Issue 4

INSIDE: CRIMINAL INJUSTICE SYSTEM • 6 // TAR SANDS OIL • 8-9 // ABSENCES & OIL-RIGS • 10 // FEMINISM AND SCI-FI • 12

the STRAND VICTORIA UNIVERSITY`S STUDENT NEWSPAPER vOL. 55 iSSUE 4 • Oct. 15 2012 • WWW.THESTRAND.CA

Installation of a new Principal— no manual required Angela Esterhammer officially installed as Victoria’s newest principal SABINA FREIMAN NEWS EDITOR After many speeches and a change of robe, Professor Angela Esterhammer was officially installed as Victoria University’s eleventh principal as part of Victoria’s 176th Victoria University Charter Day Convocation and Special Installation Ceremony on Oct 10, 2012.

Esterhammer graduated from Victoria College in 1983 with a degree in English and Literary Studies. Since then, she has travelled to many universities and various countries, holding a variety of positions and writing numerous books.

When comparing her previous positions to her new role, Esterhammer admitted that she has “been in comparable administrative positions before [at West-

ern], and ideally a university administrator will keep being a teacher and scholar as much as possible in the time available—so in that sense there’s a quite a lot of continuity with [her] roles as a professor at other universities.”

However, the role of being a principal “involves a sense of potential and enterprise, a possibility of trying new things, that makes this role different and special,” she explained. One of the most interesting aspects of her background, of course, is the fact that she used to be a student here. “It’s a strange feeling in some ways to find yourself in the same physical space but in a very different role. In another way, though, it seems very natural; my past at Victoria is the best possible preparation for helping to contribute to its present and future!” Es-

terhammer said.

Though almost thirty years away from the university is a long time, she notes that many things have stayed the same. “Vic has strong and valuable traditions; many things such as VUSAC, Acta Victoriana, and the Literary Studies program are familiar from my days as an undergraduate. Those continuities are definitely helping me reintegrate into the Vic community. And in the process I’m realizing how important my background at Victoria was in making me who I am.”

So far, her role as Principal has been a hectic one. “It’s been a whirlwind of activity! I recently moved back to Canada from Europe; there’s a lot to learn very quickly about how things work at Victoria and UofT, and the principal’s calendar involves a busy schedule of com-

mitments of all kinds. I was happy to be able to participate in a couple of events during Orientation Week and I look forward to more occasions for getting to know Vic students in the future,” she says.

Orientation Week was the first time that Shoaib Alli, the VUSAC president, met the new principal. During the Charter Day Convocation, Alli gave a speech in which he detailed his first experience meeting Esterhammer. After a long and tiring day spent at Frosh, he was asked to step outside for a brief photoshoot with the new principal, to be released in the next edition of Vic Reach. “She walked right up to me, she shook my hand, and she said ‘hello’—and honestly, I instantly

SEE ”PRINCIPAL” ON PAGE 3

Guerilla gardeners mobilize at city hall MONICA GEORGIEFF Occupy Gardens, a growing collective committed to tending gardens all over the city, joined an ongoing fight against an enemy common to all of us. Their weapons: shovels, seeds, and soil. Their battleground: City Hall on a sunny autumn afternoon on Oct 1. Their guerilla tactic: gardening against the omnipresent danger that is the global food crisis.

What they left behind: an expanding urban garden to grace our city.

Beginning with its founding by the Occupy Gardens movement on 1 May of this year, eager student and neighborhood gardeners collaborated to expand a free community food garden in the heart of Queen’s Park. Its proximity to the UofT campus has encouraged youth participation in initiatives and events headed by the group, which deals primarily with raising awareness and promoting the philosophy of direct local action in order to address pressing

global problems.

What appears to be a commendable initiative is at the same time considered illegal according to Toronto municipal legislation. Since the planting of the original garden in Queen’s Park this spring, the city at first turned a blind eye to the “lawbreakers”, choosing to focus instead on the importance of their cause and the awareness this public display is raising. However, on the eve of the Queen’s Park garden’s harvest on Sept 29—an event members advertised as the “Autumn Jam”, city employees arrived to dispose of the crops, throwing away the live plants and the rare bean seeds. A night that promised a “musical, edible, theatrical picnic potluck with free gardening, seed saving and yoga workshop” was stopped before it could begin when Toronto city officials intervened.

Jacob Kearery-Moreland, a Victoria College student, and avid participant,

SEE ”GARDEN” ON PAGE 3

THOMAS LU

After destruction of first protest garden, Occupy Gardens takes things up a notch

City council ditches bags, bike lanes; keeps zoo, animosity JONAH LETOVSKY “I would have kicked him in the nuts and the face at the same time,” admitted councilor Giorgio Mammoliti in reference to his colleague Gord Perks in the aftermath of the political chaos—an apt characterization of this month’s Toronto city council meetings in general.

Clearly substantive policy issues weren’t the only focus for the city councilors of Canada’s largest city.

Nevertheless, some major issues affecting Torontonians were dealt with. Many readers may be aware that the council recently decided to entirely ban the sale of plastic grocery shopping bags—previously there had only been a 5¢ tax on the environmentallyunfriendly disposables. Mayor Ford openly opposed the ban on ideological grounds, and while he and his allies attempted to re-open the debate this past month, they weren’t able to gather the necessary votes.

The other déjà vu moment for this council session was the renewed debate over the Jarvis St. bicycle lanes, the policy item that perhaps most affects the daily lives of UofT students.

Approved and installed during the term of former mayor David Miller, the lanes – which stretch from Bloor St. to Queen St. East – have been extremely contentious, with proponents arguing that they protect cyclists’ safety, reduce the “highway” effect along

mostly-residential Jarvis St, and have barely increased car-based commute times while tripling the number of cyclists that use the thoroughfare.

Opponents of the lanes, including the famously car-loving Ford and his allies, claim that by removing the reversible fifth traffic lane, the bicycle lanes increase congestion on a vital city artery and are un-

“

This council session was widely anticipated by progressive forces both inside and outside of city hall as the last opportunity to save the lanes before their upcoming removal in late autumn.

necessary given the new separated bike lanes on Sherbourne. The lanes were also approved irrespective of an Environmental Assessment and without community consultation. The motion to keep the lanes lost in a vote of 24-19 after a fiery debate.

The council session was widely anticipated by progressive forces both inside and outside of city hall

SARAH CRAWLEY

SARAH CRAWLEY

NEWS

as the last opportunity to save the lanes before their upcoming removal in late autumn. A majority of city council, led by Ford, voted to eliminate them and reinstall the reversible lane more than a year ago, at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The “clamshell” (as City Hall is lovingly known) also battled over a report by city ombudsman Fiona Crean that strongly criticized Mayor Ford’s civic appointments process—leading to Councillor Mammoliti’s colourful words in reference to Perks. Mammoliti has been described as “a former NDP MPP who took a hard turn to the political right—and often eagerly defends Mayor Rob Ford” by the Toronto Star. Crean reported that Ford’s allies had threatened and intimidated city staff into excluding diverse candidates and refusing to advertise available city positions in the Toronto Star.

This prompted Mammoliti to declare the report “politically motivated” and go on to attack the credibility of the ombudsman. In response, left-leaning Councillor Perks declared him a bully and the two appeared to come very close to violence, directly in front of a mass of reporters.

One of the session’s last pieces of business was an almost unilateral decision to cancel any possible sale of the Toronto Zoo, an item which was proposed earlier in the week. Toronto’s animals, both political and biological, aren’t going anywhere.

THOMAS LU

On Thursday Oct 4, Vic celebrated the centenary of Northrop Frye’s birth with the unveiling of a statue by Darren Byers and Fred Harrison.

2

Occupy Gardens tills political soil

THOMAS LU

“GARDEN” FROM PAGE 1 admits that in its definition as a “guerilla garden”, the project “does not have express permission from the City of Toronto,” and therefore has always existed under threat of potential hostility.

He describes the inaugural event of their original Queen’s Park garden as having taken place “in front of dozens of police officers and national news media in an attempt to raise awareness, education, and action towards the global food crisis, which is inseparable from the ecological, economic and democratic crises.” Yet it took five months for the city to finally act.

Their project reaches beyond the boundaries of Toronto, although not all have been as successful. Approximately ten days before the event at Queen’s Park, the group travelled to Ottawa and planted a heart-shaped food garden on Parliament

Hill in front of RCMP officers, who proceeded to trample the plants and threaten arrests.

Despite the problems they have been facing, the unwavering persistence of the Occupy Gardens movement was apparent in Kearery-Moreland’s final statement regarding the group’s activities, announcing that they will continue their activities as always. “We plan to continue planting free food gardens in high-profile public spaces until we reach our goal of free, fresh, food for all forever.”

With their pun-filled slogans (“It’s Thyme, Lettuce Occupy Gardens for World Peas! All we are Sowing is give Peas a Chance!”), a growing base of support, and the lucky circumstance of being stimulated by opposition instead of hindered by it, this group could prove as resilient as the issue they aim to tackle.

New principal a former Victoria student

Nobel prize winners shed light on use of stem cells in medicine ASHKAN SALEHI STAFF WRITER On Oct 8, the annual Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine was awarded to John B. Gurdon and Shinya Yamanaka for their discovery: mature cells of the body can become pluripotent again.

In cellular biology, pluripotent cells are immature cells capable of developing into any tissue of the body; a forefront of today’s research for cancer and Alzheimer treatments.

According to Science Daily, the prize was jointly awarded to Gurdon, who discovered that specialized cells could replace immature cells in 1962, and Yamanaka who in 2006 discovered exactly how intact mature cells in mice could be reprogrammed to become immature stem cells.

Yamanaka was able to create pluripotent cells by introducing only a few genes into the mature cells’ DNA in order to reprogram them.

Previously, the mechanism of this transformation was unknown – Yamanaka’s discovery effectively dem-

onstrated its simple process.

Pluripotent cells, which are also known as stem cells, have a huge impact on modern medicine. Diseases such as Alzheimer’s often result from the deterioration of cells in the body at an abnormal pace that prevents cell restoration and ultimately results in the loss of integral tissue. Since stem cells are young, unspecialized cells that can develop into any type of cell, they can ultimately prevent the deterioration of Alzheimer’s by replacing the destroyed brain cells immediately. In a University of California Irvine

study, mice indeed performed better on memory tests after neural stem cells were injected into their brains.

These are revolutionary discoveries that have reshaped theories of cell specialization. Mature cells need not be stuck in their specialized state, and many past theories have been revised. As always in scientific fields, new developments have replaced old theories to improve human knowledge and advancements.

•

News • 15 Oct. 2012 • news@thestrand.ca

SARAH CRAWLEY

felt better. She was friendly, she was warm, she was welcoming; all those things you would hope a new principal is.”

Since then, he has had the opportunity to see her in action while sitting on various committees. “It is clear that Professor Esterhammer is super passionate about this wonderful, wonderful place,” he says.

Esterhammer is passionate about more than her new role. She is a scholar of British, German, and European Romanticism and 19th century literature and culture. She has published approximately fifty articles in the last decade alone.

She was the founding director of the Graduate Program in Comparative Literature at the University of Western Ontario, where she also held positions ranging from Department Chair of Modern Languages and Literatures, to Dean of Faculty of Arts, to Associate Dean of Graduate Studies.

From there she travelled to Europe, where she

became the founding director of the PhD program in English and American Literary Studies at the University of Zurich.

At last, she found herself in the position of Principal of Victoria College. “In accepting this great privilege, and taking in the great commitment involved in being principal of Victoria College, I am emboldened by its past, its present, and its future. I join academic leaders and staff who are realizing the vision of a personalized liberal arts education that [engages] with the community. I am strengthened by my own background at Victoria as I realize ever more fully how important that experience was in making me who I am.”

Coming to Victoria, she hopes to “help build a vibrant academic community, an environment where students, faculty, and staff can develop their full potential.”

Now that she has ben installed—not entirely unlike a refrigerator or statue, she jokes — Esterhammer can now begin work as Victoria College’s official new principal.

MICHAEL FREIMAN

“PRINCIPAL” FROM PAGE 1

3

OPINIONS

A smoke break with a hipster racist I define a hipster racist as one who attempts to confront “traditional” racism with ironic racism: essentially, making a racist joke (or commentary) to demonstrate how progressive and non-racist they are, even though what they have said is blatantly racist. I’ve encountered hipster racism far too often, particularly around white liberals who’ve attempted to prove their “enlightenment” and to make me comfortably aware that they aren’t racist, by expessing racism in a non-traditional tone: “Huda—stop being an angry black woman!” followed by laughter to indicate how silly such a mentality is. However it’s counter-productive, because your shitty joke still makes me as uncomfortable as traditional racism does.

Having said that, hipster racism isn’t always conveyed with a humorous tone. Sometimes acts of hipster racism are delivered more seriously. My experience last week with a drunk-as-fuck-and-possibly-drugged-out hipster racist serves as a great example.

During the last weekend of September, I joined the rest of the city in the streets of downtown Toronto to participate in Nuit Blanche, eventually ending up at 2ninety2 on College West to see some installations and a friend’s brother performing as a DJ. At some point in the night, to escape a room over-crowded by hipster-ish folks dressed in bizarre costumes (I was standing next to the death creeper much too long for my liking), we decided to step out for a smoke. At this point, a fellow who looked like he was under the

At this point, it was evident that almost all of us were entirely uncomfortable with the dialogue because we all knew exactly what was happening —this was an attempt to prove that he wasn’t racist by being racist. Hipster racism!

For the record: hyper-sexualizing any person of colour who represents a group that has historically suffered colonization, mass rape, genocide and hypersexualization (as a justification for the enslavement or colonization of these bodies) is so fucking wrong, especially if you are a white male who physically resembles a colonizer.

Hyper-sexualizing a black woman to prove that you do, indeed, find her attractive is problematic, uncomfortable, and, dare I say, racist itself.This is a clear indication of hipster racism, because his intent was to prove how progressive he is as a white male to actually be attracted to a person of colour.

Had he not had racism latent within him, an explanation of why he was even attracted to a black woman in the first place would not have been necessary. What he had done was not assert that he, as a man, was attracted to a beautiful woman; but rather that he, as a white man, was actually attracted to a beautiful black woman. I believe that somewhere deep down inside, he felt that it wasn’t allowed or normal to either him, us, or somebody else.

TAIWO BAH

HUDA HASSAN

influence of something much too fun asked one of us for a cigarette, eventually leading to that awkward dialogue that follows when someone receives a free cigarette and feels that their forced conversation is some sort of compensation for the minor deed.

This gentleman, who was a white twenty-something male, complimented one of my girlfriends by telling her how gorgeous she was. After she thanked him for the kind remark, he proceeded with the (unnecessary) assertion of how much he loves black women. Instantly, a feeling of awkwardness shadowed our smoke-break crowd. He continued to make an ass of himself when he began to ramble on about his sexual attraction to black women by explaining that he specifically only jerks off to black women when watching porn. Somewhere in his little universe, I think that was supposed to suffice as a compliment.

“Give me sincere racism or give me no racism at all, but enough with this weaselly shit” – some amazing blogger.

Order up, douchebags!

The trials and tribulations of working in the service industry ISAAC THORNLEY

4

Of the many students at UofT who work part-time throughout the school year, a large portion of them (myself included) work in what’s known as “the restaurant industry.” This is obviously not a phenomenon exclusive to UofT— rather for young people throughout Canada, the restaurant industry makes up a significant portion of their employment.

A 2010 report conducted by the CRFA (Canadian Restaurant and Foodservices Association) found that for 22 percent of Canadians their first job was at a restaurant, and that nearly a third of Canadians currently work or used to work in the restaurant/food service industry. Despite the high level of familiarity that many Canadians have with the industry, there are nevertheless those pesky customers who, as my restaurant friends would put it, “just don’t get it.”

These guests are the ones who seat themselves when there’s a “Please Wait to Be Seated” sign; they order water and ask for extra bread; they stay sitting at their table for hours after paying; they compliment the service then tip less than 15%; they order seafood and complain that it’s too fishy; they

order a steak well-done and complain that it’s too chewy; they tell you they’re in a hurry then take twenty minutes

“

Next time you’re in a restaurant and you feel as though the service is bad (and it might be that it is), before making any decisions, before complaining or deciding that “this waiter isn’t getting any tip from me,” do try to think about why things are taking a little longer.

to order; they think that bills separate themselves; they modify their meals like it’s their job. I think you get the picture. It’s bad news.

The bottom line is that there is an unwritten set of rules in the restaurant in-

dustry that only some people are aware of. It’s easy to tell when you’re serving a fellow industry person; they’re usually patient, understanding, and conscientious (not to mention they give the best tips). As a result we often say halfjokingly at my restaurant, “Only people who’ve worked in restaurants should be allowed to eat in them.”

I admit that this is a bit excessive.

If only restaurant people could eat in restaurants, then surely the majority of restaurants wouldn’t have a large enough clientele to stay in business.

Impracticality aside, I think the idea is worth entertaining.

As it stands currently, anyone who’s wearing shoes and a shirt and has enough money to pay for a meal can eat at a restaurant. That being said, it must not be forgotten that eating in a restaurant is a privilege and not a right.

Despite the fact that a restaurant serves food and people need food to live, a restaurant’s primary angle as a business is leisure rather than sustenance.

Nobody needs restaurants; people want restaurants. And I’m not complaining—if people didn’t want restaurants, I and most of the people I know at UofT would be out of a job.

The fact remains, though, that some guests are an absolute nightmare to

serve. It’s usually not even about the money, not about the tips (though crappy tips are hard not to take personally).

In fact, for someone my age, working as a waiter gives me more income than a lot of people I know. What I’m most concerned with is the stress. Essentially all I do at my job is pick things up, carry them, and put them down as quickly as possible. Waiting tables also requires a great deal of emotional labour; we all have our own little fake laughs and smiles, all of which contribute to our stress.

To anyone still reading who does not work in a restaurant or does not know anyone who works in a restaurant, I don’t mean to lecture you. All I would ask is this: next time you’re out to eat and you feel that the service is bad (and it might be that it is)—before making any decisions, before complaining or deciding that “this waiter isn’t getting any tip from me,” try to think about why things are taking a little longer. Is the establishment really busy? How many waiters do there seem to be working in the dining room? Is it just one? Are there ten? Never assume first that your waiter is lazy and not doing their job properly. Always remember—innocent until proven guilty, hardworking until proven lazy.

The Stephen Harper doctrine JUSTIN P’NG

W

hen Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird delivered a blistering critique of the United Nations to the General Assembly in recent weeks, you could almost see it as a rare moment of public introspection for the Conservative government. Condemning the many failures of the UN (which I won’t defend here), Baird went on to vow more direct cooperation with like-minded allies and to affirm his dedication to a harsher stance against human rights abuses around the world. Coupled with the similarly over-the-top rhetoric of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s earlier acceptance speech for the World Statesman Award, this served to inaugurate an ideological shift in Canadian foreign policy. We might call this the Stephen Harper Doctrine.

Traditionally, Canada’s foreign policies have been marked by a tendency towards pragmatism and moderation.

This was established when Lester Pearson responded to the 1957 Suez Canal Crisis with a United Nations peacemaking initiative, later earning him the Nobel Peace Prize. Since then, the maple leaf has been emblematic of diplomatic friendliness, particularly in the now infamous incident when American diplomats were ex-

tracted via Canadian passports during the Iranian Revolution. Much has changed in recent years, as the Liber-

“

The national budget has bizarrely undergone a peacetime militarization that has seen billions of tax dollars funnelled through a distorted accounting process to acquire fighter planes for no specific purpose.

als have declined in status while the Conservatives have risen to reshape the Canadian landscape. The result is a radical transformation of our foreign policy. The Harper administration has been aggressive in its support of Israel and subsequent dismissal of the Palestinian plight, posturing that has continued in their diplomatic severance from Iran. The national budget has bizarrely undergone a peacetime militarization that has seen billions of

tax dollars funnelled through a distorted accounting process to acquire fighter planes for no specific purpose, except perhaps for increased contribution to NATO. Consequentially, $170-million has been undercut from diplomatic resources, economically inspiring a proposal to share embassy space with cash-strapped Britain. This budgetary recirculation transparently reflects an extension of the administration’s hawkish demagoguery.

Such regression may have found its roots at the moment Harper’s bid for a virtually useless Security Council position was rejected in 2010. This souring relationship with multilateral forums quickly spiralled into unilateral retrenchment, as when Canada detached itself from the Kyoto Accord.

Irrespective of these platforms’ actual efficacy, their symbolism is a crucial anchor in a global system defined by the pre-eminence of sovereignty. Considering this, Harper seems intent on emulating the path trail-blazed by President Bush Jr; that of moral projection and interventionism. Thus the neoconservative tide may have receded from America only to wash up on Canadian shores. Although heavily diluted by our relative lack of international presence, it has enjoyed a creeping resurrection.

All this may serve to tarnish Can-

ada’s Pearsonian image as the traditional peacemaker—no longer the mediator, but the arbitrator. Accordingly, our expats and diplomats will be subjected to the resultant blowback in the form of anti-Canadianism. As the maple leaf blurs into stars and stripes, our passports will no longer be clean tickets through borders. Concurrently, such doctrinal alignment will water down our national identity, once differentiated by its divergence from Americanism.

Nonetheless, the Harper Doctrine, as with Bush’s, comes loaded with its own caveats. Against his earlier condemnations of human rights abuses in China, Harper’s about-face pandering and increased participation in Pacific region trade forums demonstrates a realist inclination bordering on neoliberal. In fact, distinctly absent in the political discourse is a coherent blueprint for Canada’s international role.

Despite occasional humanitarian gesturing and abstract speechifying, the administration remains consistent in their deference to the “almighty dollar.” Harper’s politics are thus a kind of neo-Conservativism, idealist on the surface but pragmatic in practice.

The result is a fumble between promoting freedom and promoting free markets, all wrapped neatly in the Canadian flag.

FLICKR/IMAGE EDITOR

Is there no middle ground in the Middle East?

Amidst the lingering after-effects of the Arab Spring, which took hold in late December 2010, the armed conflict ravaging Syria still continues. Just east of Syria, the very existence of Iran has seemed to place European and Western world leaders on the edge of their seats, heightened by the threat to Israeli well-being as imagined by Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. These two events have had a major impact on the Western half of the world, but not, perhaps, in the way that one might believe.

The unifying effect that Syria and Iran have had on North America and Europe is astounding: is it only in crisis that countries can come together almost definitively? But like a Lego

“

We’re looking at going from cold to hot in the war department, and I’m willing to bet that before this mess is over, before the first shots are fired, we’re going to have a much bigger problem than paranoia and conflicts of interest.

piece on the floor that gets stepped on from time to time, the Russian Federation, with its ties to Syria and Iran, has stopped the Western

powers from beginning to pursue militaristic or diplomatic intervention in these two countries.

What I will question, however, is intention. The Canadian government is ready and willing to support any efforts within Syria and against Iran, and I cannot imagine that our goals in these conflicts are any different from those of the USA, England, France, Israel, and even Russia: self-interest and reputation are two devils too big to ignore.

Calling politics a dirty game is just too cliché; it brings out the Hobbes in most people. As it is, Russia has maintained clear ties with Syria and Iran since 1936, when Russia had significant influence and and an interest in spreading communism. At the same time, Russia was also trying to recruit elite students from Asia, Africa, and Latin America, placing them into the same collective environment for schooling in Syria.

The result was a political marriage of sorts between Syrians and Russians. The welfare of the population of Russians in Syria is a concern that can be shared by the Western powers as well, whose citizens are also stranded in war-torn districts of the country. The intent behind Russia’s veto of the motion to remove Syria’s President Bashar Hafez al-Assad and UN and foreign intervention in the daily bloodshed in the country are also suspect.

Russia has a lucrative arms deal with the current Syrian government amounting to $700 million per year, as well as a port off the Mediterranean that is the last remaining Soviet-era military base.

Iran, on the other hand, whose target on their back is a few hundred kilometres wide, has ties with the Syrian and Russian government, and due to the recent push to “stop” Iran and their supposed nuclear threat, it should not be not surprising that the United States would be eager

to volunteer their support for military intervention. The US used to have fairly good relations with Iran: in the early wake of the terrorism scare

“

The unifying affect that Syria and Iran have had on North America and Europe is astounding: is it only in crisis that countries can come together almost definitively?

Opinions • 15 Oct. 2012 • opinions@thestrand.ca

URSULA McCLINTOCK

that plagued the US, Iran played a role in the apprehension of terrorist suspects. But old favours are often forgotten. The key result of ousting President Assad is the crumbling of an Iranian ally to be replaced with a pro-Western government. And suddenly, things – and resources – in the Middle East seem a bit easier to handle.

But let’s not forget about Russia here. I can’t help but wonder what exactly Russia would do if actions were taken in what could be seen as an attack on Russia itself. Historically, how does a country—a country that is big, armed to the teeth, and unafraid of a military showdown— react when their allies are attacked? Exactly.

We’re looking at going from cold to hot in the war department, and I’m willing to bet that before this mess is over, before the first shots are fired, we’re going to have a much bigger problem than paranoia and conflicts of interest.

•

5

EDITORIAL

SEX200 LEC0204 WITH

OUR MASTHEAD Editors-in-Chief Pauline Holdsworth Muna Mire Patrick Mujunen News Associate

Sabina Freiman Vacant

Opinions Associate

Sara Deris Vacant

Features Associate

Malcolm Sherwood Vacant

Arts & Culture Associate

Paula Razuri Vacant

Film & Music

Associate

Bahar Banaei Alex Griffith Vacant

Stranded Associate

Will Pettigrew Vacant

Copy Associate

Blaire Townshend Vacant

Photo Associate

Thomas Lu Victoria Chuen

Art Associate

Sarah Crawley Vacant

Web Associate

Jamie Shilton Vacant

Distribution

Jen Roberton

Editorial Assistants Vacant Contributors Bahar Banaei, Victoria Beales, Haley Currie, Sinead Doherty-Grant, Monica Georgieff, Huda Hassan, Bess Jarvis, Liza Kobrinsky, Jonah Letovsky, Tom McCarthy, Ursula McClintock, Ashkan Salehi, Isaac Thornley, Ilse Von Miele.

Cover Photo Michael Freiman Copy Amanda Aziz, Matthew Casaca, Johanna Lewis, Emily Pollock, Emma TennierStuart

The Strand is published 14 times a year and has a circulation of 2500.

It is distributed in Victoria University residences and across the University of Toronto’s St. George campus.

The Strand zestfully enjoys its editorial autonomy..

Please direct inquiries by email to editor@thestrand.ca.

Our office is located at 63 Charles St.W.,Toronto,ON,M5S 1K9.

Follow us on Twitter for news and updates: @strandpaper If you follow us, we’ll follow you too.

6

Dear Dr. SexLove, My best-friend-slashboyfriend and I have been dating for three years now, and our relationship has been – for the most part – great. Last year was hard for us, because he was doing another year of high school and I’d already graduated and left. Towards the end of the school year things got really stressful, I was pretty mean, and he ended up breaking up with me.

After that I convinced him to see me so that I could talk to him, and we ended up slowly getting back together.

But then I found out that he’d cheated on me multiple times during our relationship. He made out with two different girls, at the beginning and about a year into our relationship.

He started having “dirty conversations” with one of my friends and later had sex with her. And, during our stressful year, he had sex with her again. I felt betrayed on so many levels.

The thought of it all made me physically ill.

But here’s the problem: he’s my best friend. He truly does seem sorry now, and although I accidentally found out about one of the

things he told me the rest of them up front. Since I found out I have seen him cry, I have seen him stop what he’s doing as soon as I tell him that it makes me uncomfortable, and I have seen him making an effort to make things better: he has spoken to all of the girls involved, told them that what happened can never happen again, and has cut off contact with them. He wants to make things work - and despite everything, I want things to work too.

During the time we were broken up, I realized just how much I cared for him.

He truly is my closest and best friend, and although he did all these terrible things I don’t believe that he was doing them to hurt me. I believe that he was a teen, that he was stupid, and that he did what he did without thinking about the consequences and without really attaching the actions to himself or the people around him. He tells me that he hardly even remembers the details of these things because once they were done, he never thought about them. He wants to change, and I believe that he can be a better person, but I just don’t know if I’ll be able to live

Dr. SexLove with myself, knowing that he did these terrible things to me and I let him, in a sense, “get away with it.”

So I guess, after this long and rambling letter, my question is this: do you think that I should forgive my boyfriend?

Thanks, - Cheated-On & Confused Dear COC, Trust is a very tricky thing. Once it has been broken, it can be very difficult to rebuild. And while it seems like your boyfriend is making an effort now, you cannot base your decision solely on the way he has been acting after being caught.

Let’s consider the facts: he cheated on you four times in three years. Based on what you’ve told me, it doesn’t sound like he ever made the initiative to change his behaviour until he was caught. And you seem to be doing a lot of justification on his behalf.

I must be listening to too much Beyoncé lately, but she would tell him to move everything he owns in a box to the left. In other words, move on.

In real relationships,

however, things are never as simple as packing up and leaving someone, especially when love, longevity, and a deep friendship are at stake.

Ultimately, you have to decide for yourself what is right. Are you capable of forgiving him completely?

Can you trust him fully so that it won’t become an issue in your relationship going forward? And, finally – what really stands out to me is – are you sure that in trying to save the relationship, that you are not doing it alone?

It seems to me that you have always been the one wanting to get back together. You were the one who maintained loyalty and honesty in the relationship, and now you are the one who seems to be putting in the most effort to hold it all together. I could be wrong, because even a rambling letter doesn’t give me the full picture of what is going on, but given that he broke the trust in your relationship, if efforts to get back together are at all one-sided, the effort needs to be coming from him.

- Dr. SexLove

FLICKR/710928003

“Prisons do not disappear social problems, they disappear human beings.” -Angela Davis

Safe as houses PAULINE HOLDSWORTH EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Conservatives love to tell us that they’re tough on crime. But their constant reminders about their tough agenda have more to do with narrative-building and branding than thoughtful consideration about what safety means for everyone, not just those with fancy alarm systems.

This “tough on crime” narrative is incompatible with the Conservative Party of Canada’s other primary narrative— that it’s just as tough on budgets. The CPC’s crime agenda is also increasingly incompatible with legality, as the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child recently reported that, in the wake of the omnibus crime bill C-10, Canada no longer meets international standards for its Youth Criminal Justice Act. “The Committee is deeply concerned at the fact that the 2003 Youth Criminal Justice Act, which was generally in

conformity with the Convention, was in effect amended by the adoption of Bill C-10 and that the latter is excessively punitive for children and not sufficiently restorative in nature,” reads the report. In particular, it notes that the government has failed to take action to raise the age of responsibility, and, as of March, allows children under the age of 18 to be tried as adults depending on the gravity of their offense. The report also condemns the Canadian criminal justice system for its excessive use of force, its failure to address the overrepresentation of marginalized populations in prisons, and its failure to protect inmates from sexual assault and abuse at the hands of guards.

Bill C-10 is hardly the first sign of problems within Canada’s deeply flawed criminal justice system, and for longstanding critics of the prison-industrial complex and the Conservative Party’s crime agenda, this UN report is nothing new. But it’s worth considering, in

the wake of this report, how the “tough on crime” narrative works and what its implications are.

The attraction of these narratives is intimately connected to societal anxieties about security and safety, particularly in a post-9/11 landscape. Sociologist Zygmunt Bauman writes about the “transfer of anxiety,” a process through which things like mandatory minimums and the creation of new prisons provide concrete, highly visible proof to those anxious about personal safety that the government has taken steps to protect them. And in an atmosphere of global uncertainty and austerity, these local steps make people feel like they’re being protected from the world at large.

But what about housing security?

Food security? By defining security as incarceration and increased policing rather than social support and shelter, the Conservative “tough on crime” agenda increases insecurity and trauma for marginalized populations in the

name of making already-protected citizens more certain of their safety. Safety and security, words we could use to talk about dignity and support and a government’s responsibility to protect its most marginalized constituents, are employed instead as tools of division and violence.

Rather than talking about safety as a collective concept, recognizing the need for social programs, and using housing as a way to address public health in addition to crime rates, we use it to differentiate between those who deserve safety and those who do not. We prioritize increasing privileged groups’ feeling of safety above ensuring the literal safety of people in prisons, on the street, or struggling to access housing.

These are words and ideas we can use towards better ends. But doing so will require us to reconsider our understanding of “safety” and question who is currently excluded from efforts to make our world more secure.

MUNA MIRE

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF A recent unanimous decision handed down by the Supreme Court has brought Canada to the forefront of criminalizing HIV nondisclosure.

On Friday Oct 5, the court acted to clarify the previously used standard for criminal nondisclosure, the “significant risk” test. Condom use is no longer enough to prevent “significant risk”. Individuals now have to disclose their status unless they use condoms and also have a low viral load. The decision was a huge blow to the HIV positive community.

The “significant risk” test was established in 1998 when the court ruled that failure to disclose one’s status as HIV positive could potentially be considereds assault. The threshold was set so that persons must disclose status if they posed a “significant risk” to their partners. Since that decision, officials have upped the ante and charged individuals with aggravated sexual assault who fail to disclose when they do not meet the “safety” threshold set by the courts. The irony there is that

this decision codifies an already dangerous trend in public health.

Public health officials, HIV and AIDS advocacy groups, and HIV positive individuals have all roundly criticized the new standard for criminal nondisclosure. The new standard has essentially ensured that all HIV positive persons must disclose their status, unless there is virtually zero chance of transmission of the virus.

The issue here is not disclosure. Disclosure is necessary and moreover, ethical.

The questions people have are about the use of the state’s criminalizing apparatus and how likely that makes it that people will actually disclose their status. Stigmatizing persons with HIV (which the threat of criminality does quite effectively) is not the way to get people to disclose. Furthermore, the impact that stigmatization has is directly harmful to an already potentially vulnerable community. Harm reduction is important.

According to Mark Tyndall, Head of Infectious Diseases at the University of Ottawa, criminalizing nondisclosure will make it more likely that people will not disclose.

“Why would someone disclose their

HIV status if they thought there was a chance that they could be charged with aggravated sexual assault? It discourages people from talking to their doctors and other health-care providers [...] It even discourages people from getting tested for HIV in the first place. Why would people want to know something that will set them up for criminal prosecution?

Finally, it further stigmatizes and isolates people who are HIV positive just when we are getting to a point when treatment is widely available and effective.”

We need to aggressively question the state’s motives for choosing criminalization instead of actually engaging with social problems. We also need to be aware of this as a trend, particularly since the passing of Bill C-10. Instead of creating useful and effective policy by working with community leaders, the state is attempting to disappear social problems by throwing people in jail. Jail does not address social ills, it exacerbates them.

Many of the justifications for the criminalization of nondisclosure play on social anxieties about public health and security.

The safety of women has been raised as a concern connected to the new standard

for nondisclosure. When it comes to negotiating social issues within community, it is critical that we defer to the knowledge of those with lived experience of those issues. Jessica Whitbread, a woman living with HIV, spoke to this issue at the Day of Action to Stop HIV/AIDS Criminalization recently held in Toronto.

“Over ten years ago, I contracted HIV from an ex-partner, a man that would later be convicted of aggravated sexual assault. He was sentenced to five years in prison for exposing one woman and transmitting the virus to another. Why he didn’t disclose is a mystery to me even to this day. But regardless the reason, I don’t think it was because he was a vicious murderer, he got lost in a system, misled by the dominant ideas about masculinity and failed by a government that is racist, homophobic, transphobic, and criminalizes sex workers and drug users. All this systemic discrimination is a breeding ground for AIDS phobia. Ultimately, I feel that it is our system that is to blame for me being positive, not him.”

I don’t think it can be said any better.

•

Editorial • 15 Oct. 2012 • editor@thestrand.ca

Criminalization of HIV nondisclosure furthers goals of Canadian prison-industrial complex

7

FEATURES

BURNING UP OUR FUTURE TAR SANDS OIL

BY TOM MCCARTHY

I

t’s well past time we got serious about addressing climate change, and as Canadians, stopping tar sands exploitation needs to be our top priority.

Right now, our planet’s atmosphere contains roughly 403 parts per million of carbon dioxide, the most abundant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere and the main byproduct of our carbon-based global economy. In order to prevent a dramatic shift away from the climate we have had on this planet since hunter-gatherers started to grow food, we need to get that number down to 350 ppm. These days, there is a lot of debate surrounding the Alberta tar sands, but surprisingly few are emphasizing the fact that burning the petroleum contained in those sands will add at least 100 ppm of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.

In other words, fully exploiting the tar sands will mean not only the end of our chance at a liveable future, but a violent shift in the wrong direction. As NASA’s head climatologist James Hansen puts it, this means “game over for the climate.”

Canada, a nation that prides itself on being a ‘good guy’ in the global community, is in the process of obliterating our collective last chance to change our carbon-dependent ways and prevent catastrophic climate change.

The world is currently on track for a mean global temperature rise of six degrees celsius by the end of the century. This does not just mean milder winters and muggier summers. This means the Amazon rain forest dries out and burns up. This means the glacial meltwater that makes life in so many countries possible stops flowing. This means that entire nations will become inundated by rising sea levels and disappear from the map. Effectively, it will be impossible to grow food through traditional means across most of the tropics. We are in the process of destroying the planet’s ability to sustain us as a species.

Despite how it gets treated by politicians and in the media, climate change is not a marginal issue. Every single person and ecosystem on this planet will be negatively impacted by global warming. For us Canadians, food prices are going to skyrocket and extreme weather will make life more difficult, but eventually mass human migrations are going to cause people to leave their devastated homelands in the tropics and head north. And if we continue on our path towards being an ‘energy superpower’ as Prime Minister Harper is so fond of saying, we will be the ones to blame for ruining the planet in decades to come.

8

G

reed and lust for power are turning this country into a crony-capitalist petro-state. All three major parties in Ottawa accept the basic premise that the tar sands must and will be the driving force of our national economy for the foreseeable future. The debate in parliament essentially ranges from the gungho, ‘get the oil at all costs’ approach favoured by the government, to protectionist pandering from the opposition arguing that more tar sands oil ought be refined here in Canada rather than being shipped to the States in crude form.

All the while, federal subsidies dole out roughly 1.4 billion dollars a year to the most profitable corporations in human history to assist them in tearing up the Athabasca basin and fouling up the climate.

The ethical and regional environmental concerns raised by the tar sands industry alone are enough cause for concern, from the spike in cancer rates shown in First Nations communities downstream from the oil fields, to the fact that the process requires clearing millions of square kilometers of forest and wetCloser to home, UofT lands and removing up to twenty feet evidently has no of topsoil underneath. Just look up a picture comparing the vast forests qualms about the tar side-by-side with the gray, voided sands industry. Over wasteland that follows tar sand ex100 million dollars of traction to see the extent of the enits endowment fund vironmental devastation that this is currently invested industry leaves in its wake. in fossil fuel and tar Further, it requires enormous amounts of energy and water to sepsands corporations, arate the oil from the sand it’s emaccording to the UofT bedded in. It’s been estimated that Asset Management over a billion gallons of toxic conCorporation’s latest taminated water are released by tar published quarterly sands refineries every year, a number that is likely to increase. This water report. is left to collect in massive pools that

FLICKR/FRANK KEHREN to say that this overwhelmingly negates all the claims to ‘sustainability’ that this university routinely makes.

If you care about this planet, and about the people who live and rely on it, then it’s imperative that you become a climate change activist. It cannot

It’s well past time we got serious about addressing climate change, and as Canadians, stopping tar sands exploitation needs to be our top priority.

Features • 15 Oct. 2012 • features@thestrand.ca

are lethal to virtually all life. Entire flocks of migratory birds have been observed landing on these polluted lakes, becoming trapped in the oil slick, and drowning in the filth.

Finally, the ‘finished’ product is so thick and viscous that it must be heated up and heavily diluted with chemical solvents in order to flow and be transported. Even after the refining process, there is still a high percentage of sand and particulate matter in the crude oil, which has lead many to compare it to ‘liquid sandpaper.’ So putting this toxic, volatile, abrasive, and flammable substance in pipes and forcing it to flow over thousands of kilometers is a great idea, right? Current federal environmental and safety regulations treat this product the same as conventional crude oil, and flatly reject calls to apply more prudent standards. No wonder communities in British Columbia are up in arms about the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline.

And as unfortunate as all of this is, it pales in comparison with what burning this oil will do to our climate.

Canada’s withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol last December basically amounts to an enormous ‘fuck you’ to the global community and to those who care about climate change. Recently, Minister of Natural Resources Joe Oliver (a former Merril Lynch investment banker, so naturally an expert on the subject) released a white paper which essentially labeled all those who oppose the tar sands as ‘terrorists’ and ‘radical extremists.’ Clearly, this government is doing everything in its power to promote increased tar sands oil production, whether by muzzling government scientists, slandering activists, or through funneling billions of dollars into the industry every year. It’s shameful, openly greedy, and displays a contempt for all those who stand in the way of oil industry profits.

be put more plainly: burning the oil locked in the tar sands will destroy our last chance at a liveable future. Together, we can wrest the narrative away from those who profit from this oily status quo and save ourselves from the miserable, horrific future they are prepared to leave us with. Organizations like 350.org and PowerShift Canada are leading the effort to make young people aware of the stark reality of climate change and are taking action to end our reliance on fossil fuels. On campus, you can join UofT Environmental Action (UTEA) to collaborate with other students and become a part of the solution.

Students interested in UTEA can contact the author at tom.mccarthy@mail. utoronto.ca to find out more and get involved.

C

loser to home, UofT evidently has no qualms about the tar sands industry. Over 100 million dollars of its endowment fund is currently invested in fossil fuel and tar sands corporations, according to the UofT Asset Management Corporation’s latest published quarterly report. It’s safe

•

9

ARTS & CULTURE

C C

ontemplating ulture

SABINA FREIMAN NEWS EDITOR

University of Toronto student Fan Wu is currently leading the discussion around the creation of a Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transexual-Queer (LGBTQ) high school. The media has been monitoring the discussion, and the greatest criticism appears to be centered around segregating LGBTQ students from other students, as opposed to teaching those in the mainstream public system the values of acceptance.

As accepting as high schools strive to be, there’s often a persistent strain of homophobia entrenched in high school culture. “As an out student in high school, teachers would give me queer literature ‘under the table’ because they didn’t want to open the issue up to the whole classroom. This culture of silence inspired me to launch this idea into a public space,” Wu explains.

This describes a completely different experience from university, where, as Wu explains, “the discussions are happening and have forums in which they can happen—discussions about sexuality, identity, and looking toward the future in terms of policy and social change. It’s easier to find spaces to develop strategies or even to feel comfortable in your own skin.” Naturally, it follows that these discussions need

In a slight departure from the regular content of Arts & Culture, we consider “culture” or more specifically, the way we live. In this edition, Sabina Freiman considers education.

to find their place in a high school forum.

But does this require a separate institution?

The Toronto Disctrict School Board currently has just such a program operating at Oasis Alternative Secondary School in downtown Toronto. The Triangle Program, as it’s called, is one of three programs that make up the alternative school, along with The Arts and Social Change Program and The Oasis Skateboard Factory. All three programs have a focus on social awareness. The Triangle Program is currently the only LGBTQ program, offering lessons on the history, literature, and issues of LGBTQ culture, with related field trips and access to community events. The program operates with smaller class sizes, giving teachers the opportunity to properly mentor students. In an attempt to make the LGBTQ school accessible to all, they offer free TTC fare for qualifying students for whom finances are an issue.

Is this enough? “The Triangle Program is a great resource, but its current space and mandate does not allow for a full-fledged curriculum,” Wu stated.

The media has been comparing Wu’s proposal to the Africentric program started at Winston Churchill Collegiate Institute in Scarborough this school year.

In this, its first year, the high school program was only able to enroll six students. Although this has been portrayed as an issue with the concept of the school,

those who work there blame it on a lack of publicity—the school was only approved after students had to enroll in high school.

Despite the fact that both schools seem to segregate certain groups, Wu does not believe it is fair to compare the two. “I think it’s a dangerous [comparison] because, while it will be an alternative school, our strategies for implementation and marketing for the school will be vastly different,” he explains.

But there is another distinction between the two schools. African-Canadian students do not have to out themsleves as black; how many fourteen-yearolds would be able to confidently identify as LGBTQ? How many would be able to come out to their parents when applying? “I think it would encourage students to think about the consequences of coming out, but ‘queer-centric’ doesn’t necessarily mean that the student would have to identify as anything in particular.

Straight students would be just as welcome. Thus, students who may not be comfortable coming out at the moment of enrollment would only have to indicate interest in the curriculum aspects of the school.”

After some discussions in the community last week, there have been mixed reviews of the proposal.

Wu explains that “the community was interested, but generally wanted more discussion and research done before moving forward.”

February at the Alumnae Theatre LIZA KOBRINSKY “The Ocean Ranger began to sink on Valentine’s Day, 1982, and was gone by dawn the next day. Every man on it died. Helen was 30 in 1982. Cal was 31.”

When I first heard about the Alumnae Theatre’s production of Lisa Moore’s novel February, I was wary. I wondered: could she put that sorrowing, living story on stage? As it happens, she could.

With the help of the play’s talented director, Michelle Alexander, Moore has adapted her muchloved 2010 novel into a moving piece of theatre. The story tells of a widowed mother, Helen, living with the death of her husband Cal nearly 30 years after he died in the sinking of an oil rig off the coast of Newfoundland. Meandering through flashback, the script blurs decades of Helen’s life, bringing Cal in and out of the present day—a guiding ghost. The play also highlights the life of Helen and Cal’s son, John, who despite having left his home and moved on, is clearly still struggling with his father’s death. Helen and John’s stories are interwoven through echoing dialogue which mimics the subtle parallelism of their two lives in Moore’s novel.

The set is bare: a few chairs, a derrick off an oil rig juts out of the stage, piled with baggage and household things. Blue lights fall on Helen and John talking over the phone: she in St. John’s, he in an airport in Singapore. The dialogue is achingly human, nuanced with a slight accent. Michelle Alexander’s staging does what I had doubted the play could do—it offers the kind of closeness felt between people who

10

have shared a tragedy, spotlights isolating a distanced communion. The minimalist set allows for flashback, denying any specific period in time, and by playing with sounds and blocking, Alexander transitions us back and forth in Helen’s life effortlessly yet jarringly, the way a real memory might.

I am in love with the Helen on stage. Lavetta Griffin becomes Helen thoroughly, and watching her change from 20 years old and starting a family, to 56 and stood up at a bar, I am completely convinced that she has remained the same person. Newfoundland native Griffin has tapped into whatever it is about the

“

“This wave has been working towards the chewing and swallowing of the world since the beginning of time.”

Island’s sensibility that makes Newfoundland stories so incredibly stirring. Griffin’s Helen doesn’t live in total mourning; there is humour and sex and even hope throughout the story—something the play insists on.

Helen’s son John is played both as a child and as an adult by Justin Skye Conley, who somehow lacks the humour so vividly present in Helen. John seems to flounder alone on stage. Skye Conley’s ten-year-old Johnny, dressed in a cape and carrying a red light-

saber, just looks like a grown man wearing a sheet.

But perhaps that’s exactly what Alexander had in mind.

The rest of the cast fills in the story beautifully. Cal (John Fray) and Helen’s sister Louise (Kathleen Jackson Allamby) are funny, dark, and add a comforting stability to the circuitous narrative. Nearing the end, Cal delivers a beautiful speech describing the wave that tips the oil rig over. “This wave has been working towards the chewing and swallowing of the world since the beginning of time.” And the audience sadly realizes that it isn’t really Cal’s wave at all, but Helen’s, imagining it for him.

In all, the play offers an experience quite different from the novel. Moore, Alexander, and the cast have brought these people to life; people that I and much of Canada have come to know. The play ends as it begins, with a diptych of Helen and John, each separately having dinner with someone they love, looking out a window. The view out that window is one that seems to be coming together piecemeal through the fabric of new Canadian writers, giving us a very intimate thread of their part of Canada. February, for its part, gives me St. John’s in a small playhouse in Toronto.

At the talkback after the show, an audience member quietly says that she grew up across the street from Moore. “I just wanted to say how incredibly proud we are of her.” I look up at Lisa Moore on stage and think, in that presumptuously familiar way you always think of your favourite writers, how very proud I am of her too.

Opera for a new age:

CHRIS HUTCHESON

Strauss and Verdi reach out to younger audiences

PAULA RAZURI ARTS & CULTURE EDITOR The Canadian Opera Company (COC) is currently increasing their emphasis on student-friendly pricing in an attempt to distance themselves from the age-old notion of the stuffiness of opera. It is an association that is not unwarranted; the form itself welcomes criticism, as the line between the absurd and the wonderful is thin when characters communicate by singing their emotions in an extended vibrato. Yet the COC’s productions of Die Fledermaus and Il Trovatore warrant high praise for being buoyant and chilling, respectively.

DIE FLEDERMAUS (THE BAT)

Director Christopher Alden succeeded in both preserving the classical identity and distinguishing his own unique vision of the comic operetta: both music and spoken dialogue was in the original German (with English surtitles above the stage), while a clean presentation implied modernity. The set was loaded with symbolism: a large watch hung over the stage, imposing order while swinging occasionally as if to hypnotise the crowd, the marriage bed stood firmly to the side of the stage, and a crack in the bedroom wall revealed a champagne-fuelled party.

On occasion, the directness of character placement and prop use was painfully obvious, and the attempt at Freudian overtones seemed an unnecessary addition to what was already a thoroughly enjoyable production, but for their part the energetic cast enjoyed their roles far too much to engender any negative feelings.

The story takes place in Vienna in the late 1800s, and revolves around the manipulative actions of Dr. Falke (Peter Barrett). Bitter about being abandoned after a party years ago, he plans his revenge through an extravagant party where mistaken identity and inversions of social status yield delightful results.

The experience of Die Fledermaus was enchanting. Under the conduction of Johannes Debus, the music was as light and sparkling as the champagne which filled the glasses of the operetta’s characters, and Paul Palazzo’s lighting transformed the tone of the stage from darkly comic to bright and airy.

Die Fledermaus was wonderfully self-aware, and the COC’s performance broke the audienceactor barrier without pretence on more than one occasion. In a very clever moment, the character of Rosalinde (Tamara Wilson) proclaimed that she needed some music, held her hands together, and politely turned to the conductor, who kindly obliged. David Pomeroy’s character Albert stood out comedically as the representation of everything over-the-top about the opera: his feathered hat, cape, and pink undergarments invited the audience’s laughter, but the wonderful thing about Die Fledermaus was that the characters laughed, too.

IL TROVATORE (THE TROUBADOUR)

The scene opened to rows of army cots with warmly-lit soldiers in their nightclothes. Their chorus was haunting, and immediately established that the music of Giuseppe Verdi’s Il Trovatore would be powerful and moving. The story, based on a play

by Antonia Garcia Gutierrez, was heavily Italian in its thematic focus on revenge, but the driving force of Il Trovatore was Azucena (Elena Manistina) and

her emotional struggles.

Manistina stood out as the most emotionally complex performer amongst the cast. Her voice was clear and strong, yet simultaneously impassioned and nuanced throughout her entire performance. She projected to the audience the emotions behind her immense moral dilemma between her love for her son and her obligation to avenge her mother’s death.

Azucena’s son, Manrico (Ramón Vargas) vied for the love of Leonora (Elza van der Heever) with the Conte di Luna (Russell Braun), whose baritone performance stood out and received enthusiastic applause (especially for the beautiful way his voice danced around every syllable of the word, “Le-ono-ra”). The vocal performance of Leonora herself, by van der Heever, was technically solid and undoubtedly clear, but seemed to lack the same passion that Braun, Vargas, and Manistina brought to their performances.

The COC’s production of Il Trovatore found most of its power in its music and the passion behind the on-stage voices. There was an obvious chemistry between the actors and conductor Marco Guidarini, whose baton led the music’s pace with expertise and an intuitive musical sense. The set design of Il Trovatore was very clean—another reason why I found the main impact of the performance lay in the music rather than the on-stage spectacle— though I found the use of large paintings (complete with frames) in lieu of a landscape background to be an intriguing choice of set design.

The experience of Il Trovatore was nothing short of moving. It required a little work on the audience’s part to set aside the revenge-driven plot and focus on the music itself, but once done, Il Trovatore proved to be touching and rewarding.

Tickets at $22 for those under 30. Die Fledermaus runs until Nov 3, Il Trovatore until Oct 31. Visit coc. ca for more information.

My Second Smile and the makings of a superhero Noah Spitzer’s self-written, self-performed production, My Second Smile, finished its run at The Factory Theatre on Sept 30. Co-directed by Eva Barrie and Harveen Sandhu, the play was an unshakeable reminder that the best theatre should come from the heart. The story is entirely true (with the exception of a few comic embellishments), and centers on a landmark event in Spitzer’s teenage life—although probably not of the sort that you’re imagining.

Ottawa-born Spitzer is a recent graduate of Ryerson Theatre School, where My Second Smile first came to life as his final performance piece. It’s an extremely intimate production, which is exactly why it packed such a punch in both the humorous and tender moments.

With no set, apparent costume, or props (aside from a single on-stage water bottle) to speak of, the show was a collection of Spitzer’s personal monologues, jumping between present-day confessions about his lack of religious identity and flashbacks delivered by his 16-year-old self, interspersed with rib-tickling

impersonations of schoolmates, old ladies, and sassy nurses.

But beneath all this humour was some very serious subject matter: this was the story of a young boy’s brush with thyroid cancer. In between facetious jabs at asshole doctors and ignorant peers, Spitzer caught us off-guard with poignant references to his family and his fears.

It was in these moments that Noah gained our sympathy—without ever asking for it—simply by telling us the truth. But before the audience could break into uncontrollable sobs, he’d pick us all back up again, with the snap of an imagined latex glove and the hijinks of two clueless post-operative attendants. The entire piece was a carefully-crafted blend of heart wrenching and hilarity.

While the genius script alone would easily have kept the audience content through the hour-long running time, lighting by Mikael Kangas and sound by Evan Bonnah-Hawkes underscored the dialogue in all the right places.

The show was produced by Theatre Bassaris, an independent company whose focus is to support up-and-coming artists and their work.

In most respects, the poster’s claim was completely true: this really was just “a one boy show.” But perhaps Noah Spitzer is more than just that. At the very least, he has a superpower to boast about: the ability to look fear straight in the eye and come out laughing.

Arts & Culture • 15 Oct. 2012 • artsandculture@thestrand.ca

VICTORIA BEALES

•

11

FILM & MUSIC

presents

“Dispatches From Venus” A brand new column on feminism and science fiction

BESS JARVIS STAFF WRITER

T

he first three companions of the Doctor Who revival were strong, independent women who grew and developed throughout the show.

That’s part of why the last two seasons, written and produced by Steven Moffat, have met with such vocal criticism in feminist circles; the show attracted a fanbase that expected good representation of women. Moffat’s Doctor Who makes subtle use of a trope that the show never fell into before: the femme fatale. Amy, played

by Karen Gillan, is one such example.

The trope is not obvious, but on close examination, Amy’s power is located primarily in her sexuality, and her power to solve problems and direct her own life is frequently undermined.

Amy’s power is not overtly sexualized (that is, she does not clearly use her sexuality as a weapon, as the typical femme fatale does), but she does share one fundamental characteristic of the femme fatale: her power is frequently located in her ability to dominate men—specifically her husband, Rory, and the Doctor himself. This is mostly expressed in the form of cheap jokes that have little bearing on her interest or character development. In “The Vampires of Venice,” the Doctor and Rory concede that they are “her boys.” In “The Big Bang,” Rory resigns himself to the idea that their family name is Pond rather than Williams, beginning a running gag clearly meant to imply a reversal of gender roles in their marriage. These jokes might be funny or revealing if they bore any significant relationship to the way gender dynamics actually play out in the show, but the fact is that Amy rarely plays a genuinely dominant role in the TARDIS family. In fact, once Rory begins travelling with them, her participation in events drops rather dramatically.

In the fifth season, Amy plays an instrumental role in solving several major conflicts. In “The Big Bang,” the power of her memory is crucial, and even in “The Vampires of Venice” she asserts her independence by insisting on going into the girls’ school to find out what’s going on, (though she does need to be saved).

In contrast, the sixth season finds

12

Amy regularly deprived of her ability to make decisions. Apart from killing Madame Kovarian in “The Wedding of River Song,” she never plays an important role in the resolution of a major conflict; instead, Rory and the Doctor frequently have to rescue her. She spends much of the season trapped at Demon’s Run against her will and without her knowledge, she is sent home without discussion of her wishes in “The God Complex,” and in “The Girl Who Waited,” the

“

Sexuality is the only strength Amy has left, and even that is only depicted through a series of tired jokes.

At this point, Amy has been reduced to a punchline.

course of her life is literally decided by the Doctor without her informed input.

Despite Amy’s passivity, she is still superficially presented as the dominant figure in her marriage. She repeatedly insults Rory, using “stupid face” as a term of endearment. She also asserts her dominance physically; she hits Rory on-screen at least twice, and in “The God Complex” he implies that this is a trend (“Something hit me...was it Amy?”). These lines are played for laughs, but what story are they telling? It’s clear from their respective actions that Amy and Rory have not genuinely reversed stereotypcial gender roles; Rory repeatedly plays the hero, while Amy almost never does. Amy’s dominance also seems to be relevant only to her relationship with Rory—she never has a chance to use her strength to her own advantage. Once the fifth season is over and Rory comes into his own as a companion, any advantage Amy had over him in terms of intelligence or competence vanishes. The implication that Amy is still a powerful figure is not just inconsistent with the plot, it is consistent with a harmful stereotype about women’s sexuality as

a threat to men.

In her very first episode, Amy makes it clear that she is comfortable in her sexuality. She works as a “kissogram” (a sort of call-girl whose job description ends at smooching), and she unabashedly takes pleasure in watching the Doctor undress. In “Flesh and Stone,” she expresses her sexuality again when she tries to seduce the Doctor, and the plot of “Vampires in Venice” partly revolves around Rory’s consequent feelings of insecurity. In “Asylum of the Daleks,” we see this spelled out: Rory believes that “the defining characteristic of [their] relationship” is that Rory loves Amy more than she loves him. The superficially gender-reversed power dynamic in their marriage is based solely on the threat that Amy’s sexual freedom poses to Rory. Without the power of her sexuality, Amy would be defined in the sixth season by her passivity and helplessness. Sexuality is the only strength she has left, and even that is only depicted through a series of tired jokes. At this point, Amy has been reduced to a punchline.

“

Amy’s story is not one of empowerment—which means the sixth season’s emphasis on her sexual power at the expense of everything else she has to offer remains unredeemed.

I

n the seventh season, Amy almost gets a chance to finish her story on a genuinely empowered note. “Dino-

WALLCHAN.COM

Doctor Who and the Femme Fatale

saurs on a Spaceship” and “A Town Called Mercy” illustrate Amy using her intellectual skills and her moral power to contribute to the plot resolution in significant ways. In “The Power of Three,” her marriage is presented as more mature and equal, and the writers largely avoid the sixth season’s cheap jokes about Amy’s dominance over Rory. Most importantly, they show her gradually moving away from the Doctor and towards a decision to move on and live a normal life. After a lifetime of being pulled back and forth with little opportunity to direct her life’s course, these few episodes see Amy in the process of making a considered decision about her life.

However, her final episode disappointingly stunts this narrative. In choosing to follow Rory by giving herself to the Weeping Angel, Amy’s decision is forced, abrupt, and she gives it little serious consideration; she doesn’t know where the angel will take her. The drama, emotionality, and speed of this decision mean that it doesn’t follow smoothly from her thought process over the past four episodes. It is not the content of her decision that makes this story disappointing—I have no problem with her choosing a life with Rory. What makes this problematic is that she is yet again denied the opportunity to make a genuinely informed decision about her life.

In the end, despite some glimpses of real strength and opportunity, Amy’s story is not one of empowerment—which means the sixth season’s emphasis on her sexual power at the expense of everything else she has to offer remains unredeemed. As a result, Amy’s character fits the “femme fatale” trope in a way that Doctor Who has, until now, managed to avoid.

Habibi New world cinema from the Toronto Palestinian Film Festival ILSE VON MIELE

“

Habibi’s sorrowful, heartwarming, and occasionally comical narrative is a perfect portrayal of the imperfect world we inhabit, where poetry, religion, love and oppression are a reality.

The film Habibi does not tell a story that has never been told before, nor does it present innovative characters or situations. Rather, the film depicts issues of historical importance and relevance while allowing the viewer to find a place in its narration and position his or herself within one of the many conflicts it illustrates.

The film tells the story of two

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH

When I arrived at the final showing of the Toronto-based Palestinian Film Festival I had a keen sense of expectation. I found myself immersed in a plethora of different cultures. The people around me seemed to share common interests and knowledge, mentioning names of artists I had never heard about.

young lovers, Layla and Quay (characters adapted from the Arabic story “Layli and Manjun”) and how their lives are radically changed when they get their visas revoked by the Israeli government, resulting in their forced return to Gaza. While there, they face the harsh realities of their relationship, and their radically changing personal lives.

Habibi not only serves as a narrative about a broken romance, it also raises and depicts important issues affecting Palestine. Issues such as arranged marriage, violence, systematic religious control, sexism and poisonous generational gaps are all

tastefully represented. They blend into the storyline perfectly, coming to the viewer naturally and making their impact all the stronger.

The performances of the cast are crisp, measured and accurate. The characters of Layla and Quay are gracefully portrayed by Maisa Abd Elhadi and Kais Nashif. Both give their characters youth and authenticity. Nonetheless, as impactful as their performances may be separately, their chemistry as companions is questionable. It is clear they are lovers, but the couple struggles to convince the audience of their adoration for each other.

Although the translation of their love into the screen is lacking, this void is filled by the phenomenal relationship between Abu Wardeh (playing Layla’s father) and Abd Elhadi. Their father-daughter relationship is perhaps the film’s most enthralling emotional arc.

Although Habibi is not a groundbreaking film, it is perfectly understandable that it was chosen to close the festival. It is an agent of a new and youthful form of cinema, and its handling of sensitive issues shows maturity and understanding.

Habibi’s sorrowful, heartwarming, and occasionally comical narrative is a perfect portrayal of the imperfect world we inhabit, where poetry, religion, love and oppression are a reality.

This is the true beauty of Habibi: it understands the human spirit and it portrays it thoroughly. Disordered, chaotic, and yet utterly simple and plain, Habibi is what it is: nothing more, nothing less.

BAHAR BANAEI MUSIC EDITOR On Tuesday Sept. 15, the Antlers made an appearance at the Great Hall in Toronto’s West End after the release of their newest and highly anticipated EP, Undersea.

The trio emerged into the indierock scene in 2006 when lead vocalist and guitarist Peter Silberman created the band in Brooklyn, New York.

After the band’s inception, they successfully released four studio albums and EPs, including the critically acclaimed Hospice (2009), a concept album that tells the story of the relationship between a hospice worker and a cancer patient.

Undersea deviates only slightly from the emotionally loaded songs of the band’s 2009 album, but the content is something that recurs throughout their music and their

concerts.

Arriving two songs into the show, I rushed into the imposing hall, which was already filled with an unsurprisingly brooding atmosphere. What could be seen through the cool lighting emitted from the stage where the silhouettes of a silent audience swaying back and forth to Silberman’s soft and calming voice, as it travelled through the crowd, up and around the room.

Several songs into the show, they started their Hospice segment, followed by the introduction of new songs along with a powerful performance of “Endless Ladder” from Undersea, with an emphasis on the beautiful guitar melody that echoed through the venue. Their rendition of songs from Hospice was a surprise; for the first time in my experience, Silberman’s lyrics were well enunciated and the verses understandable.

And every now and then between songs, polymath musician Darby Cicci would light up the air with a few dry jokes as the rest of the band prepped their instruments for the next song.

“

Their rendition of songs from Hospice was a surprise; for the first time in my experience, Silberman’s lyrics were well enunciated and the verses understandable.

One of the few things Silberman told the crowd after the roaring cry for an encore was that the band would be going on hiatus after their tour. The only thing I can say is that I hope it’s not too long before they come back.

•

Film & Music • 15 Oct. 2012 • filmandmusic@thestrand.ca

The Antlers live at the Great Hall

13

Jack White sings solo

A review of Jack White’s thrilling solo debut in Toronto

JOE MCCAUGHTY

The talent and charisma showcased in White’s performance elevated all these elements of the band. Rotating between various electric and acoustic guitars, he performed his melodic rock with a personal touch. His expressive voice rose above the music and filled the entire Sony Theatre. While performing the Blunderbuss single “Love Interruption,” the instruments stopped playing and only White’s voice carried throughout the performance space. His performance was nothing short of extraordinary.

HALEY CURRIE The stage is dimly lit. The instruments are unveiled. The sound checks are completed. The band steps on stage, and the crowd goes insane. Jack White has arrived for his first ever solo show in Toronto.

Jack White is one of the most renowned musical frontmen of our time.

The White Stripes, Dead Weather, and The Raconteurs have all been blowout acts over his musical career, but until this past year White hasn’t gone solo.

His debut solo album, Blunderbuss,

draws influences from blues, funk, and soul, and touches on themes such as love and punishment. Overall, the album is rooted in the essence of White’s spirit, but embarks on a new musical path with no limits or restraints to his creativity.

On Oct 3 and 4, White brought the act to Toronto. He played both nights at the Sony Centre for the Performing Arts, creating a powerful atmosphere for each audience. White was accompanied by two bands that played on separate nights, both equally talented and suited for their role as White’s backup act. The all-female band the

Peacocks played the first night, followed by the all-male Los Buzzardos performing on the second. The set list also incorporated various tracks from White’s previous musical projects, although these were performed in a different mood and style than ever before.

There were plenty of made-in-Nashville flourishes—fiddle, mandolin, and pedal steel that transformed the songs into completely new pieces. The band performed classic White Stripes songs such as “Hotel Yorba,” “Dead Leaves And The Dirty Ground,” and “We’re Gonna Be Friends,” all with southern blues-style tones and melodies.

“

Jack White proved that despite his broken ties with his previous bands, he is nowhere near finished making an impact on the music world.

The concert tied in elements of blues and rock-n’-roll aesthetics with the intense lighting, elevated sound, and stunning performances of the artists.

Jack White proved that, despite his broken ties with his previous bands, he is nowhere near finished making an impact on the music world—undoubtedly he will be back for more, and Toronto had better watch out.

80 years old and still dirty A list of the top ten tunes from the 1930s

Film & Music • 15 Oct. 2012 • filmandmusic@thestrand.ca

SINÉAD DOHERTY-GRANT & BAHAR BANAEI

1939 1938

14

Night and Day by Billie Holiday

Cole Porter’s classic is given a melancholy twist in Billie Holiday’s 1939 version of the song.

1930

My Girl’s Pussy by Harry Roy and his Orchestra

Banned on the radio. This outrageous song is lyrically ahead of its time (If you know what I mean).

Body and Soul by Libby Holman

When a Woman Loves a Man by Billie Holiday

1937

My Woman by Al Bowlly

Sex Appeal by Adam Aston

Was John Williams inspired?

Adam Aston, Polish Pop singer of the thirties sexes it up in this Polish song where the only English words are...sex appeal! If you’re fond of drugs, check out his song Opium. You’ll love it.

1936 •

Amapola by Carlo Buti

1931 1932 1933

Torch Singer Libby Holman is not afraid of letting her voice drip with emotion. Enjoy a hardy dose of melodrama.

She tells him he’s super sexy hot like... every second. This languorous style makes the song less...obsessive? Like, we know she’s devoted to him, but she’s not killing herself over it.

Love Locked Out by Al Bowlly

Modern love songs have a lot to learn from these lyrics.

Nuages by Django Reinhardt

I love you, my dear girl, as the flower Django, a guitar master, composed loves day’s light. Need I say more? some of the most popular Gypsy Jazz pieces and continued to do so even with after losing all but two fingers in an accident.

1935

The Very Thought of You by Ray Noble and his Orchestra Ray Noble’s romantic classic was also recorded

by Billie Holiday and Victor Young. Make sure you check those versions out.

1934

Q:

STRANDED WHERE JOY COMES TO DIE

Did you get dumped this past Thanksgiving weekend?

A: Yes.

I’ve taken the liberty of answering this question for you and the reason is twofold: I know everything because old-ass jokes ring true through eternity, and because my odds of being right are pretty good. I have a complex formula that I have spent long hours calculating in The Strand office (63 Charles Street West, my office hours are every other week, Thursday to Saturday, 2-6 AM, come visit sometime!): Stranded’s readership is equal to one (you), you have a 50 percent chance of having a relationship with someone from your high school (either out in bumfuck nowhere or the GTA), and there’s a 50 percent chance that that relationship has recently ended. Since I dig the humanities, I forgot how to use math a long time ago, but I did use a bunch of science, so I think I’m probably right. Either that or I should never get into gambling at the Woodbine Racetrack.

Anyway, the point is that you either got dumped by or did the dumping of your high school sweetheart and you probably thought, deep down in the cockles of your heart, that a long distance relationship was something you “could totally make work” and that you “could think about going to the same grad school after.” Well, it turns out none of that stuff was true and now you’re getting revved up for the single life, which (spoiler alert!) also sucks, maybe even more so. If by some strange miracle you haven’t had your high school relationship end, Christmas is coming. If you make it past Christmas you should get an award/I’m actually really happy for you; don’t fuck it up! If none of this applies to you, let’s hang out sometime. Stranded is down with running personals in the future just in case.

Also, large fonts fill more space. Try it on your essays sometime!

15

STRANDED UNFORTUNATELY

So everyone is talking about this election business

Stranded • 15 Oct. 2012 • stranded@thestrand.ca

Remember this guy? He gropes people and cheats on his spouse(s). Everybody thought he was gonna be prez, but it turns out he sucks.

ALL PHOTOS: WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

Hopefully I’m not the only one who doesn’t give a fuck. Yeah, American politics are cool and everything but like, fuck, let’s get over it. Yeah, they control the world blah blah the outcome of the election will dramatically alter global politics blah Romney is the devil, etc. I get it. Whatever. I don’t need an excuse to get drunk (see the presidential debate drinking game phenomenon), I don’t want to gawk at the media circus, and I don’t want to hate on people with different views than mine. Has no one ever told you that America is a shitty, backwards-ass fuckhole of corruption and dirty money? It’s fucking depressing, that’s what it is. I don’t want to look at it. So I don’t. But I can’t escape it. I can’t go on the internet without seeing it, look at a paper or chill with my friends without hearing about how fucking hypocritical Romney is, how fucked up and Randian Paul Ryan is, or how Obama is also bad. Jeepers, did nobody ever read The Lesser Evil by Michael Ignatieff? In any case, fuck it, I’m done. Here’s my version of the events that have happened and will happen. Not to subtly rip off a piece in The New Yorker that I saw at a friend’s house who could afford it or anything.

A bunch of strange people with unusually shaped heads get pressured by the media to try to challenge Nobel Peace Prize winner President Barack “The Islamic Shock” Hussein Obama in single combat.

But then Mr. White Horse himself rides in with more money and... that’s about it. He’s rich. And a dick. Surprise.

Union-busting, Ayn-Rand-stroking, iron-pumping Paul Ryan comes in to be Mitt’s squire/stable boy. The internet goes nuts for it. Thanks to Time for fucking condemning this guy to a lifetime of mockery.

And Obama wins again and nothing changes! Great. Didn’t see that one coming at all.

16

•