More than 300 researchers and educators rallied in downtown Boston to protest President Donald Trump’s attempted cuts to federal funding for research. Attendees described recent White House directives as “unconstitutional” and “fascist.”
4
Harvard Theater: Spring 2025 Preview Researchers Rally Against Funding Cuts
THIS SEASON. Here’s The Crimson’s guide to student productions this spring, including “101 Damnations” in Farkas Hall, “Gruesome Playground Injuries” at the Loeb Ex, and “Postcard from Morocco” at Lowell House.
Can Harvard Keep Everyone Talking?
“instructors should be aware that their public opinions about issues — whether expressed in a book or a social media post or a sticker on their laptop — may cause students to worry about unequal treatment.”
of his position as Winthrop House faculty dean. College Dean Rakesh Khurana announced to students that he decided to not renew Sullivan’s contract because the environment in Winthrop had become “untenable” under Sullivan’s leadership.
AFaculty of Arts and Sciences com -
mittee urged the FAS last month to assure professors that what they say outside the classroom will not affect what courses they can teach — a move that would be a strong signal that the school won’t penalize faculty for speaking their minds.
The FAS should encourage instructors to tell students they are “free to hold and express political opinions that differ from those of their instructors, without fear of negative consequences,” the report’s authors added.
But Sullivan claimed he was dismissed for a different reason: he joined the legal team representing disgraced film producer Harvey Weinstein as Weinstein battled sexual abuse allegations.
BY
Hillel, Chabad Hold Vigil To Mourn Dead Hostages
‘COLLECTIVE GRIEF.’
Around 100 people mourned the lives of four Israeli hostages at a vigil in the Science Center Plaza Thursday after Hamas returned four bodies to Israel that day as part of a ceasefire exchange.
SEE PAGE 7 VIGIL
ENDOWMENT EDITS. The Harvard Management Company added new positions in Apple, Amazon, Tesla, and Microsoft to its directly held stock portfolio during the final months of 2024, while reinforcing its already substantial investment in Meta. The move bets on the so-called “Magnificent Seven”tech giants that have driven recent stock market gains. SEE PAGE 13 HMC Bets Big on Big Tech in Late 2024
But even as some faculty advocate for protections on controversial speech, Harvard administrators and professors have also become increasingly concerned that opinions instructors share outside the classroom could make students stay silent.
The committee’s January report found that students often “hesitate to speak up in class because someone will disapprove of their opinions” and say they sometimes write papers that align with the perceived ideologies of their instructors.
Harvard has taken those fears seriously. In May 2024, it adopted a policy against taking public stances in most political debates — a norm some faculty had fought for because they feared perceptions of an official University line would make affiliates hesitate to dissent.
The January recommendations seek to have it both ways.
Though the committee suggested that the FAS should protect faculty “extramural speech,” it also warned that
Still, in interviews with The Crimson, several professors said they believe faculty can take public stances on contentious issues while still fostering free inquiry in the classroom.
“There’s ways for professors to teach about a topic while their position is known,” said Salma Abu Ayyash, a School of Engineering and Applied Sciences preceptor.
Economics professor David I. Laibson ’88, who chaired the FAS committee alongside History professor Maya R. Jasanoff ’96, wrote in an emailed statement to The Crimson that he thought the guidelines were “not in conflict.”
“Students should listen to competing perspectives and be empowered to come to their own conclusions,” Laibson added.
FAS spokesperson James M. Chisholm declined to comment for this article.
Can Faculty Speech Go Too Far?
In 2019, Harvard Law School professor Ronald S. Sullivan Jr. was forced out
“Their problem was that I represented an unpopular person,” Sullivan said at a November 2019 talk. Sullivan is one of at least three Harvard faculty who have alleged in recent years that they faced repercussions for their public statements.
In January 2023, Carole K. Hooven resigned from her position as a Human Evolutionary Biology lecturer after backlash among graduate students in the department over her July 2021 statements on Fox News arguing that there are only two biological sexes. Hooven claimed that her department and the FAS let her down by not publicly backing her during the controversy.
And graduate students insisted that Harvard fire epidemiology professor Tyler J. VanderWeele or ban him from teaching after he signed a 2015 amicus brief opposing the constitutional right to gay marriage. Sullivan, Hooven, and VanderWeele’s cases became causes célèbre for free
SPEECH ON PAGE 6
BY CAROLINE G. HENNIGAN AND BRADFORD D. KIMBALL CRIMSON STAFF WRITERS
Harvard Law School students have proposed a referendum urging the University to divest from companies involved in Israel’s war in Gaza and accusing Israel of committing a genocide.
The referendum started as a petition, accruing more than 300 signatures by Tuesday. Petitions with more than 300 signatures are required to be brought before the full Law School student body for a vote by the student government’s constitution. It is unclear when the referendum, which urges divestment from all companies “complicit in violations of international humanitarian law,” will actually be held or if planning has begun.
“We will be talking to the council about next steps,” John M. Fossum and Déborah V. Aléxis, the student government co-presidents, wrote in a statement. “The referendum dates are to be determined.”
The impending referendum adds yet another wrinkle to a monthslong power struggle between the Law School’s administration and its student government.
In the fall, the student government attempted to introduce a referendum that condemned HLS’s decision to temporarily suspend library privileges of students who participated in study-in protests. More than 100 suspensions were doled out throughout the semester. However, that referendum didn’t proceed as planned. It was first delayed to December and then to January and, as of now, is indefinitely postponed.
When the referendum was first announced, the Dean of Students Office deactivated the student government’s email address, preventing them from sending it out. More than 280 HLS students subsequently signed a petition claiming the DSO’s response was an “unprecedented and unacceptable display of repression.”
Interim HLS Dean John Goldberg met with the student government in early January, where he conveyed that the administration would not proceed with the library referendum as originally drafted, according to a student government representative. The student said Goldberg declined to comment on what language his administration disapproved of. HLS spokesperson Jeff Neal declined to comment on the new referendum or criticisms of HLS administrators’ response.
“The HLS Administration’s refusal to help Student Government administer the referendum on the library suspensions has been disappointing but unsurprising given its recent track record of student suppression,” Fossum and Aléxis wrote.
In response to the repeated delays, the student government passed a resolution that affirmed “the constitutional authority of the Student Government to administer elections and referenda independently of the HLS Administration” on Jan. 8.
“Student Government has the authority to run its own elections and we intend to explore that option moving forward,” Fossum and Aléxis added.
The student government has not held any elections or referendums since that resolution took effect on Jan. 16.
Though the student government has, in the past, often worked with HLS administrators to host student referenda, their constitution does not require administration cooperation.
“We have a duty to advocate for our student peers and defend the integrity of student democracy,” Fossum and Aléxis wrote.
standards of her job,” Swann said. HSDM spokesperson Heather Denny declined to comment on Coleman’s removal, citing a policy against commenting on personnel matters. Coleman is still a full-time faculty member at HSDM, but an updated biography on HSDM’s website lists that she left the ODEIB in January. Coleman declined to comment on her status with the ODEIB, but wrote in a statement that “some would argue that I exceeded expectations in my work.” She cited her work increasing the “school’s DEI footprint by 85 percent in one year” and developing more than 30 “community-building programs using a learning together model.”
SEE HSDM ON PAGE 6 SEE SENATE ON PAGE 6
than $3 million in federal grants to Harvard researchers were labeled as promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives or “neo-Marxist class warfare propaganda” in a Senate Commerce Committee report released last week. The investigation, spearheaded by committee chair Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), identified more than 3,400 National Science Foundation-funded research grants awarded by the Biden administration, totaling more than $2.05 billion in federal funding.
The database offers the Trump administration a list of possible places to cut funding after the president issued an executive order last month ordering agencies to remove “illegal DEI” policies and race or gender-based diversity programs. Grant review at both the NSF and the National Institutes of Health is currently frozen as the agency conducts an audit of its grants for compliance. “Over the past few weeks, the Trump administration has been BY SAKETH SUNDAR CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
FEDERAL SUPPORT FOR BOOK BANS WILL HARM STUDENTS, LIBRARIANS WARN
and deed” against new federal policies that threaten research. The temporary funding freeze threatened around $1 billion of research at Yale. The letter urged the university to incorporate more transparency and faculty involvement in the response to political threats.
DAILY NEWS FACULTY LETTER CALLS ON YALE PRESIDENT MCINNIS
They Won’t Let Sacco and Vanzetti Die
In the early 1920s, Sacco and Vanzetti — two Italian immigrants, workers, and political anarchists —were arrested and tried for the robbery and murder of two pay -
guards in Braintree, Massachusetts.
Memorabilia and archived materials line the walls of the church, memorializing Sacco and Venzetti’s “political martyrdom.”
Bob D’Attalio, a founding member of the “Sacco and Vanzetti Commemoration Society,” inherited original copies of an anarchist publication that was circulated despite bans in both the U.S. and Italy.
Dean P. Stevens, the Church’s Administrator and Music Director, plays the guitar.
D’Attalio amassed a vast collection of Sacco and Vanzetti ephemera, which was rescued and preserved by Jerry B. Kaplan, another founding member of the society.
BY MAE T. WEIR - CRIMSON PHOTOGRAPHER Kaplan takes out a poster.
TRUMP CALLS UKRAINE PRESIDENT ZELENSKY “A DICTATOR WITHOUT ELECTIONS”
President Trump called Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelenskyy a “dictator without elections” and warned him that he “better move fast” or else he “wouldn’t have a country left.” He also wrote on Truth Social that Zelenskyy dragged America into a costly “war that couldn’t be won.” Trump’s remarks came after Zelenskyy said that Trump was “trapped” in a Russian “disinformation bubble” and had brought Russia’s leader Vladimir Putin back from his “long isolation.” The tit-for-tat marks an unprecedented escalation of tensions between the two nations.
NEW YORK CITY MAYOR ERIC ADAMS’S POLITICAL FUTURE IN JEOPARDY
According to the Associated Press, a federal judge in Manhattan punted a ruling over whether to drop corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams. The Justice Department charged Adams last September for accepting illegal campaign contributions. After President Trump’s election, however, the Justice Department moved to drop the charges, saying that they were “grave errors of judgement.” The order to drop the charges led to the resignation of interim U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon and seven prosecutors. Sassoon refused to follow the order and said it was motivated by a deal in which Adams would assist Trump’s administration with immigration enforcement in exchange for the dropped charges. New York Governor Kathy Hochul has also been under intense pressure to use her powers to remove Adams as mayor.
PRINT CORRECTIONS
The article “Research in Jeopardy as NIH Threatens to Limit Report,” which ran in The Crimson’s Feb. 14 print issue, incorrectly referred to David C. Bell on one reference as an Applied Physics professor and on another as a Computer Science professor. In fact, Bell is a professor of the practice in Applied Physics.
The article also incorrectly stated that Bell leads Harvard’s Center for Nanoscale Systems. In fact, Bell manages the CNS’ imaging and analysis facilities.
Due to incorrect information provided by Bell, the article incorrectly stated that the CNS gets most of its money from indirect costs. In fact, the CNS is classified as a specialized service facility, and its funding mechanisms do not contribute to Harvard’s indirect cost rate. Finally, the article incorrectly referred to Richard M. Losick as a former Harvard Medical School professor. In fact, Losick taught in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, not the Medical School.
This list may not be comprehensive. For the most up-to-date versions of articles in The Crimson, please visit thecrimson.com.
Associate
NEXT WEEK 3
What’s Next
Start every week with a preview of what’s on the agenda around Harvard University
Friday 2/21
WE HAVE NEVER BEEN WOKE: THE CULTURAL CONTRADICTIONS OF A NEW ELITE
CGIS South S030, The Lee Gathering Room, 12:00-1:00 p.m.
Author Musa al-Gharbi will be discussing his new book that analyzes the language of social justice that “woke” elites use to gain more power.
Saturday 2/22
WEAVE YOUR WAY: TRADITIONS OF PHILIPPINE TEXTILES
Peabody Museum of Archaeology & Ethnolo -
gy, 10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m. or 2:00-4:00 p.m.
Register for a two hour hands-on workshop that will showcase Philippine art and weavery.
Sunday 2/23
SPOTLIGHT TOUR: MAKING REALITIES, WITH JADE XIAO ’27
Harvard Art Museums, 2:00-2:50 p.m.
Student Jade Xiao will lead a tour about the reality art is in and how art can create its own realities.
Xiao will focus on a French piece, a Chinese piece, and a Roman Egypt piece. The event is free and open to the public.
Monday 2/24
THE 2025 LAMONT LECTURE: A VIEW FROM UKRAINE Institute of Politics at Harvard Kennedy School, 6:00-7:00 p.m.
Dmytro Kuleba, former foreign Minister of Ukraine and the youngest minister to hold the post, will be talking about navigating challenging times during Russian aggression during this JFK Jr. Forum.
Tuesday 2/25
THE POWER OF COMMUNITY: CULTIVATING BONDS AND BUILDING BRIDGES
Harvard’s annual forum highlighting community building and bridging differences begins Tuesday and will run through Wednesday.
Wednesday 2/26
FROM THE BRIEFING ROOM: A CONVERSATION WITH KARINE JEAN-PIERRE
Institute of Politics at Harvard Kennedy School, 6:00-7:00 p.m. The Institute of Politics will be hosting former White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre.
Thursday 2/27
EDUCATION AT A CROSSROADS Institute of Politics at Harvard Kennedy School, 6:00-7:00 p.m.
The Institute of Politics will be hosting a JFK Jr. Forum discussion with Professor Thomas Kane, Aaliyah Samuel, Professor Martin West, and Tassy Warren regarding the current state of education in America and around the world.
The Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies is hosting a conference with the WZB Berlin Social Science Center highlighting the challenges of majority-constraining institutions.
CLASSES IN THE COLD
ADELINE S. KIM — CRIMSON PHOTOGRAPHER
ELLEN P. CASSIDY — CRIMSON PHOTOGRAPHER
HMC Bets on Big Tech at End of 2024
INVESTMENTS. The Harvard Management Company added new positions to investments in Apple, Amazon, Tesla, and Microsoft in the final months of 2024.
BY SAKETH SUNDAR CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
The Harvard Management Company increased its exposure to Big Tech in its directly held stock portfolio during the final months of 2024, adding new positions in Apple, Amazon, Tesla, and Microsoft while reinforcing its already substantial investment in Meta. The move marks a decisive bet on the so-called “Magnificent Seven” — a group of tech giants that have driven much of the stock market’s gains in recent years. The shift comes as Harvard’s public equities portfolio reached $1.69 billion at the end of 2024, slightly down from $1.73 billion in the previous quarter, but still up 42 percent from $1.19 billion a year ago. HMC sold off large percentages of its shares in Alphabet, Booking Holdings, and Advanced Micro
Devices. The $68 million decline in Alphabet made an exchange-traded fund tracking the Nasdaq-100, Invesco QQQ, HMC’s second-biggest holding.
Harvard also deepened its investment in Meta, increasing its holdings by 10 percent to $762.8 million, which now makes up 45 percent of its public equities portfolio. The University added $27.2 million in Apple, $14.8 million in Amazon, $22.4 million in Microsoft, and $8.1 million in Tesla, all of which were absent from its previous filings.
John Longo, a finance professor at Rutgers Business School, said that the Trump administration’s stance on business and technology may have influenced Harvard’s increased exposure to major tech firms.
“The Trump Administration is embracing pro-business policies and technology infrastructure investments, with a particular emphasis on artificial intelligence,” Longo wrote in a statement to The Crimson.
“Perhaps HMC’s managers noticed the underlying technology spending trends and believe these specific firms are well positioned in the year ahead,” he added.
HMC spokesperson Patrick S. McKiernan did not respond to a request for comment.
One of the most significant reductions came from Booking Holdings, where HMC cut its shares by 46 percent. Booking, which operates Booking.com and Kayak, was previously Harvard’s third-largest holding but has now dropped to its sixth largest position.
The company has historically drawn criticism for its business activities in Israeli settlements in the West Bank, leading to student activism calling for divestment.
HMC’s directly held public eq-
uities portfolio remains roughly the same size, with 16 companies, up from 15 last quarter.
HMC also fully sold positions in Snowflake, Samsara, and Q32 Bio, companies specializing in cloud computing, internet infrastructure, and biotechnology, respectively. These removals continue a shift away from high-growth, high-volatility firms in favor of more established companies.
“Snowflake is an expensive stock according to most valuation metrics, so perhaps HMC’s managers believed the proceeds from selling may be better deployed else-
where,” Longo wrote. The exit from Q32 Bio makes HMC’s $2.4 million holding in 10x Genomics Inc. its only directly held healthcare stock after two years of slashing healthcare investments.
New York University finance professor David L. Yermack ’85 cautioned that the disclosures only offer a partial view of the endowment’s holdings because they exclude private equity, hedge funds, and other alternative investments.
Yermack, a former Crimson managing editor, wrote in a state-
ment that attempting to pick individual stocks rather than diversifying across the entire market runs counter to widely accepted financial principles.
“Trying to pick individual stocks that may outperform the market violates one of the central tenets of finance, the Efficient Market Hypothesis, which recommends simply diversifying a portfolio across the entire market in the belief that no one investor knows enough to out-think the wisdom of the crowd,” Yermack wrote.
saketh.sundar@thecrimson.com
Ed Department Takes Aim at All Race-Conscious Higher Ed Practices
based on race,” Trainor added.
The Department of Education warned Harvard and other federally funded institutions not to use any race-based decision-making on Friday, arguing in a Dear Colleague letter that all such practices are illegal under the Supreme Court’s decision outlawing race-conscious admissions.
The department’s Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights
Craig W. Trainor wrote in the letter that the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision to effectively strike down affirmative action applies to finan-
cial aid, scholarships, and housing. He wrote that the department will consider steps to revoke federal funding to institutions found to consider race in their programming after Feb. 28. According to the letter, educational institutions cannot consider race in decisions about “admissions, hiring, promotion, compensation, financial aid, scholarships, prizes, administrative support, discipline, housing, graduation ceremonies, and all other aspects of student, academic, and campus life.”
“Put simply, educational institutions may neither separate or segregate students based on race, nor distribute benefits or burdens
While Harvard does not determine financial aid or scholarships based upon race or explicitly consider race after the Court ruled against the University in favor of Students for Fair Admissions, the letter also argued some race-neutral programs could also be illegal.
“Although some programs may appear neutral on their face, a closer look reveals that they are, in fact, motivated by racial considerations,” Trainor wrote. “And race-based decision-making, no matter the form, remains impermissible.”
After the Court’s 2023 decision, Harvard added a required supplemental prompt to its college appli-
cation asking students to reflect on the “the importance of enrolling a diverse student body” and their own life experiences. While the change reflected guidance from the Court that race could be considered as part of an applicant’s lived experiences, the Friday letter called such practices into question.
In the letter, Trainor wrote that colleges and universities “may not use students’ personal essays, writing samples, participation in extracurriculars, or other cues as a means of determining or predicting a student’s race and favoring or disfavoring such students.”
A Harvard spokesperson declined to comment for this article.
SFFA president Edward J. Blum wrote in an emailed statement that the letter “is likely a prelude to a forthcoming series of detailed directives that will identify discriminatory policies and programs that will be challenged in federal court by the Education Department.”
“Public and private educational institutions that have adopted policies that they consider race-neutral may soon have those policies declared illegal race proxies,” Blum added.
But in an interview with Inside Higher Ed, Blum himself said he did not think the SFFA ruling applies to the programs outlined in
the OCR letter on Friday. Peter F. Lake ’81, a law professor at Stetson University and Director of the Center for Excellence in Higher Education Law and Policy, said that the legal basis for applying the Court’s decision on affirmative action to broader programming — as the Department of Education has done — lies in the Equal Protection Clause.
“Anyone who’s taking Title IV funding — directly or indirectly through student loans or grants — is subject, among other things, to Title VI,” Lake said. “That prohibits race and national origin discrimination.”
Richard H. Sander ’78, a law professor at UCLA, said the Biden administration had not fully enforced the Court’s SFFA decision.
According to Sander, the letter signaled a new desire to enforce a prohibition on racial preferences.
“It’s been unclear, almost from the outset, the degree to which Title VI prohibits what we call benign racial preferences,” Sander said.
“In other words, is it only intended to protect minorities against deprecations by majorities, or is it also intended to just create a level playing field with non discrimination across the board?” Trainor wrote that institutions should expect additional le-
gal guidance in the coming days and should audit their programs and practices for both “overt or covert” racial preferences. The OCR gave federally funded institutions two weeks to stop all practices that could be in violation of the guidelines before the Department of Education begins reviewing compliance.
“I want to make sure everybody understands this is not an ordinary Dear Colleague letter. It is a cease and desist letter,” Lake said, arguing that it should be read as a notice of future legal action. Lake added that “even a school with the resources like Harvard might be challenged to find every pocket” of race-conscious programs on campus. But with a sweeping list of programs potentially under legal threat for “indirect” racial preference, it is still unclear how this decision will be enforced.
“By virtue of the fact that they’re emptying out a lot of the federal offices, they’re not going to have the staff to pursue enforcement in all these directions,” Sander said. “I don’t think anybody knows how aggressively this is going to be done,” he added.
Researchers, Educators Rally To Protest Research Funding Cuts
More than 300 researchers and educators rallied outside the John F. Kennedy Federal Building in downtown Boston on Wednesday to protest President Donald Trump’s attempted cuts to federal funding for research.
Several Harvard groups — including the University’s chapter of the American Association of University Professors and Harvard Academic Workers-United Auto Workers — participated in the demonstration. Protesters braved frigid temperatures to blast Trump’s executive orders to slash federal funding for research overhead expenses and diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.
The rally was organized in response to a Feb. 7 order from the National Institutes of Health that the University estimated would have would reduced NIH funding for Harvard’s indirect expens-
es from $135 million in fiscal year 2024 to just $31 million. The order was temporarily blocked by a federal judge last week. The NIH announcement has left Harvard administrators scrambling to understand how exactly the order could be enforced. Despite the pause, Harvard researchers are bracing for severe reductions in the funding they depend on for rent, equipment, and utilities needed to keep research projects running.
In a speech at the rally, Kojo Acheampong ’26, a member of Harvard Undergraduate Workers Union-UAW, said “universities are complicit” in Trump’s attacks on higher education. Acheampong implied Harvard President Alan M. Garber ’76 was collaborating with Jayanta “Jay” Bhattacharya, Trump’s nominee to lead the NIH and Garber’s former student and research partner.
“They’re in cahoots,” Acheampong said in an interview after the rally. “They clearly have a relationship.”
For his part, Garber issued a statement hours after the executive order warning the cuts would mean “severely compromised” scientific research and treatment development.
A Harvard spokesperson declined to comment for this article.
During the rally, demonstrators held signs — including ones that read “Freezing Funds Freezes Treatments” and “Keep Fascism Out of Our DNA” — that took aim at both Trump and Elon Musk, the tech billionaire who has led Trump’s effort to gut federal agencies.
History professor Mary D. Lewis said in an interview that she attended the rally to support “actually distributing those funds as they were intended.”
Lewis criticized the proposed NIH cuts as “unconstitutional” and said she found “the whole situation appalling.” In speeches, several medical practitioners slammed Trump over his attempted funding freezes and argued that scientific research like their own had broad
value for society that warranted funding.
Stephanie Ragland, a pediatric research fellow at Boston Children’s Hospital, said that life-saving medical discoveries such as penicillin required federal support and were “simply not possible at companies where money drives the bottom line.”
“Anyone can die of an infection, even important people, even billionaires,” Ragland said.
In an interview after the rally, Adam Schyla — a member of the HAW-UAW bargaining committee and postdoctoral student at Harvard Medical School — said that before the judge halted the NIH order restricting research funding, he didn’t know if he would receive a salary for the month.
“There was definitely a window of about 48 hours where I was genuinely not sure if I was gonna get paid for January,” said Schyla, who researches microbiology. Other speakers criticized Trump’s funding cut as an attack
on DEI initiatives. In her speech, Bianca Ortiz-Wythe — a policy analyst at UMass Boston’s Gaston institute for Latino Community Development — said that she and her colleagues had been told to “whitewash” any mention of DEI and environmental justice in order to meet what she described as “fascist political demands.”
“These federal attacks are sabotaging critical research projects by dismantling the very infrastructure meant to address systemic injustice,” Ortiz-Wythe said. “We cannot sit back and allow higher education to be defunded, dismantled, and devalued.”
Niki K. Thomas — a member of the Graduate Employees of Northeastern University-UAW bargaining committee — said the funding cuts and other Trump policies like immigration restrictions are emblematic of fascism.
“They are symptoms of the same disease, a system that prioritizes power and profit over people,” Thomas said.
After the speeches, many demonstrators marched to the O’Neill Federal Building a few blocks away to join unionized federal workers protesting Trump’s decision to fire tens of thousands of federal employees.
Kimberly Wilson, a vice president for the American Federation of Teachers Massachusetts, said in an interview that federal workers are “in particular disastrous shape” after the firings.
“We need to do everything we can to support them,” Wilson said. “What they’re going through is just unbelievable.” In the last line of her speech, Ortiz-Wythe, the UMass Boston policy analyst, blasted the Trump administration for politicizing funding for scientific research and universities at large.
“We demand that higher education be protected as a public good, not a political playground,” Ortiz said.
The Harvard Management Company is located at 600 Atlantic Ave in Boston, Massachusetts. STEVE S. LI — CRIMSON PHOTOGRAPHER
THE HARVARD CRIMSON
FEBRUARY 21, 2025
SEAS Instructors Partner With Tech Firms
109A: “Introduction to Data Science” required large computational power.
“We, in the computing group, approached Amazon at the time,” Waldo said. “We approached them to see if they would be willing to give us credits for this class.”
Last September, more than 250 Harvard students flocked across the Charles River to compete in the Computer Science 50 Puzzle Day. After hours of solving puzzles and logic problems, three teams emerged from the Science and Engineering Complex victorious — with over $1,000 of Meta merchandise in hand.
Meta, which has sponsored the Puzzle Day for almost 15 years, is just one of the many tech companies that support courses at Harvard. Professors at Harvard’s School of Engineering and Applied Sciences have repeatedly collaborated with companies — like Amazon, OpenAI, Google, and Microsoft — to secure technical support for their students.
SEAS has a “number of contracts” with Amazon, according to Jim H. Waldo, the Chief Technology Officer at the school.
“We’ve been using Amazon Web Services for years, probably ten or more,” he said. “We just reach out to the people that we know there who are in charge of dealing with academic institutions and talk to them on a case-by-case basis.”
The partnership originated because the course Computer Science
For classes that want to use AWS — a cloud computing platform — the professors contact the department’s computing staff, who then communicate with Amazon directly to arrange a distribution of credits.
“It is always associated with a class,” he said. “It’s not for particular students, although sometimes the students may need to sign up in some way, but the credits are all just gifts from Amazon.”
These credits allow students to pursue much larger-scale projects that Waldo said would not otherwise be possible.
Computer science concentrator Justin Liu ’27 said that he appreciates the school’s partnership with tech companies.
“I think it’s nice that students have the opportunity to work on ambitious projects that require a lot of compute power, without having to worry about where to find those compute credits from,” he said.
Waldo said that the partnership increases Amazon’s visibility in campus settings.
“From Amazon’s point of view, I think the main thing that they get out of this is students being used to Amazon and when they need in the future large amounts of computing, they’ll turn to Amazon as a frame-
work that they understand and know how to use,” Waldo said.
An enterprise account manager at Amazon who works with higher education clients did not respond to a request for comment on the company’s relationship with Harvard.
Amazon is not the only big-tech company with a presence in Harvard’s classrooms. This spring, “COMPSCI 1060: Software Engineering with Generative AI” offered students free Codeium credits. And students enrolled in the class “AC 215: Advanced Practical Data Science” had access to Google’s computer platform.
CS50, however, remains the largest class with corporate sponsorships.
The popular introductory computer science class lists companies such as Meta, Amazon, Google, Microsoft, OpenAI, GitHub, and Visual Studio Code as its partners.
Julia J. Poulson ’26, a former CS50 student, said that she found the partnerships helpful.
“I actually think they used it in a very good way that made the class really accessible to people,” she said, referring to VS Code.
“They had their own graders that were easy to access and in VS Code. Lots of commands that they had programmed that made it easy to check your work, and that kind of abstracted away a lot of the complex language,” she added.
AWS has supported CS50’s cloud usage since 2008 when instructor David J. Malan ’99 moved the course onto cloud.
“Although Amazon support-
ed our experiment financially with credits, it was not without costs,” Malan wrote in a research paper, citing the technical difficulties with the move. But even with the initial struggles, Malan wrote that “the upsides proved worth it.” As the course has expanded its corporate partnerships, Malan wrote in a statement to The Crimson that all sponsorships “have been initiated on our end.”
“Typically, I’ve reached out to alumni or others in industry when we’ve caught a glimpse of some technology that we think could improve students’ or TFs’ experience in CS50,” Malan wrote.
“These collaborations enable CS50’s students or TFs and CAs to learn and leverage technology that we might not otherwise have access to,” he added.
Professor Christopher A. Thorpe ’97-’98, who teaches CS 1060, also spoke positively of his partnership with Codeium, an AI-powered coding assistant.
“Although it’s not a formal partnership, Codeium generously sponsored their Pro plan for our students and course staff for six months,” Thorpe wrote in a statement. “This was at no cost to Harvard or our students.”
Akshat Agarwal, who works at Codeium as part of their product and growth team, said that the company is trying to make “the technology as accessible as possible.”
“If you look at our history as a company, we really strive to bring down the cost and we’ve given away a lot of stuff for free, and that’s definitely a future goal,” he said.
Lucas Chu ’23-’25, who is a
teaching fellow for CS 1060 and a Codeium campus ambassador, helped facilitate the partnership with the class.
“I learned that Codeium was offering complimentary access to Harvard Computer Science students and requested accounts for the class, which was approved,” he wrote in a statement. “This presented a valuable opportunity for our students.” Thorpe wrote that while “our first priority is our students’
Despite Budget Cut
When Christian Serrano ’28 entered the 2025 Datamatch cycle, the student-run matchmaking platform paired him with his best friend.
“So we literally just got free donuts,” he said, adding that he had a friendship date planned for later that day with another match.
“I feel like everyone should do it, because you might get your best friend,” Serrano said.
Founded by Harvard undergraduates in 1994, Datamatch is a student organization that uses a “top secret” algorithm to match students based on their responses to a survey.
Last Datamatch round, participating students’ semi-anonymized personal information
was leaked on a website. The website — created by Sungjoo Yoon ’27 — uploaded students’ initials next to their Rice Purity Scores to warn his peers to “not keep putting your info into random apps.”
But leading up to and following this year’s survey release, many students were not concerned with their data privacy. Roughly 2,700 Harvard undergraduates — more than 1,400 fewer students than last year — participated in this matchmaking cycle, according to Datamatch’s website.
This year, the humorous multiple-choice survey, which is revised annually, featured questions such as “what’s your go-to excuse for skipping class?”
“The survey is meant to be a pretty fun thing. The questions aren’t necessarily optimized towards finding the best match for a particular person,” Howard R. Huang ’26, Datamatch co-presi-
dent — or “Supreme Cupid” — said on Feb. 4, prior to this year’s survey launch.
According to Huang, “half of the algorithm” is accounting for reported “blacklists,” such as avoiding intra-House matches or finding matches within specific age ranges. After considering these preferences, “then we get into the actual survey, which maybe means something,” Huang said.
“I think people generally say that we have okay results, but you do hear a lot of complaining on Sidechat,” he added.
Matches were released by the organization on Feb. 14. Participants could schedule a date at a Harvard Square eatery, such as Playa Bowls or Berryline, with Datamatch picking up the tab.
To fund the dates, the Harvard Undergraduate Association awarded Datamatch a grant worth $4,000 at its Feb. 10 meeting, a
$2,000 decrease from the previous year’s allotment.
In response to a request for comment, Datamatch spokesperson Jackson Moody ’26 wrote that “Datamatch at Harvard partners with local businesses to receive bulk discounts, and subsidizes dates largely through HUA funding. As a result, decreased funding from the HUA will impact the number of dates that Datamatch is able to support going forward.”
Free food and a fun story were driving motivators for students to join Datamatch, students said in interviews with The Crimson.
“I thought it was fun. I never really took it seriously,” Kate Y. Lee ’28 said. Lee added that she was paired with her roommate, “so we’re going out to go get free food, which is awesome.” But not all students were as lucky.
Emerson A. Utgaard ’27 said
that getting matches was “very exciting,” after not participating in Datamatch last year. But, three days after receiving her matches, Utgaard had yet to go on any dates.
“After matching all of them, only two of them matched me back and they didn’t respond to my messages, so I sadly did not get the free food,” Utgaard said.
Though Sasha Khalo ’28 had matched with “a couple of people,” neither party texted each other to schedule a date.
“But I still want a Playa Bowl, so I’m going to probably text her,” she added.
Erica S. Ho ’27 said that while she had participated in the matchmaking service last year, she did not submit a survey this year. Still, when she opened the site on Feb. 17, she discovered that she had received matches.
The Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Student Council is looking for new ways to make sure elected student representatives attend its monthly meetings. At the GSC’s most recent meeting, on Feb. 6, its executive committee proposed three options for increasing participation: reinstating mandatory attendance for all program representatives, requiring mandatory attendance for at least one program representative, or mandating attendance at 80 percent of meetings.
“We need people in the room with us from the start, from literally the first meeting,” GSC President Laura E. König said in an interview.
König said that student representative attendance has decreased since the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, a pattern she attributed to the removal of mandatory participation requirements for the GSC’s program representatives.
“I think previous leaders didn’t think of the implications that this would have beyond a time when in-person meetings were not pos-
sible,” said König, a Neuroscience Ph.D. student. “We would like to have the engagement that they had in the past.”
The GSC consists of an 11-member executive committee, as well as representatives from each degree program, divisional representatives, and at-large representatives. Before the pandemic, the GSC tied meeting attendance to departmental funding. If program representatives were not present at the meetings, then their departments would be ineligible for GSC funding — which supports grants for conference attendance, summer research, and January@GSAS mini-courses.
But during the pandemic, the GSC stopped requiring attendance. Under the Council’s current bylaws, each program’s attendance is recorded in the monthly minutes, but there are no specified penalties for missing meetings.
The GSC now offers financial support for recognized GSAS student organizations and research grants on an application basis, rather than tying them to attendance.
Graduate students are elected to the GSC on a voluntary basis. König noted that encouraging more consistent representative turnout at open meetings through
accountability measures is not meant to be punitive.
“It’s not us being like, we want to take away funding,” she said. “We want to support the students that show up and that really are engaged members of the community.”
GSC Advocacy Chair Max Lu said that, though the proposal drew debate, the pushback was “not as much as we thought.”
“We’re glad we’re hearing from both sides, and hopefully we can make some good progress on this one,” said Lu, a Ph.D. student at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. “We didn’t expect this whole thing to settle in one meeting.”
The GSC did not vote on the proposals at its February meeting.
GSC Treasurer Fardin Aryan, a Molecular & Cellular Biology Ph.D. student, said he supported mandating attendance. Increasing participation, he said, was key to helping the GSC fulfill its mission of “representation and advocacy.”
“Those things go hand in hand,” he said. “We cannot advocate for the student body if they are not there.”
BY KAITLYN Y. CHOI AND SOHUM SUKHATANKAR CRIMSON STAFF WRITERS
Biotechnology company 10x Genomics and Harvard University reached a Feb. 6 settlement in a patent lawsuit that they jointly filed against Vizgen Inc. in 2022, alleging that Vizgen unlawfully used gene sequencing technology developed and patented by Harvard researchers.
The case was dismissed with prejudice — meaning it cannot be brought back to court. The settlement terms were not disclosed in court filings.
The judge overseeing the case, Matthew F. Kennelly, issued a Jan. 3 summary judgment dismissing antitrust counterclaims that Vizgen lodged in response to Harvard and 10x’s suit, as well as all of Vizgen’s claims against 10x. Vizgen’s additional claims against Harvard were resolved by the Feb. 6 settlement.
Before the resolution, Harvard and 10x were seeking more than $9 million in damages, and Vizgen asked for up to hundreds of millions of dollars over its antitrust claims.
The parties’ dispute centered on research led by Harvard ge -
In response to a request for comment, Moody wrote that “it is not possible for previously registered users to have received matches this year without creating a new account. That being said, we do our best to match as many registered users as possible, so users who partially completed their surveys and/or profiles may still have received matches.” Despite a lack of matches, students like Khalo said they enjoyed completing the Datamatch survey. “The survey was really, really fun,” she said. “Very creative.” “Keep up with great questions,” Khalo added.
“I haven’t done anything with them. I don’t particularly plan on it, just because I’m pretty busy,” she said. “I feel bad for the people who are taking Datamatch more seriously and are matching with people who are inactive.”
Harvard, 10x Genomics Settle Patent Dispute With Vizgen
neticist George M. Church, whose team developed technologies to help scientists visualize the molecules that store genetic information without removing them from cells and tissues.
In 2009, Church received a $20 million genomics research grant from the National Institutes of Health. Church wrote in his application that his team would “pursue open and non-exclusive licensing agreements” that allow inventions developed with the grant funding to be “made widely available to researchers and commercial entities.” Church used some of the patents from his research to help launch a Massachusetts-based startup — ReadCoor, Inc. — in 2016. The same year, Harvard granted ReadCoor an exclusive license to use fluorescent in situ imaging technology. 10x — which acquired ReadCoor in 2020 — used the techniques to develop the Xenium In Situ Platform, which allows researchers to measure and map gene activity in tissue samples. In 2020, during 10x’s acquisition process, Harvard broadened the terms of the license, granting ReadCoor exclusive rights to the sequencing, analysis, and nucleic acid amplification technologies
developed by Church’s team. Vizgen fired back, denying all allegations of patent infringement and arguing that Harvard was violating the terms of the original NIH grant. Harvard and 10x’s decision to sue was evidence that they were violating antitrust laws by trying to quash competition from Vizgen, the complaint alleged. Vizgen, 10x, and Harvard moved for summary judgement in November, asking Kennelly to decide some claims in the case without allowing them to proceed to a trial. But Kennelly partially denied Harvard and 10x’s requests and shot down Vizgen’s in full, and a jury trial began on Feb. 3. Three days later, Harvard, 10x, and Vizgen agreed to close the case. In a statement, Harvard spokesperson Jason A. Newton wrote that “Harvard is pleased to have reached an amicable resolution to a patent dispute involving 10X and Vizgen, allowing both companies to continue enabling impactful research.” 10x and Vizgen did not respond to requests for comment.
Harvard Balances Protections for Student, Faculty Speech
over her July 2021 statements on Fox News arguing that there are only two biological sexes. Hooven claimed that her department and the FAS let her down by not publicly backing her during the controversy.
And graduate students insisted that Harvard fire epidemiology professor Tyler J. VanderWeele or ban him from teaching after he signed a 2015 amicus brief opposing the constitutional right to gay marriage.
Sullivan, Hooven, and VanderWeele’s cases became causes célèbre for free speech advocates, including some Harvard colleagues and the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. Hooven and VanderWeele did not receive formal sanctions from the University. And Harvard has only publicly barred faculty from teaching courses over allegations of misconduct, including sexual harassment and data fraud. But at other universities, some professors have been restricted from teaching required courses over statements deemed offensive or discriminatory.
If the FAS adopts the January report’s recommendations, it could indicate that Harvard does
not see such administrative penalties as acceptable. But concerns that faculty will face strident public criticism remain. For some, those concerns only intensified after Oct. 7, when a few professors became the center of cascading national criticism for their views on the Israel-Palestine conflict.
When History professor Derek J. Penslar, who studies Jewish history, was appointed to cochair a presidential task force on antisemitism in January 2024, high-profile critics blasted his selection. Former Harvard President Lawrence H. Summers on X that Penslar had “publicly minimized” antisemitism on campus. History professor Kirsten A. Weld wrote in an email that she thinks faculty speech made outside the classroom is not always “policed equally.”
Faculty who speak publicly about highly polarized subjects, “even and indeed especially if those subjects are their area of scholarly expertise, regularly face censure and harassment,” Weld wrote.
Still, many Harvard professors say faculty can’t simply give up expressing public opinions — even
controversial ones. After a dean penned an op-ed calling for “sanctionable limits” on faculty criticisms of Harvard, he drew swift backlash from professors, and FAS Dean Hopi E. Hoekstra distanced herself from his proposals.
Psychology professor Steven A. Pinker said faculty’s ability to freely express their beliefs is one of the key “contributions to society” that professors make — and even part of what draws students to Harvard.
“A lot of students are attracted to professors with a high public profile. They want to hear what they have to say,” Pinker said. “It’s part of the appeal of coming to Harvard and taking the courses with brand name professors.”
And Abu Ayyash, who is Palestinian and has vocally criticized Israel for the war in Gaza, said her ability to express public opinions is inseparable from her identity.
“I’m a political human being. Politics is part of my life,” Abu Ayyash said, adding that she could never “just maintain a sanitized academic theoretical life.”
Watching Words
When Sullivan, Hooven, and Van-
Dental School Fires Head of DEI
Coleman’s exit from the ODEIB was communicated to all HSDM faculty members in an email from Giannobile on Jan. 7 obtained by The Crimson. In the email, Giannobile did not address the reason for her departure, but wrote that he was “appreciative” of Coleman’s work.
“While she makes this transition, I will ensure that support is in place so that the vital work of the ODEIB continues with minimal disruption,” Giannobile wrote. With Coleman’s departure, the ODEIB is now run by just one person: Ariel Heim, a program coordinator with the office, who took on the role in Oct. 2022. While the office remains active, HSDM has not yet launched a search for Coleman’s successor, according to a person familiar with the matter.
Coleman’s departure comes amid growing scrutiny of DEI programs at colleges and universities from the new Trump administration. In a Dear Colleague letter last Friday, the Department of Education called on federally funded universities, including Harvard, to terminate the use of race in any decisions relating to “aspects of student, academic, and campus life.” Several Ivy League colleges and universities have begun
to sunset their DEI programs and messaging, most notably the University of Pennsylvania, which replaced its central DEI webpage with a message that it had “initiated a review of our programs in this area to ensure compliance” last week.
As of Thursday, no school at Harvard has announced changes to DEI programming and the University’s central DEI webpage remained active. A online directory page for HSDM’s ODEIB office now redirects to an empty page, but Denny attributed the change to a new website infrastructure system.
Swann said Coleman’s departure from the ODEIB could
prove to be a permanent measure.
“I feel like it’s being phased out in my personal opinion,” he said.
Swann said that Coleman’s departure raises serious questions about the relationship between the ODEIB and Giannobile — and how their expectations of the office’s work differed.
“What was he expecting becomes the question,” Swann said. “Whether it was delivered or not, becomes another question that I don’t think anybody really knows the answer to.”
dhruv.patel@thecrimson.com
derWeele drew condemnation for their statements, some students bolstered their demands by arguing the scholars’ beliefs were incompatible with their teaching or advising responsibilities.
Danukshi A.K. Mudannayake ’20, a former Winthrop House resident, said at a February 2019 protest that Sullivan should resign from his faculty deanship because he was representing Weinstein.
“The issue is that he cannot simultaneously hold that role while still having a charade of saying that he can actually protect the integrity of his students,” Mudannayake said.
In recent years, attention has shifted from students’ safety and sense of belonging to what they feel free to say in class.
The January FAS report found that only 35 percent of graduating College seniors felt comfortable expressing opposing views on controversial topics in their courses. Among seniors who said they were reluctant to speak up, a majority worried about reactions among their peers — but 35 percent said they feared penalties from instructors.
Several Harvard faculty said they feel they have a responsibil-
ity to check their public speech to allow students to comfortably speak up in course discussions without fear of retribution.
Computer Science professor Ariel D. Procaccia argued that professors should not discuss polarizing issues unless they have relevant experience or expertise on the issue and have “good reason to do so.”
“I never broadcast my views, other than occasional opinion pieces on topics in which I have some expertise,” Procaccia wrote.
Government professor Daniel P. Carpenter said he makes it a point to think through multiple perspectives when engaging in discussion or debate.
“I try to be careful to consider, and occasionally represent, different sides,” he said.
Molecular and Cellular Biology professor Florian Engert said the University should “have some way of policing” faculty speech in extreme cases when a professor is being “an asshole and a bully,” since professors are “representing the University outside and inside of the classroom.”
“There should be certain things that you’re not allowed to say publicly,” Engert added. He
cautioned, though, that extramural speech should not be moderated solely based on “somebody’s opinions.”
Other professors said faculty should speak freely in public about controversial issues, but that they should explicitly encourage students to share dissenting opinions, too. Pinker said faculty should make sure their public opinions “come in conjunction with a very firm commitment” to not penalize students who disagree. Classics professor Richard F. Thomas said that while he openly shares his opinions with his students, “I always encourage them to express themselves as they wish and say I’m happy to have people disagree with me.” Still, SEAS professor Kit Parker wrote in a statement that students should worry less about offending others and more about their “responsibilities” to their “values and beliefs.”
“Only amateurs and peasants talk about power dynamics. Leaders talk about responsibilities,” Parker wrote.
taking a sledgehammer to the radical left’s woke nonsense,” Cruz said in a press release. “DEI initiatives have poisoned research efforts, eroded confidence in the scientific community, and fueled division among Americans.”
Fourteen Harvard-based research projects, receiving between $25,000 and just more than $600,000 in NSF funding, were flagged in the investigation. The projects — spanning ecology, political science, physics, and computer science — include a program for developing educational robotics kits, research on gender differences in digital learning, and a summer environmental science research program for undergraduates at the Harvard Forest.
The NSF, an independent federal agency, funds research in science and engineering, awarding billions of dollars annually to universities and research institutions. While it operates independently, its budget is approved by Congress, and its grants are subject to government oversight.
Harvard received $56 million in NSF funding in fiscal year 2024, supporting projects across the natural and social sciences. That funding has become one of many targets of Republicans’ crackdown on “illegal DEI” policies at Harvard and other universities.
University spokesperson Jason A. Newton declined to com-
ment on the committee’s database release.
In January, Harvard Vice Provost for Research John H. Shaw notified faculty that the University would begin reviewing NSF grants in response to these new federal restrictions. His email followed an NSF directive instructing grant recipients to cease any activities that “use or promote the use of diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility (DEIA) principles and frameworks.”
Harvard researchers whose projects appear in the database said the list reflects an arbitrary selection process rather than a substantive assessment of their work.
Archaeology Professor Christina G. Warinner, whose NSF grant funds research on Classic Maya social kinship networks, said she did not understand why her project was in the database.
“My project investigates the political structure and alliances of the Classic Maya so that we can better understand the ancient civilizations of the Americas,” Warinner wrote in a statement to The Crimson.
“On what grounds the current administration has classified this research as ‘woke ideology’ — or even more mysteriously, ‘neo-Marxist class warfare propaganda’— is utterly unclear,” Warinner added.
William L. Wilson, director of the Center for Nanoscale Systems at Harvard whose NSF-funded Quantum Noir conference connects underrepresented researchers with leaders in quantum sciences, said his project was misclassified as a DEI initiative.
“Quantum Noir is not a DEI initiative, it is a workforce development initiative,” Wilson wrote in an emailed statement. “The meeting’s focus is to expose and network young researchers in an important emerging technology space, a space important to the nation’s technology future.”
“Some filter was used to flag certain keywords or internal NSF designations to lead us where we are,” he wrote.
NSF grants require a public impact statement describing how the project will contribute to “desired societal outcomes,” with inclusion listed as one example. Many Harvard-associated research proposals mention diversity, equity, or similar language in their proposals, though researchers said this does not define the core of their work.
“Senator Cruz has made it clear that his knowledge of science is limited to sloppy keyword searches,” Warinner wrote. “The only waste I see here is in the Senator’s office,” she added. saketh.sundar@thecrimson.com
FRANK S. ZHOU — CRIMSON PHOTOGRAPHER
SPEECH FROM PAGE 1
SENATE FROM PAGE 1 The
In Rare Appearance , Gay Moderates Talk
FACULTY. Former Harvard President Claudine Gay moderated a book talk on Wednesday evening.
BY DHRUV T. PATEL AND GRACE E. YOON CRIMSON STAFF WRITERS
Former Harvard President Claudine Gay moderated a talk with author and anthropologist Rich Benjamin on Wednesday in one of her first public events since resigning from Harvard’s top post last year.
The book talk was held at Brookline Booksmith in Boston and featured Benjamin’s new memoir on his mother and grandfather Daniel Fignolé, the former president of Haiti.
Before the Wednesday talk — which drew a crowd of around 40 people, including many of Gay’s friends — Gay has stayed out of the public spotlight, addressing Harvard affiliates only once in September to accept an award and deliver a keynote address to the Harvard Black Alumni Association. After one year on leave, Gay offered a graduate research section in the Government Department for the Spring semester. She also occasionally attends Harvard’s sporting events.
During the talk, Gay — the daughter of Haitian immigrants — praised Benjamin’s memoir for serving as “a light in what is otherwise a really dark moment.”
“It’s such a broad moment, not
just in Haiti, where we’re witnessing the collapse of the state, but also for the Haitian diaspora in the United States,” she said. “My dad, who’s been here for what will be 60 years next month, has taken to carrying his U.S. passport with him everywhere,” Gay added.
Gay described her own upbringing, saying that Benjamin’s depiction of his mother as a strongwilled, generous woman reflected how she thought of her own mother.
“There are also parts of her that, frankly, I recognize as just someone raised by a Haitian mother,” she said. “She’s formidable in ways that I recognize — the ‘stop crying, or I’ll give you something to cry about.’” Benjamin said his mom “was a woman who preferred to parent the world than to parent her own children,” adding that she spoke little of her humanitarian campaigns across the world.
Gay also praised Fignolé’s legacy in Haiti as an example of effective leadership in a time of crisis. Haiti “has had a lot of leaders, but very few that have left the kind of indelible imprint on the soul of the country and the diaspora the way your grandfather did,” Gay said.
“I found him, as a political figure, someone easy to admire, but then very difficult to love as a human being,” she added. Fignolé, a popular labor leader before assuming the presidency, governed Haiti for only 19 days in 1957 before he was deposed by a military coup backed by the U.S.
Central Intelligence Agency.
He was kidnapped and taken to New York with his wife, Carmen Jean-François, and later, their seven children who were held captive and physically abused by the Haitian army. In the U.S., the family’s outlook did not improve — Fignolé and Jean-François abused their children, and he later left his family for a younger woman.
Benjamin said he hoped to unravel his family’s complicated history through his book. He said he began researching for his book in 2010 and spent 12 years in legal battles with the federal government to unseal memos from Fignolé held in federal archives.
“I sued the State Department in federal district court and denied, denied, denied — on the fourth time, the fourth appeal, it worked and they unredacted the information,” he said.
Benjamin said he hoped his book would offer Americans an opportunity to realize the depth of the U.S.’ involvement in foreign governments.
“I know most Americans are busy educating, bathing, feeding their children — they’re just living their lives,” Benjamin said. “And they can be discarded from history, and they can be sleepwalking through history, and they cannot appreciate the full agency that they have in history.”
“What you can do to forge history — to me, that’s the relevance of the book,” he added.
Around 100 people mourned the lives of four Israeli hostages at a vigil held in the Science Center Plaza Thursday afternoon after Hamas returned four bodies to Israel earlier Thursday.
Attendees gathered around four candle-lit hearts to honor Shiri Bibas, her two sons Ariel and Kfir, and Oded Lifshitz, all of whom were taken hostage during the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack. The vigil — which was attended by College Dean Rakesh Khurana and Dean of Undergraduate Education Amanda Claybaugh — was hosted by Harvard Hillel, Harvard Chabad, and the Harvard Jewish Coalition.
Four bodies were returned to Israel in black coffins during a staged ceremony early Thursday morning. Hamas identified them as Bibas, her sons, and Lifshitz, whom they said died in Israeli airstrikes.
The Israeli military announced Thursday evening, hours after the Harvard vigil, that it had identified the two children and Lifshitz among the returned remains, but that a fourth body was not Shiri Bibas. Israel said its forensic testing showed the children and Lifshitz were killed by Hamas. In exchange, Israel is expected to release more than 600 Palestinian prisoners on Saturday. The re-
mains returned to Israel on Thursday were among the 33 hostages Hamas promised to release in the first phase of its ceasefire agreement with Israel.
Harvard Hillel wrote in an Instagram post that the hostages were “returned to Israel today in a manner further reflecting the cruelty of Hamas terrorists.”
Evan H. C. Epstein ’28 — Harvard Hillel’s Israel Chair and a Crimson News editor — helped organize the vigil and wrote in a statement that the event was meant to be “a welcome salve.”
“In times like this, it is comforting to come together as a community and share in our collective grief,” Epstein wrote.
The vigil began with a speech and prayer for the four hostages, led by campus Rabbi Getzel Davis.
“In these times of darkness it is so important that we come together,” Davis said. “We now find ourselves at a loss for words as we see the state of those who have returned. Emaciated, beaten, and now, tragically, in body bags.”
The crowd, with yellow ribbons and roses in hand, listened while some shed tears and shared hugs with each other. Davis’ remarks were followed by a moment of silence. Rabbi Hirschy Zarchi — the president and founder of Harvard Chabad and a campus Jewish chaplain — continued sharing words dedicated to the four hostages, in-
Librarians Reflect on Lamont’s 75-Year History on Campus
BY KATIE B. TIAN AND SAMANTHA D. WU CRIMSON STAFF WRITERS
For more than three quarters of a century, Harvard undergraduates have hit the books in the armchairs and study carrels of Lamont Library.
Situated in the southeast corner of Harvard Yard, Lamont — which celebrated its 75th anniversary last month — holds the Harvard Library’s main undergraduate collection for the humanities and social sciences. It was constructed in 1949, funded by a donation from 1892 alumnus Thomas W. Lamont.
Access services coordinator Michael Arena — who oversees hiring, training, and supervising student workers at the circulation desk — said his favorite part of the job is “the students, by far.”
“People will come in as a shy first year student, and then they come back as a sophomore and they’re a little bit more confident, and then they’re more confident as a junior, and by the time they’re a senior, they’re giving me a hard time,” he said.
Arena, who started working at Lamont in 2014, said the pandemic was a particularly challenging time for staff — the library was closed for a year and a half, operating instead as a pickup service where patrons collected books without entering through the turnstiles.
“To go from a very vibrant library where there’s always people here to kind of a ghost town was difficult,” Arena added.
Access services librarian Laura Sherriff said she sees Lamont’s history as intertwined with Harvard’s.
“Lamont is kind of a microcosm of what’s been going on with campus over the last 75 years,” she said.
A Library for Undergraduates
A 1947 article in the Boston Sunday Globe, announcing the planned construction of Lamont, noted that students would be allowed to “smoke, talk, or typewrite” in the library. “The old New England schoolmasters would raise their eyes in disapproval,” the article quipped.
At its founding, Lamont had three central purposes — to concentrate library services for undergraduates, make books readily available to students, and to encourage reading, librarian Keyes D. Metcalf ’45 wrote in a 1950 edition of the Harvard Library Bulletin.
The Woodberry Poetry Room — which still exists in Lamont today — contained poetry books and
four turntables to listen to records of poetry reading. In the library’s first ten months, more than 8,500 students listened to records.
Today, Lamont is still a hub for undergraduates. In 2005, the library lengthened its hours to 24/7 service, transforming it into a fulltime study-space.
Undergraduates who spend long hours in Lamont are affectionately termed “Lamonsters” by their peers. Last year, the library mounted an installation of student-written haikus about their experiences and memories in the library system in its basement.
One reads: “A midnight deluge / furious scribbling and then— / the sun rises. Peace.” Another entry, submitted anonymously, states: “I roam Lamont’s halls / searching to find a fun book / my homework? Not done.”
But Lynn Ansaldo, an access services assistant at Lamont since 2007, said she worried the “administrative merging” of library services would change Lamont’s character and make it harder for the library to focus on undergrads.
Ansaldo said a push for centralization began in 2009 when library staff were told some departments would be restructured to work under Widener Library offices. Lamont Circulation — otherwise known as “Access Services” — began reporting to Widener Access Services.
“They tried to de-emphasize and tell us that this really isn’t an undergraduate library, and that we can’t have that as our identity,” Ansaldo said.
Harvard Library spokesperson Kerry Conley wrote that in a statement that “Lamont continues to be dedicated to undergraduates at the university and will remain so for future generations of students.” And librarians say Lamont continues to be an important site for Harvard College Students. Its legacy as an undergraduate-oriented space persists “in the middle of a huge, sometimes intimidating university,” librarian George E. Clark wrote in an email statement.
“We felt that anyone who came to Harvard College should know what the depths of the library were before they left, so that they would always see that as the context for their continuing development as thinking beings,” said Heather Cole, who worked in the Harvard library system from 1970 to 2008.
Turning the Page
Lamont has seen watershed moments throughout University history, from opening to women in 1967 to serving as a space for campus protests.
“Radcliffe women were really angry that they could not get into this library,” said Susan Gilroy, the College’s librarian for undergraduate writing programs. In 2003, Radcliffe class of 1953 alumnae arranged a 50th reunion “flash mob” celebration in Lamont, featuring singing and champagne “because they could come into the library,” Gilroy added.
In 2012, students organized an occupation in the library’s café to protest staff wage cuts — which Gilroy called an example of how Lamont has “been a space that’s had lots and lots of purposes.” The café itself, which served as a reference room when the library first opened its doors, was added in 2006, amid a series of physical changes including a media lab in 2010.
Lamont has undergone major technological changes throughout the decades, particularly with the introduction of the Hollis catalogue, barcode scanners, and visual signifiers on shelves — changes that librarians said have paralleled shifts in academic instruction at the College. And more changes are in the works as Harvard undertakes major renovations of four libraries, which it hopes to complete by 2036. Harvard’s chief librarian, Martha J. Whitehead, said in an April interview that renovations to Lamont — such as increasing window lighting in the library’s reading rooms and moving in Harvard’s Fine Arts Library — are “a first priority phase” of the project. Clark wrote that he and many of his colleagues came to work at Lamont when the old Littauer Library, which held Economics and Government materials, closed. The move brought him closer with undergraduates and those in the humanities, he wrote, making him “a more well-rounded person.”
“My office overlooks the Lamont Cafe and Lamont’s big front window,” Clark added. “It lets me see the human ebb and flow of the academic calendar, with students studying, chatting, cramming for exams.”
cluding the two young children in the Bibas family, aged 4 years old and 9 months old.
“Our hearts have been broken more times than we can count, and today, our hearts are shattered once again. The Lifschitz family, the Bibas family, with their adorable red-headed children, took up residence in our hearts and minds,” Zarchi said.
Zarchi also called for the release of the rest of the hostages still in captivity in Gaza.
“We look to the voices of the world to unite in this message of calling for the immediate release and freedom of these innocent people who were stolen from their homes and their families,” Zarchi said in an interview.
Before the vigil’s closing, the crowd joined in on singing Hatikvah, Israel’s national anthem, led by Gilad Mills, a Harvard Law School student. The vigil ended as attendees placed yellow roses in the center of each of the four candlelit hearts, situated in front of pictures of the four hostages.
“I think it’s important for the Jewish community, Jewish-Israeli community, here at Harvard, just to remember that we’re here together and we can support each other,” Mills said in an interview. “Our ability to come together in these moments is a source of strength that we need to be proud of having.”
annabelle.yu@thecrimson.com
BY LAUREL M. SHUGART CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
Keypad locks will be installed on the communal bathrooms in Pforzheimer House after students repeatedly encountered a man allegedly entering the building half naked, according to a Thursday email from Pforzheimer House administrators.
In an email to Pforzheimer House on Thursday, resident dean Monique A. Roy wrote that the new keypads will be installed “in response to requests from entryways.”
Roy added that the keypad locks will be installed on the second and third floor bathrooms as a “pilot measure,” with the possibility of expanding to other entryways in Pforzheimer House.
The installation on the third floor bathrooms will begin Friday at 10 a.m. and is expected to last “2-3 hours,” according to the email.
“After the locks are installed, your entryway resident tutor will provide each of you with the code for the bathroom you would be designated to use,” Roy wrote.
A University spokesperson did not respond immediately for comment on the security measures. Earlier this month, the Harvard
University Police Department and Pforzheimer House administrators responded to student reports of a man exposing himself in the student dormitory. The man reportedly walked through the halls of the dorm unclothed on multiple occasions.
“It
While Roy sent an email to all house residents about the early February incident on Feb. 6, administrators have been attempting to secure Comstock Hall for more than a month. Students had witnessed the man entering bathrooms and wandering between floors multiple times since last December. The
Steven
Comstock Hall is located in the Radcliffe Quadrangle as housing for Pforzheimer House. BARBARA A. SHEEHAN — CRIMSON PHOTOGRAPHER
Claudine Gay speaks with Rich Benjamin about his memoir. GRACE E. YOON — CRIMSON PHOTOGRAPHER
BY ELISE A. SPENNER CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
hen Kathryn J. Edin
Wstarted graduate school at Northwestern University, she did not have big dreams. She had gotten into the doctorate program off the waitlist with mediocre math scores, and she wanted nothing more than to teach at a small liberal arts college. But that was all before she met Christopher S. “Sandy” Jencks ’58. Then a professor of sociology at Northwestern, Jencks hired Edin as a part-time researcher. After working together for five years, they published a ground-breaking article based on Edin’s dissertation. Two decades down the road, he testified on her behalf before Harvard’s faculty hiring committee, after which she received tenure. And until a few years ago, he was still editing her papers.
“He made my career,” said Edin, who is now a sociology professor at Princeton University. “Sometimes you meet somebody, and it just changes everything.” Jencks nurtured others, too. Jal D. Mehta ’99, a professor of education at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, called Jencks “the best advisor I or anyone could have asked for.”
“He took a lost graduate student and helped me find a direction and scholarly identity, even though it was very different from his own,” Mehta wrote in a statement.
Former Harvard Kennedy School Dean David T. Ellwood ’75 called Jencks “the titanic figure” in the field of sociology.
“If you look at so many people in the field that really did make a difference — a huge fraction were Sandy’s students,” Ellwood said.
“He was the best mentor and collaborator practically I’ve ever seen.” Jencks, who moved from Northwestern to HKS in 1996, died at his home on Saturday, Feb. 8 from complications of Alzheimer’s disease. He was 88.
Jencks is survived by his wife, Harvard Kennedy School professor Jane J. Mansbridge; their son Nat; their grandson Wilder, and a brother, Stephen.
“He was the smartest man I’d ever met. And a fixer by nature,” Mansbridge wrote in a statement. “Whether it was the broken latch on the door or the societal inequality that we struggle under every day, he tried to figure out a way to make it better.”
‘A Breath of Fresh Air’
Remembered by legions of colleagues and students as a scholar
Christopher Jencks, 1936–2025
who challenged conventional wisdom and asked the hard questions, Jencks was “the world expert” on inequality, according to Johns Hopkins sociology professor Amy Binder, one of his doctoral students at Northwestern. Binder, whose area of focus had little overlap with Jencks’ expertise, still hunted him down to advise her dissertation. “I didn’t do work that looked anything like what he did, but I had taken a class with him,” Binder said. “I loved his clarity. I loved the way he thought. I loved how he was very generous, but also skeptical of people’s initial findings.”
Jencks’ skepticism led him to question the status quo — and often led him to unexpected, and sometimes unpopular, findings. In the early 1970s, he published a book that exposed the inadequacy of various social policy interventions of the prior decade, including liberal education reform. It was a “very upsetting but unambiguous” conclusion, Ellwood said.
“He got pilloried by many people because they didn’t like what he found, and drove desperately to prove him wrong, and they didn’t,” Ellwood added.
Time would validate Jencks’ conclusion. Rather than an expan-
sive social safety net, his book proposed more direct intervention — what he coined a “negative wage tax” and what we now call an earned income tax credit. A year later, President Gerald Ford followed his lead, enacting the first ever EITC.
Later, in an article for The American Prospect co-authored with Edin, Jencks zeroed in on deficiencies in welfare programs, finding that welfare recipients also had to keep illicit jobs to make ends meet.
“Any given statement that people just accept, he would say, ‘Oh, how is that possibly true?’” Edin said. “So he inbred this skepticism of the conventional wisdom.”
“His view about both research and teaching and maybe life, I think, was: It’s really important to ask the right question,” Government professor Jennifer L. Hochschild said. “Once you’ve asked the question, the answer should be, in effect, allowed to go wherever it’s going to go.”
Jencks’ reputation for loyalty to facts over ideology may have dismayed some, but it made Jencks exceptionally popular among academics and experts alike.
Former California governor Jerry Brown remembered calling Jencks “out of the blue” over the course of his career for guidance on welfare issues. He described Jencks as a “giant” in the field whose research and writing influenced Brown’s approach to social policy.
“I didn’t feel he was an ideologue or partisan,” Brown said.
“He was just telling it the way he saw it. It was a breath of fresh air.”
‘Dozens and Dozens of Red Marks’
Born in Baltimore on Oct. 22, 1936, Jencks attended Harvard as an undergraduate, where he studied English and wrote for The Crimson. He also received his master’s degree from HGSE, but never obtained a Ph.D. Jencks then began his career as a journalist, working as an editor at The New Republic. He was later part of the brain trust behind The Prospect.
“He was an exceptionally clear writer, and very accessible,” Paul Starr, co-founder of The Prospect, said. “So he could take a complicated topic and explain it in a way that anybody could understand, and that is a hugely important skill.”
His stint as a journalist made
him a great writer, but colleagues and students said he was an even better editor.
“He also marked up my writing — line by line, word by word — in ways that no other teacher, before or since, ever did, setting a daunting example for what it means to be a good advisor,” Mehta wrote.
Jencks’ red editing pencil was famous among his peers.
“If Sandy edited a paper of yours, the good news is you got spectacular advice,” Ellwood said. “The bad news is every page had dozens and dozens of red marks on it.”
“Usually there were more comments on the page, usually written in red pencil, then there were typed words,” Edin added.
At 57, Edin — by then a tenured professor at Princeton and an eminent scholar in her own right — sent Jencks one last paper to review.
“There were more words on the page than comments, and I was kind of shocked, and I looked really carefully, and in the margins, at one point it said, ‘good,’” Edin recalled. “It was hilarious that at 57 I thought, ‘Okay, I’ve made it.’”
‘Sheer Decency and Goodness’
Those that knew Jencks said that he was universally admired for his brilliance — Hochschild guessed that he “had an IQ higher than most of us combined.” His intellect, however, was accompanied by a remarkable lack of ego.
Julie B. Wilson, a senior lecturer in social policy at HKS, said Jencks didn’t care about flaunting his rank or intelligence, distinguishing him from other faculty members.
“Sandy was the smart person in the room, but he really fit into the conversation, and was part of the group, and he was a very comfortable person to talk to, to ask questions of, to test ideas around.” Jencks often used humor to put people at ease, his students and colleagues said. According to Binder, he approached conversations with a smirk and a smile in “the kindest, most generous way.”
“He was a very funny person who wanted to laugh,” Binder said. “He wanted to find humor in things.” Lunches with Jencks offered exclusive access to his wit, curiosity, and kindness.
“He had a perspective on the world that often took the form of a sense of humor, but also wisdom,” Hochschild said. “Conversation about lunch, it could be, it wasn’t necessarily always heavy and complex. It was just, ‘Do you really think this food goes with that food?’”
“There was nothing better than sitting down to have lunch and talking with Sandy,” Ellwood added. “Could be about your work. It could be about whatever else is going on. He was good for you.”
Jencks was married to Mansbridge, professor emerita at HKS, for 49 years.
“He liked to work a lot,” Mansbridge wrote in a statement to The Crimson. “He liked quiet evenings at home. He liked to sail. He liked talking with Nat and me and our friends. I can’t describe in words the warmth we shared.” Together, Mansbridge and Jencks were an intellectual force.
“If you know his wife, Jenny, she’s the other smartest person in the world,” Edin said. “So we would just have these incredible conversations that you rarely have with other people.”
Professor of Government Michael J. Sandel wrote in a statement to the Crimson that both Mansbridge and Jencks shared not only academic prowess but “sheer decency and goodness.”
“Both Sandy and Jenny are shining examples of how character can go hand-in-hand with scholarly renown,” Sandel wrote.
elise.spenner@thecrimson.com
Peer Advisors Help Freshmen Navigate Blocking Decisions
TAMMY S. LEE CRIMSON STAFF WRITERS
Next week, the Class of 2028 will begin entering Harvard’s randomized housing lottery, which sorts rising sophomores into 12 upperclassmen Houses. As freshmen shoulder the pressure of forming “blocking groups” and fear the 15-minute walk to dorms in the Radcliffe Quadrangle, the College’s freshman Peer Advising Fellows said they have stepped up to help. Freshmen annually learn of their housing assignments when upperclassmen boisterously storm into their dorms on Housing Day — a tradition that dates back to 1995. But tension builds in the weeks leading up to the reveal when freshmen must select up to seven other students to “block” with, forming blocking groups that are guaranteed to be assigned the same House.
Several PAFs said their advisees have turned to them with concerns about forming blocking groups, some floating myths about how to game the random lottery.
“They try to find the perfect number of how many people,” PAF Daniel E. Cabrera ’27 said. “Because there’s a rumor that if you have too many people in a blocking group, then you’re going to be put in the Quad.” Houses in the Quad — Cabot, Currier, and
Pforzheimer House — are traditionally considered less desirable due to their distance from Harvard’s academic buildings.
PAF Wafiqah M. Zubair ’26 said that one of her advisees “worried that her decision of who she was going to block with is going to ruin her friendship with other friend groups.”
“I was telling her that blocking really does not mean that you will be living with them. It just means they’ll be living in the same house as them,” she added. The First Year Advising network is available to guide freshmen through the blocking process, but some freshmen said they’re hesitant to use the resource.
“My PAF is very nice, but honestly I wouldn’t think to reach out to them about that. That’s kind of personal drama,” Cristina Y. Mercado ’28 said. Still, some PAFs emphasize the importance of open communication throughout the process. “If you’re going to have these tough conversations, it’s better to do them sooner than later, so that you’re not leaving somebody in the dark or in the dust, where they have to then scramble to find a new group to block with,” PAF Dev S. Ahuja ’27 said. “In the end, it doesn’t have to be that big of a deal, unless you make it one,” he added. The freshmen who do reach out to their advising network are often reassured that blocking is not a consequential decision.
“Regardless of what happens, it’s a positive experience, nonetheless, because you’ll be interacting with so many more people than just the up to eight people that you block with,” PAF Srija Vem ’25 said.
“It doesn’t mean that you’re closing the door on friendships that you don’t block with. It just means that you’ll have a group of people that you’ll see a little more
frequently because you’re in a house with them,” she added.
Despite PAFs reassurances, freshmen say they have found it difficult to shake off their nerves about the decision.
“There are so many microscopic components that come into blocking groups. The intricacies run so far that one must take many items into consideration,” Max Blackborn ’28 said.
“Do I want to maximize the amount of familiar faces — or do I just want to secure myself just a couple of people who I know I will be always so, so, so happy, and relaxed, and comfortable to see?” he added.
“Although I do have friends here, I was never really part of any particular group, so figuring out who I actually wanted to block with was very stressful,” Mercado said. But Ames K. McNamara ’28 said that despite the blocking stresses, he is still looking forward to receiving his letter on Housing Day.
“I think for most people, in the end, it works out — but
COURTESY OF JANE J. MANSBRIDGE
When Words Lose Their Meaning
BY WALTER JOHNSON AND RICHARD F. THOMAS
It is over 40 years since the publication of James Boyd White’s When Words Lose Their Meaning. Although the precise year was 1984, Orwell and his Ministry of Truth are not the subject, though they are never far off. White deals with the past rather than the predicted future, starting with the greatest of the Greek historians, Thucydides.
Thucydides knew what could happen to language when civil discord turned to open conflict — for him, that between democratic and oligarchic parties and civil war on the island of Corfu. In the process and to justify extreme and lawless acts “they changed the usual meanings of words to describe actions for new ones as they thought fit.” White also analyzes Plato and Jonathan Swift and their shared “sense of the individual’s responsibility for the language that he speaks and for the person that he becomes in doing so.” It might be worth asking how Harvard has been doing in this sphere and how we might measure the University’s governing euphemism against the standard of its erstwhile motto: “Veritas.” What has been happening here is all child’s play compared to the current national discourse under which the Supreme Court-enabled president seems to abandon the law in the name of “saving the country.” But greater subtlety is no less deserving of criticism. It is the more effective rhetorical tool, precisely because we might not notice the shift in meaning or application. And it seems unlikely that the University will be able to survive the coming onslaught on meaning if it is unable to use language honestly itself.
Of course, there is nothing new here. Way back in the mid-1990s former University President Neil
COLUMN
L. Rudenstine indicated that a reduction of Harvard’s faculty pension contributions was potentially necessary since Harvard risked “breaking anti-discrimination” laws by contributing at too high a rate. Early in this millennium, one of us heard the next president suggest that providing a living wage for our food service workers would result in increased Harvard retail cafeteria food prices, with students eating less expensively in Harvard Square, where workers were not paid a living wage, resulting in layoffs of our soon-to-beoverpaid workers. Case closed.
Another example: “disruption of University business.” That was the judgement when encamping students confined themselves to patches of Harvard Yard. It was hard to see how such business was disrupted – with or without comparison to the truly disruptive three-week occupation of Massachusetts Hall in 2001. Speaking of rules, we also now have “time, place and manner” as applied to student protests. Indeed, the Palestine exception, always hotly denied, seems in full swing with application of these apparently “neutral” rules. Disruption is one of those words that is very much in the eye of the beholder and the rule-maker.
Then we have “institutional neutrality,” perhaps defined as the institution’s being uninterested in the outside world. Or is it the need to have University leaders express no views at all so as to ensure their students feel comfortable saying anything whatsoever? In reality, neutrality becomes a way of supporting a status quo, even a skewed and unjust one, when it is favored by wealthy donors and by the beneficiaries of that status quo.
An extension of the neutrality argument is the “both sides principle” where both sides are to get equal time, and not at the macro level of the University, but at the micro level of the single event. The canceled Lowell House panel was one example, and the principle revealed its inherent va -
cuity when a presentation at Harvard Medical School covering the effect of the Gaza destruction on children was canceled following objections that the “other side” was not represented.
Further assurances: of course we support affiliates’ right to speak out on issues, we just can’t officially recognize (i.e. allow space for) such one-sided events.
Then we have “the business of the University is teaching, learning, and research,” frequently reiterated with the apparent intention of closing down any conversation about where the endowment is invested or what word might be appropriate to describe the moral enormity in Gaza.
The Office of the General Counsel, recently seen negotiating speech policy in order to settle a lawsuit, has apparently received a carve out.
Wasn’t the pursuit of truth once included in that list? Our website still claims we teach students to be citizens (“Harvard University is devoted to excellence in teaching, learning, and research, and to developing leaders who make a difference globally”).
Doesn’t it make sense for an institution as wealthy and powerful as Harvard to accept the responsibility of speaking out broadly for the truth, and perhaps even for justice?
One gets the feeling that there lurks an implicit qualification before “teaching, learning, and research.” Today, those words are being used as the academic analog of “shut up and dribble:” “Give your lectures, take your tests, do not ask why or what any of it means in a larger sense or question the enabling fiction that separates your work from the rest of the world. And never, ever ask where the money comes from, or what we’re going to do about protecting the University and its faculty and students.”
–Walter Johnson is the Winthrop Professor of History and a professor of African and African American Studies. Richard F. Thomas is the George Martin Lane Professor of the Classics. They are members of the executive committee of the American Association of University Professors-Harvard Faculty Chapter.
Harvard Is Too Elite, but Trump’s Culture War Won’t Change That
BY E. MATTEO DIAZ
Since entering office last month, Trump has prepared to abolish the Department of Education, attempted to slash federal research funding, and targeted DEI initiatives and other race-conscious practices at universities.
Higher education is under attack. The rallying cry? That universities, especially prestigious ones like Harvard, must be recaptured from the woefully out-of-touch “woke elite.”
It’s a convenient narrative — and not entirely devoid of truth — but we must recognize this rhetoric for what it is: a duplicitous and self-serving attempt by conservative elites to exert political control over cultural centers where they have long lacked influence.
I’ll be the first to admit that Harvard, like many of its peer institutions, caters to the liberal elite. Only 13 percent of last year’s graduating class identified as conservative according to a Crimson survey. And though Harvard is notoriously tight-lipped about its socioeconomic demographics, an analysis from Harvard Economics professor Raj Chetty ’00 found that 67 percent of undergraduates come from families in the top twenty percent of the income distribution, while only less than five percent come from the bottom 20.
This socioeconomic skew concerns me, the
ideological skew less so. Universities have long been homes for progressive thought, and it’s worth noting that a liberal slant doesn’t necessitate liberal bias. After all, Harvard has taken no shortage of action to ensure that conservative ideas are heard and diverse viewpoints thrive on campus. Indeed, in my own time here, I’ve had an abundance of opportunities to engage with peers from across the political spectrum.
But regardless of how much the rest of us prioritize socioeconomic or ideological diversity, the Trump administration’s haphazard and wildly misguided policies make clear that they don’t care about either one.
Take Trump’s order to cap funding for indirect costs tied to research projects — though he’s marketed it as a campaign against elite institutions, the order deals a huge blow to universities across the board, including those in red states.
Or consider the administration’s recent Dear Colleague letter declaring race-conscious decision-making illegal. The only problem? Many of the programs that the letter explicitly targets — like admissions and financial aid — already don’t make decisions based on race.
Whether institutional DEI programs actually further the worthy goals of diversity, equity, and inclusion, or if universities employ them simply for PR purposes, certainly remains an open question.
But we could discuss DEI until the cows go
home, and we’d still be missing the most important point — that for the large majority of Americans, who don’t attend elite universities, whether Harvard has DEI programming makes no difference in their material lives.
And this is precisely why the rhetoric around Trump’s attacks is so concerning. If he was truly interested in reforming universities to serve the public good, he would implement policies that actually increase access to higher education for the many Americans for whom college tuition costs are a huge burden.
But instead, he’s cutting research funding and striking down DEI programs in an obvious ploy to score points with his base and exert political control over universities.
It’s the very same reason that Trump spent millions on anti-transgender advertisements during his campaign and signed multiple executive orders directly targeting transgender people during his first month in office despite the fact that transgender people represent a tiny proportion of the population and transgender issues were one of voters’ lowest priorities during the election.
Trump wants us to believe that he is wielding an “unprecedented and powerful mandate” to serve the best interests of the American people. But he won the popular vote by a margin of about 1.5 percent. That’s hardly a landslide — let alone a mandate for his war on liberal institutions.
And yet, so far, Harvard has publicly acquiesced, apparently deciding that quiet compliance is its best strategy. In response to the National Institutes of Health cap on funding for research projects, Harvard neglected to join 13 other universities in their lawsuit to stop it. This approach is a far cry from the one Harvard took four years ago, suing the Trump administration over federal guidelines that barred international students from attending universities online during the pandemic.
There is a case to be made for higher education, and Harvard ought to stand up and make it. I won’t pretend that it will be easy. But perhaps the best way to start is by doing what Trump cannot. We could implement socioeconomic affirmative action and end legacy admissions. We could fund more public service programs and open access educational tools. We could develop partnerships with public universities and community colleges across the country, especially in conservative states.
Harvard’s critics aren’t wrong that we’re too elite. But they’re wrong about the solution. We can’t just replace a liberal elite with a conservative one.
–E. Matteo Diaz ’27, an Associate Editorial editor and Crimson Diversity and Inclusivity Chair, is a double concentrator in Social Studies and Applied Mathematics in Leverett House.
Free Speech is Dead at Harvard. I Doubt It’s Returning Soon.
BY HENRY P. MOSS IV
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression free speech rankings — which place Harvard dead last — have been downplayed by University leadership. But let me tell you: Harvard deserves it. According to the University’s 2024 senior survey, only one-third of the graduating class feel comfortable expressing their opinions about controversial topics on campus in general, and nearly half are hesitant to do so even in a supposedly sacrosanct classroom setting. Especially concerning was the ideological split among students: The vanishingly few conservatives on campus were over twice as likely to report not being comfortable discussing controversial topics as their liberal peers.
While unfortunate for my educational experience, the current campus climate leaves me doubtful that this will change any time soon.
The report’s contents should not be remotely surprising to anyone who has paid attention over the past 18 months, considering that just last year, we were continuously rocked by protest after protest. For those who do not appreciate the national media attention, simply avoiding the protests was not enough. Tensions on campus ran so high that it felt risky to express an opinion about anything that might even appear remotely controversial for fear of being labelled genocidal, racist, or bigoted.
Although tensions have somewhat abated this year, a culture that stifles any speech not in line with leftist orthodoxy nonetheless remains.
Particularly egregious was last semester’s protest outside of Harvard Hillel in which a group of students chanted “Zionists not welcome here.” Instead of attempting dialogue with diverging perspectives, the speech climate on campus permits — and encourages — those with the most extreme viewpoints to call for those whose views are not sufficiently leftist to not be allowed to exist on campus.
Even outside of the excessive protests, there have been actions to silence dissenting voices. A recent opinion piece sharply rebuked the Harvard Kennedy School for merely hosting an event that discusses the newly created Department of Government Efficiency. Although the authors claim to be unopposed to conversations about government deregulation, they object to engaging with actors they deem not to be operating in good faith.
This caveat offers me little comfort. In the eyes of the campus speech police, it seems a precondition for good-faith engagement is a lack of any sort of disagreement at all.
What, for example, would be the verdict on a panel discussing the recent bans on transgender women participating in women’s college athletics? The Editorial Board provides a clear answer (in the event that someone supports them): supposedly “bad-faith” attacks and pure political scapegoating — surely not anything worth reasoned debate.
It does not matter that a vast majority of Americans — and a plurality of Democrats — believe that people should only play on sports teams that match their birth gender; such strident language indicates a self-assuredness incompatible with even countenancing that reasonable people can disagree. Implicit in this arrogance is a belief that dissent can only stem from bigotry or ignorance.
In this climate, it is no wonder that students on campus are so afraid to speak their minds, particularly if they are conservative. Harvard’s campus climate is so liberal, so intolerant of opposing views that it is safer for conservatives to keep their views to themselves rather than risk ridicule.
Although the College’s new Intellectual Vital ity Initiatives seek to remedy the lack of intellec tual discourse on campus, I am skeptical that it will achieve significant results. I applaud the ex tensive efforts made to encourage conversations across opposing viewpoints, but I remain con cerned that the lack of ideological diversity in evitably inhibits the amount of opportunities for students to put these theories into practice.
One can only have a truly intellectually vital campus — one in which all students are unafraid to share their views — when there is fundamen tal disagreement on key issues in the first place.
Perhaps the University could learn from for mer Harvard Law School Dean and current Su preme Court Justice Elena Kagan and make a pointed effort to welcome more conservative fac
ulty members in order to uplift conservative student and faculty perspectives. Unless Harvard makes serious changes to the campus environment, nothing will change. The University will remain overwhelmingly liberal, with the most extreme voices — those that are most interested in silencing any dissent — dominating the discussion.
Students will remain fearful of expressing controversial opinions, and their educational experience will continue to suffer.
–Henry P. Moss IV ’26, an Associate Editorial Editor, is a History concentrator in Eliot House.
Our Turn To Save Harvard’s Speech Culture
BY THE CRIMSON EDITORIAL BOARD
As if Harvard’s speech culture hasn’t been lambasted enough, new data has added more fuel to the fire.
The University’s 2024 senior survey reported that only one-third of graduating seniors felt comfortable expressing their opinions about controversial topics during their time at Harvard, a 13 percent decrease from the previous year’s class. This discomfort was disproportionately experienced by conservative students on campus: only 17 percent of conservative students reported feeling comfortable discussing controversial topics, compared to 25 percent of moderates and 41 of liberals.
While the survey results might not surprise you, the group responsible might. And no — this time, Harvard’s not to blame. While it’s true that Harvard’s not perfect — as some recent, high-profile lapses make clear — many of Harvard’s actions have quietly moved it in the right direction of rectifying speech culture.
Now, students bear the onus of ensuring Harvard’s attempts bear fruit — and that starts by leaning into discomfort and welcoming challenging conversations.
Many of the University’s efforts to foster open discourse on campus are laudable. It convened the Open
Inquiry and Constructive Dialogue working group.
Another committee explicitly clarified faculty should not grade based on political views (though the clari fication is useful, we can’t recall the existence of such a practice). The OICD group supported the Chatham House Rule, a policy that prevents students and in structors from attributing statements shared in class rooms to particular speakers.
While far from perfect and certainly not exhaus tive, these policies demonstrate Harvard’s ostensible commitment to creating a campus speech culture that welcomes and encourages diverse views on a wide range of topics. But while such policies don’t hurt, they don’t seem to strike at the heart of the issue itself.
The 2024 survey reported students felt uncomfort able expressing their opinions primarily because they feared being criticized or labeled offensive by their peers. Rather than backlash from professors or the University itself, social consequences appear to be the root of students’ self-censorship.
If students are the problem, they must also be the solution.
Instead of gossiping about classmates’ controver sial takes and attacking each other for speech that falls outside of the ideological mainstream, we must chan nel these impulses into productive — and necessarily uncomfortable — conversations.
Given Harvard’s reputation for academic excellence, you might expect classroom engagement to be high. You’d be wrong.
Recently, the Classroom Social Compact Committee released a report warning of “student curricular disengagement.” Their diagnosis might be apt, but their reported policy proposals miss one glaring issue: Student engagement is low because students aren’t taking classes that genuinely interest them — and Harvard’s course registration system is to blame.
The CSCC highlighted academic rigor in their report, proposing stricter attendance policies and citing faculty concerns about student curricular disengagement. In a similar vein, last semester the Faculty of Arts and Sciences approved an amendment to formalize the expectation that standard courses would require 12 hours of work per week.
This is a valiant effort by the FAS to rescue student engagement. It is also far from sufficient.
Reviving student engagement will require much broader structural changes to academics and culture — from both students and Harvard. The first step is fixing course registration.
Much to the chagrin of many students, course registration deadlines have crept earlier and earlier, while students have only three weeks of the semester to add or drop courses without incurring a fee. Consequently, many students fill their schedules with placeholder courses. Even worse, these strict deadlines can lock students into schedules they haven’t fully considered, especially given the lack of a formal shopping week. Given this context, it is not difficult to under -
stand the connection between the frenzy that is course registration and the lack of student engagement, as well as faculty concerns that students are skirting around a rigorous college experience.
Students can pray to the Q Guide gods and hope they manage to select optimal courses in their limited spare time during peak midterm season. Given the tight deadlines to do so, they risk that they miscalculated, bit off more than they could chew, and have to scramble to swap into whatever courses have seats left. Alternatively, they can take the easier but safer route out by filling their schedule with “gems,” or the easiest classes possible, to avoid the hassle in the first place.
It is absolutely the responsibility of students to be mindful when building their schedules — taking only the easiest courses is a waste of the incredible wealth of knowledge available at Harvard.
But how is a student supposed to truly dedicate themself to a few classes that interest and challenge them when every class in their schedule is expected to meet an arbitrarily high minimum workload? The haphazard effort to eliminate easier courses at Harvard will only result in students being left without the ability to balance their course load.
It would be overly optimistic to assume all students pick their classes for the sake of intellectual fulfillment rather than an easy A. But that vision could be achieved through efforts like requiring advising meetings that emphasize creating a balanced yet challenging schedule.
The course registration system sets students up to select classes that don’t always match ac -
ademic passion — which, of course, will lead to worse classroom engagement. So yes, students have a responsibility to choose the courses that contribute most effectively to their academic and personal growth. Yet the College must also do its part to enable that decision making by fixing a course registration system that is currently antithetical to classroom engagement. Enrollment deadlines should be more generous, and, if it cannot be formally adopted, professors ought to create an informal culture of more forgiving first week assignment expecta -
tions to improve course selection. Ultimately, we are students, not superhumans. Drastic administrative interventions that place excessive blame and unreasonable expectations on students represent a deeply imperfect attempt to boost student engagement. Harvard must trust students to meet them in the middle, and, crucially, students must seize the opportunity to make that effort.
–Layla L. Hijjawi ’27, a Crimson Editorial editor, is a Social Studies concentrator in Quincy House.
The Price of Harvard Admissions
BY JULIEN BERMAN
Harvard lives on donations. Funding for the University’s research centers, financial aid, and career services all depend on generous gifts from wealthy donors. In return, Harvard’s patrons receive an unspoken guarantee that their children will receive special treatment in the admissions process.
Is that a fair system? Actually, yes — it is.
I realize donor admissions preferences are unpopular. The optics aren’t great; it doesn’t look good for Harvard to admit yet another Kennedy when plenty of deserving students born without a silver spoon salivate outside Harvard’s gates. While this concern may be somewhat true, donor preferences get an unfairly bad rap. Unlike legacy preferences, which have only a limited impact on overall alumni giving, donor preferences almost certainly result in increased funds for universities; wealthy patrons often make substantial donations in the few years before their children apply — sometimes on the order of hundreds of millions of dollars.
The positive impact of these donations cannot be understated. Several years ago, Leonard Blavatnik’s foundation committed $200 million to Harvard Medical School to fund cutting edge biomedical research. David E. Goel ’93 and Stacey L. Goel gave Harvard $100 million to fund a research and arts performance center in Allston. Both of these donations will benefit thousands of people — Harvard students included — for generations to come. Admitting the children of donors like these seems like a small price to pay. To the extent that these funds are used to grow the pot of money for financial aid, donor admissions preferences might actually increase access
to elite education for students from less wealthy backgrounds by reducing tuition for everyone else.
Plus, the downsides of donor preferences to the Harvard community may not actually be as large as one might think.
To see this, I combed through the six years of granular undergraduate admissions data that Harvard was required to release during the Students for Fair Admissions affirmative action lawsuit. Using the expert witness reports, I was able to estimate the number of students admitted each year off the “Dean’s Interest List,” which flags applicants of special importance to Harvard, including relatives of the University’s top donors. I also computed the demographic distribution of a Harvard class in a hypothetical world where the University did not give preference to such applicants. This analysis shows first that the overall number of admitted Dean’s listers is quite low. Not surprising, given how few families can afford the price required to give their children preference. Indeed, while the rate of admission off the Dean’s list is high relative to the rate for regular applicants — 43 percent compared to 7 percent — over the course of six years, only 1,000 students were admitted off the Dean’s list, or an average of about 167 students each year.
Many of these students were likely exceptional applicants who would have been admitted even without the admissions bump. Using a model from Duke Economics Professor Peter S. Arcidiacono, which quantifies the effect of admissions preferences for Dean’s listers, I estimate that about 30 percent of these students would have been admitted anyway. Really, then, about 117 undeserving applicants are admitted each year due to donor preferences. Whether that’s a
lot or a little — you have to decide for yourself.
Eliminating donor preferences also does not substantially change the demographic composition of Harvard’s class — holding all other preferences constant. Although it is true that a supermajority of Dean’s listers are white, there just aren’t enough of them to make much of a difference.
The figure below indicates that without preferential treatment for Dean’s listers, the number of white admits would fall by about two percent, whereas the number of Black, Hispanic, and Asian American admits would each increase by less than one percent.
Of course, these data don’t tell the whole story. I wasn’t able to measure the impact of donor preferences on socioeconomic diversity, because Harvard doesn’t release data about applicant wealth. It’s reasonable to assume the effect would be substantial, though, because only the very wealthy can make the kind of donations that get you on the Dean’s list.
But the real socioeconomic problem with college admissions isn’t the donor preferences that go to such a small number of applicants.
Instead, it’s that rich applicants who are not on the Dean’s list are nevertheless far more likely to be admitted than poor ones.
Rich students have access to better schools, tutors, and extracurricular opportunities. They are also more likely to be legacies. Compared to the number of students who benefit from these systemic inequalities, the handful of spots going to donors’ children is a rounding error.
To be sure, the system of donor admissions preferences isn’t meritocratic, and that might rub some people the wrong way. But university admissions have never been meritocratic — not really.
Rather than pretending donor preferences don’t exist, universities should be upfront about how they work. Tell us how many students get in this way. If anything, push the Dean’s list price tag even higher, and then earmark those extra funds specifically for financial aid to disadvantaged students. Let us decide whether the tradeoff is worth it. In a moment when Congress is threatening to strip Harvard of its federal funding and impose enormous taxes on its endowment earnings, we need our donors now more than ever. Harvard can’t afford to turn off a multimillion dollar spigot for such negligible changes to class composition. So, sure, get rid of admissions preferences for legacies. Hell, do the same for recruited athletes. But maybe it would be best for Harvard to avoid biting the hand that feeds it.
–Julien Berman ’26, a Crimson Editorial editor, is an Economics concentrator in Adams House.
FEBRUARY 21, 2025
Mass. to Review Energy Delivery Rate
directly with the gas companies over the coming days to pursue revisions to their delivery rates to provide relief as soon as possible for their customers.”
ticipating in the program, said the Mass Save expansion — combined with colder weather and greater heating demands — was to blame for the rate hikes.
JFK Library Reopens After DOGE Cuts Result in Abrupt Closure
BY MEGAN L. BLONIGEN AND FRANCES Y. YONG CRIMSON STAFF WRITERS
ered, we had to make some adjustments.”
BY STEPHANIE DRAGOI
The Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities has promised to renegotiate energy delivery rates with oil and gas companies after Mass. Governor Maura T. Healey ’92 and several state legislators penned letters decrying residents’ surging heating bills.
Eversource and National Grid — the state’s largest energy providers — announced major energy rate hikes last fall for the peak winter months of 23 percent and 30 percent, respectively. The increases affected residents during January, Massachusetts’ coldest month, even when usage rates remained constant, sparking outrage among residents.
Eighty state legislators signed a letter to DPU chair Jamie Van Nostrand Friday urging a price revision. DPU pledged to revisit the delivery rates Monday after Healey wrote an additional letter Sunday, echoing the legislators’ concerns.
“While the DPU cannot control all the drivers, you and the gas utilities have an obligation to do all you can to help consumers reduce bills and avoid future large, unanticipated price spikes like this,” Healey wrote.
The Sunday letter, written by 22 state senators, urged the DPU to “hold Eversource accountable” and limit what they called a “free rein to impose unpredictable and excessive financial burdens on ratepayers.”
DPU spokesperson Alanna Kelly wrote in a statement that the department “will respond soon” to the letters and will be “working
State Representative Mike L. Connolly said his constituents began to report the unusually high heating bills in the last few weeks, describing it as a “brewing crisis” in an interview with The Crimson.
“It has gained velocity, it seems, and has really reached a crisis point where everyone I know who has a gas bill is freaking out,” Connolly said.
Ilan Levy, a Cambridge resident, said the unexpected financial toll has been extreme.
“Most people can’t afford to go from a bill of $150 to a $300 bill for three months in a row. That’s a huge hit to the budget, right?” Levy said.
“It’s pretty crazy that the Department of Utility, which is supposed to manage those rates so that there is no substantial increase on a yearly basis, accepted such a substantial increase in September,” Levy added. In a statement to The Crimson, Eversource spokesperson William Hinkle wrote that 60 percent of the delivery cost hike, announced in October, was due to an increase in contributions to the Mass Save sustainability program. A smaller fraction of the increase — 7 percent — was due to safety upgrades to the distribution infrastructure.
Mass Save is a state-mandated program, funded by energy efficiency charges added to gas and electric bills, to incentivize residents to switch to electric heating and cut back energy use to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Healey’s administration approved a 25 percent budget increase for Mass Save in October, which she said “will take Mass Save to the next level.” But Eversource, one of six companies par-
“It’s important to note that even if customers do not raise their thermostats, more energy is used to maintain the same temperature setting in colder weather,” Hinkle said.
In their letters this week, state legislators defended the Mass Save program, and argued that gas utilities should focus more on getting customers into its preexisting programs that can help them reduce costs.
“By participating in Mass Save, customers can save thousands of dollars in energy costs by making their homes less drafty and more energy efficient,” Healey wrote in her letter.
Connolly also disagreed that higher contributions to the Mass Save program were at the root of the issue.
“It’s my opinion that this claim has been overblown by conservatives, you know, by folks who typically look to scapegoat sustainability programs,” he said. “I think Eversource and utilities themselves, they’ve been very quick to point the finger at Mass Save and at sustainability.”
“We as policymakers have to really examine more stringently whether or not Eversource is ripping us off,” Connolly said.
But the raise is sure to put pressure on the state’s green energy incentive structure.
“If higher sustainability means that we are going to be squeezed by money, and that we’re not going to be able to afford energy, how sustainable is that?” Levy said.
“They’re telling us that it’s to be sustainable,” he added. “In the end of the day, that’s a lot of BS.”
originally people thought of as an advisory group — is actually taking a lot of action very quickly within government, even though they’re not a department,” Linos said.
After Massachusetts joined thirteen states to sue the Department of Government Efficiency, Harvard Kennedy School professors condemned DOGE’s extensive use of executive power to cut federal spending. Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea J. Campbell jointly filed a lawsuit against DOGE, alleging that the department’s broad use of executive power was unconstitutional. But on Tuesday, their request to block DOGE from firing federal employees or accessing federal agency data was denied by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan.
As the Trump administration is handed the short-term win, HKS professor of public management Steven J. Kelman ’70 said he was “scared” for the country.
“I have, in 76 years of life, never been so worried for the future of the country as I am now,” he said. HKS professor of public policy Elizabeth Linos ’07 also said she was concerned about DOGE’s expansive use of executive power as the department slashes federal jobs and funding.
“What appeared to be a socalled department — that I think
While Chutkan’s decision temporarily delays the states’ attempt to sideline DOGE, she noted that the attorneys general “legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight.”
Kelman said that the power that Musk and the DOGE wields is “totally absurd,” adding that it shows that “he has no idea what democracy is.”
“He has no authority to go online and say USAID is deleted — abolished — in a tweet,” Kelman said. “He has zero, zero, zero authority to do that.” Musk has targeted a wide array of government programs to decrease federal spending, including U.S. Agency for International Development, Financial Protection Board, and the Social Security Administration. As of Wednesday, more than 200,000 federal workers have seen their roles eliminated — and 75,000 more have accepted buyout offers.
Kelman said he is offended by Musk’s choice to target agencies which provide support to “ordi-
nary people” with more “modest means.”
“It’s particularly disgraceful that the richest man in the world has chosen the only three agencies he’s really attacked are these three agencies that help poor and modest means people,” he said. “That really offends me.”
Linos, who directs The People Lab at HKS, said DOGE’s funding cuts and mass firings are “doing damage” to public services and resources.
“Regardless of its legality, that damage is very clear to our ability to function and our ability to serve the American public,” Linos said.
“Those are kind of serious, serious, serious effects that no one should be making overnight, and certainly not a non elected civilian,” she added.
Linos said she was concerned by the DOGE’s “emphasis on just cutting” and that programs are being cut “without consideration of the impact on people’s lives.”
“If you run fast and break things in a private company, especially like a private tech company, you might have some level of chaos emerge,” Linos said. “But if you do that with the government, you’re really costing people’s lives.”
The John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum abruptly closed indefinitely on Tuesday afternoon, following an executive order that triggered a new round of federal layoffs. But the library reopened Wednesday morning — without reinstating fired workers.
The closure came after the Trump Administration fired five employees who were crucial to the Boston library’s operation. Staff escorted visitors out of the library on Tuesday afternoon ahead of the planned 2 p.m. closure.
“Due to an Executive Order concerning a ‘reduction in force (RIF),’ the JFK Library and Museum will be closed to the public until further notice,” a sign posted on the library’s front door read.
Following immediate outrage and concern from elected officials and members of the Kennedy family, the National Archives — which runs the facility — reversed its decision. The museum reopened at 10 a.m. Wednesday morning. But as of the reopening, the fired workers were not reinstated.
“It was a sudden loss of staff,” said Alan Price — the head of the library — in an interview with WHDH. “They were mostly frontline facing, and so until we could figure out a staffing solution to make sure all ticketing systems were cov -
As the museum adjusts to the staffing cuts, the facility is currently offering free admission to visitors. Entrance fees at the library were previously $18 for adults and $6 for college students.
While the JFK Library has resumed its operations, it remains unclear how the staffing changes brought on by Trump’s slashing of the federal workforce will affect its long-term future.
A spokesperson for the JFK library and the National Archives did not respond to a request for comment on the temporary closure.
The JFK Library and Museum, which is dedicated to the history and legacy of former President John F. Kennedy ‘40, attracts more than 175,000 visitors annually.
Fredrik Logevall, a professor at the Harvard Kennedy School, wrote in a statement that the library is a “jewel of the United States.”
“Historians depend on these materials for their work,” Logevall wrote. “It’s critically important that the libraries — and the museums attached to them — be open and fully staffed.”
The attempt to close the library of one of Massachusetts and Democrats’ most storied presidents was met with immediate opposition from the state’s elected officials.
Massachusetts Governor Maura T. Healey ’92 wrote in a statement that the closure was caused by the “thoughtless
crusade” of Trump and Elon Musk, lambasting the move that “caused an iconic institution and economic driver to close in Massachusetts.”
“I’m relieved that the library is reopening today to continue educating visitors and contributing to our economy,” she added, “but President Trump and DOGE should reverse course on these firings.”
Sen. Elizabeth A. Warren (D-Mass.) took to X, formerly known as Twitter, on Tuesday evening to criticize the Trump administration’s attempt to cut costs by closing the library.
“Trump’s shutdown of the JFK Library won’t lower egg prices or make housing more affordable, but it’s part of a retribution tour designed to distract from his agenda to enrich the wealthy and well-connected at the expense of everyone else,” she wrote.
Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) also condemned the action, claiming the decision to close a presidential library “degrades the very office of the President.”
“The day after President’s Day, Trump’s DOGE has arbitrarily fired staff at the JFK Presidential Library, forcing it to close its doors,” Markey wrote on X. “Shutting down this vital place of learning, engagement, and revenue creation, if even for a day isn’t just wrong — it degrades the very office of the President.”
Ed Dept. Report Finds Mass. Fails To Support Special Ed Students
BY AYAAN AHMAD AND CLAIRE A. MICHAL CRIMSON STAFF WRITERS
The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education has failed to comply with a federal law to provide necessary support for students with disabilities, according to a U.S. Department of Education report released on Feb. 12.
The report by the Office of Special Education Programs identified 10 areas of noncompliance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, a federal law that guarantees free and appropriate public education for children with disabilities. The report stated that DESE did not address and resolve complaints in a timely manner and that Massachusetts lacked a “general supervision system” to identify children who are in need of special education and related services.
Cynthia L. Moore, former president of the Special Needs Advocacy Network, said the report “was long overdue.”
Ellen Chambers, the founder of SPEDWatch — an activist group that mobilized Massachusetts parents in support of the report — said she is “beside myself with the joy that this report is available.”
“They have been fighting with their school districts for decades, and finally, the feds have said, ‘Yes, parents, you are right. The state is wrong. Your children are being denied their special education rights,’” Chambers added.
DESE spokesperson Alexandra Smith wrote in a statement that the department “has taken steps to improve its special education general supervision system, including hiring additional staff and revising policies.”
DESE has increased the number of staff implementing IDEA requirements and processing state complaints.
Chambers said the long-awaited report “vindicates parents and other interested parties who have been complaining for decades that DESE does not enforce federal special education law.”
“This information that Massachusetts is not enforcing special education law is not new. What’s new is that we have visibility into it now with this federal report,” Chambers added.
“So this is a big step forward,” she said.
The report comes after complaints by Cambridge parents that Cambridge Public Schools’ special education system is unnecessarily opaque. An investigation by The Crimson found that parents across the district struggled to access specialized services for their children.
At the time, CPS Interim Superintendent David G. Murphy told the Crimson that the district is continuing to work on improving their special education resources.
A Cambridge Public Schools parent of a second grader with an Individualized Education Plan — which provides students with additional staff support tailored to their specific needs — said they needed to jump through hoops to secure support for their child.
The parent said they were only able to secure an IEP for their child once receiving a diagnosis from an independent psychiatrist — a resource which is not available to all parents.
As the family waited to receive an IEP, the parent reported that their second grader continued to struggle in school. After receiving an IEP and transitioning to a different CPS school, however, the parent said the situation improved.
As Cambridge parents report difficulties navigating the IEP process, advocates say that the state is failing to provide support for students with special education needs.
Massachusetts is widely regarded as having one of the best K-12 education systems in the country, and recently ranked the top state in all four categories of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Advocates like Chambers, however, say the statistics don’t reflect education for children with special needs, and can be misleading.
“Massachusetts’ reputation as top for education is based solely on regular education results,” Chambers said. “If it were based on what’s happening in special education, we would not hold that position at all.” Moore agreed, adding that Massachusetts is on par with Texas in terms of the disparity between special education and general education students.
“If you are a student with disabilities, you can expect an outcome similar to Texas. If you are a student without disabilities, you can expect the Massachusetts outcome,” she said. “Those are two very different realities.”
Chambers added that the academic achievement gap between
Massachusetts students with and without disabilities is “huge, and it has been growing wider every year since 1993.”
“It’s a very dire situation. It has been for decades,” she added.
While Chambers recognized that Massachusetts has strong special education laws, she said the state has failed to enforce the laws it has set in place.
“Massachusetts is struggling — because here’s the thing, Massachusetts doesn’t enforce the law,” Chambers said.
Katherine B. Gamble, a developmental neuropsychologist and former CPS parent, agreed that the report could provide the accountability needed for special education to improve.
“If there isn’t that accountability, then there’s a much larger opening for sort of abuse and neglect of these kids — and I mean that in terms of giving them the services that they need,” she said.
Despite the increased awareness, advocates were doubtful that meaningful policy change will follow the report due to the Trump administration’s series of federal funding cuts and repeated calls for the closure of the Department of Education.
“With what’s going on in Washington right now — where the Department of Education could very well be dissolved — there will be no one for parents to go to,” Chambers said.
“So the next step in this whole process for us is to identify mechanisms outside of DESE that we can use to enforce the law,” she added. Moore said that the report is not enough, stressing the importance for parents to continue coming together and get involved in advocacy to affect actual change.
“Alone, we’re vulnerable and together, we’re formidable,” she said. “I think that one of the ways that you fall victim to the system is that you solve it for your own child, or you suffer in silence.”
“For far too long, we’ve become a little bit passive about thinking that our rights were solid and that somebody was doing something on our behalf,” she added. “Folks need to realize that all of that can go away in a blink of an eye – and that the more of us that are engaged, the more powerful the change will be.”
Cambridge Halts Transition Wellness Center Funding
CITY GOV. Cambridge will allow the shelter’s lease to expire in June 2025, costing the city 58 beds.
BY DIEGO GARCÍA MORENO
The City of Cambridge plans to halt funding to the Transition Wellness Center Shelter in June, removing the shelter’s 58 beds as the city struggles to accommodate its unhoused population. The center — which is funded by the American Rescue Plan Act — opened in December 2020 as a response to the Covid-19 pandemic and was originally intended to close in 2023. The city extended funding of the program to June 2025, but will not extend it again when the lease expires. This change comes after the state-funded Safety Net Family
Shelter closed in December 2024, eliminating services for 70 families previously served by the institution.
While state funding for the Salvation Army shelter was set to run out in March 2023, Cambridge provided funding to save the 35 beds.
With Cambridge’s American Rescue Plan Act money running out, the city was unable to fund the TWCS beyond June 2025. According to Vice Mayor Marc C. McGovern, the city has decided to invest in long term rehabilitation programs instead.
“About half of that is going to be reinvested in helping create permanent supportive housing that we’ve been creating on Norfolk Street and Wendell Street and other places,” McGovern said.
Some longer-term residents of the Transition Wellness Center, he said, would move into the other facilities.
“A lot of them are going there, and some of them have already
gone I believe or are going soon,” he added.
McGovern said that while funding both long-term projects and emergency shelters would be ideal, a lack of funding forced the city to choose between the two.
“The reality is we need all those beds at Norfolk St. and Wendell St., and we need to keep the shelter space open,” he said. “We can’t do both, so they’re deciding to reinvest money into the housing piece of it, and the shelter is going to close.”
McGovern discussed the city’s plan to transition “longer-term” TWCS residents to more stable living situations, including helping them apply for supportive housing.
“They’re actually spending time and money sort of planning and trying to help people who are going to have to leave the shelter find another place to go,” McGovern added.
McGovern said that the city was taking these efforts – including investing its own money outside of
Allston Residents, Elected Officials Ask Harvard for More Benefits
BY ANGELINA J. PARKER AND EMILY T. SCHWARTZ CRIMSON STAFF WRITERS
As Harvard finalizes its Institutional Master Plan in Allston, residents and elected officials called on the University to fulfill previous promises and increase contributions to the Boston neighborhood.
The IMP—which sets terms for the University’s plans to develop its campus in Allston over the next ten years — has drawn attention from residents on the Harvard Allston Task Force, as well as Boston City Councilor Elizabeth “Liz” A. Breadon and Massachusetts State Representatives Michael J. Moran and Kevin G. Honan.
The task force and elected officials sent separate letters to the Boston Planning and Development Authority — which will hold a public hearing to consider Harvard’s IMP next month — encouraging Harvard to increase affiliate housing in the neighborhood and support public services. The IMP has faced criticism from Allston residents since it was first presented last January. The plan was formally filed in November and includes six new construction projects — three of which were proposed in the 2013 IMP— spanning nearly 720,000 square feet of construction.
In a letter addressed to Boston mayor Michelle Wu ’07 and BPDA officials, the task force criticized delays in Harvard’s execution of development plans laid out by its last IMP — effective from 2013 to 2025. The task force also made a series of requests for Harvard to help combat the lack of housing in the neighborhood.
Task force members specifically asked for Harvard to donate land
that it owns in Allston to be used for affordable housing.
“Land is the critical element currently missing in our community for creating more affordable housing,” residents wrote. “With nearly one-third of Allston’s land under its control, much of it underutilized — Harvard’s holdings present a critical opportunity to drive economic development, provide essential resources, and uplift the community.”
The letter also called on Harvard to contribute funding to Allston-Brighton Affordable Housing Fund and the Jackson Mann Community Center Revitalization Fund. Harvard has previously donated to the ABHF, but the letter states that the Revitalization Fund remains $75 million short of its funding goals.
Jackson Mann functions as the neighborhood’s only city-run community center, providing adult education classes, after school programming, and childcare. But since a 2019 report found that the building did not qualify for renovations due to poor conditions, Jackson Mann has scaled back several of its programs — mobilizing residents to demand a timeline for repairs.
The task force also requested that Harvard fund improvements for public parks, public schools, and the Harvard Allston Partnership Fund — a fund for nonprofits — in Allston.
The letter, which was also distributed to various Boston City Councilors and state representatives, was sent in late January. Two weeks later, Breadon, Moran, and Honan responded with their own letter to the BPDA which largely echoed the task force’s requests.
The letter included demands for increased funding for the com-
munity center and the ABHF. Elected officials also called on Harvard to construct residential housing for University affiliates, noting that the IMP’s development plans do not include such units.
But the officials did not amplify the task force’s request that Harvard contribute additional land to build affordable housing in the neighborhood.
The elected officials also called on Harvard to expand programming and outreach at the Harvard Ed Portal, a community benefit negotiated in the last IMP meant to offer educational programming to local residents.
“Harvard University is a world-renowned academic institution. Harvard owns and utilizes ~184 acres of land in Allston for institutional purposes,” the elected officials wrote. “As such, we believe that education-related measures must be a critical component of this IMP’s mitigation and community benefits package.”
“Harvard is reviewing and evaluating the feedback, comments, and requests that were submitted during the IMP comment period,” Harvard spokesperson Amy Kamosa wrote in a statement. “As the regulatory process continues, the University looks forward to continuing these ongoing conversations with City Officials, local elected officials, and community members.”
The city has scheduled a public meeting via Zoom on March 3 to discuss the latest iteration of the IMP, including time for public comment.
Barring additional delays, the board of the BPDA will vote on the final IMP on March 13.
ARPA — “to make sure that people have as soft a landing as possible in a really tough situation.”
“We’re just not going to have people show up one day and have the doors locked,” McGovern said.
“The city has really been trying to plan and give people a lot of lead time.”
Jim Stewart, the director of First Church Shelter, said that the process of moving from a shelter to long term supportive housing can sometimes take months or years for their residents.
“Generally you’re talking an excess of eight to 12 months to get people stashed away,” Steward said. Changes within the city and state shelter systems mirror the tightening budgets and growing demand that many local shelters are struggling with post-pandemic, potentially compounding a worsening problem.
“We also saw more shelter resources be made available during the pandemic to help people, but we’re now coming out of the pandemic. It’s been a couple years, the
BY STEPHANIE DRAGOI AND THAMINI VIJEYASINGAM CRIMSON STAFF WRITERS
International biotechnology company GlaxoSmithKline is moving its vaccine and infectious disease research teams to Cambridge, in a latest step to strengthen its presence in the Greater Boston area.
The research and development teams will relocate from Rockville, Maryland, to the company’s existing CambridgePark Drive location — one of their three company centers in the city — in mid-2026.
GSK expanded its footprint at 200 CambridgePark Drive in 2023, reaching almost 200,000 square feet on their lease under real estate management firm King Street Properties. Prior to 2023, the company held 45,000 square feet at the location.
“Our Cambridge Park Drive facility is home to cutting-edge technology platforms,” a GSK spokesperson wrote in an emailed statement. “The expansion of lab space here to include Vaccines R&D, will help us bring together expertise working on RNA and viral capabilities.”
The London-based pharmaceutical giant also has two research and development locations at 300 Technology Square and 301 Binney Street in Kendall Square.
While GSK currently has drug discovery and immunology research teams based out of the CambridgePark office, the spokesperson added that the location’s workforce expansion is a step in advancing the company’s goals.
“With the opportunity to expand our footprint in Cambridge, and the lease of the Rockville Vaccines site at 1420 Shady Grove coming up for renewal, we were able
to align our location strategy with our R&D ambition and innovation leadership, including attracting and retaining key talent,” they wrote.
GSK’s move comes as Cambridge has seen a jump in biotech start-ups signing leases in Kendall Square, increasing demand for coworking lab space while fueling research in the city. Other biopharma companies have also been expanding their footprint in Cambridge, with heavyweights like Takeda and AstraZeneca set to occupy 600,000 square feet and 570,000 sq ft in properties opening for occupancy in 2026.
GSK’s Rockville location, which opened in Dec. 2016, was GSK’s first U.S. center dedicated to vaccine research and development, and hosts 350 employees, according to the company’s website. The company’s announced relocation comes after a year of lower vaccine sales in Fiscal Year 2024. After predicting growth in vaccine sales in July of last year, poor performance from GSK’s Respiratory Syncytial Virus vaccine Arexvy led to an overall 4 percent drop in vaccine sales.
In a press release of their 2024 financial results, GSK wrote that vaccine performance “was also adversely impacted due to COVID-19 solution sales and US CDC stockpile replenishments in 2023.” The company recorded a total operating profit of more than $5 billion — a decrease of 33 percent from last year — mostly due to charges relating to an ongoing litigation for their drug Zantac. Other vaccine companies have seen sales and profit take a hit. Moderna recorded $3.2 billion in revenue for FY 2024— a drop of almost 50 percent from $6.8
Advocates Concerned As Boston PILOT Report Remain Unreleased
BY MEGAN L. BLONIGEN AND FRANCES Y. YONG CRIMSON STAFF WRITERS
As Boston mayor Michelle Wu ’07 revamps the Payment in Lieu of Taxes program, the city has yet to release the 2024 report on voluntary funding from non-profits — prompting concerns from the PILOT Action Group. While property taxes comprise nearly three quarters of Boston’s revenue, nonprofits — including Harvard — are exempt from paying this tax. Instead, the PILOT program asks large non-profits to voluntarily
pay a portion of what they would have otherwise paid in property taxes. Many nonprofits, however, fall short of the payments requested by the city — a trend documented in their annual report. While the report is traditionally released in the summer, it has been continuously pushed back in each year following the pandemic. This year, the report has yet to be released. “The fact that the numbers for fiscal ’24 have not been published is problematic,” PILOT Action Group co-chair Enid Eckstein said. “I think that makes it harder for the city to even think about
trying to put pressure on these institutions,” she added. “Without having the current numbers, it makes it harder for us to be able to be effective advocates.”
Boston officials are currently reevaluating the PILOT program in an attempt to secure tens of millions of dollars for the city. The restructuring is aimed at increasing city funding from institutions who have not met the city’s requests — like Harvard.
Despite owning property in Longwood — and nearly onethird of land in Boston’s Allston neighborhood — Harvard has fallen short on their PILOT payments for the last 12 years.
According to the Fiscal Year 2023 Educational PILOT Contributions, Boston requested that the University contributed $14 million in PILOT payments— but Harvard only paid $11 million.
“They have not lived up to the requested payment,” Eckstein said.
After Harvard failed to meet Boston’s requested PILOT payments in 2023, University spokesperson Amy Kamosa highlighted Harvard’s consistent contributions and community-facing initiatives.
Peter D. Enrich, a law professor at Northeastern University, said that the annual PILOT re -
port is an essential tool to hold large nonprofits responsible for their voluntary payments.
“Having the details of how at least the larger institutions are addressing their obligations to the city is an important way of holding those kinds of institutions accountable,” Enrich said.
Enrich added that PILOT payments can be particularly impactful in areas like Cambridge — which contains a small number of well-funded and endowed entities that are avoiding large amounts of tax.
If a city cannot collect taxes and does not receive PILOT payments, Enrich said they will either have less money in their
budget to spend on services that benefit the city, or they will “collect more taxes from the people who are taxable.”
Eckstein, who says she relies on the data releases to understand the impact of PILOT payments on the city, the delay in this year’s report has been a challenge.
“I think that makes it harder for the city to even think about trying to put pressure on these institutions,” she said. “Without having the current numbers, it makes it harder for us to be able to be effective advocates.”
Spaulding Hospital, which houses TWCS, is located in
GlaxoSmithKline opperates more than 200,000 square feet of real estate in Cambridge. SHERA S. AVI-YONAH — CRIMSON PHOTOGRAPHER
Student Theater at Harvard: Spring 2025 Season Preview
“Songs for a New World”
Feeling comedy, dark comedy, or drama?
Political commentary or light-hearted fun?
Want to know what Harvard’s student dramatists have cooked up? Grab a friend and head to the theater this semester — whether it be the Loeb, Agassiz, or Farkas Hall! Check out this eclectic mix of student-led musicals, plays, and more at Harvard running in Spring 2025.
“101 Damnations”
The Hasty Pudding Theatricals’ “101 Damnations” is a wild romp through Hell: Convinced she is there because of a fluke, Claire Ickle-Eror (Gabrielle M. Greene ’27) must escape from Hell’s CEO Lucy Fur (Bernardo de Moura Sequeira ’26) while banding together with a team of colorful rogues. The 176th installment of the Pudding’s storied annual burlesque musical comedy, which traces its lineage back to 1844, this year’s script is penned by Rodmehr Basidj ’26 and Jackson G. P. Coombs ’26. The Pudding’s 2025 Woman of the Year, Cynthia Erivo herself, watched the show’s premiere —
you, too, could be like her.
“101 Damnations” runs at Farkas Hall through March 9.
“Gruesome Playground Injuries”
A dark comedy by playwright Rajiv Joseph brought to Harvard by director Texaco U. M. Texeira-Ramos ’26, “Gruesome Playground Injuries” is the unconventional love story of two childhood friends (Lauren E. Mei ’27 and Andrew A. Spielmann ’25) brought together time and time again by tendencies towards injury and self-destruction. Audiences should be aware that this production contains foul language, blood, and bodily harm — but also compassion and humor.
“Gruesome Playground Injuries” runs at the Loeb Ex from Feb. 20 to Feb. 23.
“Postcard from Morocco”
“Postcard from Morocco” is Lowell House Opera’s 79th season production, the first main stage performance to take place in the historic Lowell House Dining Hall in seven years. Set to music by American composer Dominick Argento and directed by Haley M. Stark ’25, “Postcard from Morocco” is an examination of the human condition within the unusual setting of a waiting room — and fittingly staged in a unique space.
“Postcard from Morocco” runs at Lowell House from Feb. 21 to Feb. 23.
“be cozy”
Written and directed by Zach B. Halberstam ’25 — who was voted Renaissance Person of his class last semester — “be cozy” follows ambitious B-list horror movie actress Emily (Maibritt M. M. Henkel ’25) trapped on a shoot in which she loses sleep and starts to question her own reality. Meanwhile, Emily’s nerdy brother Andrew (Benjamin C. Walter ’26) and compulsive partner Robert (Isaac A. Newman ’25) encounter eerily powerful actor Steve (Matine Khalighi ’25) as they leave their own bubbles.
“be cozy” runs at the Loeb Ex from March 6 to March 9.
“Arcadia”
In 1809, the precocious teenager Thomasina (Natalie A. Bernstein ’28) asks her tutor questions about mathematics and sex both; in the present, the Lord Byron-centered investigation of a researcher (Anna S. Fitzsimmons ’25) and professor (James J. Farr ’25) lead them to the grounds of Thomasina’s house. A brilliant exploration of order, disorder, truth, and time, this critically revered play by Tom Stoppard will be staged at Harvard by director Ben L. C. Arthurs ’27. “Arcadia” was shortlisted for best science book ever written by the Royal Institution of Great Britain in 2006 — proving there’s a place for STEM concentrators in the theater, too.
“Arcadia” runs at the Agassiz Theatre from March 27 to March 30.
Something between a musical and a song cycle, “Songs for a New World” is written and composed by Jason Robert Brown of “Parade” and “The Last Five Years.”
Two men (Kaylor G. Toronto ’27 and Saman de Silva ’26) and two women (Gabrielle G. Medina ’26 and Shannon M. Harrington ’26) shift between myriad characters, from an imprisoned king to reunited lovers to Mrs. Claus, to spin songs scattered in premise but united by the theme of a decisive, life-changing moment. Pop, gospel, and jazz intermingle in Brown’s score, brought to Harvard by director Jess R. Hung ’25. “Songs for A New World” runs at the Loeb Ex from March 27 to March 30.
“Jesus Christ Superstar”
Presented by BlackCAST and directed by Hannah E. Alexis ’27, “Jesus Christ Superstar” is Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice’s anachronistic rock opera on the final days of Jesus Christ’s (Kiesse K. Nanor ’26) life, with a focus on narrator Judas’ (Milena J. Manocchia ’28) skepticism about Jesus’ messianic role. Harvard’s production is reset in 1972 Oakland — the headquarters of the Black Panther Party — situating Jesus as an activist facing government and media scrutiny amidst trouble from his own followers. As this semester’s Loeb Proscenium musical, “Jesus Christ Superstar” will enjoy a profession-
al-scale stage — rather fitting for its larger-than-life subject.
“Jesus Christ Superstar” runs at the Loeb Proscenium from April 9 to April 12.
“Starville: The 30th First Year Musical”
“Starville” is the 30th iteration of an annual musical entirely written, composed, and staffed by first-year Harvard students — an educational first foray into the campus theater scene for many. With book by Ana P. Reveles Leon ’28, music by Ian B. Kim ’28, and direction by Abby S. Gerstein ’28, “Starville” will feature an eclectic bunch of characters, the quest to find oneself, and a sci-fi twist. Come for a taste of the first-years’ talents!
“Starville” runs at the Agassiz Theatre from April 10 to April 13.
“SKETCH!”
Featuring comedy sketches from seven Harvard college students spanning all four class years, and directed by Sophie M. Garrigus ’25, “SKETCH!” is the only comedy show to take place in the Loeb this spring. The nature of sketch comedy — a compilation of short, funny scenes performed by actors, perhaps most famously associated with Saturday Night Live — and the numerous writers promise a diverse and lively show unlike any other production this semester.
“SKETCH!” runs at the Loeb Ex from April 11 to April 13.
“The Old Man and the Old Moon”
In this whimsical play suffused with indie-folk music — directed by Ria S. Cuéllar-Koh ’26, a Crimson Arts editor — the Old Man (Jack F. Griffin ’24), must abandon his duty of filling the moon with light in order to embark on an epic adventure in search of his lost wife (Yirenny Cordero ’25). As the Old Man and his shipmates journey across the seas, “The Old Man and the Moon” spins a comfortingly fable-esque yarn for young and old alike.
“The Old Man and the Old Moon” runs at the Loeb Ex from May 1 to May 4.
“9 to 5: The Musical” Featuring an original score by Dolly Parton — but still borrowing the iconic titular song for the opening number — “9 to 5” is a comedy adapted from the 1980 hit film of the same name. The story centers on working women Violet (Riley M. Cullinan ’27), Doralee (Chelsea J. Bohn-Pozniak ’27), and Judy (Grace G. Hawkins ’28), who take down their firm’s sexist
Directed
New York Fashion Week : Sivan 2025 Collection Review
Welcome to “The Hotel Sivan” — a luxury escape that combines elegance, comfort, and sustainable design. Menswear brand Sivan made their first appearance at New York Men’s Day (NYMD) — the opening event for New York Fashion Week — with a refined, travel-inspired collection that is sure to put the brand on the map.
“The Hotel Sivan” collection’s presentation was a masterclass in thematic storytelling, combining richly imagined sets with creative titles like “The Road Tripper,” “The Doorman,” “The Business Traveler,” “The Bellhop,” “The Extended Stay Guest,” and more. These titles reinforced Sivan’s vision for the collection and tied all of the pieces together. The presentation was divid -
ed into three sets: one that represented a hotel lobby, one that resembled a minimalist hotel room, and one ambiguous celebratory scene in which models posed tastefully with champagne in hand. In the lobby, models were interspersed around a baggage-laden trolley. On the desk nearby, a sage-green rotary phone and glass of champagne sat beside a sign that read “CONCIERGE.” The lobby in this presentation displayed a wide range of models and styles — mirroring the overlapping lives of guests at a real hotel. Most of the pieces in the lobby were jacket and trouser pairings, but the lengths, colors, and fabrics of these items varied widely. Blues, browns, sage greens, grays, and maroons were heavily featured, and the items ranged from suede to corduroy to wool. However, one look that stood out amongst
the sharp Melton trench coats and stately blazers was a cable-knit navy blue turtleneck and matching robe, which tied loosely at the waist. This look was aptly named “The Comfort Traveler.”
sually, the highlight of the set was a beautiful floral rug with navy blue, gold, and burgundy designs that coordinated with the colors of the collection.
Four looks were modeled here: a classic green robe and pajama set with visible blue stitching and oversized buttons, a pair of navy corduroy blue pants that matched an asymmetric jacket in the same material, a navy blazer coupled with a berry red poplin skirt and patterned gold tie, and a navy blue dress with two rows of golden buttons layered over a sage blouse.
The hotel room scene was more spare, instead focusing the audience’s attention on the models. A pile of custom towels rested on a bed draped in sheets the same sage hue as the phone. Beside it, a bedside table, teal lamp, and simple wooden chair helped to build the realism of the world Sivan had crafted. Vi -
Each look felt classic and wearable, with an elevated twist that made them both elegant and subtly unique.
Finally, the celebratory scene had the most minimalist set of all, a mere blue carpet, marble floor paneling, and a handful of navy blue cushioned chairs. This ensured all eyes
were on the collection’s looks, which were displayed by models grasping champagne glasses and talking amiably with each other.
The brand’s roots in bespoke men’s tailoring were especially evident in this scene: pinstriped and navy evening suits atop silk blouses in white, baby blue, and pink, with bow ties and sashes of coordinating colors. The suits appeared in a range of fabrics: crepe, velvet, alpaca, and silk. These unexpected color pairings added a charming element of fun to an otherwise stiffly formal collection.
Sivan probed the gender binary of fashion by including multiple looks that paired a suit jacket with a full length-skirt. Sivan aims to expand men’s options for “expressing what it means to be a man in a suit,” and this collection felt fully representative of that mission.
The presentation also centered Sivan’s commitment to low-waste fashion and belief that good design hinges on sustainability. Vintage furniture was used in the sets, and Sivan prioritized eco-conscious design, production, and distribution of their products. Overall, the collection was a tribute to the craft of tailoring and the timeless appeal of a well-designed wardrobe. According to their website, the brand centers “functionality and fun” and “timelessness over trends,” and this collection clearly embodied that ethos. Imbued with Sivan’s signature elegance and imagination, it delivers both wearability and style. To summarize the collection in one sentence: Once you check into “The Hotel Sivan,” you’ll never want to leave.
NEW YORK FASHION WEEK
BY CHRISTIAN A. GINES CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
Atop the 39th floor of a building in New York’s Financial District with a view of an orange-pink sunset drenching the East River in gold, Patricio Campillo made his return to New York Fashion Week with his latest collection, “Fictions of Reality.” Campillo — a self-taught designer — founded the brand Campillo in 2017, and it remains under his creative direction today.
“Fictions of Reality” marks Campillo’s second collection after being named a semifinalist for the LVMH Prize — one of the most prestigious prizes for upand-coming brands and designers — which includes mentorship, guidance, and funding. Equipped with substantial financial backing and an ability to up the scale of already intricate designs and productions, Campillo is well on his way to staking a convincing claim on the fashion industry.
Days before the show, Campillo stated that he has big goals for the brand and is specifically inspired by the model of the French luxury fashion house Hermès. With a focus on craft and process, he hopes to turn the brand into a “Mexican Loewe” — referring to the Spanish brand that has been led by designer Jonathan Anderson for over a decade. Like Loewe, Campillo has a propensity for playing with silhouettes and materials with attention to meticulous tailoring. The runway for the Campillo show wasn’t decorated, but it wasn’t vacant either. The unadorned space set the scene for the fashion show. The open concrete slabs throughout the score and the runway’s cracked concrete set an ominous, dark, haunting scene. This ambiance was heightened by a layer of bright lights that created dark shadows on the models’ backs as they walked through the middle of the crowd, with the audience split on each side of the runway. Almost all of the models were people of color, creating a story of inclusion through the reclamation of culture — an important facet of Campillo’s brand. The show started with an orchestral piece exploding from the speakers, and the first model walked out wearing an elevated charro look. This first look featured a black suit jacket shaped with a cutout flare at the torso and flared pants with small silver coffee flowers lining the outside of each leg. The look was paired with black cowboy boots. This opening set the stage for a show that eloquently told a story of love and culture. Tailoring was the emphasis of Campillo’s show: Many of the looks included deconstructed suit
New York Fashion Week: Campillo 2025 Collection Review
UNIQUE CREATIONS. Patricio Campillo made his return to New York Fashion Week with his latest collection, “Fictions of Reality.”
in the show were muted hues of gray, cream, brown, and black, with some ombré looks where light brown and orange faded into each other. Most of the shoes in the show were either black or brown boots — a nod to traditional charro style. Scarves woven into
the collection, effectively conveying the wonder and magical realism of the show. Across all of the looks, Campillo’s design language was almost architectural in style. Precision and craft were clearly present in the construction of the garments, which made for highly inventive, sharp, and unique creations. The show was accompanied by mournful Mexican rancheras, including multiple songs by Chavela Vargas, like “Piensa en Mí” and “Paloma Negra.” Both are songs about longing, pain, and suffering, which created a dark tone for the runway show. The songs added to the tensions of joy and sorrow — love and pain — present throughout the clothes. A standout outfit was the third look: a sharp suit and gray-striped blouse. The model wore the suit along with a large gray sombrero-inspired headpiece that engulfed the entire look, providing a smooth flow which was wonderfully exaggerated by the fluid walk of the model. The surreal look of the hat furthered the feeling of a dream-like trance.
The show’s final look was a multicolored feathered jacket layered with orange and black feathers. In the background, “Soñé” by Zoé was playing — a song of love and desire that ended the show on a high note. The song and the sunset that decorated the windows as the models walked through truly encapsulated the feelings of what it means to be caught in the fiction of reality inspired by magical realism, surrealist paintings, and Campillo’s memories. At the end of the show, Campillo came out for his bow. Making a bold statement with his attire, he wore a shirt that read “Golfo de México,” a jab at President Donald Trump’s claims about changing the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. This brave decision by the Mexican-born designer served as the perfect bookend to an incredible show that displayed the wonders of fashion inspired by Mexican heritage.
christian.gines@thecrimson.com
Artist Profile: Alan T. Gilbert ’89 on Musical Inspiration
BY LARA R. TAN CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
Conductor and violinist Alan T. Gilbert ’89 has come a long way since his undergraduate years at Harvard.
After studying with violinist Masuko Ushioda at New England Conservatory during his time in Boston and completing further conducting studies at Juilliard and Curtis, he made his first splash on the American stage as assistant conductor of the Cleveland Orchestra from 1995 to 1997.
To follow were engagements with companies as diverse and prominent as the Santa Fe Opera, Royal Stockholm Philharmonic Orchestra, Metropolitan Opera, and, as he may be most fondly remembered, music director of the New York Philharmonic from 2009 to 2017.
In between engagements in Hamburg and Boston, Gilbert sat down with The Crimson to discuss his artistic horizons and musical inspirations across his illustrious career. Gilbert previously spoke to The Crimson in 2009 and 2014 about his time at Harvard, but for the unacquainted reader, he built up a whopping roster of close to a hundred performances during his undergraduate career — av-
eraging out to no less than one concert a week. He took the opportunity to program works by his composer friends, study composition himself, serve as music director from 1988 to 1989 of Harvard’s largest student-run orchestra, the Bach Society Orchestra, and conduct the Lowell House Opera. At Harvard, he developed not only his musical sensibilities in programming and performing but also crucial know-how on making a performance happen, from printing flyers and sheet music to ensuring his concerts sold out.
While Gilbert may have since left Harvard’s student-run music scene, he currently has another serendipitous opportunity to relive his undergraduate career. His daughter, Noemi S. William-Olsson Gilbert ’27, is an English concentrator in Dunster House similarly involved in the Harvard music scene as a violinist in the Harvard-Radcliffe Orchestra.
“I’m sure she’s getting more academically out of [her Harvard experience] than I did,” Gilbert said, alluding humorously to his own academic record: He made the last-minute decision to switch from an English to a Music concentration after being unable to fulfill the graduation requirements for English.
Apart from his family life
bringing him back to Boston, Gilbert maintains strong ties with the Boston Symphony Orchestra as a guest conductor. Nevertheless, he named Sweden and Germany as his artistic and personal homes, a far cry from the bustling intersections of New York City where he grew up. His wife is Swedish cellist Kajsa William-Olsson, a member of the Royal Stockholm Philharmonic Orchestra, and his sister Jennifer Gilbert now plays as concertmaster of the Orchestre National de Lyon. Having such family connections in Europe means that Europe has never been far from Gilbert’s mind.
“A lot of my life has been sort of pulling in the direction of Europe, and the eight years as music director with the New York Philharmonic were absolutely a golden period in my life. It was an amazing opportunity to work with such a fabulous workshop. But at the same time, I’ve always felt very comfortable making music in Europe,” Gilbert said.
In Europe, Gilbert has served as Chief Conductor of the NDR Elbphilharmonie Orchestra since 2019, as well as Music Director of the Royal Swedish Opera since 2022. The rootedness and security felt in these posts is a testament to the career he has built since his days fresh out of Har-
vard, when he had to prove himself as a guest conductor before securing more long-term posts as an assistant conductor and finally music director.
“I think I’m extremely lucky in that I’m chief conductor in places where I really want to be, where I feel like I can make good music and make a difference. But I’m also able to choose a few select orchestras to work as a guest conductor,” Gilbert said. Working primarily in his home bases of Germany and Sweden — in addition to Boston and Cleveland — allows him to deepen relationships with friends and colleagues who are similarly situated. Gilbert also continues to perform in summer festivals as a violinist, and travels to Japan every year to work as principal guest conductor of the Tokyo Metropolitan Symphony Orchestra. Honoring his violinist roots helps him to continue understanding the orchestra from an instrumentalist’s perspective, and as a conductor, the opportunity to work with different orchestras has kept him flexible and sensitive to the unique demands of each.
His robust artistic vision has undoubtedly ensured he is one of the most in-demand conductors today, with his dedication to expose audience members to as
diverse an œuvre as possible. He reiterated his core belief that audiences get more out of the works of canonical composers when juxtaposed with contrasting works, often more contemporary in nature and origin.
“I think it’s important for the field of Music (with a capital ‘M’) to support contemporary composers and to let them know that what they’re doing is valid and important and adds to the future canon of music,” Gilbert said.
At the time of The Crimson’s conversation with Gilbert, he was in the middle of the NDR Elbphilharmonie’s Visions festival, consisting entirely of 21st-century music.
“I know how difficult it is, and I know how much dedication it takes and how much faith you have to keep even when things are hard and when you don’t get opportunities to have your pieces performed,” Gilbert said.
He emphasized his gratification that audiences were not turned away by his ambitious programming choices and reaffirmed his impetus to challenge audiences to explore music outside the canon of symphonic works like those of Beethoven, Brahms, Tchaikovsky and the like.
Especially in an increasingly turbulent world with a trend
of diminishing public support of the arts, Gilbert finds himself invigrated by the challenge of keeping music relevant in the societies he calls his homes. Beyond educational measures to raise awareness of music’s place in society, Gilbert reaffirmed a musician’s fundamental purpose to make music with as much passion and commitment as possible, with qualities such as communicativeness and generosity underpinning a profound “desire to build human connections.” Echoing the call of fellow Harvard alumnus and conductor Leonard Bernstein ’39 to make music “more devotedly than ever before” in times of crisis, Gilbert reiterated his resistance to cynicism and the responsibility he feels to use music to highlight peoples’ connections rather than differences.
“I think the best thing we can do is to lead by example and to live a life that really underlines the belief we have in the power of music and the power of art and the importance of culture in our society,” Gilbert said. Alan Gilbert will conduct a program of Haydn symphonies and Stravinsky’s Violin Concerto with the Boston Symphony Orchestra, running at Symphony Hall from Feb. 20 to 22.
lara.tan@thecrimson.com
COURTESY OF ZEESHAAN SHABBIR
FIFTEEN MINUTES 15
Professor
Q&A:
CHRISTINA MARANCI ON MEDIEVAL ARMENIAN CHURCHES AND CRUMBLING GRANDEUR
They were understood by their worshipers — and still are — as something very different.
FM: In one of your written reflections on your work, you described Mren, an Armenian Church dated to circa 636, “as not inanimate. On the contrary, it was overcrowded with lives.” What responsibility do you and all art historians owe the unnamed individuals who conceived of, built, and occupied spaces we can now only study?
CM: For me, working in my field, I realized early on that I couldn’t study these buildings simply as works of art.
I realized I have to be more than just an art historian sitting in a library doing my work, that I needed to take care of buildings. They are not just buildings. They embody generations and generations and generations of the people who worshiped in them, who built
them, who preached from the altar. And that’s not just a pie in the sky thought, it’s made very real because traditionally, Armenian church buildings like Mren, they’re inscribed. They’re written on all over and they say things like, “remember me, Shushan” or Susan, and “my prayers and my sons” and this and that.
We have voices and lives and families that have helped to create and shape these churches, just as much as the initial architects. So that’s very meaningful, and it’s even more meaningful then when the building is in danger, neglect, vandalism, ultimately collapse — you’re losing all those voices.
FM: What does a typical day of field work look like for you?
CM: A typical day of field work is happening in eastern Turkey, or what we can also call historical Armenia. Get up early in the morning, put on your hiking boots, and you have a good
breakfast. I have to bring my own coffee because I need coffee in the morning, and often when I’m on the road, I only get tea or Nescafé, which doesn’t count as coffee, to be honest.
I guess I should say there are two kinds of field work. One kind is me doing my work on buildings: examining them, reading inscriptions, taking picture after picture after picture after picture, making drawings sometimes — although I’m not good at that. The other part is me working with a group where we’re actually doing work on the buildings
Defense Shines in Ivy Wins
Harvard women’s basketball (19-3, 8-2 Ivy) secured a pair of crucial conference wins over New York foes, dominating Cornell (7-16, 3-7 Ivy) with a 66-29 rout before edging out top-ranked Columbia (18-5, 9-1) in a hard-fought 60-54 victory.
The pair of victories extends Harvard’s win streak to four games, as the team has entered its most dominant stretch of the season, conceding a remarkable 43.5 points-per-game in the month of February.
In its finest defensive performance of the Ivy League season, the Crimson held the Big Red to an abysmally low offensive output, a stark contrast to the 72-60 outing the two squads had at the start of February.
The senior tandem of Harmoni Turner and Elena Rodriguez shined in this matchup, leading the way with 21 and 18 points, respectively. Harvard opened the game with a dominant 8-0 run, punctuated by a steal and fast-break layup and-one from Rodriguez, causing Cornell to call timeout. The reset helped the Big Red find its first basket, but the Crimson quickly countered with
another 8-0 surge, fueled by seven points from Rodriguez in the period.
The Crimson defense hounded the Big Red throughout the period, keeping it scoreless for nearly seven minutes. Though Cornell managed a late surge to cut the deficit to single digits, a jumper from junior captain Katie Krupa ensured Harvard ended the period with an 18-7 lead.
Harvard’s defensive dominance carried into the second quarter, keeping Cornell off the scoreboard until the 5:34 mark. Remarkably, the Crimson didn’t allow a single field goal in the period, as the Big Red struggled to a dismal 0-for-12 shooting and 3-for-23 in the first half. While Harvard generated quality looks from beyond the arc, only Turner capitalized, draining two treys to stretch the lead to 24-7.
Cornell ended its scoring drought at the charity stripe, but Rodriguez quickly took control. Showcasing her finesse in the paint, she used her masterful footwork to shake her defender, drawing a foul while sinking a smooth hook shot. After converting the and-one, she followed with another post hook, helping Harvard head into halftime with a commanding 29-12 lead. Turner quickly established her presence to start the second half, generating turnovers and igniting a personal 7-0 run. Drawing multiple defenders with her paint pres-
ence, Rodriguez found junior Saniyah Glenn-Bello for another triple, extending Harvard’s lead to 39-14 and forcing a Cornell timeout.
This time, the timeout provided no relief for the Big Red, who succumbed to Harvard’s relentless full court press. Consecutive turnovers led to easy layups for Turner and Glenn-Bello. Harvard stretched its lead to as much as 30 points, but a late Cornell three-pointer narrowed the gap to 50-22 heading into the final quarter.
Though the final period presented merely a formality, Rodriguez and Turner continued to dominate, combining for a 9-2 run. Both of their days were over halfway through the period, but the Crimson continued its perimeter assault with Karlee White and Krupa knocking down triples. Harvard’s defense did not surrender a point for the final four minutes, as Harvard topped Cornell 66-29. The Crimson’s defensive masterclass carried into its rematch with the Lions, prevailing 60-54 and avenging its previous 80-71 loss. Turner delivered an all-around performance, tallying 22-8-7 points-rebounds-assists including 10-for-16 free throw shooting. Glenn-Bello and sophomore Abigail Wright each contributed 12 points including timely baskets down the stretch. Unlike the previous matchup against Columbia, Harvard’s de-
fense set the tone early, holding the Ivy League’s top offense to a dismal 0-for-8 shooting to start the match. Despite the defensive success, Harvard struggled to break through Columbia’s man-to-man strategy, leading only 4-3 halfway through the period.
After junior Gabby Anderston stripped Columbia standout Riley Weiss, she delivered a precise cross court pass to Glenn-Bello for a triple. Weiss lost possession again, this time to Turner, who capitalized by drawing a foul and sinking a pair of free throws. Columbia finally converted a field goal, but Turner quickly responded, going right down the floor and threading a bounce pass between two defenders for a Wright layup. Columbia struggled from the field, shooting just 1-for-13 in the first quarter. However, the Lions made up for it at the free throw line, going 7-for-8 to cut the Crimson lead to 14-9 by the end of the period.
Scoring slowed in the second quarter, but the Lions edged the Crimson 7-5 in the period, chipping away at the deficit. Weiss finally connected on her first field goal of the night, but Turner answered immediately with a deep three-pointer.
Harvard endured a seven minute scoreless stretch while also coughing up possession seven times. The Lions failed to capital-
ize, shooting just 2-for-6, committing five turnovers of their own, and never pulling closer than 17-16. Turner eventually snapped the dry spell, driving inside before stepping back for a smooth jumper and sending Harvard into halftime with a 1916 lead. Columbia found its offensive groove in the third quarter, outscoring Harvard 27-18 in the period. Weiss ignited the Lions’ surge, knocking down a corner three to tie the game at 19-19 to start the quarter. Columbia methodically passed its way out of the Harvard press, eventually finding another corner triple to gain its first lead of the game.
The Lions maintained the momentum as Kitty Henderson finished a backdoor cut for an and-one and Weiss knocked down another triple to complete a commanding 12-0 run. Freshman Karlee White ended Harvard’s drought by securing an offensive board and converting it into second-chance points.
Turner earned trips to the charity stripe, making just 3-of-6 attempts in the third quarter. Wright provided a spark with six points, helping Harvard close the gap to 37-35. However, back-to-back late three-pointers extended the Lions to 43-37 with one more quarter to go. With its back against the wall, the Crimson rattled off a massive 9-0 run, including two three-point-
ers from Turner and Glenn-Bello to regain the lead at the start of the fourth quarter. After giving up a layup, Harvard’s defense regrouped with poise, holding the Lions scoreless for over three minutes, much to the chagrin of the Levien crowd. However, Harvard’s offense struggled to capitalize, managing only two layups from Wright during this stretch. After Columbia broke its scoring drought, the Crimson only led 50-47. Turner closed the game strong, crossing her defender and knocking down a left-handed floater. After missing another floater, she gathered her own offensive rebound, dishing it to Glenn-Bello for a triple from the top of the key, pushing Harvard’s lead to 56-49. The Crimson closed the game from the free throw line, not ceding any ground to the Lions, and arriving at the final score of 60-54. The pair of victories kept Harvard in third place in the Ivy League, but the team made significant progress in its quest for first place, now just a game behind joint leaders Columbia and Princeton. The Crimson’s dominant defensive performances also propelled it back to the No. 1 scoring defense in the country. Next, Harvard travels to Providence, RI for a showdown against Brown on Saturday at 2:00PM.
Back before the introduction of the Ivy Madness tournament, head coach Tommy Amaker used to tell his team that the league was won on performances like tonight when Harvard (9-13, 4-5 Ivy) dominated Columbia (12-10, 1-8 Ivy) 87-75. With teams typically playing two consecutive games in under 24-hours, the outcome on a Saturday night could define a team’s momentum from the weekend regardless of the outcome from the night before. While the league winner is no longer determined exclusively by standings, the Saturday night saying holds true. Despite a statement win against Cornell on Friday, Harvard entered Saturday’s contest against Columbia locked into a tight battle for a spot in the Ivy Madness tournament.
Two of the Crimson’s closest competitors, Brown (12-10, 4-5 Ivy) and Dartmouth (12-10, 6-3
Ivy), also won on Friday night, putting the pressure on coach Tommy Amaker and his team to beat Columbia in hopes of closing the two-game gap to postseason qualification. Led by a career-high 31 points from sophomore forward Thomas Batties II, who shot 12-15 from the floor and 4-6 from three point range, breaking his career high for a second consecutive night, Harvard cruised to a victory over the Lions.
“What a game by Thomas,” reflected coach Amaker. “That was a career game for him, just so efficient and productive in every different way.
“His presence on both ends, you know, has been tremendous for our team,” added Amaker. “Certainly, tonight was just a big showcase of that.”
Columbia came to Harvard looking to play, and despite entering the game as 2.5 point underdogs, found themselves up 11-7 with four minutes played after some quality offense.
Any hopes the Lions may
have had of building a significant early lead, however, were quickly extinguished by Batties. The sophomore, coming off a career high 21-points against Cornell on Friday night, kicked off his evening with a pair of back to back threes within 40 seconds.
A layup from junior co-captain Chandler Piggé gave the Crimson its first lead of the night, 12-11, and after an unanswered 7-0 individual run from co-captain Evan Nelson, Harvard’s lead was up to six, 19-13. the following week. In the midst of that sequence was an emphatic block from Batties, who would go on to record a game-high three blocks on the night.
As the Crimson sought to build up a bigger lead, the shots kept falling. Senior guard Louis Lesmond cashed in two three pointers, before another pair of layups from both Batties and Nelson pushed the lead to 12, 34-22.
Coach Amaker called for a timeout after an old-fashioned
three point play and a darting layup from Columbia cut the lead to seven with 4:45 left in the half.
First-year guard Robert Hinton responded with a fading long two and a Batties added yet another three pointer for Harvard to bring the lead back to 12, 3927. Nelson responded to the Lion’s next five points with five of his own, keeping the lead, 44-32. Columbia couldn’t convert on the final play of the half, retaining the Crimson’s 12 point lead heading into halftime.
All-in all Harvard shot a blistering 71% from the field in the first half, including 7-9 or 78% from three point range.
Thomas Batties was perfect from the field through the break, making all 6 of his field goal attempts, including three from beyond the arc.
“My coach lit a fire under me,” said Batties after the game. “It’s just trusting my teammates. It’s really the same formula that worked last night, I just happened to have more points today. I’m always going
to trust my game. Everybody that is behind me tells me to do the same – have confidence. That’s just what I’m going out and doing. Just attacking,” he added. Both teams started the second half strong. The Crimson were led by Lesmond, who knocked down another pair of threes and bullied his way inside with a hook shot to double his point tally on the night to 16 and maintain the lead, 52-44.
Hinton had his jumper blocked, but recovered, rebounded, and recycled the ball back to Batties, who cashed in on yet another three to break his career high, with 22 points and 13:23 still left to play.
The rising star wasn’t satisfied though, muscling his way inside and scoring an and one, converting the free throw to give Harvard its biggest lead of the game, 69-52. A few sequences later, Batties would record another huge block, before freshman guard Austin Hunt found him free for a layup inside the paint for two more.
Harvard managed to maintain its comfortable edge for the rest of the second half. Hunt wanted in on the scoring action too — cashing in a corner three to put his team up 80-64, with 3:43 to play, much to the joy of the Crimson bench. Columbia attempted to rally late, daring Harvard to make its free throws and seal the game, but it would do just that. After Saturday’s other games around the league, Harvard remains tied for fifth place with Brown, but is now just one game behind both Princeton and Cornell, who were both blown out by Yale and Dartmouth respectively. Now with just five games remaining, the Crimson will head south for a final road stretch, playing crucial back-to-back away matches at Princeton and Penn next weekend to keep its postseason hopes alive. Harvard will then return to Lavities for a three-game homestand to close out the regular season.
Harvard Wrestling Falls to Columbia
Tihe Crimson wres -
tling team (0-7, 0-4
Ivy) fell short to host Columbia (4-7, 1-3
Ivy) Saturday, losing 32-8 in a dual that was much closer than the final tally would imply. This was the first action for the Harvard squad since Feb. 2, when they lost back-to-back duals to Princeton and Penn. The Crimson knew it needed to clean up its performance on the mat to defeat the Lions, with both teams seeking their first league dual victories.
Despite very strong performances from Crimson freshman Logan Brzozowski and junior Jimmy Harrington, Harvard did not triumph at home. The dual started with Columbia taking a 4-0 lead as sophomore Lion Sulayman Bah defeated Harvard sophomore and 125-pounder Isaiah Adams via major decision.
It wasn’t long, though, until Harvard stole Columbia’s lead.
In the 133 pound bout, Crimson sophomore Logan Brzozowski battled with Connor Smith of Columbia. Brzozowski got in on two early single-leg attacks. He was able to finish one of these takedowns then rode
Smith out for the remainder of the first period. In the second period, Brzozowski escaped quickly and took Smith down again to extend his lead to 7 points. After Brzozowski gave up a reversal late in the second, the remainder of the match was all Harvard. Brzozowski dominated Smith in the third period with three additional takedowns. With the riding time point, Brzozowski went on to win the match via technical fall 21-6. This brought the team tally in Harvard’s favor 5-4. In a post-dual interview, Brzozowski spoke about his third-period domination.
“Coaches told me before the match: just lay it on him,” Brzozowski said. “I just listened to my coaches and did what I’m told. [I] kept my head down, and kept it rolling — just keep scoring points. That’s it.”
The next match came in the 141-pound weight class, where Harvard junior Dante Frinzi would square off against Lion sophomore Lorenzo Frezza. Despite a hard-fought first period, and a stoic pinfall defense when he was caught in bad positioning, Frinzi went on to lose the match via technical fall 17-2.
The 149-pound bout featured sophomore Jaden Pepe for the Crimson. Pepe mounted a small comeback in the third period
with a decisive takedown, but it was too little too late, as he would go on to fall via decision 8-3.
Other than the Brzozowski victory, Harvard’s only other individual win came in the 157-pound weight class. Crimson junior Jimmy Harrington dominated for the first two periods — and fended off enough upper-body wrestling in the third period that the match could’ve easily been mistaken for Greco-Roman style — on his way to a 4-1 victory via decision. The Crimson bench exploded after this Harrington victory — though it was the last win for Harvard on the day.
The next three matches went technical fall, major decision,
and again technical fall in favor of the Lions, as Harvard seniors 165 pounder Cael Berg, 174 pounder Alex Whitworth , and 184 pounder Luke Rada all fell to their respective Columbia opponents. Columbia led to dual 268, thanks to bonus points earned from the technical falls and major decision. The final two matches of the day were losses for Harvard, though they were highly competitive. In the 197-pound weight class, freshman Hudson Skove of Harvard fell just short of his comeback bid against Columbia’s Joe Curtis. A takedown in the third period left Skove behind by only 3 points, but even with legs in, Curtis was able to
Harvard Wins ECAC Championship SPORTS
As sophomore Rohan Murali ripped a cross-court forehand winner to seal a 4-2 win over Princeton (9-4, 0-0 Ivy), Harvard (8-3, 0-0 Ivy) men’s tennis earned an honorable title for the 24th time in program history: ECAC Tournament Champions. The team, swarming Murali after his three-set thriller, dominat-
ed Brown and Penn before taking down Princeton in a Sunday evening showdown. Against the Bears and Quakers, the Crimson only dropped one point. Entering Sunday’s matchup across from the Tigers, the team had extra motivation to clinch the title and add hardware to its extensive collection.
4-3 losses earlier in the season to No. 7 Duke, No. 14 Texas A&M, and No. 20 University of Michigan left the team disappointed, but undeterred.
“We were disappointed a little
bit not to get over the line especially because we were so close, but I think that we will use that as fuel and motivation for the rest of the season,” said junior Melchior Delloye.
Still, after a 6-1 trouncing of Louisville, the team recognizes the momentum built over the season.
“It’s been a really positive season. We’ve played four top 25 teams,” said Delloye. “I think we’re feeling good and we’ve got some good wins, including the ones against NC State and Northwestern.”
“In the fall, we were missing Danny and David, who were taking the semester off,” he continued.
“Myself, Mark, Valdemar, and Masa had to step up and lead by example and help the freshmen and sophomores bond with the team. We’ve really come together and the season has helped us become really close.”
“Especially this weekend, ECACs, we were really hungry to use the good performances this season to carry that into matches,” Delloye concluded.
Opening up action, the Crimson — entering the match losing only one doubles point — were stunned by intense play from the Tigers. On
the first court, Filipos Astreinidis and Paul Inchaupse broke serve early and defeated freshman Benjamin Privara and junior Masato Perera, the 21st-ranked tandem in the nation. Shortly after, seniors Daniel Milavsky and David Lins struck back and secured a 6-3 win on court 2. With the point coming down to the third and final court, the teams lined up to cheer on Delloye and fellow junior Valdemar Pape’s match.
Electric points ultimately fell in the Lions’ favor as the juniors fell 6-3, giving Princeton the doubles point and a 1-0 lead entering singles play.
In need of a jolt, Harvard quickly responded with three singles wins from Delloye, Milavsky, and Perera, giving the Crimson a 3-1 advantage. Privara, playing on court 2, fell to Inchaupse — the 20th-ranked singles player in the nation — in straight sets.
Both Pape and Murali found themselves in tight contests heading to third sets. One more win was all that was needed for the Crimson to be ECAC Champions once again. In tense environments where
crowd pressure, nerves, and self-inflicted mistakes can take hold of players, coaching becomes vital to calm a player down. Luckily for the Crimson, Head Coach Andrew Rueb ’95, in his 7th year at the top of the program, had the full trust of players.
“I know they’ve really helped us take a step forward and really focus on our intentions and what really helps us on the court, not really focusing too much on the result,” reflected Delloye. As Murali settled down and found his rhythm, he moved his opponent, Evan Wen, from side to side. His precision and calculated strikes enabled him to claw back from a one set deficit. When he slapped his forehand to win the match 3-6, 6-1, 6-3, the team quickly surrounded him and let out joyous, triumphant screams.
“A big reward for the hard work that we put in and kind of the great performances that we’ve put in this season,” said Delloye. “We trust each other and we put in the work every day.”
praveen.kumar@thecrimson.com
Crimson Squeaks By Providence
off the jump, but we learned, we saw what they did, and we adjusted.”
PROVIDENCE, R.I. – The No. 17 Harvard men’s lacrosse team (1-0, 0-0 Ivy) found glory on the road this past Saturday, squeaking past the No. 20 Providence Friars 12-10. Despite coming out to a slow start, Harvard Head Coach Gerry Byrne’s squad was able to level the score at six-apiece at the half before reclaiming the turf and clinching its first victory of the 2025 season.
Division I lacrosse was anybody’s game this past weekend, with the Richmond Spiders toppling No. 7 Virginia, Villanova besting the No. 9 Yale Elis in what is always a tough contest between the two programs, and No. 6 Maryland handily beating No. 2 Syracuse 11-7. The Crimson’s ability to clinch its contest against a top-20 team will help solidify its strength of schedule as the field shifts amongst these top programs. After beating the Friars 23-7 last year, all eyes were on Harvard to see if the team could repeat the stellar performance. Providence came into the contest hot off of two difficult wins against Holy Cross and Bryant, and utilized that confidence to race out to an early 2-0 lead just 45 seconds into play. It seemed from the jump that Providence would run away with the game, but the level-headed coaching from Byrne brought his team back down from its nervousness, and allowed the Crimson to get its foot in the door for a win. On a textbook fastbreak off the face off clamp, Providence got one past Harvard’s freshman goaltender Graham Stevens, who had a standout performance to mark his first ever collegiate contest. Stevens – who was able to work past the pressure of the high-pace push from the Friars – recorded 13 saves on the day, which earned him the title of most saves in a collegiate start for a Harvard goalie since at least 2007. The rookie found himself standing on his head several times throughout the contest, looking rock-solid in the cage. It was his presence as well as the leadership of senior defenders Martin Nelson, Tommy Martinson, Logan Darrin, senior SSDM Ray Dearth – who posted three CTOs and three GBs – junior SSDM Owen Guest, and sophomore defender Joost de Koning – amongst others – that stymied Providence’s momentum to keep the contest in the Crimson’s hands.
“It was the first game of the season, you’re always going to have those first quarter nerves,” junior attackman Teddy Malone said. “But I think we stayed composed, we trusted that we’d fall into a rhythm as the game progressed. It wasn’t pretty, but ultimately we got the job done.”
“We’re a learning team,” Stevens furthered. “We didn’t come out hot
Adjusting was the name of the game as Harvard wouldn’t find the back of the net for almost 11 minutes following Providence’s run, with the opening strike coming from veteran middie Miles Botkiss, who posted three points on the day with two goals and an assist. 30 seconds
Sean Jordan turned possession right back over to Providence. The Friars had a difficult time clearing the ball, going 18-24 on the day, as the fundamentals of catching and throwing seemed to evade the program at the midfield line. This time, Darrin was able to scoop up the errant pass, and get the ball down to the offense where the attack had
CTO. The trio of King, Speidell, and Malone certainly found its rhythm on Saturday. At the face off X, possession, or lack thereof, proved to be a mark against the Crimson as Providence out-clamped Harvard 19-7. As a result, productive, settled six-on-six play evaded the Crimson in the first half. The effort to get the ball down
later, The Friars answered the call, capitalizing on a slow rotation from the Crimson defense that left Providence’s Jack Horrigan open for an easy dish on the crease.
Following a series of turnovers from Providence and Harvard that made the crowd question whether freshman lacrosse really is a thing of the past, Byrne called a timeout that proved, literally, to be a game-changer. Returning to the field settled, it was all Botkiss again as the senior added another tally to the board to put the Crimson within one with less than a minute to play.
time to set up for one final rotation before the buzzer.
Captain and attacker Sam King quarterbacked his offense, posting a lethal seven points in six assists and one goal, notching his first mark on a feed to sophomore attacker Jack Speidell with only four seconds left on the clock. That would not be Speidell’s only tally on the day. The sophomore made himself known against Providence, opening the season with a hat trick and a Sports Center-Top-10-level play that resulted in a crafty behindthe-back finish on the doorstep.
to the attack was noticeable as Byrne’s defense had to step up in the midfield on the scrum, and down low, in order to give the attack time to work.
While it was a weakness for the first two quarters, the team showed impressive maturity in settling the ball in the second half. The second two quarters against the Friars were filled with poise as the team struck the balance between pacing itself for intentional takes and skipping the ball quickly to fuel a motion-heavy offense.
With the score seeming much more even at 3-2, and emotions running higher on the Harvard bench, a key face off win by sophomore FOGO Owen Umansky – who traded shifts with freshman Jackson Henehan and senior LSM Max Ewald – would get the ball down to Harvard’s offensive end before an unnecessary take from junior LSM
Speidell ingratiated himself with the starting lineup of King and junior Teddy Malone, and will be a key player to keep an eye on in the game against Colgate tomorrow. His comrade Malone showed why he was named The Harvard Crimson’s 2023 Rookie of the Year, sparking a fire on the attacking end with four goals, three GBs, and one
“We weren’t really going at our matchups,” said Malone about what changed between the two halves. “We said as a group that we were not playing as fast as we usually do, and so the emphasis on the second half was to really attack your guy – one move and go. We moved forward, and I think ultimately that’s what gave us the most suc-
cess, and the most success off ball as well.”
A highlight from the team was its man-down defense, which held Providence to an impressive 1-7 on man-up attempts. While there are certainly penalties that could have been avoided – two 30-second flags for off-sides, and a one-minute penalty for tripping, amongst others –the defense looked solid, and was able to mitigate the man-down threat.
A point of focus for the team heading into its next game will be to place itself into situations where it can succeed, and to try to eliminate careless errors. While a boon that the squad was able to make six man-down stops, several of those performances resulted from lapses in lacrosse-IQ that could have been avoided.
Making up for it, however, was the team’s hustle-plays at the 50yard line. Every coach tells his team that games are won by ground balls and heart, and that rang true for Harvard. Providence turned the ball over 21 times on Saturday, and Harvard was eager to make its opponent feel its mistakes.
“Coach said in the locker room after the game that we won the game in the middle of the field,” Darrin said. “That’s a big emphasis for us this year – riding and clearing and staying clean in between the lines – and that’s something that showed true today, and we are going to look to continue doing that.”
While Providence certainly turned the ball over more than Harvard – who tallied 14 turnovers –the team will need to continue emphasizing clean, mistake-free play. The squad went man-down three times in the fourth quarter – twice for 30-second off-sides penalties, and once for a minute after the referee called a slash against Nelson. Coupled with a last-minute buzzer-beater from Providence with just five seconds left in regulation, the team will have to continue working through the nerves that plague every program at the start of the season.
While the last strike on Saturday might have gone in favor of Providence, Harvard will look to stretch its winning streak to two in its game against the Colgate Raiders tomorrow, Feb. 18. Colgate will not prove an entirely easy foe for Harvard, who leads the all-time series 9-0 after besting the Raiders 14-10 in 2023. Heading into tomorrow’s game, Colgate finds itself with a 1-2 record. Despite losing both contests, the Raiders put up a fight against No. 5 UVA and No. 14 Penn State, before most recently beating upstate rival and perennial powerhouse UAlbany 19-14 over the weekend. Originally set to air at 6:30 p.m., the game has been moved up to 2 p.m., and will take place on Jordan Field. Catch the game live or stream the action on ESPN+.
