in May 1969, stated that when the policy was set out, the University aimed for an eventual 3:1 ratio of men to women. In 2022, the ratio of male to female undergraduates was roughly 1:1, with 48 per-

cent of undergraduates identifying as male and 48 percent identifying as female.

Contemporary data shows that there was at least some geographic skew among the women of the Class of 1973. Eighty-three women graduated as a part of the Class of 1973, the first graduating class of women in Princeton’s history admitted as first-years.

Those women matriculated with 19 other women in 1969; several women either completed their graduation requirements early and graduated within three years or took gap years. Only five women left Princeton or transferred out.

The women of the Class of 1973 primarily came from New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania. Of the 101 women who were listed in the 1969 Freshman Herald (out of 102 who matriculated), 23 came from New Jersey, 32 came from New York, and 11 came from Pennsylvania. No students came from Delaware, meaning that 65 percent of the women who matriculated that year came from New Jersey or a state bordering it. In contrast, 48 percent of the incoming class as a whole came from New Jersey or its neighboring states.

In New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Indiana, and Washington State, the percentage of female students from the state was higher than the broader Class of 1973 percentage of female students.

Twenty-two states sent men and no women to matriculate at Princeton that year, while 11 states sent nobody — a total of 33 states that sent no women to Princeton.

Overall, 37 states and the District of Columbia saw at least one Princeton matriculation, while only 16 and the District of Columbia had a female resident matriculate.

The Class of 1974 saw a more even geographical distribution, particularly amongst women. Nine more states, for a total of 26, had a woman matriculate at

FLOURISH MAPS

Princeton in 1970. Forty-one states sent students to Princeton in total, four more than the previous year. Three female international students, from Canada, England, and France, matriculated at Princeton that year, as compared to only one, from Spain, who matriculated the year prior. Additionally, the proportion of women hailing from New Jersey or bordering states dropped to

50 percent, only slightly higher than the 48 percent of the entire class that came from those states.

Charlie Roth is a head Data editor for the ‘Prince.’

Suthi Navaratnam-Tomayko is an assistant Data editor for the ‘Prince.’

The Daily Princetonian

page 6

Friday May 25, 2023

BEYOND THE BUBBLE | JANUARY 2023

Edward Tian ’23 creates GPTZero, software to detect plagiarism from AI bot ChatGPT

By Julian Hartman-Sigall Assistant News Editor

When Edward Tian ’23 first heard about ChatGPT, a new chatbot software, he asked it to write raps. Then, during winter break, Tian, a computer science concentrator who is writing his thesis on artificial intelligence (AI) detection, spent a few days sitting in a local coffee shop in Toronto coding a software now named GPTZero that detects writing produced by AI. Tian is a senior news writer for The Daily Princetonian.

Tian tweeted out the beta version on Jan. 2. Tian’s tweet has since amassed over 7 million views and, according to Tian, GPTZero has been downloaded by people in 40 states and 30 countries. Additionally, his product was covered in the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal among other outlets. Tian spoke with the ‘Prince’ about GPTZero and the future of his software.

“I had a bunch of free time over break,” he said in an interview. “I was like, maybe I’ll just code this out, so everybody can use it.”

ChatGPT is an AI chatbot made by OpenAI, a seven-year-old artificial intelligence research company, that can carry on conversations with users

and produce longer pieces of writing in a variety of styles in response to a prompt in plain English. ChatGPT has been the focus of substantial discussion based on its advances in accuracy and potential uses in a variety of fields. Tian said that the public conversation around ChatGPT prompted him to think about the potential impact that its impressive prose could have on plagiarism in academic writing.

“The last few weeks, the hype around ChatGPT has been so crazy,” he said. “That’s what’s got me thinking about the impact towards teachers and schools.”

Through his work on AI detection for his thesis, Tian had already spent time thinking about the technology and had some of it on his laptop.

GPTZero uses two metrics to estimate the probability that the text was written by AI: perplexity and burstiness. Perplexity measures the randomness of the word choice and construction of a given sentence and burstiness compares perplexity across sentences. ChatGPT works by predicting the most common next word, so the more random the construction of a text both within and across sentences, the more likely it was written by a human.

In a statement to the ‘Prince,’ Jen-

nifer Rexford ’91, Chair of the Department of Computer Science, wrote that “Tian’s innovative GPTZero application is a wonderful example of Princeton students engaging deeply with both the technical and the social implications of the rapid developments in artificial intelligence.”

Despite receiving multiple calls from venture capitalists, Tian has decided he will not sell the software, and instead has chosen to focus on improving it. He recruited a few recent Princeton alumni who he has worked with in the past to help him improve the model.

On Sunday, Jan. 15, this group released GPTZeroX, which includes new features, including highlighting certain phrases or sentences within a text that it believes may have been written

by AI. They wrote in their GPTZero Substack that they have big plans for the future of the software.

“GPTZero may have started out small, but our plans are certainly not,” they wrote.

Tian said that the group is currently working on identifying implicit bias in AI-generated text.

“Is there something implicit in machine-written articles that humanwritten articles do not have? We think that there probably is,” he said.

GPTZero was released amid public

JULIAN HARTMAN-SIGALL / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

GPTZero finds text to be human generated instead of AI generated. concern about how students may use ChatGPT to cheat on their essays and how it may impact typical essay assignments. For this reason, school districts across the country have blocked ChatGPT on school devices and networks. Despite these fears, Tian is not against developments in AI. “Everyone should use these new technologies. But it’s important that

they’re not misused,” he said.

Tian explained that his motivation for creating GPTZero stems from the beauty of writing. “There should be aspects of human writing that machines can never co-opt,” he said.

Julian Hartman-Sigall is an assistant News editor and an assistant Newsletter editor for the ‘Prince.’

U. AFFAIRS | SEPTEMBER 2022

Princeton to dissociate from 90 fossil fuel companies, including Exxon Mobil

By Paige Cromley Senior News Contributor

On Sept. 29, Princeton University announced that its Board of Trustees voted earlier in the month to dissociate from Exxon Mobil Corp., NRG Energy Inc., and 88 other corporations “active in the thermal coal or tar sands segments of the fossil fuel industry.”

The announcement also stated that the Princeton University Investment Company (PRINCO) will “eliminate all holdings in publicly traded fossil fuel companies” and “ensure that the endowment does not benefit from any future exposure to those companies” as part of the Board’s “commitment

to achieving a net-zero endowment portfolio over time.”

Princeton has current or recent financial relationships with 10 of the 90 companies listed as subject to dissociation, including Exxon Mobil, NRG Energy, and Canadian Natural Resources.

According to the announcement, the “quantitative criteria used to determine the dissociation list were based on recommendations made by a panel of faculty experts in a report submitted in May.” The Faculty Panel on Dissociation Metrics, Principles, and Standards had been created after the Board of Trustees first announced its inten-

tion to dissociate from “companies engaged in climate disinformation campaigns or that are involved in the thermal coal and tar sands segments of the fossil fuel industry” in May 2021, following recommendations from the Council of the Princeton University Community (CPUC) Resources Committee.

The thermal coal and tar sands segments of the fossil fuel industry were identified for their exceptionally high carbon dioxide emissions compared to other fossil fuels, according to the announcement.

Dissociation includes divestment — a decision to refuse to invest — from a corporation, but is defined

COURTESY OF AARON SERIANNI ’25

Members of Divest Princeton participate in a rally on Sept. 23, 2022.

by the University as “also refraining, to the greatest extent possible, from from any relationships that involve a financial component with a particular company,” including “soliciting or accepting gifts or grants from a company, purchasing the company’s products, or forming partnerships with the company that depend upon the exchange of money.”

This includes research partnerships with a financial component, such as Princeton’s Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment, which has had an ongoing research partnership with Exxon Mobil since 2015.

To compensate for the research funding lost as a result of dissociation, the University will “establish a new fund to support energy research at Princeton.”

In the announcement, University President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 was quoted praising this new fund, saying, “Princeton will have the most significant impact on the climate crisis through the scholarship we generate and the people we educate.”

In the May 2022 issue of the Princeton Alumni Weekly, the University released figures related to its holdings in the fossil fuel industry, revealing a $1.7 billion exposure to the industry with $13 million directly invested in fossil-fuel corporations. In the 2021 fiscal year, Princeton’s endowment was valued at $37.7 billion.

The announcement also points out that the University could reform relationships with companies subject to dissociation in the future if it deems that they have “sufficiently changed

their practices such that they no longer meet the criteria” for dissociation.

Currently, the University is contacting the leaders of the companies on the list, and if “a company provides information in a timely manner that resolves the concerns or demonstrates changed behavior moving forward, it could be exempt from dissociation and removed from the list.”

Students have been advocating for fossil fuel divestment for almost a decade. Most recently, campus activist group Divest Princeton held a rally on Sept. 23 where students expressed concern about the slow pace of University action, as well as its acceptance of research funding from fossil fuel companies.

Divest Princeton student coordinators Nate Howard ’25 and Aaron Serianni ’25 wrote in a joint statement to The Daily Princetonian that “[t]his decision is the result of a decade of activism by Princeton students, faculty, staff, and alumni.”

They said, however, that “Princeton still falls short.”

Howard is a contributing columnist for the ‘Prince.’

“Divest Princeton will keep fighting for our goals of full divestment and the end to all fossil fuel funding of research on campus,” the two student coordinators wrote. “We know that it’s possible: They’ve come this far. It’s Princeton’s moment to become a leader.”

Paige Cromley is a junior who writes for the News, Features, and Prospect sections of the ‘Prince.’ She can be reached at pcromley@princeton.edu.

The Daily Princetonian

Friday May 25, 2023

page 7

U. AFFAIRS | JANUARY 2023

University announces increased minimum salary for postdocs, postdocs say it’s not enough

By Sophie Glaser News Contributor

Gathered on the steps of Nassau Hall, a group of about 50 postdoctoral researchers read aloud their open letter calling for a higher minimum salary. Armed with a printed petition which spanned the length of the Nassau Hall steps, the protest comes just two days after an announcement from the University that postdocs would receive an increased minimum salary of $65,000 and follows months of discussion about whether postdoc pay is sufficient.

On Jan. 19, a group of postdoctoral researchers sent an open letter addressed to Dean of the Faculty Gene A. Jarrett ’97 and Provost Deborah A. Prentice, urging the University to raise the minimum postdoc salary to $68,500, provide experiencebased increases, and adjust salaries annually to account for costs of living. Over 400 individuals signed this letter, which called for administrative action before Feb. 6.

The discussion about postdoctoral pay was in part catalyzed by the University raising graduate salaries by an average of 25 percent in January 2022. In an anonymous op-ed in the ‘Prince’ published in April of that year, a postdoc wrote: “the University seems to have forgotten to extend the same pay increase to the essential postdoctoral community.”

The postdoc cited that Princeton’s minimum wage for postdocs was set at the NIH postdoc minimum, noting that under certain assumptions, postdocs could be earning less than graduate students and “paying up to 68 percent or higher of their after-tax income for rent.”

Eight days after the open letter was delivered, the University an-

nounced that it would raise the minimum salary from $54,840 to $65,000, an 18.5 percent increase.

In a letter to postdocs, Jarrett said, “Establishing this new minimum salary recognizes the vital role that postdocs play in our campus community as researchers, in advancing faculty scholarship, and in contributing to Princeton’s academic mission.”

Jarrett also stated that “The new minimum salary will make [the University] even more competitive in recruiting excellent and diverse postdoctoral researchers to Princeton.”

However, organizers from Princeton University Postdocs and Scholars critiqued that message in an email to fellow postdocs.

“We deserve more than a salary increase that allows for ‘more competitive’ recruitment. We need a salary that covers the cost of housing, food, and childcare in Princeton,” the message said. “[We asked for] the same 25 percent raise that graduate students received in 2022 (to $68,500), a yearly increase to track continued inflation, and an experience-based scale to acknowledge the value we bring to Princeton over time. Princeton did not meet these asks.”

Harrison Ritz and Judy Kim, two organizers of the protests, told The Daily Princetonian that the new plan announced by the University fell short in a few key areas and failed to consider the voices and needs of postdoctoral scholars.

“We are thankful and excited about the pay raise which will be beneficial to several of us,” Kim said.

“The issue is we were not consulted or acknowledged in any way, and the University’s announcement did not acknowledge our email with

requests for what we deserve and need. We want fair compensation for our labor.”

Ritz said that the postdocs had received no communication from the University.

“We want to be a part of the process. There was no communication or acknowledgement [of our demands],” Ritz said.

On Jan. 30, postdocs gathered to march from Icahn Laboratory to Nassau Hall. The postdocs filed into Nassau Hall to deliver their letter to University administrators personally. The protestors had hoped to meet with Dean Jarrett and Provost Prentice, but neither appeared.

When reached for comment, the University referred the ‘Prince’ to the letter sent by Dean Jarrett last week, as well as the University’s Postdoc FAQ page.

In their open letter, organizers referenced nationwide campaigns advocating for increased compen-

sation for postdocs, including for postdoc unions such as those at Mt. Sinai and Columbia.

Postdoc Eve Beaury commented on the widespread nature of the issue and current efforts across universities.

“This is definitely a national issue, and something that’s been getting attention a lot recently. In our letter to Princeton, we cited recent efforts by University of Washington, MIT, Harvard, and other universities,” Beaury said. “We’re trying to be part of that national effort.”

According to Ritz, the efforts that culminated in the protest built on the work of postdocs in years past, but specifically began last summer.

“This started sometime last summer with a group of like-minded postdocs who came together and felt like ‘we deserve better.’” Ritz said that the compensation received by postdocs “wasn’t enough to track the skyrocketing costs of living in

and around Princeton.”

When asked about what the group hopes their efforts will accomplish, Ritz commented, “as a starting point, we want a modicum of dignity and respect. We want a seat at the table.”

Beaury noted that the recent salary increase was a positive sign, and that the group would continue working to address their needs.

“Because of how rapidly this is evolving, we’re really hoping that the University is going to respond by that February 6 deadline. But we’re going to keep the communication open and keep working as a postdoc group,” Beaury said.

News contributor Kayra Sener contributed reporting.

Sophie Glaser is a News contributor and assistant Features editor for the ‘Prince.’

ANGEL KUO / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Harrison Ritz, a postdoctoral researcher and organizer of the demonstration, stands in front of the Icahn building before marching to Nassau Hall.

BEYOND THE BUBBLE | OCTOBER 2022

Alumni respond to Professor Emeritus Maitland Jones Jr.’s termination from NYU

By Julian Hartman-Sigall Assistant News Editor

New York University (NYU) has terminated the employment of University professor emeritus Maitland Jones Jr., who had taught at Princeton for four decades, The New York Times reported on Oct. 3. Jones’s firing followed a petition circulated among his students raising concerns regarding his grading practices.

At Princeton, Jones served as the David B. Jones Professor of Chemistry and was responsible for several landmark discoveries in the field of chemistry.

In a statement to The Daily Princetonian, NYU spokesperson John Beckman said that the school’s decision not to renew his contract was, in addition to the petition, informed by “a very high rate of student withdrawals,” poor course evaluations, and “multiple student complaints about his dismissiveness, unresponsiveness, condescension, and opacity about grading.”

“In short, he was hired to teach, and wasn’t successful,” Beckerman said in the statement.

In an interview with the ‘Prince,’ Jones defended his teaching style and the difficulty level of his course.

Referring to a hypothetical untenured professor, Jones said, “If that person’s career exists at the peril of some disgruntled students writing to the deans, then he or she just can’t write

real exams, can’t teach hard material — serious material.”

Jones also said that several of his students have lauded the long-term benefits of his course.

“I’m getting a million emails from former students. And one of the overarching themes is gratitude for allowing them to work through a difficult course. And if you dumb it down too far, you take that away from them,” Jones said.

The ‘Prince’ also spoke to former University students about their experiences taking Jones’s courses.

“I’m sure there were a lot of us back in the fall of 1984 that would have signed such a petition,” Mark Taylor ’88 said. “But if we had succeeded in getting the difficulty level of the class watered down, eventually we would have been disappointed with the results. I think it’s better to stick with a challenge.”

According to the Times, 82 out of the 350 students in Jones’s organic chemistry class at NYU signed a petition to the university’s dean, arguing that their low test scores proved the class was too difficult. Jones said he was not aware of the petition at the time that it was submitted to the dean.

Several NYU students who took Jones’s course in recent years spoke on the matter.

Ella Kim, a senior at NYU who took organic chemistry with Jones two years ago, told the ‘Prince’ that she

“definitely would have signed a petition and I definitely think it was a good thing that he was fired.”

“I think he was uniquely bad in the way that he didn’t really seem to care about students grasping the information, or that he was frustrated in the way that they didn’t understand the way he was teaching,” she said.

Grace Pascal, an NYU graduate who took Jones’s class, told NYU’s student newspaper, Washington Square News (WSN), that Jones “was not receptive to questions, and I didn’t want to open myself up for him to be rude to me.”

In the last few years, Jones said he noticed a change in the way that students approached his admittedly difficult class. He told the ‘Prince’ that many students skipped lectures and the number of misread questions on tests had increased.

“I can stand up there in front of the class and count the house, and when you get to the middle of the semester, it’s below 50 percent. And I saw that if you have recorded lectures, as we had to do during COVID times, you, of course, get a headcount from the Zoom app,” Jones said. “It’s discouraging to see how few people actually listen to those recorded lectures.”

“Nobody went to office hours. We had them every week, [and] we’d get between three and eight people. Those folks at office hours were not the ones who needed to be there. They were the people getting hundreds on the exams,” Jones continued.

“14 ST. 3RD AVE” / CC BY WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

Jones argued that the course is often challenging for students, attributing the semester’s unusually poor performances to the adverse effects of the pandemic on academic achievement.

“In the last two years, [test scores] fell off a cliff,” he wrote in a grievance to NYU, according to the Times.

To Steve Bernasek, a former chemistry professor at the University, the way in which NYU moved to fire his former colleague was “cowardly.” “[T]hey had every right to [not extend his contract] because it’s renewable each year,” Bernasek said in an interview with the ‘Prince.’ “They’re not terminating him. They’re just not renewing his contract for another year. But it’s kind of an administratively cowardly way to do this.”

Jones said he wished students had come to him with their complaints personally, or that the dean should have had “disputing parties” get together and work it out. He pointed to a smaller petition that was brought directly to him the year prior as an appropriate way for students to voice their complaints. Following that petition, he said he “made some adjustments.”

The news has garnered national attention, with many publications covering the saga. The Twittersphere also exploded with commentary on the news.

“He didn’t make it easy on us,” said Luis Javier Castro ’88, a former student of Jones who was on the football team.

Castro recounted a story of when he asked Jones to excuse him from a lab for a game.

“He just looked me straight in the face and was like, ‘No, you’re not excused. You are not here to play football. That’s not what your priority is,’” said Castro. “He was tough but fair.”

Speaking on his colleague’s approach to teaching, Erik Sorensen, a Princeton professor who worked with Jones, said he finds fault with the NYU students’ complaints.

“Maitland Jones is one of organic chemistry’s finest teachers. He possesses the ability to inspire students who have an affinity for the subject,” Sorensen wrote in a statement to the ‘Prince.’

The University declined to comment. Dr. Jones retains his emeritus status, which is approved by the University Board of Trustees.

Former student Dr. Evan Tobin ’88 described Jones as an “unbelievable lecturer” in an interview with the

‘Prince.’

His class was “really hard and it was really great,” said Tobin, noting that Jones’s organic chemistry class was one of his favorite classes at Princeton.

“He was a purist. This is a subject that he devoted his life to, and he had the bar very high and he expected people to meet it,” Stephanie Morris ’88 explained.

Organic chemistry is an advanced course taken by chemistry majors and a requirement for students who wish to apply to medical school, many of whom do not take many other chemistry courses. Some students felt that Jones’s particularly challenging class was geared towards the top of the class.

Jones said he believes it is necessary for organic chemistry to be a difficult class.

“You have to make sure there’s room for the really unusually abled kids to show themselves and to be stretched. Writing an exam where everybody’s getting 85 to 95 — it’s just going to bump those people up against 100 and they’re not going to learn from it,” he said.

When NYU students’ average dropped below the 65 percent that is customary for Jones’s class, the school did not renew his contract. Jones has filed a grievance against the school for wrongful termination.

The ‘Prince’ asked Jones if, given the chance, he would have approached the situation differently at NYU: “I could have made the course easier. I was pressured to do that,” Jones continued. “But I wouldn’t do it.”

Jones, who is 84 years old, told the Times he was not likely to teach for much longer. But the principle set by his firing has worried some.

“I don’t want my job back. I’m done with that,” Jones said. “But I guess all I would say is that I would like the rules to be changed at NYU. So this can’t happen to somebody else.”

To Morris, one of Jones’s former students, the firing raised a nuanced question about the pedagogy of organic chemistry.

“Perhaps this is not the man who should be teaching organic chemistry to people who don’t want to be chemists,” Morris said. “That doesn’t mean he should be fired though.”

Julian Hartman-Sigall is an assistant News editor and assistant Newsletter editor for the ‘Prince.’

page 8

BEYOND THE BUBBLE | MARCH 2023

The Daily Princetonian

Friday May 25, 2023

Remembering the ‘mother of the disability rights movement’: Judy Heumann’s legacy at Princeton and beyond

By Sophie Glaser News Contributor

“There was a deep poise about her,” Rabbi Gil Steinlauf ’91 said of Judy Heumann. “She had a deep sense of mission and purpose, grounded in her own experience for justice.”

Judith “Judy” Heumann, a lifelong disability rights advocate, passed away on March 4, 2023, in Washington, D.C. Her activism, organizing, and policy leadership spanned decades, with career highlights including her contribution to the passage of Section 504, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). As the country and the larger world process Heumann’s passing and celebrate her memory, The Daily Princetonian reached out to Princeton community members with a personal connection to Heumann.

Heumann, considered by many to be “‘the mother’ of the disability rights movement,” was born in Philadelphia in 1947. She was raised in Brooklyn and contracted polio in 1949 and had used a wheelchair since.

Heumann rose to prominence as an activist in the 1970s for her advocacy for Section 504.

Naomi Hess ’22 recalled meeting Heumann in the summer of 2020 when she participated in an internship program with the American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD). Heumann spoke with Hess and her co-workers via Zoom — an experience and memory that followed Hess back to campus in the fall.

Two years prior, Hess had brought the idea of celebrating Jewish Disability Awareness and Inclusion Month to Rabbi Ira Dounn, suggesting that she could plan a specialized Shabbat at the Center for Jewish Life (CJL). For the event’s third year, Hess had the idea to invite Heumann.

“I was able to use my contacts from [the AAPD] to get in touch with her,” Hess recalled, “and personally asked her if she would be interested in doing [a Jewish Disability Awareness and Inclusion month] Shabbat.”

Hess served as an associate News editor at the ‘Prince’ and is currently a Young Alumni Trustee.

After months of planning on the part of Hess and her co-organizer Katie Heinzer ’22, in early March 2021, the CJL hosted Heumann virtually in partnership with Hillel@ Home, Hillel International’s People with Disabilities Employee Resource Group, the Office of the Dean of Undergraduate Students, Undergraduate Student Government Projects Board, and the AccessAbility Center. Over 150 individuals from the

University community and beyond attended the event. Heumann spoke on topics of intersectionality, Jewish community, and media representation of individuals with disabilities.

Heinzer previously served as a podcast editor for the ‘Prince.’

According to Hess, who co-moderated the event with Heinzer, the event “focused on disability inclusion within and outside of Jewish spaces.”

“She did talk about her attitude towards disability … Whenever she came up to barriers, she would just forcibly remove [them], and then use [them] to teach others to show the fact that disability is not a bad word,” Heinzer said about the event.

Dounn, a Senior Jewish Educator at the CJL, commented on the impact of the event. “Judy was her extraordinary, sharp, witty self,” he said. “[She was someone] who could compassionately speak truth to power, who could tell someone with love that they were doing something terribly wrong, and that we should change and accommodate people who weren’t being accommodated and include people who were being excluded,” Dounn continued.

Dounn attended Heumann’s memorial service, which took place in March both in-person and over Zoom.

“The thing about Judy is that she made everyone into family,” Dounn elaborated.

“What was so moving about the funeral was everybody considered themselves a sibling of Judy’s or family. Here’s this person who’s doing this advocacy work trying to get society to change in a meaningful way.

But she’s doing it through love, she’s doing [it] through community, and connection and human interaction in the most pure and beautiful way,” Dounn said.

Heinzer also attended Heumann’s memorial service.

“I was having a lot of difficulty in the couple of days before, understanding that she wasn’t here anymore, because she has just such a gregarious personality … every single person in that room had those stories of Judy,” Heinzer said. “Everybody [at the service] carried that intimate piece of her in our lives and out to the rest of the world. She had such an impact on everyone who she spoke with, even once, that her memory is not lost on anyone.”

Rabbi Gil Steinlauf ’91, who currently serves as the CJL Executive Director and Jewish Chaplain at Princeton University, shared his own memories of Heumann. Steinlauf led Adas Israel Congregation in Washington, D.C. from 2008–2018, where Heumann was a member.

“She was a force. She was unstop-

pable,” Steinlauf said. “She had an exquisite sense of what is right and what is just, and would not depart from her commitment to, what we call in Judaism, tzedek, which means justice.”

Steinlauf added, “I use that term because she was deeply grounded in her Jewish tradition as well and drew a lot of strength and a lot of courage from the Judaism that she cherished in her life.”

Steinlauf also attested to his experience with Heumann’s devotion to cross movement solidarity — a core tenet of disability justice. “[When I first came out,] she was one of the first people who reached out to me, one of the first people I talked to,” he said. “Every time I shared my experiences or my struggles, she just nodded and you could tell that there was something about her that fundamentally understood the intersection between the disability community and the struggle of LGBTQ people.”

Some of Heumann’s early activism involved protesting President Nixon’s original veto of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibits federal agencies from discrimination on the basis of disability.

The act was eventually passed, but Section 504 of the Act, which specifically protected the rights of disabled people to access federally funded spaces such as libraries and schools through accommodations, did not take effect for several years.

Heumann and a group of over 100 protestors arrived at the San Francisco Health, Education, and Welfare office in April of 1977. After learning that the regional director had no idea what Section 504 was, they staged a sit-in that would become one of the longest occupations of a U.S. federal building. The sit-in was a collaborative effort between the disability activists and their allies, including members of the Black Panther Party who brought the protestors food during the occupation.

Following the 1977 sit-in, Heumann testified before members of Congress. One of the most prominent moments from her testimony involved Heumann directly addressing Eugene Eidenberg, who represented the Health, Education, and Welfare office at the hearing.

“We will no longer allow the government to oppress disabled individuals. We want the law enforced. We want no more segregation. We will accept no more discussion of segregation,” Heumann began. Looking at Eidenberg, she continued, “and I would appreciate it if you would stop shaking your head in agreement when I don’t think you understand what we are talking about.”

Later in her life, Heumann ad-

vised the Berkeley Center for Independent Living, worked with the Clinton administration’s Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, and served during the Obama administration as special assistant to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Heumann’s advocacy contributed to the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act by former U.S. President George H. W. Bush in 1990.

During Hess’ time as a student at Princeton, she had the opportunity to profile Heumann for a journalism class. Hess recalled Heumann’s response to a question she asked relating to retirement.

“I asked her what she did now that she was retired. She corrected me immediately,” Hess recalled. “She jumped right in and said that she retired from the federal government, but she was not retired by any means.

She always knew that there was more to be done. But at the same time, she cared so deeply about the people around her.”

Hess also recalled her last meeting with Heumann in January 2023.

“I went over to her apartment for dinner. Something that really stood out to me is that she was just so loving. As we parted ways that night, I didn’t know that it would be the last time, but we hugged each other. And when two people in wheelchairs hug it’s difficult, and powerful,” Hess said. “I don’t think I took it for granted that I have this really powerful disabled woman to look up to, who cared about me.”

Heumann gained additional prominence in 2020 with the publication of her memoir, “Being Heumann: An Unrepentant Memoir of a Disability Rights Activist,” and with the release of the documentary film “Crip Camp: A Disability Revolution.” The film detailed the path of campers and counselors at Camp Jened, a summer camp for disabled youth, as they explored their identities and formed a community that led many of them to impactful disability activism.

“I’m glad that she was starting to get more recognition in the past couple of years,” Hess said. “She didn’t do all this for the recognition. But after such an amazing life of advocacy … just for her to know personally that people are seeing her, truly seeing her for all her work, I’m sure that really meant a lot,” Hess said.

On the theme of family and recognition, Dounn said, “[Heumann] was not in it for glory, or for ego. She was in it because it was the all in the family. It was relationships. It was ‘How could you let this happen to your sister, your brother, your child, your father, your mother, how could you let this happen to your family?

Of course I’m going to fight for my family.’ Simple as that. It’s just so beautiful.”

Hess also noted the impact of her personal relationship with Heumann. “It’s really not often that you get to meet one of your heroes, let alone befriend them. I just feel so, so lucky to have known Judy these past couple years. The world is a better place because of her … seeing the outpouring of love for her after her passing from every corner of the world was really moving for me,” Hess said. “I just feel so fortunate to have gotten to know her and to be able to learn from her. She never hesitated to help others.”

Heinzer, who also participates in disability-related advocacy, echoed a similar sentiment: “It’s because of Judy that I see the value of my work. She wasn’t just an untouchable figure … she was a wonderful person every day and talking to her just felt like the most comfortable, easy thing.”

Several community members noted that Heumann specifically sought to inspire the next generation of activists.

Steinlauf said, “She fundamentally understood the importance of inspiring the younger generation … she understood that standing up for disability rights is actually standing up for the rights of all marginalized peoples in this world. She wanted people to understand that there’s a fellowship and a kinship between all peoples who are struggling for a more just society and a more just world.”

“She lived truly to make the world a better and holier place, and the world is a more sacred place because she lived, and it’s an honor for me personally to have known her, but I think it’s a blessing to all of us that she was in this world,” Steinlauf said.

Dounn said, “there’s a whole generation of people now who have a different fight to fight. She’s bent the arc of history towards justice in such a way that we’re now on a different part of that arc.”

“She paved the way for future disabled leaders to really make an impact. Because of some of the laws that Judy helped to get passed, I had access to an amazing public education that really propelled me to Princeton,” Hess said. “Judy spent so much of her life back when she was a teacher herself, and then once she was in leadership in the Department of Education, really making sure that would be possible for people like me.”

Sophie Glaser is a News contributor and assistant Features editor for the ‘Prince.’

BEYOND THE BUBBLE | APRIL 2023

Giberson ’23 pleads not guilty to 6 violations of U.S. Code in connection to Capitol riot JONATHAN ORT / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

The Capitol Building.

By Eden Teshome & Julian Hartman-Sigall Senior News Contributor & Assistant News Editor

Larry Giberson ’23 pleaded not guilty in his arraignment hearing at 1 p.m. on Tuesday. Giberson, who called into the arraignment hearing from campus, was arrested on March 14 for his alleged involvement in the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021.

He was indicted by a grand jury on six violations of the U.S. code on April 5.

Giberson has previously confirmed to the FBI that he was the individual identi-

fied in the photographs of him at the Capitol on Jan. 6.

During the arraignment, Giberson was read the six violations of the U.S. Code that he has been indicted by grand jury for, including civil disorder, engaging in physical violence in a restricted building or grounds, disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds, and impeding passage through the Capitol Grounds.

Assistant United States Attorney Stephen Rancourt represented the U.S. government in the trial. Attorney Charles Burnham represent-

ed Giberson. Judge Carl J. Nichols presided.

Updating Judge Nichols, Rancourt said that discovery, which involves the materials and evidence the prosecution plans to use in its case against the defendant, will be provided to Burnham by next Wednesday at the latest.

Rancourt requested to schedule a status conference in 60 days. During these 60 days, the prosecution and the defense will attempt to negotiate a plea deal. At the status conference in June, they will decide whether or not they will proceed to trial.

Rancourt said at the hearing that he has been working on Giberson’s case since last fall.

According to the DOJ, images and videos from Jan. 6 show Giberson and a group of rioters at the Capitol on Jan. 6 coordinating a “‘heave-ho’ pushing effort” in an attempt to weave their way into the Capitol. At the tunnel, one Capitol police officer was dragged into the crowd. The DOJ states Giberson started chanting “Drag them out!” and cheered as weapons and pepper spray were used on Capitol police officers in the tunnel.

Burnham declined to comment on Giberson’s plea of not guilty.

12 minutes after the hearing, Giberson was present in his ten-person seminar on religious existentialism at 1:30 p.m.

Eden Teshome is head Podcast editor and a senior News contributor for the ‘Prince.’

Julian Hartman-Sigall is an assistant News editor and assistant Newsletter editor for the ‘Prince.’

Friday May 25, 2023 ON CAMPUS | NOVEMBER 2022

The Daily Princetonian

page 9

After visual arts professor used n-word in seminar, Princeton finds no violation of policy

By Paige Cromley Senior News Contributor

On Nov. 3, visual arts professor Joe Scanlan said the n-word while posing a question to students during his VIS321: Words as Objects seminar. He used the word during a discussion about a poem by Black poet Jonah Mixon-Webster’s poetic anthology “Stereo(TYPE).”

Scanlan, who is white, is a tenured professor and artist with a history of racially charged art projects. In the classroom on Nov. 3, he used the nword when asking students how the word functioned in the text. Multiple students in VIS321 told the The Daily Princetonian that Scalan’s use of the word was not a direct quote from the poem, but his own words.

Scanlan said he disagrees with the characterization that he didn’t cite Mixton-Webster. In an email to the ‘Prince,’ he wrote, “In fact I was citing his poem ‘Black Existentialism no.

8: Ad infinitum; Ad Naseum,’ which runs for almost 20 pages and consists entirely of one word, the n word, spelled with an ‘a’ instead of ‘er.’”

After Omar Farah ’23, a Black student in the class, raised an official complaint about the incident to the University, the Office of the Provost concluded that there had not been a violation of the Policy on Discrimination and/or Harassment following an initial assessment of the situation.

Farah is a Managing Editor for the ‘Prince’; they recused themself from the news coverage of this incident.

Following the use of the word, multiple students in the class told the ‘Prince’ they felt uncomfortable continuing to be taught by Scanlan, and some called for his firing.

David Smith ’24, a Black student in the class, told the ‘Prince’ that he believes Scanlan should be fired. “They can’t fire him for saying that word, but they can fire him for being incompetent and intentionally causing harm, of which I think he did both,” he said.

Smith is a social media staff member for the ‘Prince.’

After Scanlan asked the question during the class, Farah told the ‘Prince’ that there was “shock in the classroom” and some silence before they asked, “Are we really having a discussion where you can say that word?”

Scanlan responded with a defense that the word had ended in “-a” instead of “-er,” Farah and multiple other students in the seminar inde-

pendently told the ‘Prince.’ After this exchange, Farah left the classroom.

According to multiple other students who remained, Scanlan continued to defend his choice to the class, saying that he felt the use of the word was necessary to have an academic conversation about the piece. A few other students also left before the end of the seminar.

Scanlan has been a professor at the University since 2009, and he formerly served as director of the Visual Arts Program from 2009–2017. He has previously faced public criticism for racially-charged art projects, for years, he created art under the guise of a fictional Black woman, a character he made up named Donelle Woolford.

In 2003, Scanlan’s Paydirt exhibition included a self-portrait with what appeared to be brown paint or dirt on his face, which was criticized by some as blackface.

According to Scanlan, his Paydirt piece was made in Birmingham, England, “not [in] reference [to] blackface but the long history of social justice [photography] of working men, mostly coal miners and factory workers, with dirt on their faces.”

On the morning of Nov. 6, three days after the incident, Scanlan sent a message to his students via Canvas, writing that he “was trying to make a point about Jonah Mixon-Webster demonstrating the empowering effect of how a single word has gone through an alchemical transformation: coopted, materially reconfigured, and redeployed as concrete poetry.”

“I did that very badly and, in doing so, harmed you,” he wrote in the post.

“I apologize profoundly for that.”

He continued, “I don’t expect you to forgive me, or even fully trust me from here on out, as that would be an understandable reaction. But I do hope we can continue working together through the end of the semester.”

Following the incident, Farah reached out to the Director of the Visual Arts Program, their residential college dean, and their academic advisor. Cheri Burgess, the Director for Institutional Equity and EEO for the Office of the Provost, in turn contacted Farah to discuss the incident on the afternoon of Friday, Nov. 4. Farah said they filed an initial complaint regarding the incident during the meeting.

On the evening of Monday, Nov. 7, Burgess followed up with Farah, writing in an email to them that “the vice provost has conducted an initial as-

sessment of the information provided and has determined that, given the academic context in which the word was used, it does not implicate the Policy on Discrimination and/or Harassment.”

“While the word used was offensive, it was clearly within the context of academic freedom and, therefore, protected expression,” she wrote.

“For these reasons, this office cannot initiate an investigation of your complaint.”

In the email, Burgess quoted the University’s Statement on Freedom of Expression, which states that “the University’s fundamental commitment is to the principle that debate or deliberation may not be suppressed because the ideas put forth are thought by some or even by most members of the University community to be offensive, unwise, immoral, or wrong-headed.”

Burgess also noted that “if the alleged conduct would not, even if substantiated, constitute a violation of applicable policies, then the complaint is dismissed from further review.”

“The dismissal of a complaint during the initial assessment is not subject to appeal,” she wrote to Farah.

Asked to comment on the incident, University Spokesperson Michael Hotchkiss wrote in a statement to the ‘Prince’ that “Princeton guarantees all faculty and students the ‘broadest possible latitude’ to speak freely inside and outside the classroom.

Speech is only restricted under narrow exceptions that do not apply to this incident.”

“Our rules recognize that these free speech protections apply to words and ideas that people may find ‘offensive, unwise, immoral, or wrong-headed,’ but these protections are essential for Princeton’s truth-seeking mission,” Hotchkiss wrote.

After receiving the initial email from Burgess on Monday, Farah submitted another complaint online through the Discrimination/Harassment complaint form. In response, Burgess sent them a follow-up email.

“I understand that the determination of the initial assessment is disappointing to you,” she wrote. “The University’s policies guide how we evaluate claims of verbal harassment, especially when they intersect with the principles of free expression.”

Although the University maintains that its policies were not violated, Burgess noted in her initial email

to Farah that “the department leadership is exploring ways to address the impact of this experience on you and the other affected students and to support your academic well-being.”

“It has been deemed that what Scanlan did was protected by freedom of speech and academic freedom,” Jeffrey Whetstone, Director and Professor of Visual Arts, wrote in a statement to the ‘Prince.’

“But still, students are wary of going back into the classroom. Some outright refuse to return. At least one has dropped the course. They also told me that they are afraid of grade retaliation,” he wrote. “We are trying to address that administratively and come up with a plan where students feel that they will be treated fairly and with respect.”

Whetstone said that “the racial slur used in Professor Scanlan’s ‘Words as Objects’ class has directly harmed students in that class” and also “others more indirectly — our faculty, staff, and other students — ones not even in the course.”

In Farah’s view, the course has been permanently compromised as a result of Scanlan’s speech.

“There’s no path forward for any of us in this course under his instruction,” Farah said. “It’s a difficult situation for all of us, because we’ve spent eight weeks now creating work for the class.”

On Nov. 10, the day of the next scheduled class, Scanlan announced to his students in a Canvas post that he would not be present at class time, which they could use as an open studio.

In his post, he wrote, “I suspect some of you are struggling with whether you want to come to class today, either because of my behavior or because it would suggest your acceptance of that behavior.”

“I want you to be able to continue working on your art while I work with VIS and the Lewis Center to see what arrangements we might make to help the class move forward. We would welcome your input in that regard,” he continued.

At least five students did not attend the seminar on Nov. 10.

“I went back before class started today and removed all my pieces from the classroom,” said Nathalie Charles ’25, a Black student in the seminar.

“I don’t feel comfortable around Joe Scanlan.”

“I believe that Professor Scanlan should be fired,” she continued. “And

I believe he should have been fired when he did blackface. When you do something as hurtful as using a racial slur in order to provoke students in your class to a certain end, you should face the consequences of that.”

When the ‘Prince’ asked Smith, one of the Black students in the class, if he was returning to class, he said, “No, absolutely not. I’m not gonna go at all.”

“I was assured by the [Visual Arts] administration that there would be some sort of arrangement figured out.

I was assured not to drop the class,” Smith added.

Other students expressed that they were uncertain of whether they would return to the class.

“Dropping the class feels unfair to me because I’ve been producing work for it,” said Azariah Jones ’25, a Black student in the class. But if nothing changes, she said that she would “be conflicted about going to class and it would probably be a no.”

Grey Raber ’23, a white student in the seminar, said, “If Black students in the class feel uncomfortable returning, then I won’t.”

When asked what she would like to see moving forward, Jones said that she “would like an apology, a very sincere apology, and something that indicates that he understands the gravity of what happened.”

“I want him to understand what he did incorrectly,” she continued, “and for the University to grapple with what that means for every Black student, because it’s so much more than a singular incident with this professor in this particular class.”

Other students in the seminar echoed Jones’ sentiments about the broader implications of the incident for the University community.

“I cannot emphasize [enough] the level of indignity that was placed upon the Black students in that class, and this institution has to grapple with that,” Farah said.

At this time, according to the website of the Office of the Registrar, 11 of the 12 available seats in the class remain filled. In addition to VIS 321, Scanlan is listed as one of the instructors for VIS 221: Sculpture I, and is set to teach VIS 222: Sculpture I and VIS 418: Extraordinary Processes next semester.

Paige Cromley is a junior who writes for the News, Features, and Prospect sections of the ‘Prince.’

U. AFFAIRS | MARCH 2023

No admission data from Princeton for the second consecutive Ivy Day as Ivy League rates stabilize

By Justus Wilhoit & Louisa Gheorghita Assistant News Editor & News Contributor

“I immediately started crying because I never thought that I could achieve this,” Morgan Gagnon ’27 wrote to The Daily Princetonian about her admission to Princeton on Mar. 30. “It was a crazy moment emotionally.”

For the second consecutive year, the University did not release admission statistics on Ivy Day, when prospective members receive offers of admission. A ‘Prince’ analysis of admission rate trends suggests the acceptance rate for the Class of 2027 may be 5.82 percent or higher after the expansion of the student body.

In December 2021, the University announced that it will no longer release admission data for early action, regular decision and transfer admissions cycle. The University wrote that information such as acceptance rates and average standardized test scores “raises the anxiety level of prospective students” and “may discourage some prospective students from applying.” Princeton still reports information about its annual admission cycles to the Common Data Set and the College Scorecard.

All eight Ivy League schools release their regular decision results in late March or early April, a date collectively known as “Ivy Day.” “It felt surreal,” wrote Aum Dhruv ’27 to the ‘Prince’ about his acceptance. “After the acceptance, hugging my mom, dad, and ba (grandma) was just as exciting. In fact, I’m looking forward to making bonds like that at Princeton.”

Other Ivy League institutions, including Harvard, Yale, Brown,

and Columbia, have released admissions statistics on Ivy Day the past two years. This year, Harvard accepted 3.41 percent of its applicants, Yale accepted 4.35 percent, Columbia accepted 3.9 percent, and Brown accepted 5 percent. Across the Ivy League, acceptance rates stayed relatively stable since last year, despite long-term declines in acceptance rates.

The University continues to publicly release demographic information related to admission cycles, but only for students that enroll.

1500 students enrolled as members of the Class of 2026.

University Spokesperson Mike Hotchkiss wrote in an email to the ‘Prince’ that, as was the case last year, the University “will publish an announcement later this year that focuses on the enrolled students who will join Princeton as the Class of 2027.”

In August 2022, the University released admission data for the Class of 2026 without fanfare. The acceptance rate was 5.7 percent. The latest statistic actually published on Ivy Day by the Office of Communications was in 2021, for the Class of 2025 — the regular decision acceptance rate that year was 3.98 percent.

The Class of 2027 will be the second expanded class in the University’s four-year push to increase undergraduate enrollment by 125 students per year. The first, the Class of 2026, was the University’s largest incoming class in history at the time. The University’s expansion includes three new residential colleges: New College West and Yeh College opened this academic year; Hobson College, which is under construction, has a revised timeline for opening before spring 2026.

Princeton admissions statistics The ‘Prince’ analyzed the University’s admission cycles over a ten year period from the 2012-2013 cycle to the 2021-2022 cycle using the Common Data Set. As the University continues its suspension of the standardized testing requirements, the number of applications to the University may have continued to increase.

The Class of 2025, the first class entering Princeton with the test-optional policy in place, was selected from a record-breaking applicant pool with an increase of 4,765 applicants from the previous year.

As a result, the University saw a markedly lower overall acceptance rate that year of 4.38 percent (includ-

ing Early Action), based on calculations by the ‘Prince.’ This mirrors a larger trend among the Ivy League as a whole. For the Ivy League Class of 2027, the average acceptance rate among the eight schools is an estimated 5.23 percent, compared to the 6.96 percent average acceptance rate among all Ivy League schools for the Class of 2024.

Princeton’s acceptance rate increased for the Class of 2026 due to expansion, up to 5.7 percent — Princeton is the only Ivy League school that is currently expanding class sizes. Based on admission trends at other Ivy League institutions, the ‘Prince’ estimates the Class of 2027’s acceptance rate may be 5.82 percent or higher.

Gender balance by admissions cycle For the 2020-2021 Princeton admissions cycle, more women applied than men, breaking a nine year trend. However, of the eight Ivy League colleges, the University had the second lowest number of female applicants. Starting with the class of 2021, more women have been admitted to the University than men.

Justus Wilhoit is an assistant News editor for the ‘Prince.’

Louisa Gheorghita is a News contributor for the ‘Prince.’

The Daily Princetonian

page 10

Friday May 25, 2023

U . A F FA I R S | M AY 2 0 2 3

A decade later: a split legacy for Eisgruber

By Bridget O’Neill & Sandeep Mangat Assistant News Editor & Head News Editor

DESIGN BY ANGEL KUO / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN; PHOTOS BY GUANYI CAO, ANGEL KUO, AND LOUISA GHEORGHITA / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

More than 10 years ago, history professor William Chester Jordan GS ’73 was walking with a group of students in front of Nassau Hall. As the group approached FitzRandolph Gate, instead of walking straight through the center, the students split and filed out the two side gates, as students tend to do.

Amused, Jordan asked them about the peculiar behavior. The students told Jordan the common legend on campus: that if students walked through the main gate before they graduated, they would never leave.

It was then that Christopher Eisgruber ’83, then the University’s provost, walked up. Overhearing the exchange, Eisgruber scoffed at the superstition.

‘Prince’ on April 22, 2013. Eisgruber was hardly a surprising choice. According to a 2012 article by the ‘Prince,’ former dean of the School of Public and International Affairs (SPIA) Anne-Marie Slaughter ’80 was a close contender for the role of University president, but many expected Eisgruber, right-hand man to outgoing President Shirley Tilghman, to take the role.

Professors interviewed in an earlier ‘Prince’ article said that Slaughter’s national fame, political connections, and her time at the helm of SPIA offered her distinct advantages.

However, some professors said that ultimately the decision would come down to what the Trustees thought of

“PRESIDENTS” BY JOE SHLABOTNIK / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Former University president Shirley Tilghman and Eisgruber, at the reviewing stand at the end of the 2013 P-Rade.

When he had gone to school here, there was the same superstition, he explained, and he walked in and out of the main gate all the time as a student.

As Eisgruber walked away, one of the students turned to Jordan and made the fitting observation. “And he never left,” she said.

The story captures many of the essential aspects of Eisgruber. He is the first undergraduate alum to lead the University since Robert Goheen ’40 left office in 1972. And yet Eisgruber, highly regarded by many of his colleagues, often struggles to connect with the students who attend the University he’s dedicated his life to.

Last week marked the 10-year anniversary of the University Board of Trustees unanimously approving the search committee’s recommendation of Eisgruber as University president.

The Daily Princetonian conducted interviews with Eisgruber’s colleagues, current students, University administrators, and former coworkers, and reviewed hundreds of letters, speeches, and articles by and about Eisgruber. This analysis reveals a tenure characterized by a commitment to expand access to the University at a scale that, if successful, would rank him among Princeton’s most notable presidents. Eisgruber has a substantial track record of success thus far, including expanding the student body, reintroducing a transfer program, and increasing financial aid.

The ‘Prince’ analysis also reveals a reserved relationship with community members and, specifically, a poor connection to student activists, leading to the impression of an administration intent on incremental rather than dynamic change.

Eisgruber declined multiple requests for an interview or to answer written questions for this profile.

Selection as President “PRESIDENT EISGRUBER: Provost named next U. president” blared the

Tilghman’s tenure.

“If they viewed Tilghman’s tenure as successful, the committee would most likely choose an ‘in-house’ candidate like Eisgruber from within the University to continue down the course Tilghman had set,” the ‘Prince’ reported.

Eisgruber said he had never considered himself a candidate for president. He had told the ‘Prince’ in 2012, “I have always assumed that I would return to my teaching and research — which I love — after my time as provost is done.”

At the press conference announcing him as president, Eisgruber said he eventually changed his mind after reflecting and realizing that “this was a very important time for the University.”

“This was also a very important time in higher education, and one where ideals that I care deeply about are going to be affected in very significant ways,” he said.

A history of succeeding “There are all sorts of politicians who have colorful personal lives. I don’t.”

That’s Eisgruber, describing himself in an interview with the ‘Prince’ one year into his presidency.

Over the next few years, many would try to dig into Eisgruber’s background, but stories about Eisgruber often focus more on his achievements than his personality.

The child of two German immigrants, Eisgruber was born in Indiana and moved to Oregon at age 12 when his parents took positions at Oregon State University. Eisgruber was known in his youth for his intelligence and commitment to both his schoolwork and extracurricular pursuits.

For example, Eisgruber led his high school competitive chess team to the national championship in 1979, his senior year. According to an in-

terview his childhood friend gave to the ‘Prince’ in 2014, Eisgruber’s team cleaned parking lots and parked cars to raise funds for the trip to the championship. They ultimately went — and won.

At Princeton, Eisgruber concentrated in physics, but took many politics classes and was interested in philosophy. Jeffery Tulis, a politics professor who taught Eisgruber at Princeton, told the ‘Prince’ in 2014 that he “never had an undergraduate student even come close to the talent he showed.”

Eisgruber graduated at the top of his class before earning a masters as a Rhodes Scholar and later a Juris Doctor (JD) from the University of Chicago Law School, where he was editor-inchief of the Law Review.

Reading the then-27 year old’s resume, Judge Patrick Higginbotham, who Eisgruber clerked for, said his first thought was: “This guy’s either brilliant or a fraud.” Eisgruber would also clerk for Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens.

In 2014, his college roommate, Hyam Kramer ’83, told the ‘Prince’ that “It’s hard for me to see anything ill about him, because really there was nothing ill with him.”

In an interview the same year, New York University President John Sexton, who gave Eisgruber his first job as a law professor in 1990, characterized Eisgruber as a uniquely flawless character.

“He’s a rebuke to all of us who suffer from original sin,” he said.

When questioned about times he has struggled in life Eisgruber inevitably cites a single C that he received in physics in his first year at Princeton.

Eisgruber’s seemingly invulnerable personality may contribute to the appearance of distance from the student body. Teddy Schleifer ’14, who covered Eisgruber for the ‘Prince’ extensively as he stepped into the presidency, told the ‘Prince’ that he felt Eisgruber was “not totally aware of just how big of a public figure he was about to become” when he became University president, which led to a rift between him and the student body.

Yet those closer to Eisgruber speak about his more human side. In a statement to the ‘Prince,’ politics professor Melissa Lane wrote that she was particularly affected by Eisgruber’s address at Opening Exercises in 2021, in which he spoke about his experience being diagnosed with an acoustic neuroma, a benign tumor that grows deep inside the ear.

“I was profoundly moved by his honesty about the acoustic neuroma that he has, and the lesson he shared with the entering class about the importance of remembering that ‘everyone has vulnerabilities, pain, and struggles that they conceal from the world. That is true no matter how impressive, authoritative, or composed someone may appear,’” Lane wrote to the ‘Prince.’

Stanley Katz of the School of Public and International Affairs, who has known Eisgruber since Eisgruber was hired as a faculty member in 2001, and worked closely with Eisgruber in the program of Law and Public Affairs (LAPA), shared that Eisgruber is an “an extraordinarily thoughtful person.”

He emphasized Eisgruber’s unique ability to connect with students he teaches, sharing that “almost all the students I’ve known who’ve taken something with him, but particularly his freshman seminar, have had good experiences.”

Time as provost Eisgruber’s tenure as provost gave an indication of how he would be as

president. Former University President Tilghman told the ‘Prince’ in 2014 that she did not have as defined an agenda as Eisgruber’s so early in her tenure. She said that Eisgruber’s term as provost prior to his taking on the presidency prepared him for the role.

Eisgruber, who told the Princeton Alumni Weekly (PAW) recently that he didn’t initially want the provost position, served in the role for nine years.

“President Eisgruber knew the University and the way it functions and is administered extraordinarily well, because of his nine years as provost. That was a huge advantage,” Tilghman said in a recent interview with the ‘Prince.’

Tilghman described Eisgruber as the “finest provost Princeton’s ever had.”

“I was just enormously impressed with his judgment, his intelligence, his good nature,” she continued.

She specifically highlighted Eisgruber’s leadership during the 2008 recession, given that the provost is the chief budget officer of the University.

Tilghman told the ‘Prince’ that Eisgruber was able to absorb the “decline in the endowment, and do so without harming the University and that was an enormous undertaking, and he executed it, I think, really brilliantly.”

His previous administrative experience also led Eisgruber to enjoy significant faculty support at the beginning of his term.

“The University has been doing very well for a long period of time in large part because of his work with President Tilghman as provost,” thenpolitics department chair Nolan McCarty told the ‘Prince’ in 2014.

“I don’t expect that things will change very much,” McCarty predicted at the time.

Eisgruber’s inspiration Despite Eisgruber’s initial claims that he was uninterested in higher roles at the University, University administration and Princeton’s history are topics he seems deeply invested in.

In a recent interview with the ‘Prince,’ former Dean of the College Nancy Malkiel said she learned that former University President William G. Bowen’s book “Equity and Excellence in American Higher Education” was a significant influence on Eisgruber. Malkiel is currently writing a biography of Bowen, who served as president from 1972 to 1988.

“The argument of that book is that admission officers should put what President Bowen called ‘a thumb on the scale’ in favor of the admission of low-income students,” Malkiel said.

Increasing access to the University has become a cornerstone of Eisgruber’s approach. Eisgruber often cites the anecdote that Princeton could admit up to 18,000 students without reducing the quality of the incoming class.

Malkiel added that Bowen’s book is “very data driven, it has extraordinary analytic underpinnings,” perhaps fitting with the technocratic approach that many ascribe to Eisgruber.

Eisgruber also took some inspiration from Princeton’s most famous, and now most controversial, president, Woodrow Wilson. In 2014, Eisgruber cited his aim to incorporate more of Wilson’s oft-cited motto “in the nation’s service” into University culture, with a desire to expand Princeton’s impact.

At his first Council of the Princeton University Community (CPUC) meeting, Eisgruber cited two ambitious goals, both of which would serve to expand access to Princeton: possibly reversing the University’s policy on not admitting transfer students, and expanding the student body.

Tilghman told the ‘Prince’ in a re-

cent interview that Eisgruber was a “very careful decision-maker.”

“I never saw him make an off-thecuff decision where he hadn’t really thought it through carefully,” she said.

Eisgruber would take years to fully implement his ambitions, but he was working at them from very early on.

The decision on grade deflation The first major debate that Eisgruber waded into was over a policy of his predecessor’s. Grade deflation, which stipulated that no more than 35 percent of undergraduate grades given in a department should fall within the A-range, was implemented in 2004.

Spearheaded by Tilghman and Malkiel, the policy was intended to combat an excess of As at Princeton.

In his first couple months as president, students pressed Eisgruber over his stance on grade deflation, a policy widely unpopular with the student body. As always, Eisgruber started first with caution. In his first interview with the ‘Prince’ as president, Eisgruber shared his support for the status quo on grade deflation, calling it a “grading fairness policy.”

By October of his first year, Eisgruber was willing to reevaluate the policy. Citing worry over the impact on prospective students’ perceptions of the school, Eisgruber charged an ad hoc committee of nine faculty members with the task of reevaluating grade deflation.

The ‘Prince’ reported at the time that, for Eisgruber, the “complaints from the student body regarding the grading policy have always been taken seriously, but that up until this point, these simply have not matched with the data the administration has gathered.”

Clarence Rowley ’95, professor of mechanical engineering, chaired the committee and told the ‘Prince’ in a recent interview that Eisgruber was “very interested in data.”

The final report from the committee included information on historical trends of grades, variation of grades across departments, impact of grade deflation on graduate school admission, and student perception of the policy.

Rowley noted that student input was “important,” and the report cited anxiety students experienced due to the “culture of competition” that the grade deflation policy caused.

Eisgruber said at the time that conversations with alumni were especially persuasive, as they, unlike enrolled students, had no personal stake in the issue.

In 2014, faculty members voted to reverse grade deflation, allowing each department to determine its own grading policy. It was a significant moment for Eisgruber’s early tenure.

Nearly nine years after this first major success of the Eisgruber administration, there are administrative concerns that the balance of grades has swung too far in the opposite direction. At a November 2021 Undergraduate Student Government meeting, Dean of the College Jill Dolan told students “the steep increase in [amount of] ‘A’ grades” is concerning.

Dolan pointed to data showing that there has been a .172 point increase in average GPA since 2015.

At the Black Justice League protest One of the most definitive pictures of Eisgruber is him sitting at his desk, surrounded by protestors from the Black Justice League (BJL) during the 33-hour sit-in in his office.

As protestors discussed their demands, Eisgruber noted the limits of his own authority, and Dolan noted that change happens “little by little.”

Friday May 25, 2023 The argument of incrementalism was not one that appealed to the protestors.

The BJL, a student organization founded in 2014 — in the wake of the police murder of Michael Brown — and dedicated to fighting anti-Black racism, told the ‘Prince’ in 2020 that they only managed to get meetings with the University administration after organizing public demonstrations.

In December 2014, the group confronted Eisgruber at a faculty panel titled “What Kind of Diversity: Is Princeton Too Narrowly Focused on Race and Ethnicity Rather Than Economic Diversity?” BJL members particularly took issue with a comment made by Russell Nieli GS ’79, then a senior preceptor in the James Madison Program.

“The racial diversity we have in this country is bad diversity and let me explain why,” Nieli had said.

After the encounter with Eisgruber, BJL members were invited to a number of meetings with University administrators.

“At that point, they were very much trying to placate,” Joanna Anyanwu GS ’15, a former BJL member, told the ‘Prince’ in 2020.

Destiny Crockett ’17, another former member of BJL, told the ‘Prince’ in 2020 that the group “got the runaround” in the meetings.

“We would meet with one person, and then they would say, ‘Oh, you should meet with this other person,’” she said.

In November 2015, the BJL held their organized sit-in, presenting Eisgruber with a list of demands, including mandated cultural competency training for faculty and staff, an ethnicity and diversity distribution requirement, and the removal of Woodrow Wilson’s name from the then-named Wilson School and College. The protesters occupied Nassau Hall, saying they would stay there until their demands were agreed to.

“We are tired of talking to people.

It’s conversation, conversation, conversation. We try and protest; we meet with the administration every other week,” one BJL organizer, Asanni York ’17, said at the time. “We’re done talking. We’re going to be here until he signs this paper. We’re going to be here until things are met.”

Ultimately, Eisgruber agreed to a list of revised demands, including a promise to consider a distribution requirement, affinity housing, and Wilson’s legacy on campus, 33 hours after the Nassau Hall sit-in began.

“We appreciate the willingness of the students to work with us to find a way forward for them, for us and for our community,” Eisgruber said following the sit-in. “We were able to assure them that their concerns would be raised and considered through appropriate processes.”

Since the sit-in, some of the protesters’ initial demands have been met, including the institution of the Culture and Difference distribution requirement and, notably, the removal of Woodrow Wilson’s name from the School of Public and International Affairs after the murder of George Floyd in 2020.

Eisgruber had emphasized the importance of diversifying a historically white institution prior to the sit-in.

At one of his 2013 CPUC meetings, Eisgruber highlighted the need to increase faculty diversity after the Ad Hoc Committee on Diversity showed that the University remains predominantly white.

In October 2021, the University released its first annual Diversity Equity Inclusion (DEI) report to track improvements in such matters. The reports have shown some improvement in faculty diversity, though the faculty remains primarily white.

Yet the 2015 sit-in captured many student frustrations with the speed of change and the administration’s communication with the student body.

Expansion gets underway Meanwhile, Eisgruber’s earlier ambitions of student body expansion continued to unfold. In an early conversation with alumni, Eisgruber noted that Princeton was turning down a large number of students who could “greatly benefit” from the Princeton experience and could increase the potential to “make a difference in society.”

Expanding the student body was a hefty task for the one of the smallest Ivy League schools clustered around a historic campus. Eisgruber approached the task step by step.

In 2016, the University announced its strategic planning framework, which included plans to increase the number of undergraduates by 500 — 125 per class for four years — and reintroduce the transfer program for the first time since 1990.

The transfer program was reinstated in 2018 with a focus on attracting students of diverse backgrounds, including military veterans and low-

The Daily Princetonian income students who have already begun their college careers in community colleges.

Eisgruber had even more ambitious initiatives planned — in his 2019 annual letter to the University, Eisgruber detailed the eight-year construction plan that would allow for the expansion of the student body.

This construction plan included the now-named Yeh College and New College West and the construction of Hobson College. Through the letter, Eisgruber inaugurated a new era of construction on campus.

Stanley Katz, the longtime SPIA lecturer, said in an interview with the ‘Prince’ that members of the Princeton community are not asking enough questions about this increase in the student body.

While completely in favor of the diversification goals emphasized in expansion, Stanley Katz argues that increasing class sizes is not the way to achieve such goals and only serves to make campus “less intimate.”

“If it were up to me I would cut out all legacies … and take fewer athletes,” Stanley Katz said.

Nevertheless, of Eisguber’s oftcited 18,000 eligible applicants, more will get the chance to attend Princeton than ever before in 2024.

The Joshua Katz affair and Eisgruber’s reputation On May 10, 2022, President Eisgruber made a recommendation to the Board of Trustees that would significantly impact his public profile.

A years-long controversy surrounding classics professor Joshua Katz was about to reach a new national audience. Two years earlier, Katz had received a year-long suspension in relation to a relationship with a student in the mid-2000s that violated University policy. The suspension had not been publicly reported at the time.

In February 2021, a ‘Prince’ investigation included information about the suspension, and told the story of that relationship, along with two other separate allegations of inappropriate conduct.

Katz admitted to the first relationship but denied any inappropriate conduct with other students in a later statement.

After the alumna with whom Katz had engaged in a relationship during the time that she was a student came forward to the University, administrators began a new investigation into the professor’s conduct. Dean of the Faculty Gene Jarrett ultimately recommended that Katz be fired. Eisgruber affirmed that recommendation to the Board, which fired Katz on May 23, 2022.

According to the ‘Prince,’ Eisgruber’s letter recommending Katz’s dismissal alleged that Katz misled investigators during the 2018 investigation.

Katz and his lawyers denied this claim at the time.

Katz’s own narrative surrounding the firing gained significant traction: that he was fired as part of a politically motivated effort to remove him because of an op-ed that he wrote in 2020, in which he criticized a faculty letter proposing anti-racism measures and characterized the BJL as a “small local terrorist organization.”

When Katz had written the original 2020 piece, Eisgruber criticized Katz’s statements while also saying that there would be no official disciplinary action. “By ignoring the critical distinction between lawful protest and unlawful violence, Dr. Katz has unfairly disparaged members of the Black Justice League, students who protested and spoke about controversial topics but neither threatened nor committed any violent acts,” Eisgruber wrote. Yet, Eisgruber said in a 2020 op-ed for the ‘Prince,’ that University policies “protect Katz’s freedom to say what he did, just as they protected the Black Justice League’s.”

Professor Robert P. George, the most prominent conservative scholar at Princeton, praised Eisgruber at the time of that statement, saying that choosing to publicly condemn but not investigate or dismiss Katz was fully in line with the culture of academic freedom that Eisgruber touts.

Yet after Katz’s firing, Edward Yingling ’70 and Stuart Taylor ’70, co-founders of Princetonians for Free Speech, criticized the dismissal, citing Eisgruber’s criticism of Katz’s oped as evidence of bias.

George, whom Eisgruber has spoken highly of, tried to thread a needle, arguing that the issue was not one of free speech but one of due process, and instead laying responsibility for the firing on others on campus, including the ‘Prince.’ But with the issue of Katz’s firing becoming a cause célèbre in conservative circles at the time, Eisgruber’s public reputation on free speech issues has been increasingly criticized from the right.

Yingling and Taylor, for instance, said that Eisgruber had “caved to the pressure from the mob” in firing

Katz. They referenced other administration decisions regarding Katz as “destroy[ing] Princeton’s acclaimed free speech rule.”

Throughout his time as president, Eisgruber has expressed the importance of freedom of speech many times. He has written frequently on questions of free speech and discussed them in campus addresses.

He has at times been criticized from the left for his decision not to punish offensive speech, including in 2020 by the ‘Prince’ Editorial Board when Eisgruber initially declined to punish Katz.

Even if it did not alter his convictions, the Katz affair did change the public perception of Eisgruber on the issue of free speech, as evidenced by letters to Princeton Alumni Weekly (PAW) in which many alumni criticized Eisgruber’s handling of the issue, connecting it to questions of free speech.

Eisgruber has yet to speak publicly at length on the issue. Earlier this month, he discussed the firing briefly in an interview with PAW: “I think we made the right decisions and I think I need to leave it at that,” he said.

A series of changes during COVID-19 “The last ten days have been unlike any other we have known,” Eisgruber wrote on March 17, 2020, in a letter to the community. Princeton students had just been sent home due to the COVID-19 pandemic, marking the most momentous world event in Eisgruber’s tenure.

The University’s pandemic response succeeded in keeping case counts on campus extremely low for a year and a half, even after some students returned to campus for the Spring 2021 semester. The University was also praised for significant engagement with the town during the pandemic.

Eisgruber’s leadership in particular was praised by department heads.

Alan Patten, current Chair of the Department of Politics, wrote in a recent statement to the ‘Prince’ that, “Eisgruber was a thoughtful and prudent leader in the time of the pandemic, who kept his eye on the big-picture goals and values of the University.”

Yet Eisgruber’s role on pandemic issues from a student perspective was notably low-profile. Eisgruber wrote infrequently on the pandemic itself, and major University announcements were often signed by Vice President for Campus Life Rochelle Calhoun.

Eisgruber has taken a more public role at other moments during his tenure. For example, in 2019, Eisgruber stood on the steps of the Supreme Court in support of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, next to María Perales Sánchez ’18, a DACA recipient, and Brad Smith ’81, president of Microsoft. The University successfully sued the government after former President Donald Trump threatened to revoke the order.

In contrast, Eisgruber’s tenure during the pandemic was marked less by public-facing gestures and more by the culmination of many of Eisgruber’s long-sought plans.

As students studied at home, construction was proceeding on two new residential colleges and plans were being reviewed to build a third.

This fall, the Class of 2026 walked through FitzRandolph Gate as the largest class in the University’s history, sitting at 1,500 first-years.

A slew of University policy changes in the aftermath of the pandemic also shows an administration with continued ambitious goals to remake the University. In 2022, the University renamed concentrations to majors.

This change overturns more than one hundred of years of Princeton history: the concentration was established by Woodrow Wilson himself.

Also in 2022, after years of activism, the Board of Trustees voted to divest from all publicly-funded fossil fuel companies. The move was a major

page 11

milestone for the University, yet what activists remember of Eisgruber’s role was his unwillingness to engage with them at the time.

Hannah Reynolds ’22, an organizer with Divest Princeton, told the ‘Prince’ that the group “repeatedly asked President Eisgruber to meet and he repeatedly maintained that he had no influence over the decision [to divest] and that he was unwilling to meet with students who ‘had an agenda.’”

Reynolds feels Eisgruber’s response was “misleading” as Divest observed “he plays an influential role in Board of Trustee decisions.”

In an interview with the ‘Prince’ last Fall, Eisgruber praised Princeton’s process around the divestment decision, saying that it emphasized reaching a “community judgment,” rather than having an unexplained announcement come from University administrators.

“If we were to do something in response to a particular group on campus without it reflecting the deliberations of the entire community, including those who disagree with that group, then we would be unfaithful to this process,” he said. “There’s no doubt that the activists played a significant and important role in contributing to these conversations.”

The pandemic era also saw the start of construction on a massive new engineering complex, which Eisgruber has highlighted as a recent goal. Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science, Andrea J. Goldsmith, shared in an email with the ‘Prince’ that a major part of her decision to join Princeton in 2021 was excitement over “the bold strategic plan that President Eisgruber crafted early in his tenure.”

Goldsmith said that Eisgruber’s “historic investment in the engineering school” will “catalyze collaborations … launching interdisciplinary research.” She is confident that “under President Eisgruber’s leadership, Princeton and its School of Engineering are poised to play a critical role in mitigating the threats and seizing the opportunities facing our country and our world in the decades ahead.”

Engagement with the student body Eisgruber’s tenure will continue, after the Board of Trustees voted in April 2022 to extend his term by five years, specifically citing his expansion of the student body and his stalwart defense of free speech. Eisgruber’s effort to remake the campus has not stopped — construction projects are all across campus, and large swathes of Princeton in 20 years will be Eisgruber’s legacy. With expanded financial aid for the coming year, the socioeconomic diversity of Princeton’s class may increase as well.

Yet Eisgruber continues to face criticism from the University community for what some describe as a closed-off style of leadership and a lack of engagement with the student body.

Schleifer, the former ‘Prince’ reporter, says that he believes Eisgruber should engage with the student body like a politician would, like a “constituency that he needs to cater to,” adding that Tilghman had a “normal relationship” with students and was open to interviews with them.

Stanley Katz, the SPIA lecturer, says he feels President Eisgruber is “notably isolated.”

“I think it’s a mistake … it’s his job … but I think he can be more effective if he could manage to spend more time with more people,” Stanley Katz added.

Stanley Katz blames Eisgruber’s bureaucratic approach for the lackluster connection between students and the presidency, saying “there are simply more folks between [President Eisgruber] and you.”

In another interview with the ‘Prince,’ John Raulston Graham ’24 noted that Eisgruber does not often share his experiences as an under-

graduate at the University.

“He’s an alumnus, just like many other past Princeton presidents, and I’m sure he has tons of experiences at Princeton that could endear him to students,” Graham said, adding that “it’s sad to me that I don’t hear about those.”

“I would love to hear what it was like for Eisgruber to go to events for students at Princeton that we still have, because there’s so much continuity,” he said. Graham added that he would also like to see Eisgruber at more athletic and student performance events.

Eisgruber does hold informal conversations with students, speaking at the different residential colleges with undergraduate students, and at the Lakeside commons for discussions with graduate students. This semester, Eisgruber also held scheduled office hours on April 5. Students could sign up online and were required to provide topics of discussion in advance.

Eisgruber was also criticized last fall for comments about student mental health which some saw as reflecting a disconnect with the student body.

In a rare discussion with the ‘Prince’ in November, the ‘Prince’ asked Eisgruber about the University’s role in preventing mental health crises, and whether he saw “there being a tension between the rigor and productivity demanded of Princeton students and student mental health.” The issue was being widely discussed on campus at the time, as the interview happened a month after the fourth student death by suicide in two years. Eisgruber first pointed to the “mental health epidemic in the country,” then addressed the more specific query.

“I think high aspiration environments, and that includes academically rigorous environments, are fully consistent with and helpful to mental health. I think part of what creates meaning and connection in our lives is engagement and demanding collective enterprises,” he said.

“I don’t see any evidence that academic laxness or academic mediocrity would somehow be better from the standpoint of mental health,” he concluded.

Eisgruber faced stiff criticism from students following the publication of the Q&A. In a guest contribution published in the ‘Prince’ a month later, Eisgruber cited multiple studies about the causes of the mental health crisis, but students have continued to criticize his inability to connect with the subjective reality on campus. “Structurally, it does not seem like my voice as a student is being heard,” Jupiter Ding ’24 told the ‘Prince’ regarding Eisgruber’s comments and subsequent response.

Eisgruber, however, tends to use other avenues to share his thoughts.

In recent years, the President’s Page in PAW has become his place to weigh in on major campus debates — writing discursive essays to a primarily alumni audience on issues such as institutional restraint and campus events such as commencement.

In his interview with the ‘Prince’ last fall, Eisgruber spoke more about the obligation he sees for a Princetonian, such as himself.

“All of us are blessed to have a place on this campus — and I have felt blessed in my life to have been a student and a faculty member here.

That gives you opportunities that are rare in the world,” he said.

He continued: “And I think your obligation as somebody who has experienced those rare blessings is to ask ‘How do I pay it forward? How do I make a difference in the world for the better with what I’ve done?’”

Sandeep Mangat is a head News editor for the ‘Prince.’

Bridget O’Neill is an assistant News editor for the ‘Prince.’

COURTESY OF UNIVERSITY PRESS CLUB LIVE-BLOG, 2015

Students in President Eisgruber’s office on Nov. 18, 2015.

page 12

U. AFFAIRS | JANUARY 2023

The Daily Princetonian

Friday May 25, 2023

ORL, CPS, USG review next steps on mental health, PEESA calls for improvements

By Isabel Yip & Tess Weinreich Head News Editor & Associate News editor

Content Warning: The following article includes mention of student death and suicide.

Two weeks after the Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office released the completed autopsy report for the death of Misrach Ewunetie ’24, ruling it a suicide, the University continues to mourn while grappling with student mental health on campus. Ewunetie marks the most recent loss for the University, which suffered two additional undergraduate deaths in May 2022 — Jazz Chang ’23 and Justin Lim ’25 — as well as the death of a staff member in September.

The Office of Religious Life (ORL), Counseling and Psychological Services (CPS), and Undergraduate Student Government (USG) are each looking to expand mental health resources on campus. The University has made commitments to following through on suggestions to improve student wellbeing outlined by the Mental Health Resources Task Force, led by USG, Director of CPS Dr. Calvin Chin, and Vice President of Campus Life W. Rochelle Calhoun.

On Dec. 16, Calhoun shared an update on the status of recommendations of the working group to explore mental health resources. Of the 31 recommendations, 20 were categorized as “completed (and ongoing),” 10 are “in progress,” and one is “under review.” The next update regarding these recommendations is expected in May 2023.

Student-led initiatives, such as the USG mental health taskforce, have also driven a recent push for expanded mental health programming on campus.

“The tragedies of last year show that there is still a lot of work to be done to make Princeton a place where everyone can thrive,” wrote USG president-elect and chair of mental health taskforce Stephen Daniels ’24 in an email to The Daily Princetonian. “We will continue to use both qualitative and quantitative data including responses to this feedback form

to advocate for expanding services to meet student needs.”

In an email to the ‘Prince,’ Chin noted the unique difficulties that 2022 posed for the campus community. “We have had several campus tragedies over the past 6 months which have been devastating for the [U]niversity community,” he wrote. “It’s hard to compare from year-to-year, but this has certainly been a challenging year for everyone.”

Chin also outlined the work CPS has done in the wake of campus tragedies over the past year. “We reach out to students who were directly affected. We expand our dropin availability and work with our campus partners to make sure students are aware of our services. And we provide supportive spaces for students to gather and grieve together,” he wrote.

Since 2018, demand from students for CPS services and appointments has increased by 19 percent, according to Chin. To meet this demand, CPS has hired short-term temporary counselors. “We have hired the equivalent of three additional counselors since the Fall,” Chin wrote in an email to the ‘Prince.’

Conversations surrounding mental health continue. Princeton Ethiopian and Eritrean Student Association (PEESA) Co-Presidents Joachim Ambaw ’24 and Faeven Mussie ’24 call for increased diversity among CPS staff.

Ambaw noted that this can help mental health resources better serve Black students and other students of color on campus.

“Some Black students can’t find therapists within CPS that are able to relate to them,” Ambaw said in an interview with the ‘Prince.’ “Finding somebody that they can relate to on an identity level can lead to better interactions and a better therapy process.”

Following Ewunetie’s passing, PEESA has played an important role as the community mourns. The student group organized a Candlelight Vigil and provided other resources for members.

Mussie described how the group came together to re-

member the life of a member of the PEESA community.

“The Eritrean Ethiopian community is a very, very tight knit community all over the world,” she said in an interview with the ‘Prince.’ “We always show up for each other, it’s in our culture to do so.”

Mussie expressed concern with the amount of information the University was sharing with students during the search for Ewunetie and the wait for the completed autopsy, which was released over two months after she was found dead on campus.

“I think the main frustration that we had, and students on campus too, was at the lack of information that we had when the case came out,” she said. “It was our frustration with not having any updates when it’s our safety on the line being on campus.”

A focus on ‘postvention’ Dr. Victor Schwartz, Senior Associate Dean for Wellness and Student Life at CUNY School of Medicine and longtime researcher studying higher education mental health, noted how the pandemic has reduced resources for universities everywhere.

“It’s becom[ing] harder to find places to refer students who have long-term needs, and that’s put added pressure on the system,” Schwartz said in an interview with the ‘Prince.’ “This was made acutely worse on the college front when, during the pandemic, people realized that it was possible to do private practice on virtual platforms.”

Schwartz also commented on the many expectations students have of the universities they attend. “Students are looking to the school to be both their human services provider and to some extent, be their parent as well,” he said. “There is expectation, and maybe in some cases, there’s been over-promising what schools can provide or unrealistic expectations.”

Still, Schwartz noted the importance of effective suicide postvention — the provision of support and assistance from a University to its students in the campus healing process. In the Higher Educa-

tion Mental Health Alliance (HEMHA) Postvention Guide, which Schwartz worked on, HEMHA outlines effective postvention protocols as those that “provide both immediate (i.e., within 72 hours of event) and long-term plans (e.g., anniversaries),” “secure campus safety,” and “address the complex mental health issues for individuals and groups that may arise after a student suicide.”

CPS has expanded its resources, continuing to increase access to counseling for students, according to Chin.

Following Ewunetie’s passing, CPS launched the CPS Cares Line, which provides 24/7 access to counselors by phone and emerged as a recommendation from the Mental Health Workgroup last summer.

In an email to the ‘Prince,’ Chin described how students can expect to see mental health resources on campus expanding over the next semester. “We will be sponsoring additional listening circles focused on healing from grief in the next several weeks,” he wrote. “[W]e continue to work on fulfilling the recommendations from the summer workgroup that met this summer on Mental Health Resources.”

Rev. Alison Boden GS ’70, Dean of Religious Life and of the Chapel spoke to the ORL’s role in supporting mental health on campus after a community loss. The office held an initial gathering on Oct. 21 in Murray-Dodge Hall, immediately after Ewunetie’s body was located, and has organized ongoing programming as more information pertaining to her death became public.

“With the most recent information about Misrach’s passing we convened another gathering (Dec. 29) to support students who were impacted by the news,” Boden wrote in a statement to the ‘Prince.’

According to Boden, all chaplains have observed increased demand for pastoral counseling this year — interest that she anticipates will only ramp up once students return to campus for the spring semester.

These services are available to all students, regardless of

previous engagement with the ORL. Both one-on-one and group sessions are offered.

“We also do occasional mental health-themed programs or sponsor initiatives to support particular cohorts of students. Students tell us that our weekly and monthly meditation offerings are very helpful and healing for them, as well as our religious services,” Boden said.

“I think there are more mental health challenges for students now than in my previous years at Princeton and that the pandemic is largely responsible … I’m reminded of the year after 9/11, when students (and others) had a similar uptick in mental health challenges,” Boden said.

In an interview with the ‘Prince,’ Dr. Madelyn Gould GS ’74, Irving Philips Professor of Epidemiology in Psychiatry at Columbia University, who has researched youth suicide prevention and strategies, noted that mental health resources extend beyond the limits of campus, as parents should have an active role in their children’s mental health as well.

“There needs to be communication between the University and parents as well,” she said. “Parents need psychoeducation, if they’re not already getting it, with regard to the challenges that their children have and might be experiencing. They have a role in identifying these risk factors.”

Expanding on Schwartz’s research on postvention, Gould noted the importance of communication between the University and student body in coping with a campus tragedy.

“The first thing, there has to be real open communication, and then for the University to demonstrate what changes or additions they’re making to services,” she said. “There’s a big endowment at all these schools, so it’s a matter of setting priorities.”

Tess Weinreich is an associate News editor and a Features contributor for the ‘Prince.’

Isabel Yip is a head News editor who typically covers University affairs and student life.

U. AFFAIRS | APRIL 2023

Artifacts valued at over $200K seized from University Art Museum

By Sandeep Mangat Head News Editor

Eleven pieces of art cumulatively valued at over $200,000 were seized from the Princeton University art museum, according to a search warrant filed by the Manhattan District Attorney’s (DA) Office and obtained by The Daily Princetonian. Issued on March 22, the warrant calls for the seizure of the items in question “without unnecessary delay.”

The Manhattan DA Office alleges that the art was stolen before the University acquired it. Six of the artifacts were loaned to the Art Museum by Edoardo Almagià ’73, an antiquities dealer based in Rome who is under investigation for illegally smuggling art from Italy to the United States for three decades and for filing false customs documents. The source or sources of the other seized objects were not disclosed in the warrant. The Department of Homeland Security is assisting in the investigation.

The seizure was first reported by The New York Times.

In a statement to the ‘Prince,’ Almagià said that he “wasn’t very happy” when he heard about the art’s seizure. He said the artifacts he

loaned to the University came from his family’s collection.

“I was quite sorry that the museum gave up objects which I had given as a loan, they have no rights to consign those objects,” he said.

“They were, frankly, idiots,” he added, referring to the Art Museum.

When asked how he came in possession of an Etruscan terracotta plaque, valued, according to the Manhattan DA search warrant, at 40,000 dollars — among two of the most valuable items loaned by Almagià to be seized — he said “to begin with, … it is worth probably 2000 dollars.”

He added that he could not recall precisely where he acquired the artifact from but that it was “a few years ago.”

“It is an absolutely irrelevant piece,” he told the ‘Prince.’

Also among the stolen artifacts seized is a calligraphic Qur’anic wall tile, dating from 1700-1900 C.E and valued at 45,000 dollars. This is the most expensive single artifact to have been seized.

This is not the first time that the Art Museum has had to return art. In 2002, it voluntarily returned a marble funeral monument after research at the Art Museum found that it been smuggled out of Italy. It also returned

artwork in 2007 because the art had been stolen before the University’s acquisition.

In a statement to the ‘Prince,’ Associate Director for Communication and Information at the Art Museum Stephen J. Kim said that the Museum was “cooperating fully with authorities in an ongoing investigation.”

“We are always grateful for new information that allows us to fulfill our stewardship responsibilities relative to our collections, in keeping with our commitment to ethical collecting,” Kim wrote.

Given the current construction on the Art Museum, all works are currently being stored off-site.

Almagià, who graduated with a history degree from the University, has been implicated in similar offenses before. In 2010, he was investigated by Italian authorities for allegedly loaning artifacts stolen from Italian sites to American museums, including the Princeton Art Museum and the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Italian authorities also accused Michael Padgett, the then antiquities curator at Princeton, of knowingly acquiring stolen art from Almagià. Padgett denied the charges at the time, and the investigation of Padgett was ultimately dis-

missed and no charges filed.

The University did return some artwork to Italy in December 2011, though it did not say whether the returned art had been acquired from Almagià. In December 2011, the Metropolitan Museum of Art returned vase fragments donated by Almagià to Italy “to serve as evidence in the investigation and possible trial of Edoardo Almagià,” according to a comment given in March 2012 to the Princeton Alumni Weekly by a Met spokeswoman. However, the investigation did not lead to an indictment.

In a 2010 interview with the Princeton Alumni Weekly, Almagià said that he had stopped dealing art in 2002 and claimed that the Italian investigation had political motivations, characterizing it as a “masterpiece of irrationality and schizophrenia.”

“You are immediately equated with a criminal nowadays by being a collector.

You have in Italy hundreds of thousands of people that have antiquities at home. They might have inherited them or bought them. In my youth, there were flea markets, and you could buy every antiquity you wanted. All those people that bought things – are they all criminals?” Almagià said at the time.

“Every American museum should fight for its right to acquire objects in the market,” he continued, “The Americans need to say: We believe in freedom, free markets, free enterprise. It’s a very serious ideological battle.”

In 2021, the Manhattan DA confiscated 160 artifacts from around the United States that, according to the New York Times, were “tied” to Almagià. That same year, 200 items, 150 of which were linked to Almagià, were delivered to the Italian consulate in New York. That marked the largest single repatriation of artifacts from the United States to Italy.

Almagià told the Times in 2021 that “So much money is being spent to persecute dealers when it can be used to repair Italian museums, where so many similar items are already at risk.”

The Times also reported that Almagià was stopped at John F. Kennedy airport in 2000 with two stolen frescoes and in 2006, federal agents raided his New York apartment, leading to the seizure of six items. He left the United States for Italy in the same year.

Sandeep Mangat is a head News editor at the ‘Prince.’

Friday May 25, 2023 MARCH 2023

The Daily Princetonian

page 13

Who governs Princeton? The Board of Trustees, examined.

By Ryan Konarska & Lia Opperman Assistant Data Editor & Investigations editor

Behind the doors of Nassau Hall, a group of 39 individuals make the decisions that determine Princeton’s future. As the chief governing body of the University, the Board of Trustees passes the University’s budget, supervises the management of the endowment, sets changes in tuition and fees, determines what changes to teaching methods should be made, and crafts the admission policy that whittles Princeton’s more than 30,000 applicants to the lucky 1,500 incoming first-years.

Decisions of the Board of Trustees have had major impacts in recent years. Last September, the Trustees voted to dissociate from 90 fossil fuels companies and in June 2020, the Board decided to rename the previous Woodrow Wilson School, now the School of Public and International Affairs, and Wilson College, now First College.

Despite their importance, the composition of the Board of Trustees is not widely known. The Daily Princetonian examined Trustees’ backgrounds, professions, and relationships to Princeton.

None of the members of the Board responded to a request for comment from the ‘Prince.

Election to the Board Constitutionally, the Board of Trustees is composed of no fewer than 23 and no more than 40 members. Currently, 39 trustees sit on the board. All members of the board except Gov. Phil Murphy, an ex officio member, are alumni of the University.

There are four types of elected trustees: Charter, Term, Alumni, and Young Alumni Trustees. Charter Trustees are elected by existing members of the board for six-year terms with the opportunity to serve an additional two-year term; until July 2020, Charter Trustees were elected to eight-year terms. Term trustees are chosen by the board for a term of four years.

Nine Alumni Trustees are elected by the full alumni of the University for a term of four years, with new alumni trustees elected every year.

There are also four Young Alumni Trustees: every year, the current junior and senior classes, as well as the two most recently graduated classes, elect a member of the senior class to serve as a Young Alumni Trustee for four years. Most recently, the Classes of 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023 elected Naomi Hess ’22 as Young Alumni Trustee.

Additionally, the President of Princeton University and the Governor of New Jersey are included on the board as ex officio members.

Currently, these roles are filled by University President Christopher L. Eisgruber ’83 and Phil Murphy.

Trustees can serve multiple terms on the board, including through different processes, provided there is at least a one year gap between terms.

Despite the difference in selection processes, Section 1.1 (g) of the University bylaws states that “Trustees ex officio, Charter Trustees, Term Trustees, and Alumni Trustees shall have the same duties, rights, and powers.”

Trustee backgrounds The Board of Trustees contains alumni from a wide array of backgrounds, disciplines, and lines of work. Many are accomplished in their fields, with CEOs, members of Congress, and professors among the ranks of trustees. The ‘Prince’ combined the biographies listed on the Office of the President website with degree and eating club information to create brief profiles of each trustee.

15 of the 39 trustees have or currently work in financial fields, such as capital management, investing, or consulting. Seven trustees work in academia, while five work for nonprofits or other advocacy fields.

Just five trustees work in STEM-related fields.

Louise Sams ’79 has had the longest tenure on the board, followed

by James Yeh ’87 and Laura Forese ’83, each of whom served four years from 2010 to 2014 as Term Trustees before being named Charter Trustees in 2015. Their service mirrors a pattern of other trustees’ tenure

PHOTO COURTESY OF THE OFFICE OF COMMUNICATIONS

The current 2022-2023 Board of Trustees.

— many trustees serve four years as Alumni or Term Trustees before leaving the board for a year and then being named Charter Trustees.

The median year of trustees graduating from Princeton is 1988.

Graduation years range from Paul Maeder in 1975 to young alumni trustee Naomi Hess who graduated in 2022. No members of the board of trustees graduated between 1999 and 2016.

Places of residence 35 of the 39 trustees live in the United States, according to the Board of Trustees website. Five trustees call New York home, all of whom live in New York City. Four trustees live in California, all in the Bay Area, and four live in New Jersey. 32 states have no trustees within their borders. Trustees tend to live in the coastal regions of the United States, with just five trustees coming from landlocked states.

Their time at Princeton At Princeton, most trustees studied a discipline in the humanities or social sciences. The most common field of study was history, with nine trustees having majored in this discipline, while seven trustees studied in the School of Public and International Affairs and four in mechanical and aerospace engineering. In total, 13 out of the 39 trustees studied STEM disciplines.

32 of the 39 trustees graduated from Princeton as undergraduates.

Of these 32, 27 received Bachelor of Arts degrees, while just five received a Bachelor of Science in Engineering. Of the six trustees who attended Princeton for graduate study, five received Doctor of Philosophy degrees, while one obtained a Master of Public Affairs degree.

The ‘Prince’ used the University Library’s Yearbook archive to determine which eating club, if any, University trustees who attended Princeton as undergraduates were members of. Cap and Gown Club has the most trustee alumni, with seven former members. Following Cap is the University Cottage Club and Cannon with four trustees each, though one of these was a member of Dial Lodge and two were in Elm Club, both of which are predecessors to today’s Cannon Dial Elm Club.

Tower Club and Tiger Inn each had three trustees. Quadrangle and Campus Clubs each counted two trustees as part of their alumni, while Charter, Colonial, Cloister, Ivy, and Terrace each had one trustee.

Politics Many trustees are active in the political realm, through public service or donating to political causes.

Through the Federal Election Commission’s donor lookup tool, we examined the political donations of each of the University trustees. The ‘Prince’ identified 3,135 unique monetary donations made by members of the Board of Trustees dating back to 1989. In total, the current Board has collectively donated $7,858,125 to political causes over the last 33 years.

Approximately 78 percent of political donations made by the current trustees have been to can-

didates or causes associated with the Democratic Party. This balance has shifted towards Democrats over time; for example, in 2010, nearly 58 percent of the current trustees’ donations were to Republican candidates or associated groups, a number which declined to just six percent in 2022. The total sum of donations has also increased over time — the current trustees donated just $344,092 to political causes in 2012, a presidential election year, but they donated nearly $1 million in 2016 and over $1.5 million in 2020.

The trustee that has donated the most to political causes by far is Blair Effron ’84, who has donated $2,942,046.91 since 1992. Since 2005, Effron has donated entirely to Democratic-associated or nonpartisan causes. Effron’s donations represent almost 38 percent of all trustee donations.

Following Effron in political donations are Bradford Smith and Peter Briger, who have donated $1.53 million and $1.23 million, respectively. Almost all trustees have donated mostly to Democratic candidates and causes except for Yeh and Anthony Yoseloff ’96, who directed 80 and 58 percent of their donations to Republican beneficiaries, respectively.

Impact on campus The trustees’ donations to the University can be seen in the many buildings and organizations named after them. Yeh is the namesake of Yeh College and Yoseloff provided the donation to construct Yoseloff Hall in Butler College. Maeder Hall, which houses the primary lecture hall of the Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment, was made possible by a gift from Maeder.

The M.S. Chadha Center for Global India is named after Sumir Chadha ’93. Effron provided the funds for the Effron Center for the Study of America, which expanded the University’s American Studies program. While the ‘Prince’ could not verify whether the Effron Music Building was named after Effron himself, it bears his last name.

How wealthy are Princeton trustees on the whole? Looking at the cumulative net worths of the Board, the wealth seems to be relatively concentrated in a few trustees.

About 75 percent of trustees have a net worth below $10 million. Trustees’ net worth was found through public resources online.

Princeton class reunion books often feature profiles of alumni with their children’s names. The ‘Prince’ was able to identify 26 children of 10 trustees, 23 of which were old enough to have applied and attended college. Of these 23, 14 attended Princeton, though only six were admitted during their parent’s time on the Board of Trustees.

Comparison to other schools Compared to the rest of the Ivy League, Princeton has an average number of trustees. Yale University has the fewest number of trustees, at 19, and Cornell University has the most trustees, at 64.

Yale University’s Board of Trustees consists of the University President, ten “successor trustees” select-

ed by the existing Board of Trustees to serve up to two six-year terms, six alumni trustees elected by alumni of the University, and one senior trustee chosen by the President. The Governor and Lieutenant Governor of Connecticut serve as ex officio members.

At Harvard University, there are two governing boards; one is the Board of Overseers, which is made up of alumni, and the other is the Corporation, which is made up of the President and Fellows. New members of the Board of Overseers are elected each spring “by Harvard degree holders (excluding officers of government or instruction at the University and members of the Corporation).” Fellows of the Corporation are appointed to their position.

President of the University emeritus and professor of molecular biology and public affairs Shirley M. Tilghman has served as a Fellow at Harvard since 2016.

The Board of Overseers is tasked with a number of essential duties, including directing the visitation

process, which is the “primary means for periodic external assessment of Harvard’s Schools and departments,” and it provides counsel to University leadership. The Corporation “exercises fiduciary responsibility with regard to the University’s academic, financial, and physical resources and overall well-being.”

The 39 largely-unknown members of the Princeton Board of Trustees hold enormous influence in determining the future of the University. Through an analysis of their time at Princeton, their political activity, and their personal wealth, this opaque institution becomes more transparent.

The next meeting for Princeton’s Board of Trustees will take place on May 12, 2023 on campus.

Ryan Konarska is an assistant Data editor for the ‘Prince.’

Lia Opperman is the Investigations editor for the ‘Prince.’

page 14

SEPTEMBER 2022

The Daily Princetonian

Friday May 25, 2023

140 YEARS of Princeton History: as told by The Daily Princetonian archives

By Anika Maskara & Elaine Huang Head Web Design Editor Emeritus & Head Data Editor

At The Daily Princetonian, we’re used to focusing on the present — reporting on stories that unfold as we write.

With this project, we at the ‘Prince’, the second-oldest college newspaper in the country, took a step back. Leveraging data from the The Daily Princetonian Larry DuPraz Archives, kindly shared with us by Mudd Library, we immersed ourselves in decades worth of print publications in the hope of better understanding the journey the ‘Prince’ and the University have been on over the past 140 years.

To help you explore our findings, for each decade, we’ve summarized a few emblematic terms, sized relatively to their popularity. Clicking on a particular emblematic term will allow you to see a chart of the frequency with which it appeared in the ‘Prince’ over time. Additionally, we’ve included search functionality if you’d like to see a frequency chart for words of your own choosing.

Like The Pudding’s New York Times headlines project that served as our inspiration, in order to find terms particularly emblematic of a particular decade, we compared word usage frequencies between a decade and the preceding and following decades — selecting terms that were used disproportionately more often in the decade at hand as compared to neighboring decades. You can read more on this process in our methodology section.

This summary is only a bird’s eye view of the information the archives hold, and we hope our work here inspires further analysis with its wealth of data.

1880s Offering an 1880s alternative to present-day Google searches,

the Princeton Directory section of the newspaper featured a list of services offered by local shops and business owners, including tailors, bookbinders, grocers, apothecaries, and more.

During that decade, The Daily Princetonian covered sports news in immense detail, regularly incorporating box scores into articles on University athletics.

Athlete names — such as Dan Bickham, pitcher and outfielder on the school’s baseball team — rather than political or newsbased terms, showed up with the greatest frequency.

In 1877, Lasell Leaves, the magazine of Lasell University (a private university in Massachusetts), criticized The Crimson’s character for “the plentiful supply of lager beer and tobacco advertisements contained in its columns.”

A few years after reporting on this criticism, hundreds of tobacco advertisements flooded the advertisement columns and Princeton Directory sections of the ‘Prince’ in the 1880s, particularly in 1885 and 1886.

Reflecting the language of the time and the fact that Princeton was not yet a coeducational institution, gendered language like “gentleman” was also common when reporting on campus news.

1890s Like the 1880s, the most disproportionately used terms of the 1890s related mainly to sports news and advertisements for everything from furniture to drug stores.

Sports coverage at the time remained more detailed than today, with full team rosters printed alongside game play-by-plays for a variety of sports including football, crew, and cycling. The frequency of the word “bicycle” in fact, referring to cycling competitions, peaked in the 1890s.

The teams covered were associated with the University and played familiar foes like Harvard

and Yale. However, the paper’s coverage was not always Princeton-specific, as it was also common to report on games between other northeastern institutions.

“Studying” was also used disportionately in this decade, most often included in the Alumni Notes section of the paper to describe the academic accomplishments of alumni who pursued further education in fields like medicine or law. Without LinkedIn, students had to be subscribed to the ‘Prince’ to keep up with alumni careers and network.

The Alumni Notes section was so popular that the ‘Prince’ fielded several complaints from readers asking the editors to devote more space to them.

1900s During the 1900s, ‘Prince’ headlines began suggesting a stronger presence of the performing arts on Princeton’s campus, with the word “performance” spiking in frequency compared to neighboring decades. Furthering this trend, various performing art groups such as Triangle Club posted rehearsal and show announcements in the University Notices section of the newspaper — the equivalent of today’s listservs, group chat messages, and calendar invites.

In 1895, Princeton built The Casino, the Triangle Club’s first theater. The building also served as a hub for the blossoming performing arts scene and was used for theatrical productions, dance recitals, and more.

First produced in 1864, the Brica-Brac was Princeton’s student life yearbook that has since been discontinued, rendering it unfamiliar to most present-day Tigers.

Advertising for the Bric-a-Brac committee, the ‘Prince’ played an integral role in sharing information regarding the yearbook’s sale and distribution.

The term “o’clock” was also disproportionately used in this

decade, visible throughout the University Notices section when announcing events and meeting times, as opposed to the standard numeral system used today.

1910s In 1910, after the ‘Prince’ became an official member of the Associated Press, the paper began publishing wire messages from the A.P. with daily world news summaries. These stories were attributed to the Associated Press in the byline, contributing to a steep spike in the usage of the term “associated.”

Other emblematic terms were related to World War I. Even before the United States officially entered “The Great War,” fears of an impending American entry prompted the establishment of military training classes on campus and the organization of a Princeton Provisional Battalion for training military officers — foreshadowing the launch of the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) program in 1919. The program celebrated its centennial just three years ago.

In April 1917, then Assistant Secretary of the Navy Franklin D. Roosevelt penned a letter to The Daily Princetonian, answering undergraduate questions about the Naval Coast Defense Reserve, including the commitment that enlistment entailed and whether a background in “summer yachting” would be helpful.

In other aquatic news, intercollege varsity rowing returned to Princeton in 1911 for the first time since a lack of a proper practice space had forced the program to retire in the 1880s. This return was made possible after the construction of Lake Carnegie in 1906, a gift from steel magnate Andrew Carnegie.

1920s During the Roaring Twenties, performing arts and social events were bustling on campus.

The prom committee was busy at work planning a night to remember. In hopes of continuing to have proms on campus in the future, the committee also worked to satisfy institutional guidelines, such as proper conduct on the dance floor and no loitering on campus or Nassau Street after the dance.

Orchestras were also regularly invited to perform on campus, and the Princeton University Orchestra encouraged undergraduates to join them. Many events and meetings were held in University Commons or in Murray Dodge, with the latter yielding high traffic when students passed the building to attend then-mandatory religious services at the Chapel.

Undergraduate speech and debate organizations also became more centralized and established on campus, with the formation of Princeton Speakers Council, an Inter-Hall Council composed of Whig, Clio, the Speakers Association, and the Debating Committee.

Meanwhile, in sports news, reporters frequently used the term “yearlings” to refer to underclassmen athletes typically in their first year. This trend in the use of “yearlings” mirrors the overall spike in popularity across Google Books Ngram Viewer’s English corpus of books in 1920.

1930s During the 1930s, the term “gold” saw a spike in usage, often in reference to stories about moving off the gold standard — one of the key national debates in the early years of the Great Depression.

In local coverage, Herbert O. “Fritz” Crisler signed on as head football coach in 1932. He went on to coach successfully for six years, compiling a 35–9–5 record and leading the team through two undefeated seasons until he left for the University of Michigan.

Crisler would go on to become a giant in football history, known for his development of the “twoplatoon” system at Michigan — the practice of having different player units for offense and defense.

Although Princeton’s intramural sports program was already thriving at least two decades prior, coverage of the leagues rose sharply in the 1930s, with game schedules and outcomes printed regularly. The program was so popular that James Tyson, thenwriter at The Harvard Crimson, praised it when comparing it to Harvard’s much smaller intramural leagues.

McCarter Theatre, designed and financed by the Triangle Club, officially opened in 1930.

The theater’s establishment was made possible by a $250,000 gift from alumnus Thomas N. McCarter Class of 1888. After the theater’s opening, the ‘Prince’ regularly reported on its many performances.

The word “geology” was also used disproportionately in the 1930s, oftentimes in reference to “an unprecedented array” of Princeton-led field work trips to locations including the Caribbean, Yellowstone, and Canada.

1940s Just as World War I prompted a shift from local coverage two decades prior, World War II dominated headlines in the 1940s. As the global war took hold, usage of terms such as “wartime,” “marine,” and “postwar” rose throughout the decade. During the war, the ‘Prince’ faced a staffing shortage, prompting the communications office to publish The Princeton Bulletin three times a week in place of a studentrun newspaper.

In response to the global crisis, Princeton founded the Department of Aeronautical Engineering. In 1942, the University recruited Alexander Nikolsky, an engineer who helped build the first practical helicopter, to be one of the first faculty members of the newly founded department. Nikolsky’s contributions helped to establish the department as a leading center for study of the rotary-wing aircraft. Amid growth of aeronautical efforts, mentions of the word “aeronautical” increased ninefold from the previous decade.

Established in 1930, Princeton School of Public and International Affairs (SPIA) celebrated its 10th anniversary in 1941 and marked the momentous occasion with the return of many former SPIA members and distinguished guests. In 1948, after the addition of a graduate professional program, Princeton renamed SPIA to the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs after Woodrow Wilson Class of 1879, the 28th president of the United States and a former president of the University. Seventy two years later, amid a national racial reckoning spurred by the Black Lives Matter movement, the school would return to its prior name.

WPRU, Princeton’s studentrun radio station, delivered music to students across campus. Out of the 94 percent of students who had access to radio on campus, 67 percent listened to WPRU — and 37 percent of that subgroup listened to the radio at least one hour each day. Coming a long way from the campus radio station’s initial expectation that “signals may possibly penetrate as far as the Graduate College,” WPRU’s successor, WPRB, later moved to the FM dial (103.3).

1950s Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower achieved a landslide victory with nearly 55 percent of the popular vote in the 1952 presidential election, still paling in comparison to the 73 percent majority he won in The Daily Princetonian’s presidential poll.

In the context of the 1950s’ Red Scare, use of the word “communist” in the ‘Prince’ peaked during that decade, leading some articles to even speculate on the existence of a secret communist cell on campus.

Our analysis of this decade also found disproportionate usage of terms like “prayer,” “worship,” and “Episcopal,” oftentimes included in the Religious Notices section of the paper. Although the

Friday May 25, 2023 University’s chapel requirement would not come to an end until 1964, the ‘Prince’ featured much discussion on the topic throughout the ’50s, including one poll in 1951 that found that 75 percent of the undergraduates polled viewed mandatory religious service attendance as “unfavorable.”

The decade also saw major shifts on Prospect Avenue. In 1949, Alfred de Jonge ’49 pointed out in a letter to the editor that while 81.3 percent of all eligible bickerees had been accepted to an eating club after one round of bicker, only 32.1 percent of Jewish eligible bickerees had been accepted. The following bicker season, more than three-quarters of the sophomore class pledged to not join an eating club unless everyone who bickered could get a bid.

Following this protest, the In​​ terclub Committee was able to maintain a “100 percent” matching rate until 1958, when 23 sophomores, more than half of whom were Jewish, did not receive a bid. The resulting scandal, which became the subject of national outcry, was known as the “Dirty Bicker” of 1958.

A major vernacular change also took hold during the Eisenhower years. Although the word “frosh” was first mentioned in the ‘Prince’ much earlier in the 20th century, its usage skyrocketed in the 1950s, alongside the similarly shortened “soph.”

1960s The 1960s saw a pivotal change to Princeton’s undergraduate population: coeducation. University Trustees voted in favor of coeducation in January 1969, following intense external and internal pressure. Less than a year after Yale’s decision to become coeducational in November 1968, Princeton became coeducational in the fall of 1969.

In September 1969, Princeton’s first class of female students — 101 female first-years and 70 female transfer students — joined the student body, resulting in a roughly 20:1 male to female student ratio. The introduction of women led to several logistical issues across campus, including determining where to house the women and offering eating clubs a temporary plan for feeding “coeds”: charging a $20 registration fee to be applied to meals and requesting extra if she eats more but refunding the difference if she eats less.

During the 1960s, the Civil Rights Movement shaped national conversations, a reality that was reflected in an increase of reporting on racial issues in the ‘Prince,’ which printed articles discussing Black enrollment in the Ivy League and the experience of Black students on campus. By 1967, there had been fewer than 100 Black undergraduates at Princeton in the University’s history.

Gaining a bigger presence on campus, Undergraduate Student Government (USG)’s predecessor, the Undergraduate Council, initiated a series of weekly meetings, and the ​​Interclub Committee played a leading role in bicker reform. In response to and indeed in opposition to the Vietnam War, Princeton’s Students for a Democratic Society gained prominence during the 1960s, hosting marches, sit-ins, walk-outs, and other protests.

1970s In the midst of the Great Inflation and a national energy crisis, Princeton faced budget problems in the 1970s — prompting the University to raise tuition by nearly 50 percent between 1969 and 1973, a rise notable enough to make national news.

The ROTC program at Princeton also faced significant changes. In 1970, in the wake of protests against the war in Vietnam, including a fire-bombing of the Princeton Armory ROTC offices, faculty voted to end the program.

This suspension only lasted a year, ending when the student body passed a referendum recommending the return of ROTC as a “non-credit” activity, the very first use of the USG referendum procedure.

In 1969, East Asian Studies and Near Eastern Studies, previously one department, were split and moved into Jones Hall. Prior to this move, Jones Hall was known as Fine Hall. The building’s previous tenant, the math department, was moved to a newly constructed building on Washington

The Daily Princetonian

page 15

Road. This new Fine Hall stood at 13 stories and was described by the ‘Prince’ as Princeton’s “first bonafide skyscraper.”

The word “Jadwin” also saw disproportionate usage throughout the 1970s, oftentimes in reference to Jadwin Gymnasium which opened in 1969.

1980s Following the 1980s’ growth of computer usage in schools, computers starred in many newspaper articles. In the summer of 1980, the University announced that it would be offering its first introductory computer science course geared towards humanities majors: EECS 103. Princeton strove to make computer usage accessible to students by providing computer facilities on campus, though some computers were reported to be stolen from such clusters.

The 1980s’ increase in court cases addressing sexual harassment — and the landmark decision of Meritor Savings Bank v.

Vinson (1986) where the Supreme Court ruled that sexual harassment violates the Civil Rights Act — sparked conversations nationwide. The spike in reporting on harassment, including coverage on major incidents of harassment at peer instituitions, prompted the University to revise sexual harassment policies and host sexual harassment trainings.

On campus, the Undergraduate Student Government (USG) became increasingly visible, hosting frequent forums to allow members of the campus community to voice their opinions. At the start of the 1980s, the University established the residential college system, which originated from Woodrow Wilson’s 1906 “Quad Plan” and would later become an integral part of Princeton’s campus life and undergraduate experience.

In 1979, Sally Frank ’80 fought for gender equality when she sued the three remaining all-male eating clubs: Cottage Club, Ivy Club, and Tiger Inn (TI). Although pushback persisted from Ivy and TI, Cottage became coed in 1986, and Frank donated $2,000 of her $20,000 settlement with the club to Princeton’s Women*s Center.

In 1989, the New Jersey Supreme Court agreed to hear Frank’s case, and shortly after, both Ivy and TI voted to accept women in February of 1990.

1990s During the Clinton years, as many American politicians were growing increasingly interested in environmentalism, use of the word “environmental” skyrocketed at the ‘Prince.’ Student-led environmental groups began new publications, released studies, and campaigned for sustainable reforms on campus. The University also founded the Princeton Environmental Institute in 1994, now known as the High Meadows Environmental Institute.

Other frequently used terms in the decade referred to the worldwide AIDS epidemic: By 1994, the disease was the leading cause of death in Americans between the age of 25 and 44. Throughout the 1990s, Princeton hosted​​events for annual world AIDS awareness week, and editorials in the ‘Prince’ stressed the urgency of fighting the pandemic, calling it “perhaps the defining plague of our time.”

In sports-related coverage, volleyball became a varsity sport at Princeton in 1997, and the softball team became the first Ivy team to post 12 league victories.

The word “machine” was also used disproportionately throughout the 1990s, referring to, among other things, The Daily Princetonian’s fax machine number. At the time, some students even had their own personal facsimile machines, “the ultimate in student high-tech gadgetry.”

The ‘Prince’ also disproportionately mentioned the word “television” during the ’90s. By 1995, about 50 percent of dorm rooms were wired for cable, although underclassmen in residential colleges were not allowed to subscribe, forcing first-years and sophomores to rely on communal televisions to stay up-todate on shows like “Seinfeld” and “90210,” released one night a week.

2000s In 2001, Princeton became the nation’s first university to implement a “no loan” financial aid program: a pioneering decision that helped students graduate debt-free and inspired institu-

tions across the country to do the same. The following year, the University announced that for the first time in Princeton’s history, 50 percent of the first-years received financial aid. For the next two decades, Princeton’s financial aid packages would go on to benefit over 10,000 students.

In the years leading up to and at the turn of the 21st century, the ‘Prince’ reported more on drinking culture on campus, including the eating clubs’ role in fostering a safer environment for college drinking compared to unsupervised, underage drinking. The Amethyst Initiative petition, introduced by then Middlebury College President John McCardell, advocated lowering the drinking age to 18. While some presidents of peer institutions supported the petition, then-President Shirley Tilghman did not see high potential in its success or certainty in its outcomes.

Colloquial terms such as “guys” and “girls” were disproportionately used during this century, especially in more playful sections of the newspaper, such as Kiss & Tell and Street’s Top Ten. Top Ten was a popular section among readers in the 2000s that aligned with the weekly issue’s theme, synthesizing reader submissions and exploring a variety

of fun, random topics such as the top 10 theme songs for buildings on campus and the top 10 chick flicks guys actually like.

2010s The rise of social media in the 2010s transformed life at Princeton and beyond. For the first time, entire classes of alumni could stay in touch on Facebook, sparking more than a few controversies. Online confessions pages allowed any student to anonymously share their experiences at Princeton.

The University itself began using Facebook and Twitter to help reach current and potential students. In February 2010, Princeton University had about 11,000 Facebook fans, “991 times less popular than Michael Jackson.” The ‘Prince’ also started to cultivate a social media following, urging our readers to “procrastinate productively” by liking our Facebook page.

The Black Justice League, a student group dedicated to fighting anti-Black racism, was founded in the fall of 2014 as racial justice uprisings swept the nation. A year later, the group orchestrated a march on Nassau Hall, calling on the University to create affinity spaces for Black students, mandate cultural competency

training for faculty, and remove Woodrow Wilson Class of 1879’s name from Princeton’s policy school and first residential college, among other demands.

The ‘Prince’ also disproportionately used “assault” and “violence” throughout the decade, reporting on misconduct and giving a space for survivors to share their stories publically. In order to promote sexual health on campus, The Sexpert, a moniker for a team of peer health educators, also wrote prolifically in the 2010s — answering questions on everything from circumcision to female ejaculation.

During the 2010s, the Princeton student body considered several different referendums on topics including USG reform, bicker, and the use of Sabra hummus in dining halls, as some students pushed for divestment from the Israeli brand. An annual, University-wide Mental Health Week also began during the decade, sponsored by the newly formed USG Mental Health Initiative.

Anika Maskara is a head Web Design and Development editor emeritus.

Elaine Huang is a head Data editor for the ‘Prince.’

page 16

The Daily Princetonian

Friday May 25, 2023

Beyond Poe Field: A first look at Yeh College and New College West SEPTEMBER 2022

By Angel Kuo & Candace Do

Art Director & Head Photo Editor Emeritus

With a brand new yellow porch, Yeh College welcomes all students from across Poe Field.

An entrance to New College West.

Stairs leading to the basement dining hall area of New College West and Yeh College.

A colorful lounge in Yeh College.

Friday May 25, 2023

The Daily Princetonian

page 17

After being under construction the past year, New College West and Yeh College are now bringing pops of color to south campus.

Yeh College and New College West provide ample space for students to relax and work.

Even in the first few days of classes, study spaces around Yeh College are starting to fill with students eager to start classes and enjoy a fresh space.

Construction continues at the new colleges.

The size of the shared New College West and Yeh College dining hall alludes to the popularity of the new colleges and foreshadows the coming construction that will soon close First College and the adjoining Wucox dining hall.

page 18

The Daily Princetonian

Friday May 25, 2023

The Sweet Sixteen,

MARCH 2023

By Julia Nguyen, Angel Kuo, & Aarushi Adlakha

Managing Editor, Art Director & Contributing Photographer

Community members gather around the band to send off the team in Princeton on Wednesday.

Senior forward Keeshawn Kellman wins the tip off for Princeton.

Students hold signs at watch party in Whig Hall.

Crowd goes wild as the Tigers tie the game 31–31.

Friday May 25, 2023

in photos

The Daily Princetonian

page 19

Fans react at the Nassau Inn.

Princeton students and alumni traveled to Louisville, Ky. for the Sweet 16 March Madness matchup.

Princeton’s cheerleading squad made the trip to Louisville to support the men’s team.

Mascot dance-off during a time-out.

page 20

MARCH 2023

Hum r

Princeton University accepts 0.00% of applicants to Class of 2027

By Lauren Owens Contributing Humor Writer

The following content is purely satirical and entirely fictional.

On Thursday, March 30, the date known as “Ivy Day,” high school seniors around the world waited with bated breath for the 7 p.m. EST notification: “there has been an update to your application portal.” Very few applicants were met with an offer of admission to an Ivy League university, and fewer still were given the option to choose between multiple of these prestigious schools. But they all had something in common.

Not a single one was accepted to Princeton University.

In denying admission to 100 percent of students who submitted applications, Princeton makes history as the first university to have an entirely equal acceptance rate across all demographic groups. The admission department is currently celebrating the success of its new procedures.

“Admissions are tricky, so we’re really excited about this development,” said Dean of Admissions Nowuns Gudenuf. “By refraining from opening up any spots in the Great Class of 2027, Princeton can guarantee that every student was treated equally no matter the privileges or disadvantages that their pasts have afforded them.”

Assistant Admissions Officer Saul Ek Tivity added, “It’s a thrill to see our acceptance rate drop head and shoulders below our peer institutions.

I feel honored to be part of making this University truly one of the best in the country.

Take that, Harvard!”

Dean of Admissions at Harvard College, Ani-joe Shmoe, points out, “at least we actually have an acceptance rate.”

However, in an attempt to maintain its standing with Harvard, Yale, the Beverly Hills High School, Hogwarts, and Monsters University, and their goal to continue to produce future famous alumni,

the University has decided to grant honorary 2027 bachelor’s degrees to a handful of promising young people, including Olivia Rodrigo, Noah Schnapp, Dean Jill Dolan, Princess Charlotte of Wales, and the ghost of Louisa May Alcott.

“We believe the accomplishments of this astonishing group will far outweigh anything that 2027 hopefuls could have contributed,” said Tivity. “No offense. They’ll be happier at Northwestern anyway.”

The choice to follow through with this program of zero percent acceptance

was made quite recently, according to sources familiar with the situation. As a result, large envelopes containing orange and black confetti were sent in March to the homes of students admitted through Early Action in December, letting them know that their admission had been revoked.

Lauren Owens is a sophomore Humor writer who thinks Princeton’s new admissions policies are only further proof of her long-held theory that first-years don’t exist.

LOUISA GHEORGHITA / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

FEBRUARY 2023

Nassau Hall to be picked up, walked around campus, and dropped back off

By Walker Penfield Staff Humor Writer

The following content is purely satirical and entirely fictional.

This coming week, construction efforts will begin to raise the iconic Nassau Hall from its foundation so that it may be transported around the perimeter of campus and

dropped back off after an hourlong jaunt. Administrators will remain inside their offices throughout the journey.

President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 told the Daily PrintsAnything that he is “excited to wave out at onlookers from his office window and reconnect with the charm of the Princeton campus.”

The very slow-moving pro-

cession will allow administrators to peek up from their screens to acknowledge various campus cultural landmarks such as Wawa, Fine Hall, and a high school skateboarder or two.

When asked why the countless administrators of Nassau Hall were not willing to walk around campus on foot, Dean of the College Jill Dolan said,

“COVID?” The project is projected to cost the University $20 million dollars, which otherwise would have gone to hiring more CPS counselors.

Walker Penfield was an economics concentrator from Mendon, Massachusetts before withdrawing after getting struck by a moving building.

NATE BEGGS / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Construction teams prepare to lift Nassau Hall from it’s foundation, take it for a spin around campus, and return it to where it began.

The Daily Princetonian

Friday May 25, 2023

page 21

MARCH 2023

“The Matilda E ffect”

By Juliet Corless & Emily Wang

Associate Puzzles Editor & Contributing Constructor

ACROSS 1 Target with a throw 7 Included on an email 11 Hawaiian garland 14 "I, Robot" author 15 With 58-Across, chemist who discovered the helical shape of DNA, acknowledged only in a footnote 17 Biology field 18 "It seems to me..."

19 Engineer who took over construction of the Brooklyn Bridge, acknowledged on a plaque 70 years after its construction 21 Lois of The Daily Planet 22 Gym bests: Abbr.

23 Tap sites at a frat party 26 Director Lee 27 "90 Day Fiancé" network 28 My Chemical Romance genre 31 Hosp. scan 32 Cause of storybook insomnia 33 Conflicts in Hollywood?

35 Aeronautical engineer for NASA who studied wind and aerodynamics, and who fought against racism and sexism her entire career 37 A book one shouldn't miss 39 Long, long time 40 Nile reptile

41 The ten in "first and ten": Abbr.

42 Introduction for José or Diego 43 Half a couple, maybe 46 Content of a bog 48 Strike caller 49 Mother Earth 50 Physicist who worked on the Manhattan Project and studied beta decay, who was not acknowledged in her colleagues' Nobel Prize 55 The Twelve Tables' system 57 Like "Romeo and Juliet" 58 See 15-Across 59 Shop on the 100-level of Frist 60 Next of ___ 61 Pepper's partner 62 Speeds on

DOWN 1 ___ Beesly, formally ("The Office" character) 2 How Mulan dresses in much of "Mulan" 3 Fathering 4 "Say cheese!"

5 Broadway award 6 Like "Happy" by Pharell Williams, perhaps 7 A baby's wails 8 Kind of salad 9 Donkey, in Düsseldorf 10 Surrealist painter of melting watches

11 Vassal 12 Letter holder: Abbr.

13 Chemical suffix 16 Connection 20 "Lord of the Rings" monster 24 [Don't touch my bone!]

25 "Rah, Tiger, ___, Boom, ah!"

27 Towel fabric 28 Yadda, yadda, yadda 29 Sell 30 "Ender's Game" author ___ Scott Card 32 Reassuring touch 33 Blue 34 Got the gold 35 1980s video game spinoff 36 Madison or Monroe: Abbr.

37 Treasure hunter's aid

38 "___ the Force, Luke" 42 Texter's expression of disbelief 43 Housefly larva 44 Update electrically 45 Barbeque, soy, and marinara 47 Billie Eilish's "Happier ___ Ever" 48 4-time World Cup champions who fought for equal pay, for short 49 Summer swarm 51 Printers' supplies 52 Jazz's Fitzgerald 53 Hammer's target 54 Major part of the night sky?

55 D.C.'s ___ Stadium 56 "Either you do it ___ will"

page 22

Features

Friday May 25, 2023

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Princeton’s energy grid transforms right beneath our feet

FEBRUARY 2023

By Raphaela Gold

Staff Features Writer

“We’re literally changing the wheels on the bus while we’re going down the road at full speed,” said Energy Plant Manager Ted Borer. Borer’s metaphor succinctly captures the complex process of transitioning Princeton’s cogeneration plant to a geo-exchange system while simultaneously running the cogeneration plant.

Cogeneration, also known as Combined Heat and Power (CHP), burns natural gas to produce both electricity and thermal energy. By taking the heat exhaust from a combustion turbine to produce steam, cogeneration can efficiently heat and cool Princeton’s campus, meeting most of the University’s heat and energy demands.

Soon, however, the cogeneration plant will take a backseat as the University expands solar power generation and creates a geo-exchange heating and cooling network in an ambitious step toward accomplishing Princeton’s 2046 net carbon neutrality goal.

Princeton built its first geoexchange system under the golfdriving range in 2004 to serve the Lawrence graduate student apartments. Subsequent installations were built to serve the Lakeside graduate apartments and the Lewis Center for the Arts.

Most recently, the University drilled 52 boreholes on the front lawn outside of Whitman College. Each hole is 850 feet deep and 5-6 inches in diameter, filled with a narrow high density polyethylene tube and grout. There are over 800 boreholes on campus today — and the University anticipates the installation of more than 2000 in total.

Princeton’s current energy system comprises a West Energy Plant, a High Performance Computing Research Center on the Forrestal campus, and ten solar arrays across campus.

Over the next year, the University will construct two new energy facilities. The Thermally Integrated Geo-Exchange Resource or TIGER will be built East of Jadwin Gym and Denunzio Pool. The TIGER facility will work with the West Energy Plant to supply heating and cooling to the University’s central campus.

Rather than using combustion and cooling towers, it will exclusively use daily thermal storage and geo-exchange fields for seasonal energy storage.

A smaller structure called CUB (Central Utility Building) will be built across Lake Carnegie to serve the new Meadows Neighborhood. In addition to geo-exchange, the CUB facility will have a small hot water heater to supplement the geoexchange and heat pumps on the coldest days of the year as needed. For the hottest days of the year, it will also be equipped with a small cooling tower to provide extra support for the geo-exchange and heat pumps.

Because the piping design required for hot water is different from the current steam distribution design, more than 13 miles of district hot water piping will be installed underground throughout campus. The largest proportion of campus energy demands will be transitioned from steam to hot water heating over the next five years. Over the course of the subsequent decade, hot water pipes will connect every campus building to geo-exchange.

As the University begins to rely more on solar power generation and heat pump facilities, the cogeneration facility will operate less frequently. But, it will continue to play a crucial role during severe weather events, saving the University the costs

LOUISA GHEORGHITA / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Image of geoexchange construction outside Whitman College

of purchasing energy from the regional power grid.

On a tour of the current cogeneration system, Energy Plant Manager Ted Borer explained to The Daily Princetonian that the transition to hot water, heat pumps, and geo-exchange will be a significant up-front cost to the University — but makes sense considering the whole lifecycle cost. “The geo-exchange and district hot water pipes should last 50 to 100 years. A chiller or heat pump might last 20 to 40 years,” said Borer.

Borer also explained how the geo-exchange will improve Princeton’s efficiency. By transitioning buildings from steam to hot water, the University will be able to move heating and cooling across campus using about 20% the amount of total input energy the cogeneration plant uses today, according to Borer.

Tom Nyquist, Mechanical Engineer and Executive Director of Facilities Engineering and Campus Energy, emphasized that geo-exchange will create seasonal energy storage. “We [will] take heat out of the buildings in the summer and transfer it into the ground. In the winter, we [will] take that heat out of the ground, concentrate it, and send it back up to the buildings,” he explained.

Geo-exchange will also reduce Princeton’s water usage. While cogeneration and the current chilled water operation require an input of water from an outside source, geo-exchange recirculates the same water between the geoexchange fields and the heat pump plant.

Assistant Director of Sustainability Dr. Ijeoma Nwagwu, who manages academic engagement and Campus as Lab initiatives, affirmed the sustainability goals of the geo-exchange and discussed its potential for student involvement.

Nwagwu also emphasized the importance of engaging the community, saying, “What we see are buildings being built and geo-exchange being installed, but the way we see it from a sustainability standpoint is… we are actively thinking of ways to engage the community.” Nwagwu encouraged students to read the signage on construction and engage with the transition.

As Nwagwu envisions, Princeton community members are already engaging in the campus’s changing energy grid, conducting research and closely following the progress of the geo-exchange construction.

Forrest Meggers, an Associate Professor of Architecture at the Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment and Co-Chair of the Princeton Sustainability Committee, has been researching these methods in his lab and exploring different college campuses’ approaches to energy transition.

“We have one competitor in terms of heating and cooling: Stanford,” said Meggers. However, he believes that Princeton’s geo-exchange installations will take the University’s efforts beyond Stanford’s by neutralizing various energy loads from summer to winter. He said, “Our campus is going to be way cooler than Stanford, but Stanford tried to be pretty cool.”

Although Meggers’ praised Princeton, he also discussed some challenges the installation of geo-exchange will face on Princeton’s campus. He commented, “The geology in Princeton is the worst for this. Yale should be doing it, and Columbia, because they’re sitting on the perfect material. We’re sitting on sandstone, which is problematic for drilling.”

Another challenge is that the benefit of geo-exchange is only proportional to specific weather — how cold it gets in the winter versus how hot it gets in the summer. Meggers was on the committee which evaluated whether Princeton should keep the cogeneration plant or switch to geo-exchange. She noted that temperature variation complicated the economic models which were used as a justification for geo-exchange. “It all came down to the fact that we wanted to electrify,” he explained.

Some alumni and students have also been invested in tracking the University’s energy transition.

Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering concentrator Harry Shapiro ’22 wrote his senior thesis on “Carbon-Adjusted Dis-

patch Optimization for Princeton’s Campus Energy Plants,” overseen by Borer and Nwagwu.

Shapiro now works as a private equity analyst in NY. Shapiro considered the student perspective on energy, saying, “In terms of the general student body, none of this is something you ever really notice. And that’s kind of the goal, right?”

He continued, “You want to have an incredibly reliable energy system such that when you turn on the hot water, the hot water comes out, and when you plug in your laptop, it charges.”

Shapiro also touched on Princeton’s approach to addressing its carbon footprint. “I think one of the most powerful things about what Princeton is doing is that our system is going to reach net zero primarily through engineering. It’s a very challenging engineering problem, and Princeton isn’t afraid of doing it the hard way,” Shapiro said.

Civil and Environmental Engineering concentrator Alex Moosbrugger ’24 also appreciates the science behind geoexchange. “The geo-exchange is overlooked, but really cool,” said Moosbrugger. “I think Princeton’s variety of approaches… shows a deeper understanding of the solution.”

In response to student complaints regarding construction, Moosbrugger said, “The construction impacts are destructive, but I think geo-exchange as the main heating and cooling system makes a lot of sense.”

Another issue which community members are considering is the timeline of Princeton’s decarbonization and geo-exchange’s place in that timeline. Princeton’s net neutrality mission of reaching net neutrality by 2046 is relatively late in comparison with other Universities such as Harvard, Yale, and Brown.

When asked why Princeton’s net carbon neutrality goal is later than other Ivy League in-

stitutions, Meggers responded, “They chose their years because other universities chose theirs… but nobody has a solid, believable plan.”

Meggers believes that Princeton can and will reach its energy goals sooner than other universities, despite the fact that the claims say otherwise. “We have a much better plan than them… if we want to [beat the 2046 goal], it’s easy.”

Nwagwu confirmed discussions amongst University officials about potentially striving for an earlier date, with carbon neutrality intended by “2046 or sooner.”

According to Meggers, this is a healthy competition which will compel all Universities to reach their goals sooner. He also pointed out that in many cases, other Universities’ plans involve purchasing significant carbon offsets from outside sources, whereas Princeton’s plan prohibits the purchase of carbon offsets and instead focuses on reducing on-campus emissions.

In the same vein, Moosbrugger noted, “There are a few things that are really difficult to decarbonize. I think it is really important to acknowledge and figure out how to work around that.”

Despite this recognition, Moosbrugger finds “Princeton’s goal specifically to be somewhat underwhelming.” He added, “It could very well be done sooner on a timeline that I would be more thrilled with being a part of as a student at Princeton than the 2046 date.”

Regardless of the timeline, the University is currently in a moment of substantial energy transition in which there are opportunities for student involvement. As Nwagwu said, “It’s amazing the learning that happens when students are engaging with the transition.”

Raphaela Gold is a staff Features writer for the ‘Prince.’

The Daily Princetonian

Friday May 25, 2023

page 23

Princeton women’s rugby goes varsity, keeps walk-on spirit

SEPTEMBER 2022

By Molly Taylor & Gia Musselwhite

Assistant Features Editors

In 2019, Josie Ziluca, then the part-time coach at Princeton’s women’s club rugby team, was driving across the country when she received a phone call from Princeton Athletics. On the side of the road, she was informed that her team was going varsity.

“I had tears of joy,” Ziluca said. “I was so excited.”

After years of student advocacy, the change to varsity status represents an opportunity for the team to compete at the highest level of collegiate rugby, an NCAA emerging sport.

But this season is also a moment of transition as the players — most of whom hadn’t played rugby before they got to Princeton — become Division I athletes. Amid this adjustment, the players have sought to maintain the team’s walkon culture.

A new member of the National Intercollegiate Rugby Association (NIRA), the team competes against other varsity programs. After a nationwide search for a full-time head coach, Ziluca was selected to continue leading the team, with Anna Albrecht as assistant coach. And for the first time in the University’s history, three athletes were recruited to Princeton for rugby.

The team’s elevation to varsity status, according to Captain Leilani Bender ’24, is regularly described as “historic.”

Bender serves alongside Captains Sophia Villacorta ’24 and Kathyrn-Alexa Kennedy ’23.

Still, players try to keep the shift to varsity in perspective — especially as the pressure of the word “historic” hangs over the team.

“That word inherently adds pressure,” Bender said. “Before our first game, I tried to remind everyone that even though they’re going to sing the national anthem, and they’re going to announce all of us, once the whistle blows, we’re just playing rugby.”

The path to varsity status A little-known fact, according to Ziluca, is that women’s club rugby was once the “winningest sport” at Princeton.

Between 1995 and 1997, the team won back-to-back national championships and 57 consecutive matches.

But a few years ago, players began to notice a trend that troubled them: teams they used to be competitive with — like Harvard, Brown, and Dartmouth — were consistently defeating them in Ivy League tournaments. In the early 2010s, these club teams had been elevated to varsity status.

This change was not limited to the Ivy League. Recognizing the growing popularity of women’s rugby, the NCAA established the NIRA in 2015 to increase varsity opportunities for female athletes. Since then, NIRA has expanded from eight founding teams to more than 20.

The idea for the club team to go varsity, according to former club president Kate Leung ’20, originated as a way to remain competitive within the changing landscape of collegiate rugby.

When Leung was a first-year in 2016, upperclassmen had already begun to sketch out a plan. Still, at the time, Leung said, “it seemed like a very faroff possibility, like a dream.”

But with time, Leung and her teammates began to embrace the idea. With the understanding that higher level competition would demand a greater commitment from each athlete, the team took a vote in 2018. It was unanimous: they would pursue varsity status.

“We knew this probably wouldn’t happen while we were here,” Leung said. “But we thought, ‘if we don’t do it now, it won’t happen for the people that come after us.’”

In 2019, the team, with the support of its alumni board, submitted a 15-page proposal to Princeton Athletics. Its motivation to go varsity, the document stated, was to “return to the national championship stage.”

The proposal included statistics on player injuries, addressing the administration’s concerns about safety — it would only be improved, the players argued, with a fulltime coach and better training support. The document also emphasized that a varsity rugby team would help close the gender gap in athletic participation. That year, the University had 32 percent more male athletes than female athletes.

In the spring of 2021, two years after the team submitted its proposal — and several years after players first imagined going varsity — Princeton Athletics announced that women’s rugby would become a varsity team.

‘We want to find our stride’ When Bender first entered the team’s locker room in August, she knew that this season would be different.

“That was the first time we were in a space that was solely for varsity athletes,” she said.

“It was our own space, too.”

In this moment of transition, even the smallest of changes — like access to a locker room — carries symbolic weight.

“The other captains and I made cute themed signs for everyone’s lockers,” Bender added. “Just to make it a little more fun and less official.”

But other changes more immediately affect the team’s level of play, allowing the program to build toward its goal of national championship. For one, the coaches now have the ability to recruit up to three players each year.

Alayshja Bable ’26 is among the University’s three first-ever rugby recruits. Before coming to Princeton, the fullback from Philadelphia played for elite club teams like Atlantis Rugby and Midwest Thunder-

birds.

She hadn’t even thought about playing for Princeton’s debut varsity program until she met Ziluca at an Atlantis tournament in the winter of her senior year.

“We played a game, and [Ziluca] was cheering me on from the sidelines,” Bable said. “Afterward, she told me, ‘I’m with Princeton, and I want you to check us out.’ I had no clue that would even be an option.”

But now, despite being new to the team, Bable and the other two recruits have taken on leadership roles to share their unique competitive background with walk-on teammates.

“We’re allowed to lead things in practice,” Bable said.

“You can say, ‘Oh, hey, maybe if you try doing this, you’ll have a better pass or be able to get a little bit stronger in a tackle.’ It [still] felt a little bit odd… we’re all new to the varsity experience.”

Beyond this season’s logistics, Ziluca sees the team’s elevation to varsity status as a long-term endgame that demands strategic decisionmaking.

“I’ve always put pressure on myself,” Ziluca said. “It’s not so much about game outcomes or scores — it’s more of, ‘Are we exploring all options to make sure that we’re moving forward the best way possible?’”

Ziluca started coaching at Princeton in 2019, bringing years of elite competitive experience to the program. She currently plays for the USA Touch Women’s Open Team, and she used to tour nationally with club teams — even winning a national championship in 2014. It was at Longwood University, where Ziluca entered as a two-sport varsity athlete, that she discovered club rugby.

“I’m a fierce competitor,” Ziluca said, but “in our first [varsity] year, our goal is certainly not to win the conference. We want to find our stride.”

Tigers at home On Sept. 10, Princeton women’s rugby played their first home varsity match against the U.S. Military Academy.

The match served as a reunion for dozens of former Princeton rugby players, who were honored during the team’s “Alumni Appreciation Day.” Several alumni in attendance had competed on Princeton teams that advanced to the national semifinals — there were six between 1997 and 2005.

Former captain Gretchen Jacobi ’06, who watched the debut, had also been to a rugby match at each of the 10 Princeton reunions she has attended.

“When I see the team now has trainers and a locker room, I think it’s going to make them that much more competitive,” Jacobi said, “but it will also build their community because really, rugby is about community.”

For Mags Dillon ’06, who worked on the varsity initia-

COURTESY OF EMILY DELLA PIETRA ’24

tive, the game represented the culmination of the years-long effort to go varsity.

“It’s rare to see so much change happen really quickly,” Dillon said. “[Watching the match] was really moving.”

That day, Princeton lost its second game of the season 87–0. The first game, versus Sacred Heart, ended in a score of 51–21. And over the last two weekends, the team fell to Brown and Harvard.

But for Jess Ward, senior associate director of Campus Recreation, the significance of this season isn’t related to the team’s win-loss record against opponents that have been varsity for years.

“I went to their first game and watched them score their first try, and I cried because it didn’t matter that they were losing,” Ward said. “They were still working super hard, and this is what they want.”

Even with the team’s difficult schedule, Stuart Rickerson ’71 noted his optimism for the season ahead. Rickerson, the founding chair of the Princeton University Rugby Endowment Board, traveled from his home in California to watch the home opener versus Army.

“It’s all new,” Rickerson said, sporting orange Converse and knee-high tiger-print socks.

“But we’re going to surprise some people.”

The walk-on culture Despite the team’s new ability to recruit athletes, most players joined the rugby team when they got to Princeton, without ever having played the sport before.

In the spring of her first year at Princeton, Bender saw a club rugby flyer in the bathroom of Frist Campus Center.

By the end of April, she was practicing with the team.

“I really threw myself into it,” Bender said. “I never felt scared because I didn’t know something. The seniors made it really clear: as long as you’re trying, it’s all good.”

For Bender, who played water polo in high school, rugby was a way to continue with high-level sports in college.

Former team president Frances Walker ’22, who had played basketball, tennis, and volleyball before Princeton, saw rugby as a similar opportunity.

“Growing up, I always wanted to play football,” Walker said. “And my mom wouldn’t let me. There was the stigma that it was too dangerous for me, as a girl.”

Like football, rugby is a “collision sport.” Before new players can participate in contact practices, they repeat drills to learn how to tackle and fall safely.

Because rugby has so few barriers to entry, like previous experience or expensive equipment — mouthguards are the only protective equipment used — several players noted the team is distinctly inclusive.

“As a sport at Princeton, it was one of the most, if not the most, diverse with regard to ethnicity, income groups, and parents’ education status,” Walker said. “It also allows for a diversity of bodies and different types of skill sets.”

“We had people from tennis, who could move very liberally, and we had people from track and field who run very fast or jump really high,” Walker continued. “I was bigger, so I played prop, a forward position that requires a lot of strength.”

For captain Sophia Villacorta ’24, it was key to preserve this team atmosphere between the other changes brought on by the shift to varsity.

“I wanted to make sure that the community and the environment didn’t change too drastically,” Villacorta said.

Villacorta is a podcast contributor for the ‘Prince.’

President Zoë Koniaris ’25

agreed, noting that walk-ons’ lack of experience has not impeded their achievement.

“We’ve produced walk-ons who have come out to be great, competitive players after their time at Princeton,” Koniaris said. “And we hope to keep doing that.”

For example, in recent years, former captain Jessica Lu ’18 and Charlotte Wallace ’21 competed in the Women’s Premier League, the top-ranked American club women’s rugby league organized by USA Rugby.

In the team’s competitive season, it plays 15 versus 15.

Consequently, in three years, when the roster might contain 12 recruits, walk-ons will still make up a significant part of the program.

“We are a walk-on team, and we always will be,” Ziluca said. “That’s just the spirit of rugby.”

Looking forward The team is in its “testdrive” period for prospective walk-ons, inviting students to attend practices at West Windsor Field and learn the fundamentals of the sport.

“To me, rugby looks very intense,” prospective walk-on Katarina Ivkovic ’25 said. “[But] they’ve done their best to try and make it more bite-sized.”

On a Tuesday afternoon in mid-September, Koniaris coached the group of new players, demonstrating passing technique and reminding them to call to each other by name throughout the drills.

“In rugby, we only pass to people who are calling for the ball, developing that skill of constantly communicating on the field,” Koniaris said.

For Koniaris, the transition to varsity has been an opportunity to refocus her energy as president away from logistical operations, which are now primarily handled by Princeton Athletics.

“Rather than being in the nitty-gritty, I get to be more of an ‘ideas’ person,” Koniaris said. “I see my job as checking in with each of the individual players on the team and advocating for them as best I can.”

The growth of rugby at Princeton is a part of a larger trend. Over the last two decades, the number of rugby participants in the U.S. — including youth players — more than tripled. In 2018, rugby was deemed the fastest-growing sport in the country.

With universities increasingly adding varsity programs for women’s rugby, according to Ziluca, this is a particularly important moment for the women’s side of the sport.

There finally exists a path for young girls to advance from club teams to collegiate play to professional competition.

“In the future, when we think of rugby in the States, it’s going to be women’s rugby,” Ziluca said.

While leading practice, Ziluca joined the returners in their scrimmage as a “doubleagent” for both teams, weaving through players to score quickly.

After a few minutes, the coach paused the game to address the prospective walkons. They couldn’t join just yet, as they hadn’t been medically cleared for contact play.

But they could stick around.

“Feel free to watch the craziness that’s about to ensue,” she called as she ran back toward the scrimmage.

Molly Taylor is an assistant Features editor for The Daily Princetonian. She can be reached at mollypt@princeton.edu.

Gia Musselwhite is an assistant Features editor for the ‘Prince.’ She can be reached at gmusselwhite@ princeton.edu or @gia.musselwhite on Instagram.

page 24

The Daily Princetonian

Friday May 25, 2023

M AY 2 0 2 3

More than just a number: Princeton’s history of tragic loss

By Elaine Huang & Suthi Navaratnam-Tomayko Head Data Editor & Assistant Data Editor

Content Warning: The following article contains discussion of death and suicide.

University Counseling Services are available at 609-258-3141, and the Suicide Prevention Lifeline is available 24/7 at 988. A Crisis Text Line is also available in the United States; text HOME to 741741. Students can contact residential college staff and the Office of Religious Life for other support and resources. For employees, Carebridge counseling services are available 24/7 by calling (800) 437-0911.

“The most humble person I’ve ever met.” “Simmering with energy and curiosity.”

“Bright, witty, dedicated, empathetic, and compassionate.”

These are the ways that the people who were closest to those in the Princeton community who tragically took their own lives remember them. Over the last two years, four students and one staff member have died by suicide, an incalculable loss for the University.

These tragedies have fallen disproportionately on students of color. In addition,

suicides have been clustered around times of high academic stress. The ‘Prince’ looked back at a tragic decade for Princeton.

Deaths have become more common at Princeton over the last ten years. A Dec. 3, 2015 article by the ‘Prince’ reported that “there have been 24 undergraduates, seven graduates, seven professors and four staff members who have died by suicide at the University that have been reported in The Daily Princetonian since 1876.”

Since the article’s publication, six undergraduates have taken their own lives. Additionally, faculty and staff have also died by suicide since then.

Over 19 percent of total Princeton student suicides reported since 1876 have occurred in the last 10 years. For undergraduates alone, the difference is even starker: 25 percent of undergraduates who have died by suicide since 1876 have done so since 2013.

Two of the eight student suicides that occurred in the past 10 years took place during the month of January. Until 2020, fall term final exams took place during January; both of the deaths that took place during January happened before 2020. Two deaths occurred in May, in which spring term final examinations take place.

According to the Director of Counseling and Psychological Services (CPS), Calvin Chin, CPS “tailor[s] our services to anticipate times of higher demand by bolstering the staff with additional counselors and partnering with other offices and departments in promoting mental health services. For example, our engagement specialists in UMatter develop targeted social media posts to reflect what might be most stressful for students at any given time (e.g., bicker, midterms, deans (sic) date) and share helpful health information and resources in these posts.”

Over half of all students who took their own lives in the past 10 years have been juniors at the time of their passing.

Every student who has died by suicide in the past ten years has been a person of color. There have been calls by students and organizations such as Princeton Ethiopian and Eritrean Student Association (PEESA) to diversify CPS counseling.

In a past interview with the ‘Prince,’ PEESA co-president Joachim Ambaw ’24 stated that “some Black students can’t find therapists within CPS that are able to relate to them,” and that “finding

somebody that they can relate to on an identity level can lead to better interactions and a better therapy process.”

According to Chin, “40 percent of [CPS] counselors identify as BIPOC and 35 percent identify as members of the LGBTQ community.” Chin states that CPS takes care to “prioritize diversity in … hiring” so that “all students are comfortable accessing services.”

According to W. Rochelle Calhoun, the Vice President for Campus Life, in a statement to the ‘Prince,’ the University “recognize[s] that particular populations or groups of students may be especially vulnerable [to suicide]. The impacts of racism, homophobia, and transphobia in our society are real.”

Calhoun also highlighted “multiculturally competent” mental health resources on campus, such as “a series of mental health programs and workshops co-sponsored by CPS and the Asian American Student Alliance (AASA) in the fall, a retreat co-sponsored by the Office of the Dean of Undergraduate Students (ODUS) and Our Health Matters emphasizing the health and wellbeing needs of Black women over winter break, and a series of workshops and

programs facilitated by one of our TigerWell Outreach counselors, who frequently assists BIPOC and LGBTQIA students, done in partnership with SIFP and the GSRC.” University counseling programs have become more popular over time.

The percentage of students who have considered pursuing any form of mental health counseling or therapy has increased from 75.0 percent to 78.5 percent in the Class of 2022 and Class of 2023, respectively. Similarly, 64.6 percent of members of the Class of 2023 have had counseling, whether inside or outside of CPS: a 7.8 percent increase from the 59.9 percent reported for the Class of 2022.

“We recognize that there is always more work to be done in ensuring a safe and inclusive environment for all students and are committed to continuing to move this work forward,” said Calhoun in her statement.

Elaine Huang is a head Data editor for the ‘Prince.’

Suthi Navaratnam-Tomayko is an assistant Data editor for the ‘Prince.’

LOUISA GHEORGHITA / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Wisterias cover the walls of Joline Hall and Campbell Hall.

Opinion

Friday May 25, 2023

page 25

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } NOVEMBER 2022

vol. cxlvii

editor-in-chief Rohit Narayanan '24 business manager Shirley Ren ’24

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

Suzanne Dance ’96 Gabriel Debenedetti ’12 Stephen Fuzesi ’00 Zachary A. Goldfarb ’05 Michael Grabell ’03 John G. Horan ’74 Danielle Ivory ’05 Rick Klein ’98 James T. MacGregor ’66 Julianne Escobedo Shepherd Abigail Williams ’14 Tyler Woulfe ’07 trustees ex officio Rohit Narayanan ’24 Shirley Ren ’24

147TH MANAGING BOARD upper management Kalena Blake ’24 Angel Kuo ’24 Katherine Dailey ’24 Hope Perry ’24 Julia Nguyen ’24 Strategic initiative directors Education Mobile Reach Kareena Bhakta ’24 Rowen Gesue ’24 Amy Ciceu ’24 DEIB Chair

Financial Stipend Program Genrietta Churbanova ’24

Christofer Robles ’25

Sections listed in alphabetical order. head audience editor head opinion editor Rowen Gesue ’24 Abigail Rabieh ’25 associate audience editors Laura Robertson ’24 Paige Walworth ’26 head copy editors Jason Luo ’25 Nathalie Verlinde ’24 associate head copy editors Tiffany Cao ’24 Naisha Sylvestre ’25 head data editor Elaine Huang ’25 Charlie Roth ’25 Associate Data Editor Ryan Konarska ’25 head features editors Paige Cromley ’24 Tori Tinsley ’24 associate features editor Sejal Goud ’25 head graphics editors Noreen Hosny ’25 Katelyn Ryu ’25 head humor editors Spencer Bauman ’25 Liana Slomka ’23 associate humor editors Sam McComb ’25 Sophia Varughese ’26 head news editors Sandeep Mangat ’24 Isabel Yip ’25 associate news editors Lia Opperman ’25 Annie Rupertus ’25 Tess Weinreich ’25 head newsletter editors Olivia Chen ’26 Sidney Singer ’25 associate newsletter editor Aly Rashid ’26

community opinion editor Lucia Wetherill ’25 associate opinion editors Eleanor Clemans-Cope ’26 Ashley Olenkiewicz ’25 head photo editor Jean Shin ’26 head podcast editor Eden Teshome ’25 associate podcast editor Senna Aldoubosh ’25 head print design editors Avi Chesler ’25 Malia Gaviola ’26 head prospect editors Kerrie Liang ’25 Claire Shin ’25 associate prospect editors Isabella Dail ’26 Joshua Yang ’25 head puzzles editors Joah Macosko ’25 Simon Marotte ’26 associate puzzles editors Juliet Corless ’24 Sarah Gemmell ’24 Jaeda Woodruff ’25 head sports editors Nishka Bahl ’26 Wilson Conn ’25 associate sports editors Cole Keller ’26 Brian Mhando ’26 head web design and development editors Ananya Grover ’24 Brett Zeligson ’24 associate web design and development editor Vasila Mirshamsova ’26

147TH BUSINESS BOARD assistant business manager Aidan Phillips ’25 business directors Benjamin Cai ’24 Juliana Li ’24 Samantha Lee ’24 Gabriel Gullett ’25 Jonathan Lee ’24 project managers Brian Zhou ’26

Sophia Shepherd ’26 Andrew He ’26 Diya Dalia ’24 Tejas Iyer ’26 Laura Zhang ’26 Dauen Kim ’26 Julia Cabri ’24 Jessica Funk ’26 Tony Ye ’23 Anika Agarwal ’25

A Teranga-filled homecoming: My experience on Princeton’s fall break trip to Senegal Ndeye Thioubou

Senior Columnist

A

fter completing my final day of midterms, I found myself hurriedly packing and rushing to Wawa to embark on my Princetonsponsored fall break trip. Despite being exhausted from exams, I was filled with anticipation about the journey that lay ahead: I was going to Senegal. After a long 24 hours and two flights, we finally arrived in Dakar, Senegal’s capital. Stepping out of Aéroport International Blaise Diagne, it truly started to sink in. I was in Senegal. Home. My parents were born and raised here, before they decided to immigrate to the United States. I had not been to Senegal since I was eight years old, and so the little recollections I had of the country were fuzzy and blurred together. But here I was, returning over a decade later, through Princeton’s support.

It is not often that Princeton holds trips to the African continent during fall and spring breaks, as most opportunities are concentrated in Europe; the University must build on the precedent of the Senegal trip and create more of these opportunities for students.

My group was comprised of eight other Princeton undergraduate students, four graduate students, and four chaperones: Imam Khalil Abdullah, Reverend Theresa Thames, Associate Dean of Diversity and Inclusion Tennille Haynes, and Equity and Diversity Specialist Felicia Edwards.

Our trip was held in collaboration with the organization Where There Be The Dragons, so we also had three amazing instructors guiding us: Samba, Mbouillè, and Mamadou. The purpose of our trip was to explore the peaceful coexistence of Christianity and Islam in Senegal, as well as to make a pilgrimage to Gorée Island, home to the House of Slaves, a departure port for enslaved Africans during the Transatlantic Slave Trade. As a first generation Senegalese American and Muslim woman, there was no doubt in my mind that this would be a deeply impactful trip for me.

Although I was only able to spend a week in Senegal, I truly made the most out of my time. Guided by the theme of religious tolerance, we visited churches and mosques in both Diakhanor, a village in Senegal, and Dakar, which is the country’s largest city. One highlight of these visits for me was going to the Massalikoul Djinane Mosque. The Massalikoul Djinane Mosque only opened in 2019 and was completely funded by the Mouride Brotherhood. The Mouride are one of the most prominent Sufi brotherhoods in Senegal, and Sufi brotherhoods are a distinctive part of religious life in the country. Adorned with gold, chandeliers, and Islamic patterns, the mosque is breathtaking.

I am forever grateful I had the opportunity to pray in such a beautiful mosque that was funded, built, and continues to be maintained by my people. Massalikoul Djinane can fit more than 30,000 people, and our guide told us how during the weekly Friday Jummah prayers, the mosque is filled to capacity, with some residents forced to pray on their rooftops.

The visit to Massalikoul Djinane emphasized to me the importance of community within religion and spirituality.

Throughout the week, my peers and I had the opportunity to speak with the respective priests and imams of these churches and mosques, and saw the spirit of tolerance and mutual respect nationwide. In Senegal, we saw no tensions between different religions or different ethnic groups. The communities we encountered viewed each other as family, and coexisted peacefully. Multiple religious leaders actually mentioned how during Eid, many Christians will support and celebrate with their Muslim neighbors, and vice versa during Christmas. The harmonious coexistence of different religious and ethnic groups in Senegal may serve as a role model not only for other countries on the continent, but across the world.

A key point during our trip was also making a pilgrimage to Gorée Island to go to the House of Slaves.

This visit was extremely emotional.

We were able to stand inside a holding room for enslaved Africans. While all 20 of us barely fit inside, our guide told us that approximately 40 people would be packed inside the room.

Some people held the 20-pound balls that had been attached to enslaved African ankles so they would be unable to escape off of the ships. I felt the most emotional when I was at the Door of No Return, where my ancestors and the ancestors of millions of others would pass through to begin the journey across the Atlantic Ocean.

The ocean looked vast and never ending, but I knew it eventually had to lead to land. I wondered what was going through my ancestors’ minds as they were forcibly ripped away from their lives, their families, and violently dehumanized. I can understand why many enslaved Africans did decide to jump into the ocean.

Death was freedom to them, and they did not see the point of living life when it would mean constant torture and suffering. Despite the toll of being at the House of Slaves, it was a very important facet of my journey and a place I believe everyone should visit at least once in their lives — yet another reason why Princeton must prioritize access to these experiences.

Aside from the religious and historical elements of our trip, we also immersed ourselves in Senegalese culture. All of us had Wolof lessons led by Samba, and so everyone on the trip could at least exchange basic greetings with the people we encountered. We ate native Senegalese dishes throughout the week, including cheebu jen, yassa, and mafe, alongside drinking refreshing bissap, bouye, attaya (a Senegalese tea made with Chinese green tea leaves and mint) and ginger juice. One night featured Mamadou playing the djembe drums while singing a song in his native Fulani, and we danced along to the beat of the drums.

Another night we spent in the village of Diakhanor, and also featured more drumming and dancing. We also bought custom tailored Senegalese outfits, which we will wear to our reunion dinner at Prospect House. In Dakar, we learned to bargain in the Senegalese spirit while we bought more clothes, jewelry, and tote bags.

Everywhere we went in Senegal, we were wholeheartedly embraced: Senegal is known for teranga, roughly translating to hospitality in English.

I was familiar with teranga growing up, but it is a completely different thing to actually experience it on a

daily basis. In a few days, I soaked up so much knowledge about my culture and became even more proud to be Senegalese.

Having grown up as a first generation Senegalese American, it was extremely rewarding for me to use Wolof to communicate with other Senegalese people, eat Senegalese food everyday, and even see a few of my family members. I also really loved having the opportunity to speak with someone who worked at the U.S. Embassy in Senegal. She spoke extensively about the educational systems in Senegal as well as Senegalese female empowerment.

The Senegal pilgrimage was fulfilling in so many ways. More Princeton students need to be on trips similar to this fall break trip and expand their knowledge of the African continent.

Trips to Africa are particularly significant for students studying in the School of Public and International Affairs, one of the most popular majors at the University. How can future policymakers and leaders in international affairs have a truly global mindset if most of their travel opportunities are restricted to Europe and Asia?

The Senegal fall break pilgrimage was undoubtedly a success. The trip was well-balanced intellectually, culturally, and historically — and included opportunities for group bonding and fun. The people on the trip made all the difference, and I could see the intentional selection of the participants of the trip through the conversations I had with them and our collective memories. Indeed, in only a few days, we all trusted each other enough to become very vulnerable and share our family stories — one of the most powerful moments of the entire week. I want experiences such as these to be more broadly accessible to the campus community.

Trips like the one I was lucky to experience are especially important because the different academic opportunities that Princeton does have on the continent are limited to a couple of countries. Next summer’s global seminars will take place in Kenya and Morocco. For Princeton study abroad options, students only have the option of those two countries or South Africa. None of these opportunities even touch West Africa, for example. Furthermore, only having opportunities to visit three countries in a continent that has over 50 is simply insufficient — especially when compared to the European opportunities, where several different countries are represented. It is vital that more of the Princeton student body has the opportunity to visit different countries in Africa and learn about nations’ respective cultures, values, and peoples. Hopefully, this expansion of opportunities to study in the African continent would also lead to greater expansion and diversification of the African Studies department at Princeton — a move for which I have previously argued.

Thank you Princeton, for a truly transformative experience at home.

My experience inspires me to push for more students to be able to have the opportunity to create their own impactful and meaningful experiences on the African continent.

Ndeye Thioubou is a sophomore from the Bronx, N.Y. She can be reached at nthioubou@princeton.edu.

147TH TECHNOLOGY BOARD chief technology officer Joanna Tang ’24 lead software engineer Roma Bhattacharjee ’25 software engineers Eugenie Choi ’24 Carter Costic ’26 Dylan Esptein-Gross ’26

Ishaan Javali ’26 Adam Kelch ’26 Tai Sanh Nguyen ’26 John Ramirez ’26 Aidan Phillips ’25 Jessie Wang ’25 Shannon Yeow ’26 Brett Zeligson ’24 COURTESY OF MBOUILLÈ DIALLO

THIS PRINT ISSUE WAS DESIGNED BY Avi Chesler ’25

Malia Gaviola ’26

Me and other Princeton students, as well as our chaperones and instructors, taking a photo with a US Embassy worker who spoke to us about Senegalese education and female empowerment.

Opinion

page 26

FEBRUARY 2023

Friday May 25, 2023

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

If ChatGPT can do our homework, AI isn’t the problem

Christopher Lidard

Technology Columnist

R

ecent coverage of ChatGPT, a large language model developed by OpenAI that uses the power of machine learning (ML) to generate responses to text prompts, has primarily fallen into one of two camps: those that assert the death of the college essay and those that hail a new era of streamlined education where students are freed from mucking through first drafts.

My perspective is more realistic and lies somewhere in between: the limitations of ChatGPT are significant enough that it can and should serve as a helpful tool, but it won’t be able to kill the college essay or revolutionize much of anything, at least in its current form.

Last month, Senior Columnist Mohan Setty-Charity ’24 urged the University to be cautious before rushing to ban tools like ChatGPT. He is correct, but not because artificial intelligence (AI) will replace the college essay for Princeton students. Instead, we should use the advent of this tool to question whether our homework assignments are just asking to create coherent text rather than develop coherent ideas.

To start, GPTZero is not particularly effective at writing college essays. As advanced and sophisticated as language models like ChatGPT may seem, it is important to remember that they are just algorithms trained on vast amounts of data. Further, as computer science professor Arvind Narayanan and PhD candidate Sayash Kapoor recently explained, they can easily become “bullshit generators” if we don’t use them with caution. This is because Chat-

GPT, like any AI model, is only as good as the data it is trained on. If the model is trained on a dataset that contains inaccuracies or biases, it will reflect those in its generated text.

Further, the actual output of ChatGPT is based on the probability of certain sentence constructions, not any measure of truth. This means that any text produced by ChatGPT, while potentially helpful in terms of finding content or ideas, needs to be thoroughly checked for accuracy and precision before being submitted as student work. In my experience, over a longer stretch of text, it doesn’t appear that GPT says anything beyond the superficial. Even those with heavy reliance on the tool for written work will still have to undertake a great deal of original thinking to create any assignment worthy of merit.

Given this, if students are being assigned essays that can be written by ChatGPT, perhaps it’s not a good assignment in the first place. ChatGPT begs us to rethink the purpose and value of homework. Some would argue that ChatGPT subverts the purpose of a good education by providing students with instant, personalized assistance on a wide range of subjects and topics.

Yet if Princeton homework can be completed by a machine, what is its true value?

Instead of assigning homework as a way to evaluate learning, it should be used as an opportunity to challenge students and their ability to extend upon core concepts, while generating original arguments and insights. ChatGPT can be used to help students achieve the bare minimum, but Princeton courses generally have a more ambitious aim: to teach students to think critically, solve problems, and apply what they have learned

ANGEL KUO / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

in new and creative ways. That is something that ChatGPT cannot do well, and, consequently, any student will still find themselves “filling in” critical thinking for their essays. AI is simply a tool, and, like any tool, it needs to be used with caution and in conjunction with human intelligence. The aspects of homework that are actually valuable won’t be lost if students draft individual parts of essays with ChatGPT, then edit them. In fact, this represents a valid and time-efficient way of completing written work that avoids the minutiae of drafting while preserving the voice and original thinking of the writer.

The sure sign of pure ChatGPT output that will show through in any written work is a lack of critical thought. A ban is not necessary for students to face the consequences of an unedited draft. On the other hand, if a ban on ChatGPT were put in place, teachers may rely on tools like GPTZero, an AI detection algorithm made by Edward Tian ’23. While GPTZero is an impressive tool, its accuracy remains untested in a real-world context at this time.

Teachers don’t need to rely on the suspicions about esoteric measures such as “perplexity” and “burstiness” that GPTZero may raise; the clear lack of coherence or accuracy from ChatGPT output is a much easier indicator of failure to demonstrate critical thought.

These key differences become clearer and even more obvious as a user becomes more familiar with AI-generated text.

I anticipate that faculty will learn rather quickly how to spot the aforementioned ‘generated bullshit,’ and assign a commensurate grade without bringing honor into question.

In contrast, if faculty were to become reliant on an AI detection tool with contested accuracy because of a ChatGPT ban, the amount of false positives and false negatives may confound a grading process that should be focused on a broader sense of understanding.

It is clear that banning ChatGPT at Princeton University is not only unnecessary—it would be silly. If anyone were foolish enough to turn in a raw ChatGPT-produced essay, it would be easily detectable with other AI tools such as

GPTZero, not to mention that the inaccuracies in the text could be easily spotted by any grader. The University needs to see clearly how the limitations of this product allow for a better learning environment that is by no means substantively threatened by plagiarism or dishonesty.

By the way, more than 80% of this column was drafted by ChatGPT. It took me slightly less time to edit and augment than writing an article from scratch, but much of the work of developing ideas remained the same as an original piece. If you run it through GPTZero, it raises some flags, but this column has been so heavily edited that it appears to be human text. My main thesis statement, most importantly, was 100% original, much like any ChatGPT-assisted essay worth turning in.

Christopher Lidard is a sophomore from outside Baltimore, Maryland. A computer science concentrator and tech policy enthusiast, his columns focus on technology issues on campus and at large. He can be reached at clidard@princeton.edu.

DECEMBER 2022

On academic standards and mental health

Christopher L. Eisgruber Guest Contributor

L

ast month, a reporter from The Daily Princetonian asked for my views about the relationship between academic rigor and mental health.

I said what I believe: that a challenging, high-aspiration academic environment is fully consistent with, and even helpful to, student mental health.

That comment has provoked debate and discussion. Understandably so: Student mental health is an urgent priority for me and for Princeton. And any student can struggle with academic work here — I certainly did.

At a time when students report increasing levels of mental distress, in a year when we are grieving the deaths of multiple community members, and in an era rendered precarious by threats of political conflict and environmental crisis, we all need to care about mental health and treat one another with compassion.

As I said in my interview with the ‘Prince,’ we also need to pay attention to data that can help us understand and address the problems we confront.

What does that data tell us? Reports from the Healthy Minds Study, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and other sources show, among other things, that increased mental health challenges afflict an entire generation of young people. The

problem affects young people whether they are in college or not, and it affects college students across all varieties of institutions and academic programs.

These data provide no reason to think that highly challenging academic programs are worse for students’ mental health. There are, however, strong correlations between mental distress and other factors, including poor sleep habits, alcohol consumption, or a lack of community or social support.

I sometimes hear Princeton students boast that they “work hard and play hard.” If “play hard” involves alcohol or other drugs, it is by far the riskier element of that couplet from a mental health standpoint.

But doesn’t academic rigor create stress? And isn’t stress always bad for mental health?

Before answering these questions, it is important to clarify terms. Educators tend to define “academic rigor” as referring to standards of excellence that are academically, intellectually, or personally challenging. Others, however, may view the term more negatively, as implying, for example, excessive competitiveness or unrealistic perfectionism.

Here’s how I understand the term. Princeton’s academic program insists on high standards of scholarly quality and achievement that even its very talented students will find challenging. Do these high expectations create stress?

They do, indeed. Stress often comes from gaps between

our goals and our confidence about attaining them. Many valuable activities — including athletic competition, artistic performance, taking leadership roles, having children, and, yes, getting an education — simultaneously add meaning and stress to our lives.

If we set personally demanding goals about anything, we — all of us — will sometimes fail. (In fact, we fail, at least in small ways, every day.) When we fail, we sometimes feel frustrated, sad, anxious, or disappointed.

These feelings, however, are not the same as mental health problems. They are an ordinary part of a healthy life. We need to know how to cope with and manage uncomfortable emotions, but we cannot sustain high aspirations, or personal growth, without them.

It is true that we might reduce stress by lowering standards or eliminating goals: If we do not care about doing well, we will never feel stress or anxiety about our performance. But lower standards or diminished expectations have their own profoundly dispiriting effects.

So to answer the questions I posed earlier: Yes, demanding academic standards create stress. But no, stress isn’t always bad for mental health.

Of course, we should avoid needless or excessive stress.

Chronic stress can indeed damage mental health; moreover, dealing with stress is hard. Princeton has and continues to explore ways

to reduce needless stress, including when the University eliminated its grading curve in 2014 and moved its fall term examinations from January to December beginning in the 2020-21 academic year.

There remain, however, good reasons to do hard things.

We should bear in mind why Princeton and its peer institutions create challenging, highaspiration academic programs for their students. Our goal is to provide students with the intellectual and personal foundations for a lifetime of rewarding engagement with their communities, societies, and professions. An intense, challenging period of academic study has transformative benefits both in the short term and the long term.

The collective pursuit of this demanding project can itself be a source of inspiration and meaning. For example, Princeton alums take great pride and satisfaction from their senior theses for many reasons, including not only the quality of the work they produced but also how they learned — with help from friends and mentors — to overcome the frustrations and difficulties of completing this rigorous and demanding project.

There are lots of questions worth asking about this enterprise and college life more broadly. For example: What goals are worth having, for our academic lives and our lives beyond campus? How do we create a high aspiration, challenging academic envi-

ronment that is as rewarding and as beneficial to students as possible? How do we equip students with the skills to handle the stress that comes with high aspirations (and, indeed, with life’s hardships more broadly understood)?

How do we improve mental health on campus, both by providing needed resources to treat mental health challenges and by addressing issues (including alcohol consumption, poor sleep habits, or a lack of a sense of belonging) that can damage mental wellness?

These are all important topics. They benefit from widespread campus engagement and discussion, and we should always seek to improve our answers.

It is a mistake, though, to conceive all of them in terms of mental health, or, in my view, to suppose that demanding academic standards and good mental health are at odds with one another. We can, and should, commit ourselves simultaneously to a highly challenging academic environment and to a campus culture that supports health and well-being, including mental health.

I welcome further discussion about these topics, and I look forward to talking with you about them in the weeks and months to come.

Christopher L. Eisgruber ’83 is a guest contributor and president of Princeton University.

Opinion

Friday May 25, 2023

page 27

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } M AY 2 0 2 2

Shame on you, The New York Times

Rohit Narayanan

Community Opinion Editor Emeritus

T

he years-long controversy surrounding Professor Joshua Katz made national headlines last week as both The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal reported that Katz was to be dismissed due to a University investigation finding he had misled investigators in a previous inquiry into allegations of sexual misconduct. Shockingly, however, these mainstream outlets give credence to Katz’s narrative of a conspiracy to fire him because of his 2020 criticism of a faculty letter, which argued for controversial anti-racist measures.

According to this theory, University President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 surrendered his free speech bona fides and terminated the professor in the face of pressure from, among other groups, woke student mobs.

This framing completely misrepresents the truth of the matter. Princeton University students have neither the energy nor the organizational skill to meaningfully pressure the administration to fire anyone, let alone a prominent professor like Joshua Katz. The easy choice would have been to quietly welcome the professor back to campus.

You can say what you want about Princeton’s decision to fire the classicist, but you

cannot blame it on a nonexistent, cancel-hungry student body. The mainstream media could easily have discovered this truth if it had bothered to talk to undergraduates in the process of reporting their articles rather than practically copying and pasting an overwrought stereotype about college campuses.

Princeton is a profoundly apathetic place. A recent protest against the reported reversal of Roe v. Wade gathered just more than 100 students on a campus with more than 5000 undergrads. Signing a petition or open letter is about the extent of the activism that the vast majority of Princeton University students are willing to engage in. Let’s not forget that Katz’s controversial statement about a “small local terrorist organization” referred to a single student group — the Black Justice League in 2015 — that felt their cause deserved more than the typical shrug political issues get on campus, and their protest so offended the campus status quo that the question of whether their protest was appropriate fuels this ongoing controversy seven years later.

The administration has also shown no desire to cater to the will of the student body, simply ignoring student referenda on political issues like full divestment from fossil fuels, politically neutral issues like making Election Day a holiday, and completely apolitical issues like reducing penalties

for an Honor Code violation. If the administration is secretly under the thumb of the students, it has a funny way of showing it.

So when the Times wrote, breaking the story: “The case has deeply divided the campus,” that’s true if “the campus” means the small coterie of left-wing and right-wing professors who spoke with The New York Times. When they write “Many students were already furious about his Quillette article [in which Katz made disparaging remarks about a student group active in 2015],” that’s true if “furious” means some were angry but not really interested in doing anything about it. And when they call the entire affair a “Campus Uproar,” that’s true if “uproar” means intense interest from a tiny fraction of hyper engaged students and faculty and bemused apathy from everyone else.

The Times makes an even bigger mistake by centering its entire article around Katz’s remarks on anti-racism, adopting his framing that the allegations of sexual misconduct are political retaliation — both in its initial story and in its coverage of the official dismissal, which continues to devote core paragraphs to the unrelated controversy. In the initial article, the allegations of sexual misconduct don’t even appear until two paragraphs in. The Times writes “with attention focused on Dr. Katz, the student newspaper,

The Daily Princetonian, began an investigation of sexual harassment accusations against him,” as if student newspapers have either the time or interest to dig deep in the past of a professor and conjure up sexual harassment allegations just because some students are mad at something a professor said.

The truth is, most current Princeton undergraduates weren’t even enrolled when Katz’s 2020 article was released. So, Katz’s alleged sexual misconduct is likely far better known on campus than his opinions on the Black Justice League and certainly better known than his forgotten critique of the George Floyd era faculty letter (very little of which was ever even implemented). And even on the issue of sexual misconduct, criticism of Katz has largely gone silent — the main student group focused on Title IX reform has disbanded. It would have been easy to just let the matter go.

The real (and far more interesting) story is of a University president whose sincere desire to protect free speech on campus was stymied by a professor who had a relationship with an undergraduate advisee. It’s the story of a completely ineffective campus activist movement whose members will soon bring that dysfunction to the high offices of the Democratic Party, and a university full of “future leaders” who don’t know or care what’s

going on at their own school.

And most importantly, it’s a story of the potential for a dangerous power dynamic on a college campus between professors and students. Instead of telling those stories, the Times and the Journal resort to the stereotype of the leftwing cancel culture mob.

This mistake could have been avoided if the media giants had bothered to show evidence of talking to a single student in the process of writing their articles. Journalists talk a big game of respecting local news, but then completely ignore the people who know the controversies best when it comes to campus drama.

I’ve always thought free speech on campus was worth protecting and under threat.

But when I see The Washington Free Beacon and Bari Weiss, followed by the Journal Editorial Board and then the Times completely misrepresent a story on my own campus to lend fire to a free speech culture war, it rocks my faith in the reporting on free speech controversies at other schools.

If you care about free speech, this faulty narrative must be rejected.

Want to cancel Rohit Narayanan, a sophomore electrical and computer engineer from McLean, Va. and the community Opinion editor emeritus at the ‘Prince’?

You can wound his fragile ego by screaming at him over email at rohitan@princeton.edu or tweeting insults to @Rohit_Narayanan.

FEBRUARY 2023

Princeton’s climate research: In the service of BP

Eleanor Clemans-Cope & Alex Norbrook Associate Opinion Editor & Contributing Columnist

T

he federal government put Princeton’s renowned research on display last October. But far from being a source of pride exemplifying the University’s scientific discoveries, it was an exhibit of a House Oversight Committee investigation into fossil fuel misinformation.

The investigation highlighted BP’s (formerly British Petroleum, now known as Beyond Petroleum) efforts to “confidently and conspicuously” wage campaigns of climate disinformation aimed to protect their brand and their mission to extract oil and gas indefinitely. And the House Committee’s recently released trove of subpoenaed documents implicates Princeton’s Carbon Mitigation Initiative (CMI) in these efforts.

BP’s relationship with CMI reaches back over two decades: When the world considered serious climate action in the late nineties, BP and other companies ramped up climate disinformation efforts, and the company went looking for a university to house a new “energy institute.”

In 2000, they chose Princeton, and soon after, the Carbon Mitigation Initiative was launched.

Although Princeton’s Carbon Mitigation Initiative conducts real, insightful, and critical research, the fact that it is solely funded by BP raises suspicions when the Institute’s work allows the company to direct the climate conversation towards energy changes that benefit it. This is sponsorship bias, a well-documented phenomenon where industry funders influence research questions and the framing of issues to the general public. CMI’s research does not necessarily produce incorrect results — its papers are certainly high-quality. Rather, CMI’s funding structure allows BP to set the agenda on climate research, directing dollars to-

wards activities that help protect their business and away from research that doesn’t. Further, through CMI, BP leverages its relationship with Princeton to greenwash its image into that of a “climate leader,” despite plans to continue fossil fuel extraction past critical tipping points.

The first of BP’s strategies to direct the conversation in ways that benefit them has been to promote natural gas, an emissions-intensive fossil fuel mostly made up of methane, as a “green” option. Although burning methane emits less carbon than coal or oil, research shows that natural gas is far dirtier than the public has been led to believe. With a high chance of catastrophic pipeline leaks that potentially outweigh its relative carbon savings, natural gas is rapidly becoming one of the biggest impediments to a fossil fuel-free world. Yet BP aims to “advance and protect the role of gas — and BP — in the future of energy conversation.”

CMI’s research helps BP in this quest. For one, in CMI’s groundbreaking Net Zero America Project — which aims to lay out pathways to decarbonize the United States – four out of the five proposed pathways involve some level of natural gas use.

This bias permeates to the top of CMI: Director Stephen Pacala was quoted in a 2018 BP tweet saying that a “cost-effective” energy transition would “require expanded production of natural gas in the near and intermediate terms.” This is part of a broader trend: a study published in the journal Nature Climate Change found that fossil fuel-funded climate studies are more likely to be favorable towards natural gas, as opposed to other research that proposes renewable energy as alternatives.

BP justifies its focus on natural gas with a second tactic. The company claims that gas emissions can be offset by carbon capture and storage, a technology that aims to suck carbon dioxide out of the air and sequester it in the ground. Carbon

CANDACE DO / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

The Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment.

capture will play a role in decarbonization — reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recommend that carbon capture be deployed to reduce emissions from critical, tricky-to-decarbonize sectors like cement or steel. But that’s not what BP envisions, or what CMI recommends. Out of public view, CMI wrote in a report to oil companies, specifically BP, that carbon capture could “enable the full use of fossil fuels across the energy transition and beyond.”

That’s CMI telling BP that they never have to stop drilling and fracking and burning our future away.

These CMI recommendations are completely out of line with those of scientists and policymakers who don’t take their funding from fossil fuels. The International Energy Agency warns us that we can’t afford to develop any more new oil and gas production. Carbon capture is not the solution to increased fossil fuel development: it only offsets production increases if it captures 100 percent of related emissions, but current systems only capture about 10–11 percent and are mostly used for “enhanced oil recovery” — injecting captured CO2 into oil wells in order to wrest even more gas from the ground. CMI’s recommendations about carbon capture are a

dangerous distraction, serving to prolong the life of fossil fuels — and the life of BP as a dirtyenergy behemoth.

Furthermore, CMI’s association with BP greenwashes the fossil fuel company through Princeton’s credibility and name brand. Subpoenaed documents show that the company leverages CMI as a “core programme” to help “authenticat[e] BP’s commitment to low carbon.” Meanwhile, the company’s true goal is to produce “more oil, more efficiently.” This goes both ways: CMI recommended methods that BP can use to greenwash its image.

BP’s entanglement with CMI is a straightforward conflict of interest. BP is a fossil fuel company. Fossil fuels are the biggest contributors to the climate crisis. CMI is supposed to study solutions to the climate crisis.

BP’s “corporate responsibility” is not to humanity and the planet — it’s a profit mandate to shareholders. So it seems they fund CMI not for humanitarian reasons, but for financial ones. As the documents described above show, BP uses CMI to launder its image, to ensure a stream of studies that give it legitimacy, and to preserve its business model. This exploitation of research is just as bad as the tobacco industry funding studies

that investigate whether smoking causes cancer or pharma companies running their own clinical trials, both famous cases of research biased by industry.

It’s time to get the fossil fuel industry out of our University’s research. Princeton has more than enough money to fund CMI itself, and over time, researchers can find new grants from independent nonprofits and government sources. What BP gets out of CMI is worth much more than the millions they paid for it: a social license to continue destroying the world, and Princeton’s reputation to light their way.

Eleanor Clemans-Cope (she/her) is a first-year from Rockville, Md., intending to study economics. She spends her time making music with Princeton University Orchestra and good trouble with Divest Princeton.

She is an associate Opinion editor.

She can be reached on Twitter at @ eleanorjcc or by email at eleanor.cc@ princeton.edu.

Alex Norbrook (he/him) is a firstyear from Baltimore, Md., intending to study anthropology or politics. He spends his time organizing with Divest Princeton and being funded by BP. You can inquire about his carbon footprint and the individual actions he is taking to fight climate change by emailing him at alexnorbrook@ princeton.edu.

Opinion

page 28

Friday May 25, 2023

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } FEBRUARY 2023

Affirmative action doesn’t do enough to diversify elite education Christofer Robles

Assistant Opinion Editor

A

ccording to a number of court-watchers, this spring, the Supreme Court is probably going to rule affirmative action unconstitutional. Elite colleges, like Princeton, will then be faced with the challenge of building diverse classes despite race-blind admissions, a problem University President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 has admitted will be difficult to solve. But why does our admission process fail to include students of color without the bandage of affirmative action in the first place? It is because our admissions criteria is largely dependent on metrics that guarantee students of color will be excluded. We must reimagine how we admit applicants to guarantee students of color are included without superfluous solutions.

It is important to first establish why racial diversity is necessary.

Racial diversity matters because it is productive. An analysis of 366 companies yielded, “a statistically significant connection between diversity and financial performance” in research conducted by a 2015 McKinsey & Company project. According to this project, the most racially and ethnically diverse companies were “35 percent more likely to have financial returns above their national industry median,” with “companies in the bottom quartile in both gender and ethnicity” underperforming, in the same study. Not only does diversity provide an environment in which its members may feel comfortable enough to succeed, but a variety of identities yields an inherently nuanced and rigorous DECEMBER 2022

One of factors listed as “Very important” to Princeton admission in the Common Data Set is the rigor of secondary school.

Black students of all socioeconomic levels attend worse schools than their White peers of similar socioeconomic status.

Surveying tens of thousands of PreK–12 teachers revealed that 55.0 percent of teachers surveyed “[demonstrated] some degree of pro-White/anti-Black implicit bias,” with 14.8 percent demonstrating “some degree of proWhite/anti-Black explicit bias.”

This is certain to impact GPA and recommendation letters, both also listed as “Very important” to Princeton admissions in the Common Data Set. Standardized testing, one more “Very important” criteria, also disadvantages diverse communities. Income and race continue to strongly predict standardized testing scores, with 2020 ACT scores reflecting that students from households with incomes greater than $150,000 perform 42.9 percent better than students from households with incomes less than $24,000, and White students perform 31.0 percent better than Black and Native American students.

Though Princeton has suspended the requirement to submit standardized testing scores for the application process through 2025 in light of COVID-19, this change may not be permanent. Even with this suspension, students from privileged backgrounds still take advantage of this part of the application. Of Princeton students enrolled in the fall of 2021, 56 percent submitted their SAT scores (with the 25th percentile of enrolled students’ SAT scores being a 1470—nationally representative

of a 99th percentile score), 35 percent submitted their ACT scores, and 91.25 percent had above a 3.75 high school GPA. Princeton also continues to consider legacy, even though legacy is nothing more than a purchase made between the privileged to secure 12.5 percent of enrollment.

Clearly, the admissions system favors white and wealthy students — not that the two are necessarily mutually exclusive. Affirmative action does not resolve this, however. Although affirmative action has been an important tool for nationally increasing diversity in higher education, it is simply an unsustainable bandage on a defective admissions ethos.

To promote diversity without affirmative action, Princeton ought to redefine its admissions criteria to realize its “pervasive commitment to serve the nation and the world.” Rather than continuing to rely on inequitable and often dubious metrics for predicting performance then, Princeton would place more emphasis on past achievement and future potential in service.

So what would a new admissions criteria look like? In an enhanced Princeton Common Data Set: Work experience and volunteer work, which are currently only “Considered” should be given “Very important” consideration; categories like community involvement, familial obligation, and demonstrated commitment to intellectual and social curiosity could be added; “Rigor of secondary school,” “Academic GPA,” and “Standardized test scores” could drop to “Considered” or be removed entirely; legacy admissions would end.

This solution does not signal a

lowering of standards but a challenging of them. A university designed to foster altruism not only better justifies our tax-exempt status, but is actually good. If a Princeton education is supposed to be in the name of service, then why does our admissions process reflect a monetary and racial bargain with bleak post-grad public sector participation?

Yes, having a class less based on “success-predicting” benchmarks may lead to students who struggle more in college, but it is Princeton’s responsibility to be inventive in accommodating these students. An environment that promotes inequitable and selfserving failure is not rigorous, it is neglectful. Disadvantaged students should be supported such that they are better able to take advantage of Princeton’s immense financial and educational resources. If not, the University is simply perpetuating a system that only caters to an already greatly and historically prepared and rewarded group of students.

Strong character and dedication to community is far less defined by one’s test scores than by an applicant’s commitment to using Princeton and its riches to contribute to good. The University’s admissions process ought to reflect the values it prides itself on and consider the potential that it may cultivate when it is better able to select students who indicate a strong desire to learn and better the world in diverse ways.

Christofer Robles is a sophomore from Trenton, N.J. He serves as an assistant Opinion editor and DEIB Committee Chair. Christofer can be reached at cdrobles@princeton.edu or on Instagram @christofer_robles.

The state of conservatism on campus

Abigail Rabieh

Head Opinion Editor

D

outcome by virtue of difference in thought and experience.

Racial diversity also matters because it provides community for students of color. It is difficult to navigate a predominately white institution when hardly any of your peers share your same racial or ethnic identity. According to Princeton’s 2021–2022 Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Annual Report, Black, Hispanic/Latino, and Native American undergraduate students combined only make up 27 percent of the student body.

White students make up 56 percent. If enrollment were more varied, students of color would have an easier time finding commonality and, by extension, security with people of shared experiences and practices. As a student of color myself, it has often been difficult to thrive in an environment in which my experience is so foreign to that of the majority community. Many strong communities coexisting not only provides affinity spaces to minority students, but also the opportunity for those many communities to exchange and learn from each other.

For this reason, the University has stood by its purported commitment to “recruiting, retaining, and supporting a diverse community of students.” Just recently, in his 2023 annual State of the University Letter, Eisgruber advocated for “embracing and cultivating talent from all backgrounds,” to fulfill our mission. But can we say Princeton really is committed to diversity if Princeton would not be diverse without the construct of affirmative action?

The core elements of Princeton admission — the parts that come before affirmative action — do not promote a diverse class.

id you hear the news?

Apparently, “true political diversity and debate at the Tory is all but dead,” or so says Shane Patrick ’24 in a column published in The Princeton Tory last month.

Patrick argued that the organization has become obsessed with two issues — “free speech and Israel.” Though Patrick’s assertion that Catholic students are severely underrepresented in the Tory and repelled by the organization’s focus on free speech and Israel politics is unwarranted, he isn’t wrong to point out the singlemindedness and tunnel vision of conservative groups on campus.

Why are the topics of interest in the Tory and other other conservative groups on campus so uniform? The answer does not lie with a lack of diversity, but instead in intellectual laziness.

The Tory focuses on free speech and Israel because the campus conservative movement has one main goal: to fight culture wars.

On campus, this manifests in crusading for free speech protections

and blindly advocating for Israel.

If conservatives, like Patrick, truly want to embrace more ideological diversity in their organizations, they should focus on engaging individuals in meaningful political discourse, rather than existing solely to react to the “other side.”

It’s not the Tory’s fault that Israel is so divisive on college campuses, but the copious defenses of Israel leveled by the campus conservatives is a prime example of their obsession with waging the culture war. Earlier this year, for example, left-wing students on campus sparked a debate about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict when they introduced a referendum calling on the University to dissociate from a construction company associated with the Israeli military. Conservative students, in response, waged a campaign of distraction by emphasizing the association between “BDS activity” and “antisemitic incidents,” without demonstrating that Jews at Princeton were in actual danger, rather than engaging with the critique offered by the activists: that Israel is a racist, settlercolonial nation. Conservative students were right to fight back:

Israel is not a colonizer nation (see here and here why). But by subsuming all of their activism into reacting to progressives’ protests, conservatives prioritized the campus culture war over constructive projects.

Similarly, while I think it’s only charitable to assume that conservatives care about freedom of speech, this concern is not enough to explain the reason behind the multitude of right-leaning free speech focused events and pieces.

Rather, the battle over free speech is another arm of the culture war.

Campus conservatives use free speech as a tool to fight political opponents. Rather than engage in meaningful and interesting conversation about issues important to their cause, conservative groups simply display an agenda by inviting controversial speakers and arguing over the value of their presence. This was on prime display last year when the Princeton Open Campus Coalition and The Tory invited Abigail Shrier, a controversial anti-trans activist and author to campus. When those on the left criticized the event, conservatives spent shockingly little amount of time defending

CLAIRE THORNTON / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

the content of Shrier’s speech. Instead, organizers picked a fight with The Daily Princetonian over a non-issue, and used this to support a whiny agenda claiming speech suppression by progressives, who had simply responded to the event with educational and discussion-based events.

Crying wolf over first amendment violations is much easier than engaging in critical discourse about why Shrier’s views on transgender issues are worth hearing. Thus, conservatives engage in a cycle of self-help in which they systematically attempt to provoke reactions and then ignore those critiques based on the very freedom that they strive to uphold.

Certainly, progressives engage in the culture war, including in debates about Israel-Palestine and free speech on campus. But they don’t suffer from the same singlemindedness as the conservative movement. The issue lies in aims.

Left-wing campus groups deal with a diverse range of issues that sometimes contradict each other and are not cohesive. All conservative organizations on campus seem to be part of a coordinated machine designed to fight the culture war. This includes the Tory most of all, which consistently publishes two-paragraph ‘news’ articles that are derisive and unexamined on events which they see as fodder for their political campaign (see recent short-form coverage here, here, here, and here).

Patrick, like most conservatives on campus, has no conception of how steeped in the culture war the Tory is. Instead, he resorts to trying to stir up division between Catholics and Jews at the Tory by including a worrying subtext in his piece. Citing a lack of Catholic presence on the Tory as a reason for its “pro-Israel” coverage, he suggests that there is a certain religious hegemony on the Tory masthead which is carefully coor-

dinating positive coverage of the Jewish State. While Jewish students have served as prominent members and leaders of The Tory, this line of thinking harkens to an old antisemitic trope that Jewish individuals are over-powerful. By associating the religious makeup of the Tory staff with its focus on Israel events, and specifically critiquing its current religious diversity, Patrick approaches this harmful line of thinking.

Patrick’s engagement with antisemitism is not just repulsive, it’s laughable as a solution to the single-mindedness of the Tory.

The idea that conservatives of any religious group should choose not to follow lockstep with the conservative agenda on campus because the Catholic Church is iffy about free speech or the existence of Israel is absurd. Within the context of the campus culture war, political polarization trumps religious affiliation.

I fully support political and intellectual diversity in all spaces of this University (see my thoughts here). But no number of antisemitic insinuations or whining in the Tory can fix the real problem: conservatives on campus are reactionary, not original. Though the nation’s culture wars cannot be ended by students, a first step to improvement might be avoiding organizations like the Tory, which claim to be both a news source and an ideological journal. If Patrick would like to see work from a politically diverse set of individuals committed to “urging people to think deeply, think critically, and think for themselves,” I would suggest that he pick up a copy of the ‘Prince’ next time he sits down to read campus publications.

Abigail Rabieh is a sophomore columnist, prospective history concentrator, and Jewish student from Cambridge, Mass. She can be reached by email at arabieh@princeton.edu, on Instagram at @a.rabs03, or on Twitter at @AbigailRabieh.

Friday May 25, 2023

NOVEMBER 2022

Opinion

page 29

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

We must prioritize architectural diversity at Princeton John Raulston Graham

Contributing Columnist

I

n 1945, with enrollment up almost 50 percent since the pre-war era, the Class of 1915 committed to building a new dormitory. Because materials and labor were in short supply, costs ballooned. The quarry of Princeton stone had just been exhausted, so most of the walls were cheaper red brick.

The building’s ornament included only a few pieces of trim, projecting dormers, and rounded archways. It was dubbed the “Poor man’s Gothic.”

Somehow, even under difficult conditions, a building meant to house a burgeoning campus population was saddled with the legacy of the Gothic buildings on campus.

The expectation that new buildings be Gothic persists into the twenty-first century. In a recent Opinion Reactions piece, Contributing Columnist Julianna Lee ’25 wrote that she wants Princeton to build Hobson College in the Gothic style. Her language is almost apocalyptic: “If Princeton wants to remain Princeton, Hobson should be built to match the collegiate Gothic style of the buildings found north of campus rather than the new colleges.” However, architectural diversity is the hallmark of Princeton’s campus, and future buildings should continue this tradition.

This conflict between “the Gothic” and other styles on campus has been APRIL 2023

persistent since Blair Hall’s completion in 1897. However, what does “the Collegiate Gothic” even mean at Princeton? For University architect Ralph Adams Cram, the style signaled the continuity of Princeton with English universities, in contrast to the professional schools of emerging universities. President Woodrow Wilson 1877 agreed, stating during his tenure, “By the very simple device of building our new buildings in the Tudor Gothic style we seem to have added to Princeton the age of Oxford and Cambridge.”

Wilson viewed Princeton as another English university, and, certainly, an only white university. Administrators and donors mostly concurred and thought that the Gothic architecture, picturesque views, wandering paths, and rural setting created an ideal environment for receiving a liberal arts education.

Despite symbolic motivations for these buildings, the architectural historian Donald Drew Egbert ’24 GS ’27 pointed out in Princeton’s bicentennial year, the Gothic buildings at Princeton are “far from being historically imitative.” In an extremely close analysis, he explains that flat rooflines, open courtyards, and blocky forms are not characteristics of any Gothic building of the 14th century and are more results of the logistical needs of the University. Egbert links formal differences like open courtyards in dormitories and larger office and meeting rooms in classroom

buildings to the educational independence that Princeton provides in contrast to other institutions — an independence developed by precepts and the thesis.

Egbert has highlighted a key point.

Princeton’s brand of Gothic was actually very adaptive to different site conditions, different programs, and different eras. Firestone Library is thought to be Gothic despite its giant, blocky plan and sparse detailing. But to me, the best symbol of the history of the University and independence inherent in our education is the diversity of buildings on campus. Would we really want an exclusively Gothic campus? Princeton has slowly grown and evolved; its architecture now naturally reflects this progression.

Similar to Egbert, I believe that we love Blair Arch because it is well integrated into the landscape, has an optimal location, and has a monumental form appropriate for an entry to campus, not because of the richness of its Gothic detailing. This building is well executed, as are many other buildings on Princeton’s campus.

But some buildings have not been so carefully considered. The buildings of First College, the Engineering Quad, and old Butler College were constructed during a time when Princeton struggled to fund the expansion of the University. Like 1915 Hall, many of these projects suffered. President Goheen recalled in 2004, “we still felt desperately short of money, so we took

the cheap way as it were.” These projects were noble in goal — to resize the campus after the stagnation of the Great Depression and World War II — but they were poor in execution.

The differences lie in the care of planning, materiality, and durability, not in stylistic choices. Can Gothic ornaments be really essential to a successful campus building when virtually no student can cite precedents of the English Gothic style outside the fictitious Hogwarts?

We would not like a campus on which we could only study one language, one style of music, or one era of film. Princeton prides itself on its liberal arts education: A diverse architecture is a physical manifestation of this belief. Architecture that spans 266 years allows for examples of construction from across that timeframe.

Seventy-five years ago, Egbert saw this too. He wrote: “Some such diversity is important for encouraging the sense of responsible freedom which Princeton seeks to develop.” Since 1946, the campus has become dramatically more architecturally diverse.

Symbolically, the full campus acts as a record of the history of the University. Standing in Scudder Plaza, a student can see an innovative Gothic form from 1907, a vaguely Gothic lab from 1929, a restrained classroom building from 1952, and a modernist temple from 1965, among many other styles and combinations throughout campus. The juxtaposition of these

Dod Hall

By Paige Min | Senior Cartoonist

buildings allows for a familiarity with the history of Princeton that would be impossible to capture in any text.

Thus, Hobson College should be built durably and sustainably to relate to its context while expressing the time when it is built with contemporary materials and methods. Just like all buildings on campus, it will be a record of its own construction. Diverse buildings on campus allow students to contrast design approaches and to view Princeton’s history.

In the same 2004 interview, President Goheen commented, “among alumni you find out that the older they are, the more intense is their feeling that the campus was perfect in their day.” Somehow students are now not only conservative but reactionary in their approach to architecture.

Wonderful buildings and contrast exist on Princeton’s campus. Hopefully, more will continue to be built, but these moments will come from great execution of the buildings, not a universal application of a single style.

John Raulston Graham is a junior majoring in architecture from Portland, Tenn. He is the Orange Key Guide Service historian and a member of the Princetoniana committee. He can be reached at jrgraham@princeton.edu. Graham is a former features writer for the ‘Prince.’

Sports

page 30

MEMORIAL | DECEMBER 2022

Friday May 25, 2023

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

‘A force for good in both our sport and our

By Wilson Conn Head Sports Editor

When Grant Wahl graduated from Princeton in 1996, he refused to take the easy road.

The Mission, Kan. native had received an offer to write for The Miami Herald, having impressed the editors while interning there the summer after his graduation. But the aspiring sports journalist had his eyes on a different prize: a job at Sports Illustrated.

The magazine had been his “bible” since he’d received it as a Christmas gift from his parents at age 10. In elementary school, he wrote a letter to the magazine expressing his interest in writing for them. Joining the publication over a decade after sending this letter, he’d have to start at the bottom as a fact-checker.

But Wahl hoped that within two or three years, he could become a writer.

By 1997, Wahl had achieved his life-long goal, with plenty of time to spare. He started off covering college basketball and soccer, with the latter eventually becoming his primary focus. Soccer was not a tremendously popular sport in America when he first started to report, but Wahl played a crucial role in transforming it into a central feature of American sporting culture. Bringing the beautiful game to an American audience was the mantle he’d carry for the rest of his life.

Wahl died suddenly on Dec. 10 at age 49 of an ascending aortic aneurysm, while covering the World Cup in Qatar.

“I felt, feel, obliterated,” his brother Eric Wahl wrote on Twitter. “Grant was my confidante, my champion, my friend, my defender, my brother & only sibling.”

With the news of Wahl’s passing, tributes poured out from the sporting world and beyond.

Former Princeton men’s soccer and U.S. men’s national team coach Bob Bradley ’80 recalled how Wahl was “fearless in his pursuit of truth.” Tennis star and activist Billie Jean King noted his ability to “elevate those whose stories needed telling.”

And Wahl’s classmate Derek Kilmer ’96 (D-Wash.), honored him with a speech in his memory on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives.

“This has obviously been a really hard time, and to get that kind of love and support and to know how he’s going to be remembered, that really means a lot to me,” Wahl’s wife, Céline Gounder ’97, told The Daily Princetonian.

‘Among the best of his generation’ While Wahl is remembered by those close to him for his kindness, generosity, and commitment to social justice, many will know him first and foremost for

COURTESY OF STEPHANIE GOUNDER.

Wahl dons a scarf emblazoned with the name of Argentinian soccer legend Diego Maradona. Wahl did his senior thesis research in Argentina and called it his “adopted country.”

the tremendous impact of his journalistic work. Chris Stone, a former editor-in-chief of Sports Illustrated who worked with Wahl at the publication for over 20 years, fondly remembered the tremendous passion with which Wahl approached his work from his very first days with the magazine.

“He pitched stories relentlessly, and he was well-regarded enough at the beginning that he would get to do some of those stories,” Stone told the ‘Prince.’

“But as time went on, his ambition and the stories he was seeking out on his own just grew.”

In 1998, Wahl had a big break at the magazine, scoring his first cover story just about 18 months after signing on as a fact-checker.

“It was a big deal,” Stone said.

“It conveyed that Grant was on his way.”

In 2002, he authored the story that graced one of Sports Illustrated’s most iconic covers, which depicted the then-17-yearold LeBron James and anointed him ‘The Chosen One.’ “Grant would have had all of the success that he found at Sports Illustrated without that cover, but I’m sure he was very happy to have that story in his portfolio,” Stone said of the piece on James.

Shortly after Wahl’s death, the NBA icon took to Twitter to express his reaction to the news.

“You had a huge impact on me and my family and I’m so appreciative of you,” James wrote. “A great person and journalist. Rest In Paradise Grant Wahl.”

That cover story helped pave the way for Wahl’s legendary,

multi-decade career at the publication, which included over 30 cover stories and lasted until 2020. For those who knew him at Princeton, Wahl’s rapid ascent and eventual stardom at the magazine was anything but shocking.

“Grant Wahl really was among the best of his generation,” Carlo Balestri ’96, former editor-inchief of the ‘Prince,’ told the paper. “We all knew that he was a superstar, and no one was surprised when Sports Illustrated hired him right out of school.”

“Grant was a tremendous talent — a top-level pro among club players who were just learning to dribble when they joined the ‘Prince,’” added former ‘Prince’ editor-in-chief ABC political director Rick Klein ’98. “He was a fully formed writer as an undergrad — fluid, versatile, quick, thorough and just plain great.”

(Klein is a member of the ‘Prince’ Board of Trustees.)

‘One of the premier writers to ever go through the halls of The Daily Princetonian’ Some students enter college without an idea of what they want to do, or change career paths midway through school.

But Wahl recognized his passion for sports writing before he even got to Princeton. In fact, he mentioned his desire to write for the ‘Prince’ Sports section on his application to the University.

“He was one of the premier writers to ever go through the halls of The Daily Princetonian,” said Joel Samuels ’94, who briefly served as one of Wahl’s editors at the ‘Prince’ and officiated Wahl’s marriage to Gounder in

COURTESY OF MALENA (SALBERG) BARZILAI ‘97

Wahl (second row, third from left) poses with other members of the ‘Prince.’

2001. “Within weeks of his arrival to the paper, he had quickly eclipsed the more senior writers.”

“The fall of 1992 was the apex of cross country coverage at Princeton, not because the team was particularly good, but because Grant was the writer,” Samuels shared. “His stories were so good that we ran longer stories on Mondays than we did on the football team.”

Nate Ewell ’96, co-editor of the sports section along with Wahl, remembered a particularly funny moment from their sophomore year that signified just how quickly Wahl had taken the paper by storm. Wahl missed part of that year due to an illness.

“I won the sophomore sportswriter of the year award, but there was a running joke, to the point that I think the Sports editor said it when introducing me: ‘Nate won this because Grant was ill,’” Ewell told the ‘Prince.’

“He was so good, and it wasn’t insulting at all. Obviously everybody knew that he was the best sportswriter we had.”

Other friends from the ‘Prince’ recalled the qualities that made Wahl’s writing so special, both while he was in college and in later years.

“Grant made sports writing about everything, and [believed] that it’s not just the back page.

It’s the whole story,” said Allison Slater Tate ’96, a friend of Wahl’s who also wrote for the sports section. “That was his mindset from the get-go, and I think that’s what made him a brilliant writer.”

“He was a sports writer throughout his career, and for a lot of people that has a very particular place in their mind, which is telling stories about things that athletes have done,” Samuels said. “What is unique in the impact that Grant had is that he not only told stories about sports, but he also shared a broader context behind the sports. And whether it was soccer or basketball, he was always digging deeper.”

Wahl’s writing wasn’t the only thing that impressed his colleagues at the newspaper. Slater Tate recalls the special care and kindness with which he and Ewell treated their staff during their time as editors, often inviting the section to come together on Thursdays to enjoy drinks, pizza, and watch TV. “It was a collegial atmosphere.

It wasn’t just ‘file your story,’” Slater Tate said. “[Wahl and Ewell] cared about having a staff that they really wanted to cultivate.”

“Grant is a guy who is never

looking for the more important person in the room. He treats everybody the same,” she added.

“There isn’t a mean or snobby bone in his body.”

‘Selfless in an industry where selflessness is not always rewarded’ Over the years, even as Wahl gained global recognition, his overwhelming kindness and generosity never faded. One former classmate at the receiving end of that generosity was Chris Long ’97, who enlisted Wahl’s help when founding his National Women’s Soccer League (NWSL) club in Kansas City.

“I think there’s one individual that is credited with the growth and popularity of soccer in the United States,” Long said. “It’s Grant Wahl.”

“He, in particular, was a champion of women’s soccer from very early stages. That too needs to be noticed,” he added.

“He always believed that the games should share equal footing. He used his platform, which was a big one, to advance those principles.”

Indeed, the impact Wahl had on the growth of the women’s game is immense — the tributes left by legendary U.S. women’s national team (USWNT) players like Becky Sauerbrunn, Mia Hamm, Abby Wambach, and others are testament to that.

Long said that Grant was instrumental to the foundation of his women’s soccer club, the Kansas City Current, which finished as the runner-up in this past season’s NWSL playoffs.

“We were in the exploration phase, and he was our first call,” Long said. “Grant started texting everybody that needed to know about us and he kept telling them, ‘The Longs are real.’

He texted the commissioner, he texted the other owners, he texted other journalists … he was all over it.”

“There was nothing he was getting credit for or anything, he was just doing it because he believed in us,” Long added.

“He [was] incredibly unselfish, and he [did] that stuff out of the kindness of his heart.”

Wahl’s generosity extended outside of the soccer business, too. Many who have come to know him through their work as journalists, including Sean Gregory ’98, who fondly recalled Wahl’s unrelenting commitment to mentoring the next generation. Gregory is a senior sports editor at Time, and also co-teaches a class on sports reporting at the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism.

“Every year, Grant has either come and talked to the students,

Friday May 25, 2023

Sports

page 31

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

society’: Remembering Grant Wahl ’96

COURTESY OF STEPHANIE GOUNDER.

Wahl and Céline Gounder met in Colonial Club at Princeton.

or was going to and had an unavoidable conflict,” Gregory said.

“He was a busy guy, he was doing his own thing and trying to build a business, but he always had time to spend an hour and a half talking to students.”

“He’s done that with a lot of young reporters,” he added. “He was really selfless in an industry where selflessness is not always rewarded.”

To Wahl, giving back to the next generation of reporters was part and parcel to what it meant to be a good journalist.

“He recognized how hard a place [Sports Illustrated] was to be young at,” said Stone. “He wanted young people to know that they belong, that they didn’t have to apologize for being there.”

Adam Duerson, who joined Sports Illustrated in the early 2000s, remembers Wahl as one of the people who was instrumental in helping him settle in at the publication. “[Sports Illustrated] used to be a very big place, and it was easy to feel like ‘I’m at the bottom.

I’m not in the meetings. I’m not heard,’” Duerson told the ‘Prince.’

“When Grant Wahl took you out to lunch, or took you to watch a soccer game, you’d be a part of the conversation.”

“This felt like what [working at Sports Illustrated] was supposed to be like, and it empowered you in other corners, and to speak up and pitch,” he added.

A senior thesis on soccer, a love for Argentina, and a passion for social justice Duerson was one of a handful of people at the magazine who were instrumental in facilitating Wahl’s switch to covering soccer full-time in 2009, rather than splitting his time between that and college basketball. This career move was something almost unthinkable even 10 years prior, when Wahl was just getting started at Sports Illustrated. In fact, according to Gregory, many journalists in the late-90s would not have even considered taking the soccer beat on a part-time basis, like Wahl did.

“Amongst people my age, in the late 90s, in the United States, it was not a sexy beat at all,” Gregory said. “The ’94 World Cup had just happened. MLS had just started. So there were rumblings, but he saw the potential, whereas so many in the country didn’t see the global possibilities.”

With Wahl having poured so much passion and dedication into growing both an audience for his soccer journalism and the American game itself, the decision to cover the sport full-time in 2009 ended up to be a roaring success.

“He ran with [soccer] like no American journalist did,” Gregory added. “He was just so ahead of the game on that.”

Wahl’s experience reporting on international soccer extends all the way back to his Princeton senior thesis, which explored the confluence of politics and “fútbol” at soccer clubs in Argentina.

Carlos Forment, a former faculty member of the Princeton politics department and current

professor at The New School, served as Wahl’s thesis advisor.

Forment, a part-time resident of Buenos Aires, hosted Wahl during one summer in the Argentine capital while he conducted research at local clubs like the famed Boca Juniors.

Forment recalled the first time he met Wahl.

“Initially I was really, in many ways, very charmed by him, because he had this disarming quality. You know, the Midwestern quality, I had never really encountered close up,” Forment said.

Forment helped Wahl get settled in Argentina, but after the first few days, he was impressed with how the Kansan operated fairly independently and achieved spectacular results.

“He met with some of the most unsavory hooligans in Boca Club.

I went with him a few times just because I was curious,” Forment said. “He charmed every single one of them and got interviews.

That was not normal. You do not get interviews from hooligans.”

Coupled with fervent archival research, these interviews paved the way for Wahl’s thesis, earning him the Philo Sherman Bennett Prize in Politics, which is given annually to the junior or senior who writes the best essay discussing the principles of free government. He also earned the Stanley J. Stein Senior Thesis Prize from the Program for Latin American Studies.

“He saw [soccer] as a way of understanding civic institutions, you know, how people came together and organized and really what were the roots of social and political organizing,” Gounder told NPR. “That shed some light onto how Grant thought about soccer. It wasn’t just a sport. It was so much more. It had a much more important role in society.”

Even after his thesis was complete, Argentina occupied a special place in Grant’s heart. He often referred to it as his “adopted country,” and remained a supporter of Boca Juniors. In recent years, he had the opportunity to return to Argentina to film an episode of his show “Exploring Planet Fútbol.”

Steve Fainaru, an investigative reporter at ESPN who taught a sports journalism class at the University this past semester, met Wahl in Argentina during the production of the episode in early 2019. Before this year’s FIFA Men’s World Cup final, which Argentina won in a penalty shootout over France, Fainaru spoke to the ‘Prince’ about the few days the pair spent together in Buenos Aires.

“As it turned out, we were using some of the same crew for our pieces, and we were coincidentally also staying at the same hotel. So we ended up hanging out a bit,” he said. “He started telling me about Argentina, and his history about how he had fallen in love with the country.”

“I’ve been thinking about it now that Argentina is in the finals, the idea that he died while he was covering this World Cup, and that Argentina is now going to possibly win, and that he won’t get to see it,” Fainaru added, on

Dec. 14. “It’s just heartbreaking.”

Four days after Fainaru spoke with the ‘Prince,’ Argentina won its third World Cup. And there’s little doubt that Wahl would have been overjoyed. But at this year’s World Cup, outside the on-field action itself, Wahl remained intently focused on human rights issues in the host nation: Qatar, where homosexuality is criminalized and thousands of migrant workers are alleged to have died while the tournament’s stadiums were under construction.

On Nov. 21, the second day of the tournament, Wahl made headlines for briefly being prevented from entering the stadium before the match between the United States and Wales for wearing a shirt emblazoned with the pride flag. Throughout the run-up to the tournament, he reported on issues related to migrant workers in the country.

His last Substack post forcefully criticized Qatari officials for downplaying the death of a worker that took place during the tournament.

“He was a force for good in both our sport and our society,” said Jim Barlow ’91, head coach of Princeton’s men’s soccer team.

Jon Wertheim, Wahl’s longtime collaborator at Sports Illustrated, echoed a similar sentiment.

“Losing Grant is just that: a loss. An unfillable hole in the lineup — for journalism, and not least for humanity,” he wrote.

For Grant, the push for equal rights and human dignity was deeply tied to the goals of his sports writing.

He avidly covered the USWNT’s fight for equal pay, and even ran for FIFA’s presidency in 2011 in a bid to end rampant corruption. In a recent interview with CBS, Gounder expanded on the role that social justice played in her husband’s career and life.

“I want people to remember him as this kind, generous person who was really dedicated to social justice. I think that’s another aspect of soccer that was really important to him,” she said. “Promoting the women’s game, the recent statements he

had made about LGBT rights.

That was Grant.”

‘A true renaissance man’ After his passing, Gounder wrote on Wahl’s Substack about some of her personal memories of Grant.

“To know Grant was to know a true renaissance man; he was endlessly curious about the world, and a lover of literature, art, music, food, and wine,” she wrote. “He was equally in his element cooking a quiet dinner of sole provencal for two, walking his beloved Zizou and Coco through Manhattan, gathering friends for a raucous dinner party, and traipsing across Moldova chasing a story.”

The pair met at Princeton in 1995, when Gounder joined Colonial Club, where Wahl was already a member.

“Grant and I were really just kids when we met at Princeton.

I was 18. He was 21,” she said at an event honoring her husband’s life on Dec. 21. “In many ways, we finished growing up together.”

Gounder wrote for the ‘Prince’ in 1994 for one semester as a news contributor, but the pair never met before she joined Colonial; according to her, during the semester she wrote for the paper, Wahl was on a leave of absence.

However, she soon became aware of his passion for journalism.

At Princeton, Wahl took seminars with the likes of David Remnick ’81, editor-in-chief of The New Yorker, and Gloria Emerson, a New York Times war correspondent. Gounder recently shared a paper Wahl wrote on Emerson for Remnick’s class.

“He had just pulled out that folder right before he left for the World Cup to reread that paper,” Gounder told the ‘Prince.’ “[Emerson] was really one of the most formative people in terms of how he approached his writing.”

And although Gounder remains a casual soccer fan, she said the sport is not what drew the two together. She recalled witnessing Wahl develop a passion for the sport to which he would dedicate his life while at Princeton.

“Grant really fell in love with soccer when we were in college,” she told NPR. “Part of the reason soccer was so important to him was it was the world’s sport. It was a way of understanding other people, other cultures, politics of different places, and really also understanding just the common man,” she shared with NPR. “Soccer is just the average person’s sport in most of the world, and it’s a great lens to get to know people.”

Those who came to know Wahl as a soccer reporter eventually came to see him as so much more.

“His great gift was that he was always kind. To everyone,” Mitch Henderson ’98, the head coach of the men’s basketball team, told the ‘Prince.’ “I got to know Grant best through Jesse Marsch ’96, and it was fun to see how the two of them interacted with one another, especially in the last couple of years with Jesse being in the Premier League and Grant being the most important soccer journalist in the U.S.” Marsch, who is the manager of Premier League club Leeds United, recalled one of the things he loved most about Grant.

“I can hardly picture him without a smile,” he told the ‘Prince.’ “In a normal conversation, he was always on the brink of smiling or laughing. And that was infectious. I will miss him.”

To remember Wahl is to uplift a profoundly impactful and far-reaching journalistic legacy; even more so, it is to carry on the traits that defined his mark on the world: kindness, selflessness, and human decency.

“He was a great friend,” said Ewell, who co-led the sports section with Wahl during their time at the ‘Prince.’ “To be as good at something as he was, and to still be that great of a person, was really remarkable.”

Wahl is survived by his wife, Céline Gounder, and his brother, Eric Wahl.

Wilson Conn is a head Sports editor at the ‘Prince.’

COURTESY OF STEPHANIE GOUNDER.

Wahl also took to the airwaves to cover the game as a correspondent for Fox Sports.

COURTESY OF STEPHANIE GOUNDER.

Wahl interviews Brazilian soccer legend Pelé.

page 32

Sports

Friday May 25, 2023

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } MEMORIAL | AUGUST 2022

‘All of us knew he was a genius.’

Remembering Pete Carril

By Matt Drapkin

Assistant Sports Editor

“I am the teacher of athletes, He that by me spreads a wider breast than my own, proves the width of my own; He most honors my style who learns under it to destroy the teacher ...

My words itch at your ears till you understand them.”

– Walt Whitman When asked about legendary men’s basketball coach Pete Carril, longtime Princeton athletic director Gary Walters ’67 points to Walt Whitman’s “Song of Myself” to illustrate his grief.

“For those of us that played for Coach Carril, I hope that we expanded the breadth and width of his own, while at the very same time being reminded that his words continue to itch at our ears,” Walters told The Daily Princetonian.

Carril, the former Princeton’s men’s basketball head coach who is known as one of the most influential minds in basketball history, died on Aug. 15 at age 92. After coaching at Princeton from 1967 to 1996, he joined the NBA’s Sacramento Kings as the assistant coach for 13 years. Carril’s “Princeton Offense” revolutionized the game, putting an emphasis on ball movement, backdoor cuts, and reliable outside shooting.

His core offensive philosophies are still embraced by a number of teams at all levels to this day, including the University of Richmond at the NCAA Division I level and the NBA’s Los Angeles Lakers in the early 2010s.

Carril’s story started on July 10, 1930 in a single-parent home in Bethlehem, Penn.

His father raised Pete on his own while working as a steelworker at Bethlehem Steel.

Pete said that his father never missed a day of work in his 40 years employed.

That commitment to hard work was seemingly ingrained in the Carril genes, evident in Pete’s love for and dedication to basketball. Carril began his playing career in his hometown of Bethlehem for Liberty High School. He found early success, earning all-state honors for Pennsylvania before committing to continuing playing at Lafayette College.

Jerry Price, the senior communications advisor and historian for Princeton University Athletics, shared a 1950 article discussing a game between Princeton and Lafayette that saw Pete Carril’s name printed in The Daily Princetonian for the very first time: “Little Pete Carril, former All-Stater from Pennsylvania, and Captain George Davidson were the only Leopards who were able to score against the tight Tiger defense consistently,” the article read.

There have since been over 2,400 editions of The Daily Princetonian that have mentioned Pete Carril. That was the last one to mistakenly address him as “Little Pete.”

“He was about 5’6”, but he was really a larger than life figure,” Price told the ‘Prince.’

Carril graduated from Lafayette in 1952. After briefly serving in the U.S. Army, he received a master’s degree in educational administration from Lehigh University. But it didn’t take long for Carril to find his way back onto the hardwood.

In 1954, his coaching career began through humble beginnings. He took the position of junior varsity coach at

Easton High School, where he was mistaken for the school janitor on his first day. In 1958, he moved onto coaching varsity at Reading Senior High School.

The lack of glitz and glamor never phased Carril. In a 2007 article published on the Princeton Athletics website by Price, Carril reflected fondly on his early coaching experiences.

“I consider my time as a high school teacher and coach very valuable,” he said. “That’s where I first learned to teach things from a very basic perspective.”

In 1966, Carril took his first coaching gig at the collegiate level with Lehigh University.

The following year, he opened the chapter to one of the greatest coaching stints in college basketball history when he took the head coaching position at Princeton University.

During his 29 years with the Tigers, Carril led the Princeton men’s basketball team to over 500 wins. In addition to his cumulative .663 winning percentage — the highest in Ivy League history — he led the Tigers to 13 conference championships and 11 NCAA tournament berths, as well as the National Invitation Tournament title in 1975.

“He was a cigar smoking, beer and pizza loving, barrel chested force of nature,” Geoffrey Petrie ’70 told the ‘Prince.’

Petrie, one of the earlier players in Carril’s college coaching career at Princeton, spent all three years of his varsity basketball career under Carril before being drafted eighth overall to the Portland Trailblazers in the 1970 NBA Draft.

“I had a fair amount of natural ability, but he’s the guy that really molded it into what it needed to be in order to be a pro player,” Petrie said of Carril. “I wanted to play in the NBA, and he was able to set my sails in the right direction.”

In 1994, Petrie was hired by the Sacramento Kings as president of basketball operations. Just two years later, Carril joined the organization.

“I played for him for three years, but I spent a lifetime with him,” Petrie said. “I was a gym rat, so I spent summers with him working on my game. We stayed in touch after I graduated and had some success in the pros. We spent another almost 15 years together after he retired from Princeton, working in the NBA.” About a decade after Petrie played for the Tigers came a new wave of Princeton basketball, led by power players such as John Rogers ’80 and Craig Robinson ’83. By now, the famous Princeton Offense had developed into a well-oiled machine.

“When he coached us in 1967, there was no Princeton Offense,” Petrie explained.

“That was something that he developed over time.”

Rogers was the captain of the 1979–80 co-champion Princeton Tigers. Before arriving on campus for the first time, however, he still remembers one of his first encounters with Carril.

“When I was arranging my visit to go visit Princeton, they had me call Coach Carril at Andy’s Tavern,” Rogers said.

“That was pretty unique… To call up the head basketball coach at Princeton and have the head of a tavern answer the phone. To have to ask, ‘Is Coach Carril there?’ That was Coach. That was the norm.”

Sean Gregory ’98 further illustrated Carril’s quirks in a recent retrospective piece for

Time Magazine that covered his own experiences playing under the coach. Gregory recalled his straightforward advice for putting on mass during the recruiting process.

“Yo, Sean, here’s what you need to do to get bigger: drink a six-pack of beer and eat a ham sandwich, before bed, every night. Got that kid?”

‘He’s like the Oracle in The Matrix’ One of the most notable recipients of Carril’s trademark candor is Robinson, who is the fourth leading scorer in Princeton basketball history.

Standing at a towering 6’6”, he dominated for the Tigers in the 1980s. He shared his story of receiving Ivy League Player of the Year honors two years in a row under Coach Carril with the ‘Prince’: “My junior year, I was the leading scorer on the team, and was voted Player of the Year in the Ivy League,” Robinson recalled. “Afterwards, Carril said to me in front of the entire team, ‘I don’t know how you ended up winning that award, because I didn’t vote for you. I don’t think you’re the best player in the league. You can’t do this, you can’t do that…’ He went on a litany of things that I couldn’t do — why he was surprised that I got Ivy League Player of the Year, and why I didn’t deserve it.”

“He said, ‘If you want to be good, you have to do all of these other things.’ The next year, I went back and I worked on my game. I averaged fewer points, but did more of the other things. I won Ivy League Player of the Year again,” Robinson said. “For the first time, I thought he was satisfied with something I did. But, he waited until I was a senior on my way out to let me know that.”

John Rogers shared similar experiences trying to play up to Carril’s high standards: “To have this genius telling you things about your weaknesses, things you need to work on, things you need to get better at, things that you never get better at no matter how hard you try,” Rogers told the ‘Prince.’ “That’s the first time anyone ever told me, ‘Johnny, you’re legally blind, and I can’t teach you to see.’

But he was right.”

“All of us knew he was a genius. So, when he was telling you the truth, it wasn’t just a coach. It was a genius telling you the truth. You just knew that this genius and this future Hall of Famer was telling you things that were accurate,” he said.

Gregory shared one of his most memorable Carril stories with the ‘Prince’: having his entire game critiqued before even making it to college.

“I remember in my senior year of high school, Coach was driving me to the Princeton train station. He just kept reiterating — ‘You’ve got to work hard. It’s going to be really tough for you. You’re going to have to put on a lot of weight, and you’re going to have to lift a lot of weights. You’re not the best passer we’ve seen. Work on your long range shooting.

Work on your dribbling.’”

“He’s like the Oracle in The Matrix,” Robinson said. “He’ll tell you exactly what you need to hear.”

Candid. Bold. Unapologetically real, sometimes, so much so that the lines between tough love and counterproductive chastisement became blurred. The New York Times recently published a piece highlighting some facets of Carril’s philosophy that were

harder to fall in love with.

“Practices, before the NCAA imposed limits, typically went for four grueling hours.

Carril frowned upon stretching, grudgingly allowed water breaks and was even more parsimonious with compliments, afraid that his players would become complacent,” the Times wrote.

Playing for Carril required immense mental toughness and resilience. While reactions from his players differed based on underlying personalities, the pressures he imposed often strengthened the teammates’ relationships.

“We all have this special bond, and I think it’s because we all persevered through some really tough moments,” Rogers explained. “All of us who played for him, we feel like we’re part of some special club.”

“When he was coaching in the NBA, he happened to be in Atlanta at the time of the Final Four,” Rogers continued. “A bunch of the Princeton guys also hang out and go to the Final Four games together.

All of a sudden, we’re all in the same city again. There’s about 12 of us that ended up in his room. We’re sitting on the floor, surrounding him in bed, all drinking beer together. We’re all telling stories, and Coach is like, ‘No, I never said that. I never did that.’”

“These old players still wanted to be around, just telling stories. Just continuing to learn from Coach. I don’t think you see that with [Former Duke Head Coach] Coach K. or [Former Indiana Coach] Bobby Knight,” Rogers added.

“Because we all were going through the same thing and practices were so tough, we all felt like if we could get through it — we had sort of been through this hazing period,” Robinson explained.

“It made everybody who’s been through it even closer.

Some of my best friendships are guys who I played with at Princeton.”

“He ended up with a great love affair with a lot of his ex-players,” Petrie told the ‘Prince.’ “He certainly wasn’t politically correct by today’s standards, but he was very honest, very direct, and just believed in hard work and commitment. It wasn’t for everybody, but for a lot of them, it gave them life lessons that carried over into the rest of their life.”

At times, Carril’s willingness to bluntly speak his mind may have been difficult to endorse from the receiving end.

Throughout his career, however, he would earn national attention for what his gritty style produced on the court.

His popularity rose on a monumental scale as his Princeton teams consistently performed at a high level during March Madness.

In 1989, one of the biggest games of Carril’s career took place in the first round of the NCAA tournament. His Tigers matched up against the star-studded lineup of the Georgetown Bulldogs, featuring future NBA Hall of Famers Alonzo Mourning at 6’10” and Dikembe Mutombo at 7’2”.

Carril knew that the powerful post presence could present matchup difficulties for his outsized Tigers offense; no Princeton player stood taller than 6’8”. To prepare accordingly, in the practices leading up to the match, he gave his assistants broom sticks to hold up high for his smaller players to practice shooting over.

Carril’s clever preparation proved extremely effective.

Although in the end, the Tigers came up short 50–49, the unexpectedly intense matchup sent shockwaves through the NCAA. The effects were two-fold.

First, the entertaining backand-forth between a No. 1 and No. 16 seed helped persuade CBS to sign a deal with the NCAA to televise every game of the tournament — not just the later rounds.

Perhaps even more important for schools like Princeton, the attention the showdown garnered proved that the underdogs deserve a chance.

At a time when discussions of removing automatic bids for smaller conferences (like the Ivy League) were gaining traction, Princeton’s impressive performance squashed the chatter. Sports Illustrated dubbed the Princeton-Georgetown matchup “The Game that Saved March Madness.”

‘Coach’s fingerprints are all over the modern game’ Carril’s final victory as an NCAA head coach would come seven years later. In 1996, Princeton defeated UCLA in the first round of the NCAA tournament in what is today known as one of the greatest upsets of all time.

ESPN included the 43–41 victory in their list of the greatest upsets in March Madness history, writing, “You know why the backdoor [cut] was invented? So 13 seeds could sneak by the defending champs in the first round.”

At the time of his retirement, which came after a second-round loss after the win over UCLA, Carril was the only active NCAA Division I head coach to reach 500 victories without the opportunity to offer scholarships to his players. “Without the ability to recruit,” Petrie reflected, “he was such a creative mind, figuring out how to compete with a different type of player.”

For Carril, “different type of player” usually meant wealthy Princeton students, who he didn’t think were cut out for the hard work he demanded.

The Coach once said, “Basketball is a poor man’s game, and my guys have three cars in the garage.”

“It’s no secret how acerbic Coach Carril could be when he was admonishing his players,” Robinson told the ‘Prince.’ “He felt like he had to toughen us up because we were Ivy League kids going up against some of the better teams in the country.”

“It’s not every guy like that,” Price explained, “but he could take guys who came from more privileged backgrounds and show them it doesn’t matter where you come from. You have to work hard. You have to improve. You have to be a teammate and you have to do what’s best for the team. We’re all equal here.”

These were two of his most clear-cut values: equality and grit. One of Carril’s favorite maxims was “you can’t separate the player from the person.” Looking back at the legacy he left behind, the same can be said about the coach.

You could see equality in the Princeton Offense, all five players sharing the ball to get the best shot for the team. You could see it in practice everyday, him criticizing each player’s weaknesses regardless of talent or accolades. And, you could see it in the way he was raised.

“I think the way he grew up in Bethlehem with his father working in the steel mills, clearly had a profound impact on him as a person,” Rogers

Friday May 25, 2023

Sports

page 33

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } told the ‘Prince.’ “When you’re at Princeton, you know, you don’t have a lot of folks who have that kind of background.”

“He talked about his dad a lot,” added Price. “He talked a lot about growing up poor and the impact that that had on him. There’s no question that that drove him and fueled him.”

In 2009, Princeton named Carril Court in Jadwin Gymnasium in his honor. After retiring from his role as an assistant with the Sacramento Kings in 2011, Carril could not scratch the itch that called him back to Jadwin Gym. “He came to practice for almost 10 years straight,” current Princeton men’s basketball Head Coach Mitch Henderson ’98 told the ‘Prince.’

In just the past few decades, so much about basketball has changed, with the transition towards positionless play, the movement outwards towards the three-point line, the need for all five players on the court to be able to pass, dribble, and shoot. Carril envisioned and implemented these principles long before they became the standard. With his typical stubbornness, Carril didn’t capitulate to the pull of the norm, but instead molded the norm into his own reality.

In 1997, Carril was inducted into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame. He is just one of two Princetonaffiliated figures to ever be inducted. The other was former NBA player and New Jersey Senator Bill Bradley ’65.

“Coach’s fingerprints are all over the modern game,” Henderson continued. “He was a visionary. Sometimes it’s hard to separate my own thinking from what Coach saw.”

‘A coach’s teaching is his immortality’ The sheer number of people Pete Carril impacted is incalculable. While his teaching primarily was done on the court, it seems the lessons passed down directly translated to life altogether.

“Were it not for him, I probably would not have gone to Princeton,” Gary Walters told the ‘Prince.’ Walters’ lifelong journey with Carril began early, when he played under Coach at Reading High School.

“He taught the game in such a way as to enable his players to understand that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.”

In 2008, Rogers was awarded the Woodrow Wilson award for embodying the school’s famous motto, “Princeton in the Nation’s Service.” The award was given in Jadwin Gym.

“When I spoke at the event, I said, ‘Coach, you are the best teacher that I ever had,’” Rogers shared. “I’ll be watching the game now — NBA game, WNBA game, high school game, whatever — and watching on TV, I’ll see someone who’s running down the ball.

I’ll see someone who throws a pass that’s off. I’ll see someone that didn’t cut back door when they’re overplayed. I can see it before it actually happens. I can almost feel it in my stomach.”

“That’s what a great teacher does. They teach you something that is so embedded in you, you know it for the rest of your life.”

Today, Rogers is the founder, chairman, and co-CEO of Ariel Investments, the nation’s largest minority-run mutual fund firm. He says that he’s instilled the values of teamwork and cooperation into the company culture because of the lessons he learned from Carril.

“We have a conference room here named after Coach Carril. It’s to remind everyone that works here that you think about your teammates first.”

“When Barack Obama got elected president, we were the temporary transition headquarters for three days,” Rogers continued. “For three days, President-elect Obama was in the Coach Carril room, calling world leaders and starting to form the government.

It just shows you the impact that it’s had for us to build our firm around those values of thinking about your teammates first.”

After playing for Princeton, Robinson went on to a lifelong pursuit of coaching basketball himself. He held positions at five different schools across a 26-year career before settling into his current role as Executive Director of the National Association of Basketball Coaches. Robinson reflected on how Carril shaped his own perspective as a coach.

“I learned sort of how to play basketball cerebrally, as well as the philosophy of playing against guys who are as good, if not better, than you are,” Robinson said. “That served me well when I got into coaching, because I was able to take some of those tenets that I learned from playing for Coach Carril into my own coaching toolbox.”

Petrie said that playing for Coach Carril was not a gift which could immediately be appreciated.

“You didn’t know it at the time, but you realize it later.

For Coach, every day in practice, every game,” he said, “it was a reflection of who you

were, what your character was, how competitive you were, how willing you were to sacrifice, how committed you were to getting the most out of your ability.”

In teaching the X’s and O’s, the defensive schemas, and the principles of a free-flowing motion offense, Carril knew exactly what he was doing.

Carril was giving his players the tools they needed to live life the way it should be lived, by the ethics he valued most: teamwork, strong work ethic, and a never-ending commitment to excellence.

And, when the job was finished? A little bit of fun, as well. In 1975, after a 55–50 victory against Virginia — a

game that saw Coach Carril ejected in the second half — he let his team go crazy in the hotel following the big win.

All of the commotion got the attention of one annoyed guest. When the woman confronted the rowdy group of college kids, the man in charge stepped forward, donning a T-shirt and black boxers. According to Sports Illustrated, the woman snapped, “May I ask what you’re doing?”

Carril puffed a cloud of cigar smoke her way before answering plainly: “I’m wallowing in success.”

“He loved to dance, he loved music, he loved good food,” Petrie said. “He would go up to the piano bar at this one Ital-

ian restaurant and sing this Frank Sinatra song … He loved life. I will miss him terribly, but he was a lifetime gift to me and to so many that crossed his path.”

“Coach’s legacy will always live on,” Gary Walters said. “At the end of the day, a coach’s teaching is his immortality.

The whole concept of passing it on — it’s what he did, and it’s what those players who played for him will continue to do.”

Matt Drapkin is an assistant editor for the ‘Prince’ sports section. He can be reached at mattdrapkin@princeton.edu or on Twitter at @mattdrapkin.

COURTESY OF GOPRINCETONTIGERS.

Carril Court in Jadwin Gymnasium was dedicated in the coach’s honor in 2009.

Sports

page 34

Friday May 25, 2023

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

A SHEEP IN WOLF’S CLOTHING: Princeton women’s basketball downs N.C. State, 64–63

WOMEN’S BASKETBALL | MARCH 2023

By Isabel Rodrigues

Senior Sports Writer

SALT LAKE CITY, Ut. — Ain’t no mountain high enough — even when you’re Princeton women’s basketball, down by five with less than a minute remaining, and exhausted from the high altitude deep in the Rockies.

In a miraculous final minute of play in Salt Lake City on Friday night, the 10th-seeded Tigers (24–5 overall, 12–2 Ivy League) overcame this deficit to defeat seven-seed N.C. State (20–12, 9–9 Atlantic Coast) in the first round of the NCAA Tournament, thanks to a last-second, ice-cold three from senior guard Grace Stone.

“She’s got ice in her veins,” head coach Carla Berube said of Stone after the game. “She has that look in her eyes and you know she’s gonna make a play, she’s gonna hit a shot.”

The baseline three was just enough for Princeton to scrape by with a 64–63 victory, and a trip to the second round in tow. The win is the Tigers’ second-consecutive victory in the Round of 64, following their victory last year over Kentucky. It’s also their 16thstraight win this season.

“It just feels a little bit like our Ivy League championship win, where we just had to grind it out and just get really gritty,” Berube said. “[We] just made the plays, made the shots and we’re advancing. That’s what it’s about.”

Princeton opened the first quarter on a 6–0 run, though none of the points came easy — it took nearly a full minute for

NOVEMBER 2022

either team to get a shot off, and both teams struggled to get into the paint early on. Although the first half would see free-flowing offense at times, this stretch was indicative of how the game largely played out; two offenses struggling to make shots, and two defenses making everything difficult.

Despite trailing by six at the half, the Tigers threw the first punch in the third quarter, opening on a 10–0 run to take a four point lead. The two teams traded baskets, but N.C. State’s size inside once again got the better of Princeton, as they dropped the lead in the final minutes, and ended up down four after a couple of key Wolfpack free throws.

Halfway through the fourth quarter, the Wolfpack kicked into gear in transition and snagged two key fastbreak layups, pushing the lead to 63–55 with 5:41 remaining to play. Junior forward Ellie Mitchell hauled in multiple key offensive boards, but the Tigers struggled to convert them, as layups, jumpshots, and threepointers, rattled out.

With Mitchell primarily assigned to defending NC State’s forwards, most of whom had an inch or two on her, Berube says their defensive success came down to leaning on Mitchell’s strengths and getting others involved: “It was just [about] using her quickness getting around because that’s what she has,” Berube said of Mitchell. “Their posts are so strong and so good inside … but she had some help from her teammates, digging in and doubling.”

“And she’s really scrappy, getting jump balls, blocks and steals — it’s just Ellie being Ellie.”

Even as Stone finally sank a three-pointer to end the scoring drought, and the Tigers grabbed quite literally every rebound, they continued to trail by five heading into the final two minutes. At long last, a shot finally snapped through — junior guard Kaitlyn Chen hit a searing three-pointer, cutting the lead to just two with less than a minute to go, at 63–61.

On the next possession, firstyear guard Madison St. Rose grabbed a clutch steal, sending the ball back Princeton’s way. But senior guard Julia Cunningham’s layup attempt went just sideways, and the Tigers were back on the defensive, where this time, Stone was the one to grab a quick steal off of the Wolfpack’s inbound pass.

The Tigers had one last chance, and as precious seconds ticked away, Stone came free off of a screen on the right wing, and drained a three-pointer to give the Tigers a one-point lead with 4.7 seconds left. One last defensive effort from the Tigers found them scrambling on the floor for the loose ball as the final buzzer sounded.

“We’ve kind of been in tight games all year,” Stone said after the game. “I think my teammates just have all the confidence in the world in me and I knew that if I missed that shot, they were getting good offensive rebounds.”

“So it’s really hard not to shoot with confidence when you have teammates like mine,” she added.

Despite going nearly nine minutes without a made field goal at one point during the second half, the Tigers walked away with a win, thanks in large part to their stifling defense; indeed, the Tigers did not give up a single basket to the Wolfpack — who had made four straight Sweet 16 appearances entering this season — after the 5:44 mark of the final quarter.

With the men making this year’s NCAA Tournament and winning their opening game against Arizona, Princeton is now the first Ivy League school to win a game in both the women’s and

Isabel Rodrigues is a senior writer for the Sports section at the ‘Prince.’

COURTESY OF @PRINCETONWBB/TWITTER

Senior guard Grace Stone hit a three-pointer with 4.7 seconds left to give Princeton a one-point lead.

A Lot On Your Plate

By Fizzah Arshad | Senior Cartoonist

men’s Tournaments in the same season.

The win is also the third March Madness victory in program history. The Tigers will look to make their first-ever Sweet 16 by defeating second-seeded Utah (26–4, 15–3 Pac-12) on Sunday at 7 p.m. ET. The game will be available to stream on ESPN2.

Sports

Friday May 25, 2023

page 35

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

‘DAVID’ KEEPS DANCING: men’s basketball defeats Missouri, 78–63, to advance to Sweet 16 MEN’S BASKETBALL | MARCH 2023

ByWilson Conn

Head Sports Editor

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Exactly one month ago, the men’s basketball team was reeling.

After leading by as many as 19 points against Yale on Feb. 18, they coughed up the advantage, losing a game that would eventually cost them the top seed in Ivy Madness and force them to share the regularseason crown with the Bulldogs.

“This one hurts a lot, but it’s not over,” head coach Mitch Henderson ’98 said after the loss. “It’s not as bad as it’ll hurt if you don’t get where you want to get in a couple weeks.

We’re going to come back fighting.”

Fast-forward four weeks, and it’s safe to say the team is exactly where they want to be. Since the Yale loss, they have won six straight games, the most recent of which being a 78–63 win over seventh-seeded Missouri that gives the program its first Sweet 16 appearance in the 64-team tournament era.

“The Yale loss specifically was a massive turning point for us, I think,” senior forward Tosan Evbuomwan told the media after the win over Missouri.

“The end of our season, [the] last five, six games, they were all huge games for us. They all felt like championship games,” he added. “All those games were big games. That kind of gives us confidence going into each game here.”

On Saturday, the Orange and Black (23–8 overall, 10–4 Ivy League) extended their winning streak — and their season — by riding lock-down defense and clutch three-point shooting to a dominant victory over Missouri (25–10, 11–7 Southeastern). Their 15-point mar-

gin is the largest ever attained in the NCAA Tournament by a 15-seed, and they are the first Ivy League team to make the Sweet 16 since Cornell in 2010.

“We are so thrilled to be going to the Sweet 16,” Henderson said. “It is an absolute pleasure being around these guys. They just grit their teeth and they do it.”

As was the case in Princeton’s first-round upset against Arizona, the biggest keys to victory were their rebounding and defense.

Princeton — who ranked 14th nationally in rebounding margin entering the game — out-rebounded Missouri 44–30, while blocking four shots and holding their opponent to just 41 percent shooting from the field for the game. First-year forward Caden Pierce led Princeton in rebounding with 16, a career-high mark that was also the second-highest total by any player in this year’s NCAA Tournament at the time of the game’s conclusion. “[We’re] a really tough group.

We can switch. [They] know exactly what they’re supposed to do,” Henderson said, emphasizing his team’s mastery of man defense principles.

“They keep their body in front of their guys. Good old-fashioned, tough-nosed defense.”

The repeated stellar defensive and rebounding efforts in both the Arizona and Missouri games did not mean there wasn’t room for improvements to be made between the two, though. Absent from the otherwise exemplary display against Arizona was a complete performance on the offensive end; although Princeton scraped together enough baskets for the win, they shot just 40.6 percent from the field and 16 percent from three-point range. Not

one starter for Princeton notched a three-point basket. “[Senior guard] Ryan Langborg, Cade Pierce, [junior forward] Zach Martini, they’re going to make some threes,” Henderson told the media before the Missouri matchup. “[They’ve] got to keep shooting it.”

By the end of the game, all three of these players would have a threepoint make. Against Missouri, Princeton hit 12 long balls as a team, tripling their total from the Arizona game.

First up was Langborg, who hit three triples within the game’s first six minutes, and scored 11 of the team’s first 13 points. He would finish with 22, the second-highest total of his career and a team-leading mark.

“Shots weren’t going in for any of us really the last game,” Langborg said. “To see the ball go through the net is always a great start to the game.”

“This guy on my right was not named to any all-league teams at all … and he was the best player on the floor [today],” Henderson said in the press conference, gesturing towards Langborg. “If you want to argue, I’m happy to argue with anybody.”

After two dunks from senior forward Keeshawn Kellman, Martini was next up in the shooting showcase, knocking down a threepointer that gave Princeton a 24–14 lead with just over seven minutes left in the first half.

As the team began to heat up from outside, the crowd — both neutral and Princeton supporters — began to roar with each attempt.

“We really drew on the strength of our fans this weekend,” Hender-

WILSON CONN / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Senior guard Ryan Langborg led Princeton with 22 points.

son said. “I don’t think anybody does it quite like Princeton … We are so proud to be representing our school and playing great basketball in front of what I thought was just a terrific crowd.”

While the three-pointers rained in, the Princeton defense dominated. Despite seven early points from forward Noah Carter, the Missouri offense stagnated in the first half, even enduring one seven-minute stretch during which they only managed three points.

Carter, who scored nearly half of his team’s first-half points, fought to keep Missouri in the game, though. While Princeton led by as many as 14 in the first half, they entered the locker room up by just seven points, thanks to a buzzerbeating layup by Missouri guard Sean East II. “‘We’re going to get on that flight, [and] no matter what, when we get on that flight, we’re going to be us,’” Henderson recalls telling his team at half, referencing their planned red-eye out of Sacramento Saturday night.

“We felt like the best version of us could beat the best version of them.”

In the first half, the Orange and Black were looking pretty close to the ideal unit Henderson described. Despite being pressed by Missouri for much of the half, they had just four turnovers, and only one through the first 10 minutes, warding off a defense that was second nationally this season in steals per game (10.2). They were also outrebounding Missouri 21–14, outscoring them in the paint (18–8) and shooting 10 percentage points better from the floor (46.7 percent compared to 36.7 percent).

Lastly, in the first half, Princeton held Missouri’s two leading scorers — forward Kobe Brown and guard D’Moi Hodge — to just four points.

The pair were each averaging over 15 points per game entering Saturday’s contest, and combined for 42 points and eight three-pointers in Missouri’s first-round win over Utah State.

Despite the lack of production from their stars, Missouri fought hard to open the second half. Although three-pointers from junior guard Matt Allocco and Pierce built another double-digit lead for Princeton, the Show-Me State squad bounced back with a vengeance, cutting the lead to 43–37 with 11 minutes remaining.

Enter sophomore guard Blake Peters.

Although he was late to the three-point hoedown, having only played two minutes with zero shot attempts in the first half, he would soon become the life of the party. In

the game’s final 11 minutes, Peters made five three-pointers and tallied 17 points while leading his team on a 16–4 run that put the game away for good. He was shooting 57.1 percent from deep in the NCAA Tournament.

“All year I’ve been working on reading Tosan [Evbuomwan] and other guys,” he said. “I think I do a good job finding open space when he drives. Missouri kept coming off [of me], so I just tried to find open space.”

“At the end of the day we’ve all put in a lot of work shooting the ball,” he said. “Our slogan is ‘Make Shots.’ Today I made shots.” “[Peters is] very calm under pressure,” Henderson added. “That’s how he is. That’s how he goes about his business.”

Impressing alongside Peters and Langborg in the stat-sheet was Evbuomwan, who was key as a ball-handler in breaking the Missouri press, and finished with nine points, nine rebounds, and five assists.

“You won’t see that again at Princeton for 50 years,” Henderson said, referencing Evbuomwan’s court vision and unorthodox skill set. “I mean, he’s really a very unique passer.”

Evbuomwan and his teammates are delighted to be moving on, but don’t plan on their tournament run ending here.

“I can’t really put the feeling into words right now, to be honest. It’s just an unreal feeling to do this with my guys,” Evbuomwan said.

“We just have such a close group.

We love to work with each other. We love to push each other. It’s showing.”

“Obviously being here is pretty surreal,” Langborg added. “Coming into this tournament, this is what we all wanted.”

“We’re not done yet. We’ve got a bunch of games left … we’re all so excited and ready to get after the next one.”

Princeton will play against either third-seeded Baylor (23–11, 11–7 Big 12) or sixth-seeded Creighton (23–12, 14–6 Big East) in Louisville, Ky. on Friday in the Sweet 16.

In the meantime, spring break is over, and the team — especially the seniors — will have plenty of academic challenges to tackle this week, amid the eruption of their national celebrity.

“I’ve got five seniors and they’re all writing a thesis right now,” Henderson said. “It’s due in two weeks.

There’s no extensions. They’ve got to get to work.”

Wilson Conn is a head editor for the Sports section at the ‘Prince.’

Sports

page 36

Friday May 25, 2023

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } WOMEN’S BASKETBALL | FEBRUARY 2023

‘She’s one of the greatest ever to play in the Ivy League’: Bella Alarie ’20 retires from professional basketball

By Isabel Rodrigues Senior Sports Writer

It doesn’t take more than a cursory glance at Princeton’s record book to learn her name.

Most points in a career: Bella Alarie ’20, 1703 Most points in a single game: Bella Alarie at Columbia (2/1/19), 45 Most double-doubles in a career: Bella Alarie, 40 Second-most rebounds in a career: Bella Alarie, 964 Most blocks in a career: Bella Alarie, 249 The list of Alarie’s accomplishments and accolades runs long, longer than most Ivy League women’s basketball players, longer than most who’ve touched the court at Jadwin Gym. She broke records at Princeton, became just the third Ivy League player to be drafted into the WNBA, was a trailblazer in the women’s three-on-three (3x3) game, and had a decorated overseas basketball career.

In short, wherever there’s basketball, there’s been Bella Alarie.

But on Thursday, Feb. 2, Alarie took to social media to announce her career as a professional basketball player was coming to an end, and that she would instead pursue the business side of sports. This comes after Alarie sat out the 2022 WNBA season for personal reasons.

“I’ve had a lot of time to reflect during this past year and have decided to enter the next phase of my life and career,” Alarie wrote. “Basketball has given me so much and has provided me with so many incredible friends, experiences, and opportunities.”

“I mean, I love Bella. I’m really proud of her,” guard Julia Cunningham ’23 told The Daily Princetonian

after the Tigers’ win over Columbia on Saturday. Cunningham was a firstyear during Alarie’s junior season.

“I loved playing with her when she was here … obviously, we all support [Alarie’s decision]. This is a great step in the right direction for her,” Cunningham said.

While at Princeton, Alarie started every game she played in — and for good reason. She was already highly decorated in high school (the National Cathedral School in D.C.), where she posted a double-double in every game her senior year. In 2016, Alarie, the No. 83 ranked recruit in the country, would become Princeton’s first top-100 recruit since Vanessa Smith ’17 in 2013.

Such were the ways of Ivy League recruiting: maybe once every couple of years, a top-rated player would choose the Ancient Eight. Now, postAlarie, Princeton and their Ivy counterparts regularly recruit from the upper echelons of girls’ basketball, with four current Tigers ranked in the top 100 out of high school.

“In high school, I never really thought of myself as someone who would achieve the things I have so far in college,” Alarie told The New York Times in 2019. “And when I was getting recruited, I did really want to put an emphasis on getting a really wellrounded college experience.”

Under former head coach Courtney Banghart, and eventually current head coach Carla Berube, Alarie quickly took over the Ivy League. In her first season, Alarie led the Tigers in both rebounding and scoring, while also setting a new Princeton first-year blocks record, on her way to becoming the 2016–17 Ivy League Rookie of the Year and earning her first of four First-Team All-Ivy nods.

By her junior year, it was clear Alarie was in a league all her own.

On Feb. 1, 2019, against Columbia, she erupted for a massive 45-point, 14-rebound performance, eclipsing the all-time single-game Ivy League scoring record.

“I was sitting there like, she’s just incredible,” Cunningham, a firstyear at the time, recounted. “She was standing at the free-throw line, cramping after she scored 45 points and I was like, ‘Go take a rest, like you deserve it.’

Berube, who coached Alarie in her senior season, recounted Alarie’s performance in Princeton’s 77–75 overtime loss to Iowa in 2019. The Hawkeyes would finish ranked No. 8 in the country by the end of the season. Yet, Alarie’s 26 points, and a clutch buzzer-beating three-pointer from Cunningham, kept the Tigers in the game until the very end.

“She could score at every level, she’s like a cheat code,” Berube said.

“She really just encompasses everything that’s great about women’s basketball.”

Alarie’s dominance rarely went unnoticed, leaving her with a heaping pile of accolades before she graduated Princeton in 2020, including three Ivy Player of the Year awards, two Ivy Defensive Player of the Year awards, two silver medals with USA Basketball, an AP All-American honorable mention, and a first-round pick in the WNBA draft to the Dallas Wings.

“I feel so honored to have coached her, knowing that she’s one of the greatest women’s basketball players ever to play in the Ivy League and had just an incredible career,” Berube said. “I’m happy for her that she’s just moving on to another phase of her life.”

COURTESY OF FIBA.BASKETBALL

Alarie (14) surpassed Tiger legend Sandi Bittler to become Princeton’s all-time leading scorer, before being drafted No. 5 overall to the Dallas Wings in 2020.

Alarie’s time in professional basketball was short but sweet. She played 53 games with the Dallas Wings, averaging 2.6 points and 3.1 rebounds per game. Overseas, she played half of a season with Galatasaray in Turkey, before finding a home in Salamanca, Spain playing with Perfumerias Avenida. With Avenida, she played in two EuroLeague Final Fours and won a Spanish League title in 2022. She signed an endorsement deal with Under Armour, had an unofficial fan club known as “The Bella Bunch,” and continues to be beloved by the women’s basketball and Princeton communities.

“I want to thank every single person who has supported me throughout my playing career and those who always believed in me,” Alarie wrote in her announcement. “Though I will no longer be on the court, I look forward to this new period of my career as I explore opportunities on the business side of sports and the game I’ve always loved.”

Isabel Rodrigues is a senior writer for the Sports section at the ‘Prince’ who typically covers women’s basketball.

MEN’S TRIATHALON | MARCH 2023

From the pool to a Princeton Ph.D.: the path of Brad Snyder

By Cole Keller Associate Sports Editor

For retired Navy explosive ordnance officer, two-time Paralympian, and current Princeton Ph.D. student Brad Snyder, adjusting to life with blindness required him to draw on resilience ingrained during his time in the Navy.

“I’ve been able to figure out a lot of crazy things, from jumping out of aircraft to scuba diving and all of that stuff I used to do in the Navy,” Snyder told The Daily Princetonian. “I can figure out blindness.”

Deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan in the midst of the War on Terror, Snyder’s daily operations

primarily revolved around being a part of the Navy’s “bomb squad.”

On Sept. 7, 2011, Snyder stepped on an improvised explosive device and sustained a complete loss of vision in both eyes and significant facial damage.

Now living with prosthetic eyes, Snyder has not merely learned to live with blindness — he’s reached the pinnacle of athletic achievement as a Paralympian.

Snyder made his Paralympics swimming debut at the London 2012 Paralympics, which occurred only a year after his injury. Winning gold in the 100-meter freestyle and 400-meter freestyle events, and silver in the 50-meter

COURTESY OF BRAD SNYDER

Snyder (left) lost his eyesight in September 2011, and has since become a star athlete at the Paralympic games.

freestyle event, Snyder’s London 2012 experience was extraordinary both in and out of the pool.

“It was very inspiring to be around all these athletes who had major life challenges — disabled athletes and wheelchairs, paraplegics, people missing hands, missing limbs — and it is not a defining characteristic for them.

It’s merely the way they compete,” Snyder said.

“To be able to compete and win was [another] thing,” Snyder continued. “There was a feeling of realizing that childhood dream of being on the Olympic team. I was on the Paralympic team, but the feeling was very much the same.”

That transition — from his recovery at a Veteran Affairs facility near his hometown of St. Petersburg, Fla., to winning five Paralympic gold medals — would not have been possible without his strong support system, including his mother Valarie.

“I actually gave one of my gold medals to my mom. We had survived this major traumatic transition. My mom was there almost every step of the way,” he said.

In fact, his mother presented the idea of swimming in the Paralympics to Snyder in the first place. It was never Snyder’s immediate goal after becoming blind to return to the swimming pool (he was a collegiate swimmer at Navy), but rather an idea that some friends presented to him a few months into recovery.

“I recognized that [swimming] was my opportunity to sort of go back to normal, show everyone everything’s going to be fine, give people a sense of peace and confidence in my new reality,” Snyder said of his first few times back in

the pool.

“More than doing a job, much of our identity revolves around what our profession is, what our contribution to society is,” Snyder added. “I knew all of those things were really dramatically changing in a short amount of time, it’s a lot to deal with. And so as a way to sort of begin that process, sports was a way for me to sort of reclaim my identity and start from the beginning.”

As he reentered the pool, Snyder received a call from a friend at the United States Association of Blind Athletes in Colorado Springs, Colo. The organization works to recruit blinded veterans to compete in sports and was able to arrange for Snyder to leave the recovery hospital for training opportunities, in preparation for Paralympic qualifying meets.

After a few months of training, while simultaneously completing vision rehabilitation, Snyder flew to Colorado Springs for a meet, where he qualified for the 2012 Paralympic U.S. National Swimming team.

From there, Snyder has gone on to win six paralympic golds, including a paratriathlon gold medal at the 2020 Tokyo Paralympics. Snyder also has three gold medals in International Paralympic Committee World Championships, winning all three in freestyle swimming events in 2015.

Past the Paralympics, Snyder’s ultimate commitment to service has motivated his next career move — pursuing a Ph.D. at Princeton as part of his goal to become a professor at the Naval Academy.

After teaching as a fellow in the leadership and ethics department at the Naval Academy, Snyder

knew that the classroom could be a potential career option.

“What I saw when I went to the Naval Academy was twofold,” he said. “One, [teaching] was a job I could really effectively do, as my constraints as a blind person are really not as relevant in the classroom as they are in other places. I also felt like at the Naval Academy, I’m serving this really important population of people, who want to be leaders in the U.S. Navy.”

Now, as Snyder has met all the requirements for a Princeton Ph.D., Snyder, his wife Sara, and their one-year-old daughter Rooney are eyeing a move to Annapolis, Md., where Snyder will write his dissertation from the Naval Academy. Once that is complete, Snyder will apply for a faculty position at the Naval Academy where he hopes to teach for the remainder of his career.

As for the 2024 Paris Paralympics?

“I’m taking a sabbatical,” Snyder joked. “I had every intention of competing in Paris, but it’s gotten to be too much doing dad duties and a Ph.D., so I’m going to sit out the road to Paris.”

“But my intention is to come back and compete for a spot on the Los Angeles team for the 2028 games, and that will certainly be my last go around,” he added.

“There is an internal desire to reclaim for myself the agency I had towards making the life I wanted,” Snyder said. “I’m an ambitious person, and I’m not going to hide from that. I want to make an awesome life for myself and for my family.”

Cole Keller is an associate editor for the Sports section at the ‘Prince.’

the PROSPECT. The Daily Princetonian

Friday May 25, 2023

page 37

ARTS & CULTURE

I see you and learn how to be

OCTOBER 2022

come to know across the years. I gave

By Ina Aram | Contributing Prospect Writer them names. “The Protector” sits at his dining table for a while after putting There is a boy working on something his son to bed. “The Woman of Steel” tonight. I can see him from the window is up at 6:30 a.m., making a lunchbox of my room. He is concentrating. This in her steel kitchen. “Hula Lady” began is one of the best things to witness: to dance one night. I wanted to dance people concentrating. On the floor too, to music I like, with bare feet, above the boy is another boy, working and with the city lights streaming into on something too, and I wonder who my room, because sometimes sitting is working harder, and if this is even at a desk doing things that need to be possible to measure, and if maybe one done feels unbearable. I wonder who of the boys sometimes feels conscious she cooks for. I wonder what it’s like of their heart inside of them beating, to leave a light on — to stay awake so beating, beating. I want to know what someone afraid can find you and run everyone everywhere is doing. to you in the light.

If I could, I would ask all the time, I do not watch with malice. I watch “How did you spend your time today?” because I am anxious. Because most There are few things more intimate of the time I don’t know if I am doing than knowing someone’s schedule. it right. I am afraid I am not doing Maybe seeing them naked. Maybe hear- what I should be doing at every moing them sing. I want to know what ment all the time. Because time has classes a person had. And how they got overwhelmed me since I was probably themselves from class to class. And 11 years old. This was when I first comwhether it was all effortless and auto- prehended it as something finite and matic, or if it was a great, great effort. fleeting. Now I’m 19 and want to swalThere are things you can’t know about low all of time. All the time in my life. people. We receive sketches of strang- I’ll let it sit like a black hole in my stomers, and that is all. Everybody walks a ach, because what else do I do with it? certain way. I like to do impressions in How do I care for it? How do I exist in front of my friends of people we know. time? How will it wash over me — how They laugh and I wonder how I would will I go from all the things I do right imitate myself. I try it in front of a mir- now to what I so want to do in the ror. The two girls move just the same. future? I lick up the days and crunch Sometimes I think I don’t know how on the hours — minutes and seconds to be human. Where do I put my body season time on my tongue. every hour? When do I take a breath?

Sometimes before dinner I just How many grapes can I eat before my stand in my dorm room. My shoes are whole body buzzes like acid? I want to wet from the rain. I could take them know how people do it, how they do off, but my pants are wet too, and then this thing that is living. So I watch. it won’t end. I’m waiting for my friends Couples in cafes. Friends in my room. to come back so we can go to dinner Strangers through windows. I see proof together. That will be our time. When of people who do it too — who wake I rush to class it is easy — that is the and live. We don’t talk about existing only thing I need to be doing. I unenough. But in the frames of windows, ravel when the decision of what to do human life is idolized like art. I see you is mine. being, and I learn. I feel okay.

There was a little banner in the From my bedroom in Tokyo, I see my Limelite store in town: “Made a Deneighbors in the apartment across the cision Today,” it said, like it was an street. There are a few characters I have accomplishment. My friends and I NOVEMBER 2022

INA ARAM / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

laughed. We thought about getting it.

I’m not indecisive. I just wonder if my decisions of what to do with my time are the best. Should I work or should I sleep? To go walk or to weep? I decide to wear a red sweater, and I decide to drink my coffee and read outside by the chapel. If not at Princeton, maybe I would be somewhere in California, and there would be no need for sweaters, and maybe I would not be someone who reads. But I do read, and winter is coming, and I like this red sweater.

This is the person that I am at this time because of all the decisions I’ve made.

We decided not to buy the banner.

I love coincidences. Unexpected people in ordinary places. Numbers in just the right order. “Jinx!” moments.

Things that seem like they happen because they have to. Signs that you were meant to be there to see it. That all of it was right.

There are those boys over there be-

yond my window, in the other building, in their windows. Maybe they know how to say “focaccia.” Maybe they know how atoms fit into cells. Or how to start Korean emails. Or what to do if, for a brief moment past midnight in the bathroom of a party, they do not recognize the person looking back at them in the mirror. Or why necklaces rotate around the neck throughout the day so they always have to be fixed, fixed, fixed.

Maybe they know how to be human more than I do. But none of that matters. We are all here now. I want to wave, but that would break something, and I don’t know what.

Ina Aram is a contributing writer from Tokyo, Japan, writing for The Prospect at the ‘Prince.’ She can be reached at ia8483@ princeton.edu, or on Instagram @inafinity and YouTube @inafinity.

An ode to Halloweekend

By Eric Fenno | Staff Prospect Writer Leaves rain down to cover walkways with a sea of orange and red. I kick my way through, admiring a particular leaf with a vibrant green core that gradually transitions into a deep red. I am on my way home from my last class on a Friday — what could be a more beautiful thing? The fog and rain of the week has dissipated into a nice warm sunshine just in time for everyone to stay warm and dry as they run around in silly costumes all weekend. The buzz of anticipation builds as I return to my room. My roommates are all home when I return, bubbling with eagerness to prepare for the night’s festivities.

Getting ready is the most essential part of a Halloween party. Whether you just throw on an oversized shirt and boxers for a low effort but utterly

classic “the guy from Risky Business” or you don full-fledged face makeup, green hair, and purple suit for the Joker, getting ready is the time to get into character. You are no longer you. You are morphing into whomever or whatever you choose to be for the night. It is the best opportunity you get all year to not be a sad and lonely student swamped with work — or at least not look like one.

The pregame inevitably follows, though it has really been going on throughout the preparation process.

Personally, I find the pregame to be a harshly underrated part of the night. Often more fun than the game itself, the pregame is where you and your close pals scheme for the night ahead. Where are we gonna go?

Who are we gonna see? The possibilities are endless.

The people start to feel themselves, everyone looking good in their costumes and ready to show off at the party. You try to play it cool but eventually excite-

JON ORT / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

ment boils over and it’s time for everyone to roll to the Street.

The party itself is where all of that preparation and scheming gets shattered and tossed out the window.

Sweat consumes your costume, dripping your Joker face paint all over the dance floor, but you don’t care, this song is your jam. Plus, you’re in costume, so you can convince yourself that no one knows it’s you anyway. Why not go all out? You talk to people you never imagined you would see in a sexy bunny outfit and, if you get lucky, you even catch a glimpse of Buzz Lightyear projectile vomiting off the balcony.

Halloweekend is a time for all rules and regulations to take a backseat and let shit get spooky. Decorations gradually get torn from the wall, costumes get unbuttoned, untied, and reduced to a shadow of themselves. The group has disappeared, one with the sexy bunny, another helping Buzz Lightyear get cozy in bed, but it’s okay because you’ve found new friends at the party and you’re all going out for a smoke before collapsing into bed.

As the joint comes your direction you reflect on the night’s most random and funny moments. The night sky glistens with the satisfaction of witnessing such uncivil shenanigans, and all is well. You think of the connections you made and fun you had, as well as the possibilities for the rest of the weekend. It’s only Friday after all.

On the way home, perhaps you and your crew catch a second wind and decide to climb around on one of the countless construction sites until PSAFE diligently arrives and shoos you away. You run from them right out of your shoe but in the adrenaline of the moment decide to leave it there. You will get it in the morning if you have to. So you walk the rest of the way home in one sockfoot, but you don’t worry about it. You don’t remember how you made it into your bed but eventually you do, costume now strewn across the floor, makeup still on, and you cozy up and fall asleep immediately, ready to do it all again tomorrow night.

Eric Fenno is a staff writer for The Prospect and Sports at the ‘Prince.’ He can be reached at ef4960@princeton.edu and on Instagram or Twitter at @lil_e_rok

page 38

The Daily Princetonian

Friday May 25, 2023

Award-winning filmmaker Ryûsuke Hamaguchi visits Princeton SEPTEMBER 2022

By Tyler Wilson | Staff Prospect Writer On Friday, Sept. 23, Ryūsuke Hamaguchi came to Princeton’s campus, kicking off the weeklong “Conversations” that began with the Humanities Council’s Fall 2022 Belknap Global Conversation at Betts Auditorium. Throughout the week in residence — sponsored

by Department of East Asian Studies, the Department of Comparative Literature, the Program in East Asian Studies, and the Committee for Film Studies — the award-winning director is leading a series of workshops where some students will create and present short films.

In tandem, the Princeton Garden Theatre is holding multiple screenings of a mini retrospective of his most recent films.

Hamaguchi’s visit follows the breakout success of his latest feature film, “Drive My Car,” which won the Academy Award for Best International Feature Film at last spring’s ceremony and Best Screenplay at the Cannes Film Festival. The three-hour film is meditative and highly emotional, capturing the hearts and minds of critics and viewers across the world.

The campus community buzzed with excitement from the Japanese director’s presence at the Bellknap Global Conversation. At the jam-packed Betts Auditorium, Hamaguchi fielded questions about his process from four panelists: Associate Professor in East Asian Studies Steven Chung, Associate Professor of Music Gavin Steingo, Professor of English Anne Cheng ’85, and Professor of Comparative Literature Thomas Hare ’75.

Hamaguchi began the event by thanking the University in English for having him back, which he then quickly followed with “Let me speak in Japanese.”

Through translation provided by Tara McGowan ’90, Hamaguchi began discussing his process with the four panelists. The first topic of conversation was his documentary work – his initial entryway into the world of cinema.

Following Japan’s triple disaster of 2011 (an earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear meltdown), Hamaguchi began interviewing victims of the crisis, typically multiple people at once. These interview resulted in multiple documentaries directed by himself and Ko Sakai, including “The Sound of Waves,” “Voices from the Waves: Shinchimachi,” “Voices from the Waves: Kesennuma,” and “Storytellers.” While working to reconcile with the tragedy that had struck his home country, he came to realize that both the trauma of the disasters and the shared histories of the interviewees’ relationships could come through authentically on film. He found that although these interviewees knew each other well, they had never had these conversations in real life. When he saw these emotions peek through, it was unlike anything he had ever seen in fiction before, and he immediately wanted

TYLER WILSON / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

to incorporate that raw sincerity into his narrative films.

Hamaguchi credits folklore scholar Kazuko Ono, the subject of the documentary “Storytellers,” as the person who revealed this to him. Ono interviewed many survivors in the wake of the disasters, showing that by listening with wholehearted respect, it was possible to pull genuine emotions out of her interviewees. Hamaguchi utilizes these same techniques with his actors to imbue his work with its signature authenticity, blurring the lines between film and documentary.

In fact, this obsession with realness seems to define much of his work. Like the lead character of “Drive My Car,” a stage actor-director named Yūsuke Kafuku, Hamaguchi insists that his actors repeat their lines over and over again to rehearse. He believes that an actor should know more about their character than the audience — he even provided actors with supplemental texts containing more information about the characters than is present in the screenplay. Hamaguchi wants the dialogue to become a part of the actors’ bodies because their interactions keep his films engaging for the audience. It’s their almost intangible interiority that counts the most.

Hamaguchi finds these interior moments — specifically the internal shift in emotions — most present in the musicality of the human voice. When a character is talking for an extended period of time, he looks for moments when the voice is particularly beautiful.

Sometimes, he thinks the voices sound so great that background music isn’t necessary. He jokes that he uses music when the directing is not going so well. Many

directors avoid including too much dialogue because so much believability is found in the voice; it can be crippling to the film’s sense of immersion if not perfect.

Hamaguchi is not afraid. He dives in head first.

Hamaguchi’s films are famous for being especially long. When asked why, he self-deprecatingly quipped, “Basically I think shorter films are better.” He believes that, despite their length, each of his films is as short as it can be. “Drive My Car” is about three hours long, with an opening credits sequence that arrives around 40-minutes into the film. His love of dialogue is partially responsible for that runtime, along with his desire to include as many different shots of actors listening as possible. But beyond that, his unique pace serves a different purpose. He believes that good storytelling is when the audience can fill in the world with you.

For this reason, what is not said in a scene is incredibly important; long, extended moments of silence are just as integral to Hamaguchi as an emotionally-wrought monologue.

Hamaguchi ended the talk by answering audience questions. An audience member asked how satisfied he was with the authenticity of “Drive My Car.” He said he felt about 70 percent successful. For an artist like him, there is always work to be done.

Tyler Wilson is a staff writer for The Prospect and Humor at the ‘Prince.’ He can be reached at tyler.wilson@princeton.edu, or on Instagram at @tylertwilson.

Friday May 25, 2023

The Daily Princetonian

page 39

page 40

The Daily Princetonian

Friday May 25, 2023

Black Arts Company: Lifting each other up by getting down

DECEMBER 2022

By Kerrie Liang | Head Prospect Editor On a Friday night, the Frist Film/Performance Theatre was buzzing with excitement. In the darkness, the dancers struck their starting pose. The crowd waited with bated breath. Soon enough, the bright lights came up and Michael Jackson’s “P.Y.T. (Pretty Young Thing)” rang through the speakers. It was time to get down.

Loud, fun, and unapologetically cool, the Black Arts Company’s (BAC) latest performance, “The Get Down,” truly took the audience on an adventure through time. The show drew inspiration from the 70s and centers Black empowerment. Imagine “Jungle Boogie.” Imagine grooving with the “Soul Train Line.”

Imagine beautiful bold afros that dominated the 70s scene. This is the vibrancy that the BAC brought to the present day.

Although the 70s theme was threaded throughout the show, each piece featured different forms of Black art and dance. From old school hip-hop to whacking, BAC defies genre, and the result is an amalgamation of unique styles. And this diversity is no accident — their choreographic process invites all members to contribute their perspective. While one could worry that combining so many ideas will impact cohesion, the members not only made it work, but used it to their advantage. At BAC, difference is embraced, not feared.

“We’re just constantly learning from everybody.

There’s really no barrier to people trying new styles or things they’ve never danced before,” said Samantha Johnson ’23. “There’s always this kind of cross-cultural — but also style-wise — [learning].”

Johnson is BAC’s website manager, who previously served as a publicity chair.

President Emeritus Aishah Balogun ’23 agreed, adding that “everyone comes with an idea of what they want to do. Some people want to do Afrobeat, others want to do a Caribbean-inspired piece. It’s very individual.”

And this individuality shined through in their performance. In every piece, the dancers moved in practiced synchronization, experimenting with formations and creating complex imagery. However, if you looked closely, you could see how each dancer added their own unique flavor to the choreography — some seamlessly blended steps into one smooth line while others emphasized the beat with subtle pops and locks. Just like they do behind the scenes, on stage, everyone brings something special to the table.

These small details allowed us to gain a glimpse into each performer’s interpretation — little Easter eggs that only the careful eye got to enjoy. However, one thing remained unanimous: under the strobe lights, each dancer was bursting with personality.

BAC prides themselves on their authenticity. In promoting their show, I noticed a bold claim on their flyers — “No one does hip hop better than us!” And that much certainly seems to be true. Their secret?

Education.

Johnson emphasized the importance of appreciating the history behind the dance styles that they do and understanding that many people have grown up dancing hip hop or listening to the music they use.

This context allows dancers to understand the gravity behind their work — each movement is loaded with a rich history.

“This is not hip hop from another source. It’s not hip hop from, you know, white facing companies or

groups. This is hip hop from where it originated,” Johnson told me.

This opportunity to indulge in the Black arts is not just reserved for Black students — it’s open to everyone. Since its conception in 1990, BAC has been open to all students, but its membership has historically been composed primarily of African Americans and other students of color. Today, BAC boasts dancers from various backgrounds, all united by their appreciation for the Black arts.

To Balogun, this diversity is important for many reasons — not only does it create more manpower to sustain the presence of Black culture at Princeton, but also sparks meaningful conversations between students. However, this openness is a two-way street.

BAC extends a warm welcome to anyone who wants to experience the history of the Black arts. However, those who wish to participate must also treat it with utmost respect.

“Whenever we have auditionees, we always ask them what Black arts means to them, and you’d be surprised by some of the answers we get,” said Balogun.

“Why is cultural sharing so important at BAC?” I asked.

“I think it can bring about really interesting perspectives to people’s experiences growing up. Maybe they grew up in an area that was predominantly Black.

Maybe they were very much surrounded by Black music and Black dance, and that’s something they want to appreciate.”

“Do you ever feel the need to protect your culture and keep it your own?” I followed up.

“I think it’s important to emphasize difference, and not look at it as a bad thing. We all come from different places and have different cultures. If we appreciate them instead of trying to erase each other, it’s a lot better than just saying ‘We’re doing hip hop and let’s not talk about Blackness at all.’ That does nothing for us,” Balogun responded.

During the show, this diversity and cultural appreciation was not only present among the dancers, it was

reflected in the audience. Halfway through the second act, one of the dancers invited audience members to join them in “getting down” on stage. Immediately, a flurry of hands shot up. As the four chosen members moved to the music, the crowd cheered and clapped along. The evidence was undeniable — BAC wasn’t just building a group of great dancers, it was building a community.

For many Black students, BAC is a safe space on campus. And for Balogun and Johnson, BAC was their first home at Princeton.

“BAC was my first taste to Black life and dance, and getting those two at the same time,” said Johnson.

“We moved like a family — there was really no person left behind from studying together, eating together, partying together, chilling together. It’s been the lens in which I see my Princeton life, academically and socially.”

“Coming to Princeton, I was really unsure about what I was going to be experiencing as a Black woman on this campus. Having a space that was so predominantly Black and had Black people in positions of authority, who were looking out for me, who were mentors to me, who I saw thriving at Princeton was really inspiring,” said Balogun.

As the dancers rushed on stage for their final bow, it was clear that “The Get Down” was much more than just a dance showcase — it was a celebration of Black culture past and present. That Friday night, Frist Theatre came to life, and I was delighted to be swept away on a journey that carried so much gravity yet so much joy.

“Black culture has become a universal thing,” said Johnson. “But, to be where it is strongest and where it is most proud — I think it’s something very special.”

Kerrie Liang is a head editor for The Prospect and an assistant editor for Podcasts at the ‘Prince.’ She can be reached at kerrie.liang@princeton.edu, or on Instagram at @kerrie. liang.

PHOTO BY COLLIN RIGGINS

Nassau Street welcomes slate of new restaurants

SEPTEMBER 2022

By Stephenie Chen | Senior Prospect Contributor

With a new academic year, comes new restaurants sprouting around Princeton. Here are a few that have recently opened (or are soon to open!) in town, just in time for that time of year when you start craving something — anything — other than dining hall food. illy Coffee At Earth’s End Princeton 45 String St — turn onto S Tulane St, next to Tacoria. Opens 8 a.m. every day.

The café At Earth’s End sources their coffee beans via their partner, illy; their coffee is composed of a blend of the top one percent of nine varieties of Arabica from around the world.

Check out their specialty drink “Neve Fondente (Melted Snow),” consisting of a single shot of espresso, steamed mocha milk, and sweet cold foam (skim milk, simple syrup, and ice).

Just next door, but still part of At Earth’s End, The Parlour offers a cigar tasting experience (Must be at least 21 to buy cigars).

MT 49 Nassau St (formerly where Dunkin’ was located) MT promises to be everything from a café to a dessert parlor to a sushi restaurant. Its menu features drinks (everything from their signature fruit teas to boba), cakes (crepe cakes, cheesecakes, mousse cakes, and more), and other desserts (try out their “milky way” treats!). The menu is slated to feature the savory as well, in the form of sushi and poké bowls.

Mochinut 140 Nassau St B (formerly where Qdoba was located) Love mochi? Love donuts? Mochinut synthesizes the two into their trademark mochi donuts. With locations across the U.S. as well as South Korea and Thailand, Mochinut is a burgeoning business that is coming to Princeton very soon. They offer mochi donuts in a range of flavors, from ube to churro,

as well as Korean-style corn dogs, boba drinks, and soft serve (including soft serve on top of mochi donuts).

Ani Ramen 140 Nassau St A (formerly where Qdoba was located) Come for the ramen, stay for the myriad of side dishes. Ani Ramen’s offerings will consist of a variety of ramen from the classic shoyu to the spicy miso and even mazemen (brothless ramen). They will also have a vegan ramen option. Apart from ramen, the menu also includes bao buns, bon buri bowls, and side dishes such as chicken karaage (boneless Japanese-style fried chicken) and crispy miso sake wings (limited quantity!).

Stephanie Chen is a senior contributor for The Prospect and Data at the ‘Prince.’ They can be reached at stephchen@princeton.edu.

The Nassau Diner 82 Nassau St The Nassau Diner offers a plethora of classic diner foods, from your all-American breakfasts to specialty international options. They are open until 10 p.m. daily, providing ample time to satisfy any late-night cravings.

Check out their “International Breakfast” section, where they offer a range of breakfast foods, from Irish staples to Jersey classics.

The restaurant is currently in a pre-opening period in which customers are free to drop by and order off their menu, but the managers will be tweaking their offerings depending on customer feedback. The diner is slated to officially open starting next week.

Below are some restaurants that are currently under construction, but will be open in the near future.

RODOLFO ARZAGA / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN