The Dartmouth 02/21/19

VOL. CLXXV NO. 139

SNOWY HIGH 44 LOW 21

250th anniversary banners stolen B y EILEEN BRADY

The Dartmouth Staff

OPINION

LEVY: STOP WORSHIPPING FEMALE CEOS PAGE 6

ZAMAN: THE SCHULTZ SHTICK PAGE 6

KNIGHT: INTELLECTUAL HONESTY AND PROTEST PAGE 7

FISHBEIN: HAIR’S TO YOU PAGE 7

ARTS

SLAM POETRY BREATHES NEW LIFE INTO THE AGE-OLD TOPIC OF LOVE PAGE 8

FOLLOW US ON

TWITTER @thedartmouth COPYRIGHT © 2019 THE DARTMOUTH, INC.

HANOVER, NEW HAMPSHIRE

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2019

Some members of the Dartmouth community have found a different, albeit illegal, way to celebrate Dartmouth’s 250th birthday. Since the 250th anniversary festivities began at the start of 2019, a number of commemorative “Dartmouth 250” banners have been stolen in Hanover and on Dartmouth’s campus. Three banners were stolen on Main Street between Jan. 17 and Jan. 19, two of which have since been returned,

according to Hanover Police captain Mark Bodanza. At least one more banner was reported taken this last week from near Collis Center, Dartmouth Interim Safety and Security director Keysi Montas said.

On Feb. 4, the Hanover Police posted a photo of two suspected culprits in a Twitter and Facebook post that has since been removed.

On Feb. 6, the department’s Twitter account announced that the two pictured individuals had been identified.

SEE BANNERS PAGE 3

MICHAEL LIN/THE DARTMOUTH SENIOR STAFF

Three of Dartmouth’s commemorative 250th anniversary banners were stolen in January.

After lawsuit settlement, Mannella Protocol established B y ELIZABETH JANOWSKI The Dartmouth Staff

Two-time Paralympic alpine skier Staci Mannella ’18, who is accustomed to overcoming challenges stemming from disability, has recently been a driving force behind Dartmouth’s policies toward students with disabilities.

Mannella, who suffers from a congenital vision impairment and is legally blind, and her

family recently reached an outof-court settlement with the College in a lawsuit originally filed against Dartmouth in April 2017. Mannella alleged in the lawsuit that the College failed to adequately provide the accommodations that she was entitled to under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Under the conditions of the settlement, the College has agreed to implement new policies and procedures that

The Dartmouth Staff

Fresh ideas may accompany the impending turnover of the Dartmouth Outing Club directorate. In a campus-wide email on Feb. 12, outgoing DOC president John Brady ’19 announced the names of students elected to lead the organization in the coming year. The positions of president,

COURTESY OF STACI MANNELLA

SEE MANNELLA PAGE 2

DOC elects new directorate for 2019

B y SAVANNAH ELLER

will address the needs of students with disabilities, including a mandatory training program for faculty and staff that will be known as “The Mannella Protocol.”

“I’m really excited about what we’ve agreed upon,” Mannella said. “I’m looking forward to seeing these changes made so that in the future, students with disabilities will have much better

vice president, treasurer and secretary were up for election and have been filled through the end of winter 2020. The new directorate will take over beginning next term.

The largest student organization on campus with over 1,500 members, the DOC is an umbrella club that encompasses over a dozen outdoor-oriented SEE ELECTIONS PAGE 5

Mannella sued the College for its lack of disability support.

Freshman start club to promote political discourse

B y HANNAH JINKS

The Dartmouth Staff

When the College Republicans welcomed conservative commentator David Horowitz to campus last fall, his talk prompted strong responses from partisan identities at the College.

William Reicher ’22 and Vlado Vojdanovski ’22 said they noticed a lack of engagement between disparate political views, inspiring them to create the Dartmouth Political Union — a

non-partisan group committed to fostering political discourse.

Reicher said he observed animosity between protesters and attendees at the Horowitz talk, but no productive debate.

“The Dartmouth Democrats and the Dartmouth Republicans don’t engage with each other,” Reicher said. “It’s created an atmosphere on campus where people are afraid and SEE POLITICAL UNION PAGE 3

PAGE 2

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2019

THE DARTMOUTH NEWS

Q&A with professor Golnar Nikpour Mannella lawsuit leads to ADA compliance B y MARY WINTERS The Dartmouth

One of 32 new faculty members at the College, history professor Golnar Nikpour brings her specialty in modern Iranian political and intellectual history to the department.

She has extensively explored questions of power, rights, and incarceration in her interdisciplinary studies, which have focused on Middle Eastern and North African history, Islamic studies, critical prison studies and women and gender studies. Nikpour received her bachelor’s degree from Barnard College and her Ph.D. from Columbia University. She is currently teaching a class on gender in the modern Middle East and North Africa, and will teach a history seminar on the global history of human rights.

How did you become interested in Iranian history?

GN: My interests began as an undergraduate at Barnard College. I took an introductory class to Islamic history my first year and was just blown away by how interesting the topic was.

When I first started college and I was 17 or 18 years old, I was interested in literature and kind of thought history was a little bit on the dull side. I was more interested in the humanities and the arts, but then taking a college level class really just opened my eyes to how much more lively history is than it seems like it is in high school. I was drawn to the idea of taking Iranian history, Middle East history and Islamic history because my own family background is Iranian. I was born in Tehran and moved here when I was small, so I had some sort of personal investment in it.

But then the topic itself actually just really came to life as I started to study it more and more, and at that point and became an intellectual investment as well as a personal one.

What do you think is the most common or problematic misconception Americans have about Iran?

GN: That’s a great question. It’s difficult to pick just one to be honest.

The baseline is that there’s this conception that folks, not only in Iran but across the Middle East or the Muslim majority, have a uniformity of life and thought, and that everybody’s sort of dominated and driven by a very doctrinal idea of Islam that is very conservative. That’s really not the case.

The entirety of the Muslim majority world is incredibly diverse in terms of languages, ethnic backgrounds, social backgrounds and religious backgrounds. Iran is a place where there’s something like 50 different linguistic groups. It’s one of the most

linguistically diverse countries in the world. It’s quite religiously diverse for the Middle East — almost as much so as the United States. There’s a lot of different kinds of people, and they’re folks who are working to make their lives livable and happy in ways that people all over the world are striving to do. I think on a very basic level, I would say that the diversity across the Middle East is often misunderstood here.

And then there’s just a basic lack of knowledge of Iranian or Middle East history. For instance, most Americans don’t know that the United States organized a coup in Iran in 1953 and overthrew a democratically elected prime minister for an authoritarian king, and that this is something that is a very raw wound in the Iranian political consciousness. The average American today wonders why there’s animus coming from Iran towards the United States, and don’t have much of a sense of that backstory. I would say that that’s generally the case across the Middle East, that there’s a lack of appreciation for how hands on the United States government has been, and a lack of knowledge of that history, which is hopefully something that I can fill out if people take my classes.

Are you currently conducting any research and if so, on what?

GN: I’m working on my first book, which is a history of the modern prison in Iran starting in the late 19th century and running until the current day. The book is about prisons as an institutional history, but more than that, it is about all of the public effects that the transformation of the penal code and the emergence of modern prisons in Iran has had — all of the ways that this big transformation has changed the way people live. The penal code in Iran was centralized in the 1920s and ‘30s, and that’s when the modern prison system was really pushed into overdrive. Tens of new prisons were built and many new laws were put off the books. And so Iranians had to learn en masse what it meant to be possibly surveilled or policed in modern ways and then possibly incarcerated. So I look at things like criminology texts, state archives, crime novels, all sorts of different ways of tracking how Iranians have thought about crime and punishment and how they live in a modern carceral state.

What have you found to be the most interesting or exciting work that you’ve done?

GN: I’ve been working on this book for several years now and I’m still routinely interested in what I’m doing.

Sometimes it’s kind of dark because I read about torture and violence and relatively grim topics, but at the same

time doing this research has given me the opportunity to spend a great deal of time in Iran and in archives across the Middle East and across Europe and the U.S. and I just really enjoy that process.

I really enjoy the process of being a historian, of doing research, of having a kind of half formed question, and not really even totally knowing what I’m looking for always, and finding things that constantly surprise me. I really love that. And beyond that, I’ve really come to enjoy teaching here at Dartmouth, too. The last few months of being here and getting to know the students have been a real pleasure.

What drew you to Dartmouth?

GN: Dartmouth is obviously one of the top schools in the country. I don’t think that there are many better opportunities in terms of the sort of perfect marriage that scholars are looking for between having all of the support that we need as researchers and a place that really supports and encourages cutting edge research, but at the same time very good and motivated students and small classrooms where you can really engage with your students and get to know them. All of the things that bring students here are similar things to what bring faculty here — you’re getting something like a small liberal arts education in a big research university that has the kind of resources at its disposal to bring that intellectual world to life for everybody.

Do you have any advice for students interested in pursuing Iranian history?

GN: If you’re in a Dartmouth student interested in history in general, Middle East history or Iranian history in particular take classes in the history department, come find me — I’m your person if that’s your interest. Start taking classes in history and talking to those of us in the department about the different options you have for career paths. For instance, if you’re interested in history, Middle East history or any history, there are so many things you can do with that beyond being a historian. That’s one of the things that sometimes worries students. They’re interested in the topic, but they’re not totally sure yet how they can make that practicable. And there’s actually a lot of different paths, and those of us in the department are pretty good at finding ways to plug our students into some of the bigger picture things, ways that they can both learn about their interests and find ways to make those part of their lives. Come talk to me. Read a lot of books and don’t believe everything you read in the press.

This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity and length.

CORRECTIONS We welcome corrections. If you believe there is a factual error in a story, please email editor@thedartmouth.com.

FROM MANNELLA PAGE 1

experiences than I did at this school.”

According to the lawsuit, Mannella alleges the College was illprepared for her arrival on campus.

The lawsuit claims that Student Accessibility Services repeatedly failed to provide Mannella with the resources necessary for her to succeed in her coursework, such as notetakers, test readers and lab assistants.

Moreover, many of her professors either failed to provide her with digitized course reading materials or failed to provide them in a timely manner. In one instance, Mannella was not given an answer key to a practice test in an accessible format until after the final examination for the class.

Several times throughout her years at Dartmouth, Mannella and her family reached out to the administration to notify it of Student Accessibility Services shortcomings, according to the lawsuit. When the College did not take action to rectify the situation, the Mannella family opted to take the matter to court.

Sarah Nunan, a paralegal who worked on Mannella’s case, noted that the lawsuit was modeled after other cases concerning ADA violations at universities around the country, such as at the University of Miami and the University of California, Berkeley. Nunan added that she was pleased with the outcome of the case, stating that the consent decree settled upon by both parties was “very complete.”

The decree stipulates that the College will conduct an external assessment of the accessibility of its facilities and resources and will develop a “corrective action plan” that addresses accommodations for students with disabilities based on the assessment’s findings. The results of the assessment and the finalized action plan will both be made available to the public.

According to College spokesperson Diana Lawrence, the College is currently in the process of hiring the external consultant to lead this initiative. Lawrence wrote in an email statement that the College has assembled a “Student Instructional Accessibility Working Group,” chaired by government and Latin American, Latino and Caribbean studies professor Lisa Baldez. The group will examine the accessibility services offered across all schools at Dartmouth, after which it will suggest policy improvements to the provost, according to Lawrence.

Additionally, the College will hire a new ADA coordinator, solidify the procedures for requesting and providing disability accommodations

and create a new protocol for responding to the grievances of students with disabilities, according to the consent decree.

Nunan noted that the Mannella Protocol, which will require faculty and staff to receive training on how to properly accommodate students with disabilities, symbolized a particularly significant victory for Mannella.

“For [Mannella], it wasn’t just important for people to understand what [the] ADA is and what their responsibilities are under the law,” Nunan said. “It was very important that they understand what this means practically. If you have a student who’s blind or deaf, you should take the time to understand how that applies to you and your classroom.”

Lawrence agreed that the settlement marks an important development in the College administration.

“The College seeks to foster an environment that is seamlessly inclusive of people with disabilities,” Lawrence wrote. “Staci Mannella pointed out where we were falling short of that ideal, and for that we are grateful.”

Mannella said she hopes that as a result of her case, the College will make lasting changes to the way that it responds to the needs of students with disabilities.

“Part of the reason I fought so hard was so that people coming up after me won’t have to,” she said.

While Lawrence stated that a time frame for implementing the changes has not yet been finalized, Mannella said that she would like to see them occur as soon as possible.

“My expectation is to see massive changes before I graduate,” Mannella said. “I plan to stay involved even after I graduate, so I’m looking to see through that all of these policies are put in place in the very near future.”

Nunan emphasized that the greater Dartmouth community should stand behind Mannella in her endeavor to improve the College’s student accessibility services.

“I think what’s really important is that we don’t let [Mannella] do this on her own,” Nunan said.

“Whether you’re a Dartmouth alumni, a current student or a community member, you should be joining [Mannella] and asking the Dartmouth administration not only to do this, but [also] to do it well. It’s 2019 — there’s no reason for Dartmouth not to get this right.”

Student Accessibility Services director Ward Newmeyer said he does not have more information about the Mannella Protocol beyond what had already been made public.

Newmeyer declined to comment further.

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2019

Dartmouth Political Union fosters debate FROM POLITICAL UNION PAGE 1

unwilling to have discourse on a lot of important issues.”

T h e C o l l e g e p r e v i o u s l y had a Political Union that was discontinued in 2010. Since its termination, every Ivy League university has adopted a Political Union aside from Brown University, according to Reicher. He said this trend indicates peer institutions’ values and noted that Dartmouth needs to emulate their example.

“There’s a precedent for [a Political Union] and it’s something this campus necessitates,” Reicher said.

The 2009 Dartmouth Political Union’s former president Nathan Bruschi ’10 spoke with Reicher and Vojdanovski to address obstacles the new club may face. “[Bruschi] made sure we were aware of how to improve, and interest students of various political backgrounds,” Vojdanovski said.

Reicher added that unlike the leaders of the first Political Union, the new Union’s current executive board is entirely comprised of freshmen. He said he believes this allows time for the club to garner support and entrench its values in Dartmouth’s culture.

The club held its first meeting, attended by roughly 10 students, at the Rockefeller Center for Public Policy last Saturday. Attendees were informed of logistics and the aims of the club. Executive board members also facilitated a debate over President Donald Trump’s declaration of a national emergency to fund his proposed border wall.

Vojdanovski said he was pleased by the turnout and hopes the club’s membership base continues to expand. He added that the club’s formal kickoff will be held at the start of spring term, during which officer elections will take place to fill the executive board’s vacant positions.

Starting in the spring, the Union plans to host public debate events two to three times a term, an idea inspired by debate societies at the University of Cambridge and the

PAGE 3

THE DARTMOUTH NEWS

University of Oxford. Students will have the opportunity to research a topic, prepare a case and represent their party. Available blocs will include Independent parties.

“The members in attendance would be polled before and after the debate to gauge interest and how much the discussion changed minds,” Reicher said.

He noted that the Union hopes invited speakers will decide the topic and moderate debates.

New Hampshire state senators have already expressed interest in participating, according to Reicher.

S t u d e n t l e a d e r s o f t h e College Democrats and College Re p u b l i c a n s v o i c e d t h e i r e n t h u s i a s m a b o u t t h e n e w Dartmouth Political Union. “[We’re obviously for] any organization that encourages political dialogue on campus,” College Democrats president Gigi Gunderson ’21 said. “The more students we can get to talk about political issues, especially heading into [the 2020 elections] ... is really positive.”

Gunderson noted that she encourages the College Democrats’ membership base to engage with differing political viewpoints. She said she views the Dartmouth Political Union as an excellent opportunity for members to refine their opinions.

College Republicans secretary C h a rl e s S ch n e i d e r ’ 2 2 s a i d he believes the Union will be successful. Schneider noted that the political diversity of the Union’s current executive board exemplifies its bipartisan vision.

He added that the Dartmouth Political Union will play a crucial role in bridging partisan divisions at the College. “[The Dartmouth Political Union] is a very good start in promoting bipartisanship on campus,” Schneider said.

“Republicans have misconceptions about Democrats and Democrats h ave m i s c o n c e p t i o n s a b o u t Republicans, so a club like this brings those ideas together in a meaningful debate.”

Dartmouth banners stolen FROM BANNERS PAGE 1

“Community Action is effective!” the post read. Bodanza said that community members with “personal knowledge” of the suspects had contacted the police department and were integral to getting the banners returned.

He added that the individuals are “part of the Dartmouth community,” but could not comment on whether charges would be filed.

Dhwani Kharel ’22 expressed concern about the incidents, especially if perpetrators were Dartmouth students.

“It’s really disheartening, depending on who did it, because if it was a Dartmouth student, then that probably kind of ruins the relationship between the town and Dartmouth, a relationship that’s already been strained in the past,” Kharel said. “I think it’s just really inconsiderate of Dartmouth students if it was a Dartmouth student who stole these posters.”

Bodanza said that the investigation was ongoing.

“Once we have the investigation completed, then evaluation for prosecution would be taken into consideration,” Bodanza said, adding that he currently had no information on specific charges filed.

Montas said that because the initial thefts were off campus, the Department

of Safety and Security was not involved they will continue to follow up on the in the case until it was notified of the case. stolen banners by the Hanover Police A student, a ’21 with experience Department. in banner theft, however, maintained “I think we must have gotten that the desire to steal a poster does notification pretty not always come shortly after they “If it was a Dartmouth with negative r e c e i v e d t h e intentions. He report,” Montas student, then that stole a 2017 said. “We work probably kind of h o m e c o m i n g together because banner during ruins the relationship i f t h e y a r e his freshman fall, investigating and between the town and said that he they have suspects and Dartmouth, a was mainly trying [who may be to gain social relationship that’s D a r t m o u t h recognition by students], they already been strained taking banners off will share that the lamp posts on in the past.” information with which they hung, us.” acquiring one for For example, -DHWANI KHAREL ’22 each friend with Montas noted that him that night. the police shared “Honestly, I was pictures of the suspects with Safety and around a lot of girls I found pretty Security. attractive, so I figured that if I kind of Safety and Security later received an stepped up my game and stole a poster internal report that more banners had I would look really cool to them,” he been stolen from within the College, said.

Montas said. Bodanza said that Saftey The student added that if his and Security then reported this to the motivation had been negative, he Hanover Police as theft from the College. “probably would’ve burned” the This second incident falls under poster. Instead, it says, it is hanging in Safety and Security’s jurisdiction. his bedroom at home, his own piece of “I believe they were stolen from Collis Dartmouth. He said he assumes those and that it happened probably within who stole the “Dartmouth 250” banners the last week,” Montas said, adding that had similar intents to his own.

PAGE 4

DARTMOUTHEVENTS

THE DARTMOUTH EVENTS

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2019

D-PLAN DILEMMAS

LAMEES KAREEM ‘22

TODAY

4:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.

Workshop: “Capturing Your Experience with Photography,” sponsored by the Guarini Institute for International Education, Jones Media Center, Innovation Studio

4:30 p.m. - 6:00 p.m.

Lecture: “The Horror of Syria: What Happened, What Might Have Been Different,” with journalist and author Charles Glass, sponsored by the Dickey Center for International Understanding, Haldeman 41

7:00 p.m. - 9:30 p.m.

Movie and Discussion: “Imagining Queer Korean America,” with screening of movie “Spa Night” directed by Andrew Ahn, sponsored by the women’s, gender and sexuality studies department and the Leslie Center for the Humanities, Rockefeller 3

TOMORROW 7:00 p.m. - 8:30 p.m.

Film: “3 Faces,” directed by Jafar Panahi, sponsored by the Hopkins Center for the Arts, Loew Auditorium, Black Family Visual Arts Center

7:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m.

Men’s Hockey: Big Green v. Yale Bulldogs, Thompson Arena

8:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m.

Play: “Into the Woods,” production by Stephen Sondheim and James Lapine, sponsored by the theater department, Moore Theater, Hopkins Center for the Arts

ADVERTISING For advertising information, please call (603) 646-2600 or email info@thedartmouth. com. The advertising deadline is noon, two days before publication. We reserve the right to refuse any advertisement. Opinions expressed in advertisements do not necessarily reflect those of The Dartmouth, Inc. or its officers, employees and agents.

The Dartmouth, Inc. is a nonprofit corporation chartered in the state of New Hampshire. USPS 148-540 ISSN 01999931

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2019

PAGE 5

THE DARTMOUTH NEWS

Decker, Vonderheide to be DOC presisdents FROM ELECTIONS PAGE 1

sub-clubs.

Three students were elected as DOC president to serve in the four upcoming terms. Libby Decker ’20 will replace Brady as DOC president in the spring. Decker has been involved in the DOC as the chair of Cabin and Trail and Women in the Wilderness. In 2018, she was also the co-director of Sophomore Trips.

Decker said she is eager to foster community between sub-clubs in the DOC, especially by making use of the DOC House on Occom Pond as a social space. Decker said she also wants to make Moosilauke Ravine Lodge more accessible to students, host more student volunteer events in the Upper Valley and work more closely with the Sustainability Office.

“I think I’m going to be able to come back in the spring and be really excited and energetic about the position and really get stuff done,” she said.

David Vonderheide ’21 will take over as DOC president in the summer. Vonderheide has been a part of the DOC as a Cabin and Trail leader and is involved with the Ledyard Canoe Club, Winter Sports, Nordic Ski and Woodsmen sub-clubs. He said that being president during the summer presents unique challenges and opportunities for the DOC directorate. He hopes to promote more interaction between subclubs through shared trips and to develop a risk management plan for The Fifty — a popular event that consists of a 54-mile hike from Hanover to the Moosilauke Ravine Lodge.

Sarah Kolk ’20 will lead the DOC in fall 2019 and winter 2020.

Kolk has been involved with the club since freshman year through the Ledyard Canoe Club, Winter Sports, Nordic Ski and Ski Patrol sub-clubs. This past fall, she was a first-year Trip leader for Climb and Hike and became the first DOC secretary when the position was created in fall 2018. Kolk said she wants to make the DOC more accessible to freshmen.

“I want upperclassmen in the DOC to really emphasize to underclassmen that they are welcome and they should come into any DOC space feeling like they are equal to anyone else there,” she said.

Kolk noted that she also wants to increase the technical competence of the DOC so that advanced members can push themselves more in the outdoors.

Brady said he is proud of the

DOC’s accomplishments during his tenure as president. Under his leadership, the DOC created a new student risk management director position for students to have more responsibility over the safe planning of trips and activities, Brady said. He added that the organization also created an environmental stewardship committee to help the DOC’s activities become more sustainable.

Brady said he hopes the DOC will continue to reach out to more students on campus, especially those who might not have much experience with outdoor activities.

“The biggest issue with the DOC as it stands right now is a lack of diversity and inclusivity,” he said.

The DOC has already contributed to this goal by making day trips and DOC feeds free to students, according to Brady. He said the DOC could still do more to make entry-level events open to new students, especially by expanding its inventory of rental equipment. Brady also said he hopes the DOC will be able to streamline the trip planning and approval processes in the future.

The position of DOC vice president will be filled by both Mary Joy ’21 and Simon Oster ’21 for the spring and summer terms. Hunter Dominick ’20 and Ben Saccone ’20 will jointly take on the position in fall and winter.

Oster said he is looking forward to taking on new projects and collaborating with others on the new directorate.

“Meeting the other people that I’m going to be working with, getting to know other chairs of other clubs and hopefully making a positive change is going to be really exciting,” he said.

Oster is the captain of the Alpine Ski Team and has been involved with the Mountaineering Club and the First-Year Trips logistics planning group. Dominick is a former DOC vice president and has been involved in Cabin and Trail and the Ledyard Canoe Club.

Saccone is the current chair of the Mountaineering Club and took on the role of DOC president in summer 2018.

Jacob Chalif ’21 will be DOC treasurer in the spring and Vonderheide will take on the position in the fall. Ben Schelling ’21 will each serve as secretary in the spring and summer terms, Kevin Donohue ’21 will be secretary in the fall and Maya Khanna ’22 will serve in the position in winter 2020.

Khanna is a member of T he Dartmouth. Chalif is a former member of The Dartmouth staff.

MICHAEL LIN/THE DARTMOUTH SENIOR STAFF

The Dartmouth Outing Club held its elections earlier this month, choosing its new directorate for 2019.

PAGE 6

GUEST COLUMNIST THOMAS KNIGHT ’22

STAFF COLUMNIST GABRIELLE LEVY ’22

Honesty and Protest

Exploitative Feminism

The D’Souza talk was political theater and a missed opportunity.

Dinesh came to campus. Cool heads prevailed.

No-one was hurt. Debate transpired. Strong, peaceful protest was seen and heard across campus.

In many ways, Dinsesh D’Souza ’83’s talk was a success for the College that hosted it, a success for the man who gave the talk, and a success for those who disapproved of the visitor and the content of his speech. There were no Antifa guerrillas or jackbooted fascists. The flashes of violence that typified similar events at Middlebury and Berkley had no more presence than the specter of Alpha Delta; looming, but ultimately insignificant. D’Souza’s talk, although it defied my low expectations, proved to be nothing more than a hodgepodge of loose ideas, with mentions of ladders and walls that lacked sticking power and seemed to disappear from the collective imagination minutes after they had been spoken. Even D’Souza’s reputation as a particularly combative debater never showed, and the fireworks that I had expected in the question and answer section appeared as mere sparks, emphasized by a moderator that, at times, declined to hold the microphone to the mouth of the person asking the question. The drama was underwhelming, with expectations dashed by a provocateur who loses his intrigue when he says nothing especially provocative. In the overflow room from where I watched, the loudest and most emotive the crowd ever became was when the feed began to buffer.

So what, if anything, can campus learn from a talk which, when it lost its role as supremely entertaining political theater, languished in mediocrity? Perhaps the focus on D’Souza is improper. He played his part, showing up to his alma mater and delivering a milquetoast speech at a place where he was not particularly welcomed or well-liked.

But it seemed that on campus, the failures of the solemn responsibility of debate, the necessity for one to be informed and intellectually honest, came down largely on the side of the opposition, not for their well-intentioned passion, but for the relative display of intellectual dishonesty that many showed.

First, let me clarify what I mean. I think this disingenuous approach is best exemplified by a Jack-O Lantern print-out that appeared on campus bearing the headline “Eight Ways to

Protest the Dinesh D’Souza Talk, One for Each Month He Spent in Prison” (It is worth noting that the Jack-O is a satirical magazine, with another recent headline proclaiming “In Effort to Impress Students, Professor Begins Cursing”).

Unintentionally, the Jack-O exposed a current problem with political discourse on the left and the right: prescriptive protest. It carried the trappings of satire, but it also offered a list of suggestions for protesting D’Souza, from quotes to put on signs, to questions to ask about his tweets, novels and films. The quotes were accurate, and the criticisms well-founded. But why should intelligent, independently-minded students take instruction in their actions and questions from handouts, flyers or social media? (To be clear, the Jack-O is a small part of the problem. Conservative campus groups like Turning Point USA are guilty of the same intellectual sin, but in greater magnitude.)

I wish that everyone in that room, prior to the talk, had taken a moment to research D’Souza themselves. They would have found his reprehensible quotes, excerpts from his absurd books, and clips from his inflammatory, inaccurate films. They would also have found details about his felony conviction for illegally donating $20,000 to a campaign that lost by over 40 points, and his resignation from the presidency of a Christian college after accusations of bigamy and marital infidelity surfaced. But what’s more, they would have gained the satisfaction of deriving their own arguments and acting as their own independent skeptics. Supporters and dissenters alike would be stronger and better equipped in their debates.

Simply, I’d bet that had the uninformed come to the talk having done their research, they would’ve been better suited at making a decision about what they saw.

Our institution, and indeed the notion of an informed, intelligent campus, is in grave danger if we allow others to create the questions we ask of authority. We risk transforming a space that stands for vigorous debate into a bleak, color-bynumber intellectual wasteland. Tread carefully: it’s up to us.

The Dartmouth welcomes guest columns. We request that guest columns be the original work of the submitter.

Submissions may be sent to both opinion@thedartmouth. com and editor@thedartmouth.com. Submissions will receive a response within three business days.

6175 ROBINSON HALL, HANOVER N.H. 03755 • (603) 646-2600

ZACHARY BENJAMIN, Editor-in-Chief IOANA SOLOMON, Executive Editor ALEXA GREEN, Managing Editor PRODUCTION EDITORS MATTHEW BROWN & LUCY LI, Opinion Editors NIKHITA HINGORANI & CAROLYN ZHOU Mirror Editors MARK CUI, ALEX FREDMAN & EVAN MORGAN, Sports Editors JOYCE LEE & LEX KANG, Arts Editors CAROLYN SILVERSTEIN, Dartbeat Editor DIVYA KOPALLE & MICHAEL LIN, Photo Editors

VINAY REDDY, Interim Publisher AMANDA ZHOU, Executive Editor SONIA QIN, Managing Editor BUSINESS DIRECTORS BRIAN SCHOENFELD & HEEJU KIM, Advertising Directors SARAH KOVAN & CHRISTINA WULFF, Marketing & Communications Directors CAYLA PLOTCH, Product Development Director BHARATH KATRAGADDA & JAY ZHOU, Strategy Directors ERIC ZHANG, Technology Director

BELLA JACOBY & SUNNY TANG, Design Editors HATTIE NEWTON, Templating Editor

ISSUE

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2019

THE DARTMOUTH OPINION

LAYOUT: Abby Mihaly

SUBMISSIONS: We welcome letters and guest columns. All submissions must include the author’s name and affiliation with Dartmouth

College, and should not exceed 250 words for letters or 700 words for columns. The Dartmouth reserves the right to edit all material before publication. All material submitted becomes property of The Dartmouth. Please email submissions to editor@thedartmouth.com.

Why we need to stop sensationalizing female success.

Just one pinprick of blood and you can be screened for thousands of diseases and disorders. This was the promise made by the female entrepreneur and former Theranos CEO Elizabeth Holmes in 2014. I remember sitting at my kitchen table over a family dinner, listening intently as my mom enlightened me of the story of Holmes and her groundbreaking company. In line with how the media was portraying Holmes at the time, my mother unconsciously spun Theranos’ narrative as a gilded story of female achievement and innovation — a feel-good account of a woman breaking through the glass ceiling and designing something better than any man had ever produced.

Yet, as many are aware, the revolutionary technology of a “miniLab” never came to fruition. Infuriatingly, Holmes never even had any reason to believe that her company, which she founded after dropping out of Stanford University following suit of Steve Jobs and other visionaries, was ever capable of producing such a technology. Investigations by the Wall Street Journal and CNBC found that Theranos had been outsourcing their bloodwork to other labs and that individuals enrolled in their trials had been receiving shaky, if not entirely misleading, results which led to several instances of harmful prescriptions of blood thinners. Indeed, the New York Times editorial board deplored Holmes’ deception as, “one of the most outrageous acts of corporate prestidigitation since Enron convinced us that it had reinvented energy.”

Surprisingly, we’ve seen this story replay itself all-too frequently over the past decade.

Take Haruko Obokata, another burgeoning young female scientist who skyrocketed to fame and became the head of her own laboratory in 2014 after claiming to have found a way to turn ordinary cells into stem cells she denoted as “STAP cells.” The only problem was, no one else could recreate these magic cells. Within months, investigations were launched and Obokata was found guilty of scientific misconduct because, to put it simply, STAP cells had never actually existed.

Most recently, there was the case of Sheryl Sandberg — the COO of Facebook and face of a “new brand of professional feminism.” Lauded for her impressive career, Sandberg’s celebrity soared after the publication of her book “Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead,” which advised women on finding the balance between professional success and family life. Again, the media and public were enamored by the tale of the unstoppable career woman, and Sandberg became a feminist icon. But then, in November 2018, the bubble burst. A New York Times report found Sandberg responsible for many of Facebook’s recent controversial business decisions, such as suppressing information on Russian hacking and hiring PR firms to attack George Soros with anti-Semitism after he criticized Facebook for being a “menace to society.”

It’s sad, but undeniable, that it has become unbelievably profitable for women to exploit feminism for the pursuit of wealth and fame.

As a woman, I am hesitant to phrase the acts of Holmes, Obokata, Sandberg and others in such blunt terms. Indeed, these individuals’ acts of

capitalist exploitation perpetuate the stereotype of the ruthless and immoral careerwoman, set in dichotomous juxtaposition to the dim, but caring housewife.

At the end of the day, it was wrong of these women to abuse the willingness of the media and public to fall in love with the story of a successful female. Nonetheless, I also argue that it was wrong for so many of us to be so eager to worship at the altar of these powerful women in the first place.

The three women discussed above are simultaneously the engineers and products of an exploitative feminist dynamic. Yet these two phenomena can also occur separately of one another. There are countless examples of successful female entrepreneurs and scientists whose reputations have not been tainted by scandal. I wish to emphasize that many powerful women did not intentionally exploit feminism as a marketing tool to advance their celebrity or careers. Take Mary Barra — the CEO of General Motors and top-ranking woman on the Fortune 500 list. In a 2015 interview, Barra discussed her inability to “understand why people found her gender such a noteworthy part of her job.” Though Barra rightfully found gender to be irrelevant to her accomplishments, the media was unable to separate her identity as a woman from her success as a CEO. Today Show host Matt Lauer even publicly wondered whether the phenomenon of the glass cliff applied to Barra’s success; had Barra been promoted because GM felt a female figure would soften the blow of their recall crisis of 2014?

On the other hand, there are also instances in which the narrative of feminism has not worked to increase public support of successful women.

After posing for the cover of Vogue, Marissa Mayer, former CEO of Yahoo!, was criticized for allowing herself to be used by the media as proof that powerful women can also be beautiful.

Instead of being lauded for her ability to “have it all,” Mayer was attacked for attempting to use overt femininity to “soften” her image. In other words, successful women do not always attempt to exploit the narrative of feminine success, though the media might still end up exploiting it for them, and those who seem to be attempting to exploit it, do not always succeed.

Yet, at the same time, I believe people should stop jumping the gun and sensationalizing female achievement. When we aggrandize an individual’s achievements more on the basis of their gender than on tangible measures of attainment, we not only risk being swindled (perhaps endangering our health in the process), but we perpetuate the idea that a woman being successful is rare enough to warrant extra media attention and praise.

Personally, I long for the day when a news story describing a discovery by a female scientist makes little to no mention of gender. When we buy into sensationalism, we open the doors of fantasy for those who are willing to lie and deceive to climb to the top. Even worse, we devalue the women who play by the rules and actually earn their success and fortune. So let’s stop worshipping female CEOs just because they are female and stop sensationalizing the idea of female success.

Let’s break through the glass ceiling of norms, not just the glass ceiling of professional success.

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2019

PAGE 7

THE DARTMOUTH OPINION

CONTRIBUTING COLUMNIST RANIYAN ZAMAN ’22

STAFF COLUMNIST DAN FISHBEIN ’19

The Schultz Shtick

Hair’s To You

Is the American Dream a pipe dream? Can we count on successes to know?

How does a boy who grew up in public housing in Brooklyn become a man who wants to cut Social Security?

This is the million — sorry, 3.5-billion — dollar question, folks. More than the question of whether former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz will run as an independent for the 2020 presidential election, as he’s been suggesting or possibly threatening to do, the question of where his entire platform sprung from has been eating away at me.

Just last June, Schultz named the national debt the greatest threat domestically to the country. He’s dismissed single-payer healthcare as economically unfeasible (false), dubbed Medicare-for-all as “not American” and has expressed strong opposition to popular tax proposals aimed at the wealthy

by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and presidential contender Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA). Recently, he popped up in the headlines again by declaring “I honestly don’t see color,” which has to be the most pre2016-election overused line ever. It’s 2019; if we’re racist, let’s flat-out admit it instead of bringing up colorblindness or, God forbid, claiming we have black friends. (Looking at you, Ralph Northam.)

Schultz’s budding platform is overwhelmingly fiscally conservative, out-of-touch, and unsurprising for a billionaire and CEO. But it doesn’t quite jive with his background story, a classic rags-to-riches Horatio Alger tale. My fellow opinion columnist Steven Adelberg ’21, in an argument in favor of a Schultz bid, described him as “a self-made business magnate who rose from the projects of Brooklyn to build his sociallyconscious Starbucks Corporation to greatness.”

Adelberg notes that Schultz’s “American Dream life story can also have broad appeal in this time of economic uncertainty.” It’s an eloquentlywritten argument that I won’t bother directly refuting, because Schultz’s platform in itself is an argument why no one should vote for him. In fact, his platform is the near-antithesis of a progressive economic agenda, the latter being possibly the only thing that could unite both the urban and rural working classes and something that nearly every Democratic presidential candidate has emphasized so far. Instead, with an embrace of classic corporatism and a telling discomfort to reveal whether he’ll sell his Starbucks shares if elected, Schultz shows more regard for C-Suite executives than labor unions.

But Schultz’s biography paints the picture of someone who is no stranger to poverty and financial hardship. The financial stress of his childhood is legitimate, and the obstacles he experienced as a youth are to be taken seriously.

Somewhere in the transition from working hot summers steaming yarn in a sweatshop as a teenager to being one of the most powerful corporate leaders in the world, Schultz has embraced the institutions that paved the way to his personal success. In doing so, he’s forgotten that these institutions are also what lock the majority of the poor and working class into the same economic class for the rest of their lives and turns socioeconomic mobility from the American Dream into an illusion. Schultz has emphasized his “perseverance and drive,” saying “I willed my dreams to come true. I took my life in my hands, learned from anyone I could, and grabbed whatever opportunities came my way.”

Undoubtedly, Schultz’s personal qualities played no small role in his success. But in building them up, he de-emphasizes the effect that luck played in his meteoric rise to the top. Surely Schultz must remember that sheer will alone doesn’t make dreams come true, and it doesn’t remove socioeconomic barriers and structural inequality. Surely, it occurs to him — what if I hadn’t gotten that scholarship? That job at the right time and place, that promotion, the money and help I needed to start Starbucks?

What Schultz doesn’t get — apart from the obvious, such as that the average American doesn’t care too much about national debt and likes the idea of having retirement money and affordable hospital visits — is that what worked for him often doesn’t and won’t work for everyone else.

It’s this poor memory (or deliberate ignoring) of structural barriers to success and fulfillment, or sometimes just basic necessities, that breeds lazy corporate thinking suggesting cuts to funding for social safety nets and instead pandering to billion-dollar companies.

This all begs a fundamental question: do economically struggling, left-behind Americans (as the popular, sympathetic narrative about Trump or stay-home voters goes) want a president who started off “just like them,” as Schultz is sure to tell his audiences, but now perches so high up the ladder he cannot remember that those below may need a hand up? Or do they instead want a politician who is accessible not because they are knowledgeable about their constituents’ struggles, but have personally experienced them?

If the latter is preferable, it may be time to correct misperceptions about how politicians and public figures brand themselves. I’ve already expressed my belief that Schultz’s odds are low, but other potential candidates have a lesson to learn here too. Voters don’t want billionaires or CEOs. They don’t want wildly impressive success stories leading this country if they can’t understand their personal story is not America’s, or that merit alone doesn’t grant most people a comfortable lifestyle.

Conservatives have traditionally preached limited government and a hands-off approach to economic policy, but as David Leonhardt of the New York Times points out, many Americans lean socially conservative and economically liberal. No doubt this is a surprise to Dartmouth, where the opposite is much more common. The Dartmouth community is quick to claim campus is a bubble due to its political homogeneity, but the real reason it’s a bubble is due to the level of affluence here. That affluence would probably experience little impact at the hands of Schultz’s ideas — financially-struggling Rust Belt voters would not be so fortunate.

And if it turns out Schultz does do well in that demographic, then it may be time to rethink popular wisdom about what part of Trump’s rhetoric appealed to these voters anyway. Hint: it probably wasn’t the bit about the economy.

There’s a takeaway here, though; Schultz’s centrism thinly disguises a backwards view on economic opportunity and complex notions of merit and “deserving” in America. Hopefully voters will see this and, well, pick a better choice.

But just in case, I recommend we all opt for KAF over Starbucks in the next few weeks or so — even if it does make the line even longer.

Becoming a mature man first requires becoming comfortable with oneself.

The hair has clogged the sink, again. I prepare long sleeves, worried that since no one else had myself for the wrath of my sister whom I share a a dark forest enmeshing their bodies, he had to bathroom with. It’s worth it, I tell myself, making mow down his like palm oil planters in Indonesia. a rough calculation of the correlation between High school me wanted to fit in. High school me the number of hairs trimmed off my body and wanted to play the game, but he couldn’t recognize the number of seconds I hope to cut off my it as one. high school swim times. At least that’s why I told As a college student, I’ve heard, seemingly one myself I did this. I knew, deep down, that a couple time for every hair on my body, about something hairs would not mean the difference between called “toxic masculinity.” Looking back on my my current results and not time at Dartmouth, I can coming in last all the time. see clear moments where “I just wanted to Looking back on it, I I did feel contaminated. be a kid.

But as my think the number of times These moments were felt my teammates made jokes classmates reminded in a literal way: just as high about my hair that did not me on a number of school me wanted to shave seem too different from and look like everybody else, the times they threw coins occasions, I looked the Daniel Fishbein during on the locker room floor different. And back his sophomore and junior next to me and said, “Hey years in college wanted to then, I wasn’t okay Jew, don’t you want the make sure he had just as money?”; the number of with that. I might have much fun at the party as times I wore a t-shirt and looked like a man, but everyone else. had hair coming out the This impulse sleeve holes; the number of I felt I had to fit in to translated into me trying times I didn’t want to look be one.” to drink just as much like a 35 year old and just Keystone as I perceived be my sophomore self; all others doing — it’s only these contributed to the decision. I just wanted to recently occurred to me that my desperation to be a kid. But as my classmates reminded me on follow the frat boy code to its fullest led me to a number of occasions, I looked different. And make a misperception. I thought I felt like a man back then, I wasn’t okay with that. I might have because I was always around male bodied people, looked like a man, but I felt I had to fit in to be we were always trying to one-up each other in pong one. I saw masculinity as a set of standards I had matches or chugging contests, and I knew that I to, but couldn’t, meet. too could read the script. But the next morning, In the many years since then, I’ve come to I’d stumble out of bed and look in the mirror. embrace my quantity of cuticles. I’ll peruse CVS The stubble covered my neck and cheeks, my shelves for eucalyptus oil (a must for any well-kept head looking like a mop in need of retirement. I beard). I feel reconnected to myself as I condition remember a professor I took several classes with my hair in the shower, a telling me I always seemed physical experience in a to have a different look Dartmouth academic life “ My hair becomes a when we saw each other. I spent much in my own personal emblem and no longer wanted to get rid head. Visiting the barbers of the hair, but I still wasn’t when on break — I can’t source of comfort, a quite sure what to do with go to the straight razor-free greeting card, a symbol it either. stores around Hanover — I’m not sure I that unites me with present a nice opportunity think masculinity is toxic, but for enriching conversation. others. It becomes I definitely think conformity Reading my history books, a tool; I can use it as can be. Right around this I tell myself I look like Ché time last year when I deI see fit, declaring Guevara, riding down from pledged my fraternity, I felt a the mountains into Havana. myself to the world.” sudden need to dye my hair I remember a past hookup blonde. I felt different, so I partner rubbing the hair on wanted to look different too. my chest, telling me how manly my hair made I’ve learned since then that I can’t just snap my me. My hair becomes a personal emblem and fingers or throw in some bleach and become who source of comfort, a greeting card, a symbol that I want to be. I’ll always have the same building unites me with others. It becomes a tool; I can use blocks though, the same brownish now-balding it as I see fit, declaring myself to the world. My base, and from there I can start to build what I difference is my strength as I try to be my own want. In my almost constant state of sobriety, my kind of man. energy levels still spike. Instead of heading to the High school me may have wanted to go fast in nearest basement, I now head to the gym. I still the pool. But high school me desperately wanted to crave community, but I now know that community do anything right, because high school me feared doesn’t just mean being around people, it means he could do nothing. High school me stuttered being with people in quite a different way. So I through conversations, not thinking he was cool head to the Tucker Center or to a professor’s office enough to talk to whomever. High school me hours, looking for meaningful discussion that can clenched his fists with rage upon receipt of a B+, create that heightened sense of connection. As I fearing such subpar academic performance meant comb my beard every morning and my nose fills that he wouldn’t get into his dream school. High with the smell of eucalyptus, I’m happy that my school me shaved his arms and legs and wore hair reminds me of me.

PAGE 8

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2019

THE DARTMOUTH ARTS

Slam poetry breathes new life into the age-old topic of love B y MIA NELSON

The Dartmouth Staff

Whenever I find a poem or story I really love, I make my friends read it to me out loud.

Poetry, which relies on the cleverest use of language, is an auditory experience as much as it is a written art. I am reminded of this when I listen to slam poetry. Hearing a piece out loud simply makes the writing more immediate and visceral. Slam poetry was started as a way “to breathe life” into poetry, both by re-invigorating the written word with performance and by functioning as a platform for marginalized voices beyond “social, cultural, political and economic barriers” according to Poetry Slam, Inc. Slam is a venue away from the traditional stuffiness of poetry, which is why it makes sense that the most fertile ground for slam is on the Internet. Both slam and YouTube are young, fresh and inviting to younger generations. The YouTube account “Button Poetry” compiles the most promising and innovative slam poets from the most respected competitions into one accessible platform.

I wanted to see what slam poets were saying about love. As a subject, writers seem incapable of staying out of it, which makes it all the more difficult to have unique approaches to it. However, “First Love” by Andrea Gibson, “Alternative Universe in Which I am Unfazed by the Men Who Do Not Love Me” by Olivia Gatwood and “Table Games” by Sarah Kay all explore love in different, if not singular, ways. These fresh perspectives are inherently byproducts of slam, as all are more conversational and daring than written poetry typically is.

Gibson’s “First Love” is a powerful exploration of queer love.

Gibson’s poem is an address to a love that had to be hidden because of their Catholic upbringing. The interplay between religion and desire is highlighted when Gibson describes their relationship with a woman named Mandy as, “two decades talking to Jesus/that was the first time I heard him talk back.” The internal conflict of believing in God and also believing in a forbidden love is expressed throughout the poem. Gibson felt alone before Mandy, and isolated

with her, “We didn’t know anyone in the whole world who would celebrate us wiping the steam from the glass to see each other blushing in the same bathroom mirror.”

This small moment of intimacy is the crux of the poem: between two people, what is not possible? What is not sacred? The difficulty arrives when society enters the intimacy and passes value judgements on love. But the poem is less about the struggle to keep love in a hostile world, and more about the joy of having found it at all. Gibson writes with adoration: “Do you remember the first record/where we didn’t have to change the pronouns to sing along?/ We’d gone so many years without music that knew us/ music that knew you could arch your back/and I would have proof the earth was round.” The poem ends with Gibson being invited back to their Catholic college while Mandy sits in the crowd next to the “the nuns and the school president.” This moment works in beautiful circularity with the poem; Gibson’s faith and love are reconciled. Gibson extolls, “I know so much has not gotten better/ I know so much has not gotten easier/but that moment knocked the wind/out of me/time finally being the kind of father we all deserve.” This poem is uniquely a slam poem not only because of the melodic quality with which it is delivered (not to mention Gibson slams with the accompaniment of a band behind them), but because the poem explores a voice that would be typically marginalized by the print world. Gibson gives voice to a tender moment in their life, not only delivering a powerful, elegant poem, but giving a voice to an experience that we don’t hear enough stories about.

G a t w o o d ’ s “A l t e r n a t i v e Universe in Which I am Unfazed by the Men Who Do Not Love Me” is different in that it is a self-love poem. The piece starts off with humorous hyperbole, a technique that works more effectively with an audience than on the page; she performs, “Once a boy told me he doesn’t believe in labels/ so I embroidered the word “chauvinist” on the back of his coat” to the delight of the crowd.

Gatwood moves through the poem with similar sentiments lamenting all the times boys and men have not loved her back. Then, in the

final moments, Gatwood shifts perspective to an alter native universe where she doesn’t perform the emotional labour of trying to get men to love her back; in this universe, Gatwood says, “I do not slice his tires/ I do not burn the photos /I do not write the letter/ I do not beg/ I do not ask for forgiveness.” Instead, she uses the leftover hours to make herself happy: “leftover from the other universe are hours and hours waiting for him to kiss me/ and here they are just hours/here they are a bike ride across Long Island in June/here they are a novel read in one sitting.” Gatwood is telling listeners that they cannot spend our lives waiting for returned affection from others; we must instead finally give ourselves the attention and care we deserve. As Gatwood says in her final verse, we have “so much beautiful time.”

“Table Games” by Kay is perhaps the most traditional of the three. However, Kay’s breakup poem is so odd and wonderful, because it is a direct product of slam’s conversational tone. She

uses her relationship’s inside joke of making grocery store puns as the container to discuss their love’s dissolution; when her boyfriend breaks up with Kay, she exclaims, “I’ve never been so beet-trayed, as I pushed over the entire display of violet roots.” This weirdness would be less accepted if Kay wasn’t speaking the lines in a way that signifies the whole poem is mostly a joke. We only reach the emotional heart of the poem when Kay tells us that the boyfriend cheated on her multiple times. We are shocked that a relationship so filled with puns and seemingly childlike joy can fall apart. The most heart-wrenching part of the poem comes when Kay asks, “Who will I play with when the waiters aren’t looking?” The experience is elevated by hearing Kay’s voice shift from her earlier comedy to devastation. “Table Games” is moving because I want to believe that there is a place in this world for the most innocent of love, one filled with vegetable and fruit puns. Kay reminds us that heartbreak can exist in all love stories, even the ones that make you

laugh at first.

The slam poetry community is small, and it is not unlikely that these poems are in conversation with each other. They cannot be viewed as independent parts. When Gatwood says “I have so much beautiful time,” I think of the “holy hours” Gibson spent “picking out [their] outfit” and of Kay’s desperate plea, “I have loved you for five years.” Even with a subject as personal as intimacy, the community borrows and builds on each other, which is one of the most rewarding parts of keeping up with the slam poetry scene.

Most poets write about love, but there is something drastically more poignant about hearing an author bare their soul as opposed to reading it. Perhaps that is why slam is what I go toward when I most want to feel understood.

Above all, that’s what each poet wants: to have someone else hear the words and believe them. Not only do I believe these poets, but their work has reminded me that humans are designed to love and to be loved back. And that knocks the wind right out of me.

THE HOOD MUSEUM AFTER RAIN

MICHAEL LIN/THE DARTMOUTH SENIOR STAFF

The Hood Museum looks out onto the Green after a rain shower last week.