Vol. 55 Issue 5

INSIDE: ELECTING THE PRESIDENT OF OHIO • 5 // MUZZLING SCIENTISTS • 8-9 // CANZINE 2012 • 10 // CAMELOT DUDEBROS & DEMON SEDUCTRESSES • 12

the STRAND VICTORIA UNIVERSITY`S STUDENT NEWSPAPER vOL. 55 iSSUE 5 • Oct. 29 2012 • WWW.THESTRAND.CA

The economy of love: an interview with Junot Díaz

BY MUNA MIRE

P

ulitzer Prize-winning novelist Junot Diaz has just released a new collection of short stories titled This Is How You Lose Her, which he read from at the International Festival of Authors (IFOA) last weekend. The Strand sat down with him to discuss his new work.

Interviewer: I want to start by asking about the epigraph to your latest collection of short stories, This Is How You Lose Her. First, it’s from a poem by Sandra Cisneros.

I’m curious what your relationship is with her work specifically? As a writer? As a man? As a person of colour?

As someone who is interested in writing about men, no one can inform you better than women of colour. I mean—who is at the sharp end of the knife of what we would call New World masculinity? When I think about Sandra Cisneros—listen, she was one of my foundational inspirations to be a writer and to be specifically a US Latino writer the way that I am. Her books were very important, they set the benchmark. The benchmark of minimal courage. I think that you can’t come any weaker than Sandra Cisneros, and not that we come any braver—you can’t. But I think that’s where you’ve got to set the bar— then you just jump. And we all come beneath it but it’s worth trying.

The epigraph seems to frame the text so well—it is almost like a call to something, an exhortation. There should be stars...you know? It echoes this listless (and sometimes it seems doomed) search for love and intimacy that Yunior, who is this really contradictory character is on. And to me, it feels like the epigraph and the central story “Otravida, Otravez” are mirroring or answering Yunior in a way. It’s like we get the other side of the story and that is really interesting since Yunior writes the story and isn’t present in it.

I mean, yeah. The last story in the book reveals the metanarrative of the whole book which is that you suddenly realize that he [Yunior] is writing the book you just read.

So yeah, all those kind of in-jokes about this

book, this novel, like you said it takes on a double meaning.

I’m interested in the imagined female voice that answers. Can you talk a bit about how you understand the ways that women of colour love? And how do we understand the epigraph and title and how they influence the ways we can read the book’s stories?

It all depends on the level of participation that you want. One of the things that’s interesting about certainly my last two books is that they permit high level participation.

They permit you to almost entirely restructure the book in, I think, fascinating ways.

Which is to say that there’s room here for the reader to have an enormous amount of authority. Now, of course there are ways to read this more [traditionally]. You could just read the book beginning to end and you just want to kind of kick back and not have to do a lot of work. But for those who want to come in at a higher level, [by] which we don’t

“

Realism has failed to describe the Caribbean experience. Realism has failed to describe fucking Trujillo.

mean superior, but just a level that requires more participation, there’s room for that too.

And I think the question of how the women characters play out and are played out in this book changes depending on the level of your participation. I think there’s a way of thinking about the gap between how Yunior sees the women in this book versus how the book permits a reader to see them.

I think that what matters about the women characters in this book is that there is a gap between how Yunior views the women in his world and how the women or men that read this book can view these women.

And I think that gap is really important. I mean, the big irony of the book is that he finally is able to see women correctly but the

woman he wants to see isn’t present!

Is that a failed strategy [on my part]? Perhaps. Every strategy that we take is a strategy because it can fail. But it felt to me that what was important was to be incredibly honest to

“

As colonial subjects, as people who continue to endure the weight, the history, the possession, the haunting of colonization and the long term effects of that—to actually value your own identity matrix over whiteness—is a revolution.

what I would call the traditional masculine view in a way that I think is excruciating.

And I hope that the reader will see the ways that these women don’t fit these guys’ reductive, myopic view of them.

It was excruciating. Your story “Nilda” in particular was hard to read for me.

Why “Nilda” in particular?

I don’t know, something about her character which I empathized with as a female was heartbreaking. She just seemed so sad, she really didn’t value herself at all anymore. And all of the sexual exploitation, too.

Well no, I guess I understand that deeply.

But I think that there is, I always feel, a very productive juxtaposition that I think it’s important to take a look at. Yunior and fucking Nilda begin in the exact same place.

How so?

They’re from the same neighborhood.

They’re probably from similar families, yeah? You discover that drug dealing is not a distant thing in Yunior’s family. They begin in pretty much the same exact place but gender plays its role. And suddenly you see at the end where this girl is like, you know, she’s still pushing forward in life. And Yunior is on

his way to college. And my sense of the story is that we sort of forget that in some ways this is a study of what happens with privilege and what happens with how the average masculine life is not about being constantly attacked for your sexuality. I mean, Nilda spends the entire time being preyed on because she has a pussy. And Yunior doesn’t spend his whole childhood being preyed on. And it gives him freedom. But what’s fascinating, and again I point this out, is that Yunior bears witness to it. And the only reason you’re excruciated with it is because Yunior, instead of pretending like most guys that this is naturalized, bears witness.

I think the thing with Yunior is that he says he loves her. And think about what it must cost to bear witness to that. I’m not saying he’s worse than her but in some ways that story reveals the DNA of the book. This is a kid that in one way loves a lot of the women that he’s watching being destroyed and he’s participating in their destruction because he graduates from watching Nilda to doing that to other women.

You said in an interview with Paula M.L Moya for the Boston Review that you wrote Yunior as this character on a quest for “decolonial love”. Can you talk a bit about what “decolonial love” is? I’m interested in how you define it, what it means to you, how you came to the idea, and how we can move through the world carrying it out. How do you embody decolonial love?

It’s a supremely academic definition.

Which doesn’t mean it’s not useful. I think for me one of the things that happens at the most molar level is that as colonial subjects, as people who continue to endure the weight, the history, the possession, the haunting of colonization and the long term effects of that —to actually value your own identity matrix over whiteness—is a revolution. And for a male in a heteronormative relationship to try to discover the ways that his masculinity has been organized vis-à-vis women of colour, is part of this colonial enterprise too. And then

SEE “DIAZ” ON PAGE 6

NEWS

Parliament debates ‘National Antibullying Strategy’

The suicide of Amanda Todd highlights urgent need for action MERAJ ZEFAR STAFF WRITER On Oct 15, the House of Commons debated a private member’s bill by NDP MP and deputy LGBTQ critic Dany Morin, calling for a non-partisan study of bullying across the country. If passed, the motion will lead parliament to develop an official national strategy against bullying.

Morin had introduced the motion in June, but the suicide of 15-year-old Amanda Todd in early October meant that his bill was debated with new urgency.

Reminding the House of other incidents of teenage suicide in the face of bullying, Morin appealed to MPs of all parties: “The federal government must play a leadership role in this issue....Young people bullied in cyberspace have to live 24/7 with the pressure, stress, and suffering.”

According to many, however, a new study is not what’s needed. Speaking to the CBC, Allan Hubley, father of the late Jamie Hubley, said, “With all due respect, I think we have enough studies. What we need is action....If there’s money available, we should find a way to get that in to the front-line troops.”

But in an interview with The Strand, Faye Mishna, dean and professor at UofT’s faculty of social work, said that a national strategy would be “a great idea if possible.”

“

“The idea is not just to deal [with bullying], but to prevent it, create an atmosphere of acceptance.”

“The idea is not just to deal [with bullying], but to prevent it, create an atmosphere of acceptance. Like PREVnet,” Mishna added, referring to a Canadian anti-bullying organization. “It brings together people who are doing the research and people who are doing the front-line work. And I think that’s the sort of thing that works.”

Like Morin, Mishna focused on the impact of social media on bullying.

“Sending photos, making gossip websites, defriending—they’re all forms of bully-

ing,” she said. “But...an adult might look at something like that and say it’s bullying— and then kids might say it’s drama. And that’s one of the reasons that everybody... needs to be involved. It’s not so easy to sort it out.”

Paddy Stamp, UofT’s sexual harassment officer, pointed out that technology can also complicate methods for dealing with bullying and harassment. “When [a case of harassment] is cyber I might have to pass it on to the police to investigate,” she said. “Partly because of ... how serious something is, but partly because I don’t have the tools at my disposal to investigate something like that.

“But so many of these laws,” Stamp added, “they’re from 20 years ago. They aren’t able to handle these things.” Referring to the online sexual harassment that Amanda Todd faced, and to the man who followed her from school to school with topless photos of her, Stamp also said that simply telling people to stop taking risks with technology won’t solve anything.

“That’s the problem with a lot of the advice out there. They say, ‘don’t do it, don’t [take photos].’ Well, it’s often too late for that. It was too late for Amanda Todd.”

Stamp added that what she calls “risk management” advice doesn’t always take relationships into account. “Of course it’s fun, it’s exciting. But also, part of it’s that these [tapes and photos] are personal—they’re not ‘risky.’ They were made in situations with trust and privacy, and then that [relationship] ends and that’s betrayed.”

Both Stamp and Mishna pointed out that legislation alone can’t solve bullying or harassment. “If children grow up in school with certain kinds of environments where [bullying] behaviour is accepted, they’ll continue to behave like that,” said Mishna. “And the media gives the message that it’s okay to not treat [certain groups] as well.”

Stamp also focused on how, in Amanda Todd’s case, it was partly those “messages” that allowed the bullying to happen. “Because in an ideal world Amanda Todd would have been [in a position] where she could say, ‘Go ahead, show the photo. It can’t hurt me.’ In an ideal world, that’s what she could say. ‘You’re the one who’ll be shamed by showing it—not me, not me.’”

Mental illness more common than cancer New report by province looks into the burden of mental illness AMANDA AZIZ EDITORIAL ASSISTANT One in five Canadians suffer from a mental illness each year. More specifically, Ontarians experience mental health issues 1.5 times more than that of all cancers, and seven times more than infectious diseases, according to Opening Eyes, Opening Minds: The Ontario Burden of Mental Illness and Addiction, the report issued by the Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion (OAHPP).

The report claimed to provide the most complete assessment of the burden of mental illness and addictions in Ontario, and how to measure burden (through Health-Adjusted Life Year) as a way to address the needs of patients.

Aliçia Sarah Raimundo, a 23-year-old mental health advocate, public speaker, and recent graduate of The University of Waterloo, looked at the recent report and its educative potential pragmatically.

“I can understand why people argue the ‘1.5 more times’ statement. I think we have to remember that, 20-30 years ago, the reputation of cancer was where [mental illnesses] are today. Now, when one finds a tumour in their body, there is no shame to talk to your doctor about that.

Yet when one is feeling depressed and looks physically fine, it’s harder for people to sympathize.”

As someone who suffers with a mental illness herself, Raimundo understands the necessity of spotlighting the stigma associated with it. At 13 years old, she

2

attempted suicide, and received therapy during her adolescence. Over the past few years, she has been getting her story out into the public, hoping to make discussion of mental health less taboo. Despite having spoken at events at public schools and conferences, such as her TEDxWaterloo talk (“Mental Health Superhero”), she still runs into problems when talking about her experiences.

“When you’re judged by one thing —you never know by what you’re being rejected for. Are they rejecting me, or my story because they Googled me? And I think that’s a personal choice that I made to be publicly open about my past, and hopefully that will incite a better conversation among people.”

The OAHPP report mentions that the burdens range from disruptions to major life transitions, like finishing high school to entry into the work force—the latter of which Raimundo has been unfortunately familiar with. After being interviewed for a CTV segment on suicide survivors last year, her former employer admitted that had he known before that she used to be suicidal, he would not have hired her. Despite the discouraging experience that came with being open about her past, Raimundo still insists that normalizing the topic of mental health is just as simple as talking about it.

“I think there is a lot that comes in a way of empowering people, just by even bringing them into the conversation to know them more and what they need.

Like with one of my best friends, the one

thing that she asks, if you are close to her, is to call her every morning just so that she could wake up and get out of bed— and that’s all she wants, but you wouldn’t know that unless you have a conversation with her. So all you have to do is just ask.”

As most media coverage of mental health related news tends to feed into the negative connotation attached to it, Raimundo hopes that the media coverage that the OAHPP report has been getting will encourage a more positive outlook on the topic.

“

Yet when one is feeling depressed and looks physically fine, it’s harder for people to sympathize.

“Growing up, when you talked about suicide or mental illness, you talked about Kurt Cobain, you talked about it after someone commits suicide, or takes a gun and shoots at people in a movie theatre or school—that’s the only time you talked about [mental illness]. So with these mental health reports, you are at least having a more constant conversation about it so that people will be more likely to get help.

So we’ve come so far, and we need to recognize that.”

Recently, Raimundo was given the distinction of being a part of the Faces of Mental Illness 2012 campaign, which

strives to conquer stigma by choosing a diverse group of people as “faces” yearly.

“What made me happy about the Faces 2012 campaign was that you’re talking about stories that touch on hope, recovery, and change. You can be honest and say ‘Yeah, I’ve gotten better, but there is still an old wound there, and some days will not be so great, but at least I can get up and go on with living my life healthily.’”

The Opening Eyes, Opening Minds report states that its intention is for this information to help health care providers, practitioners, policy-makers, and researchers as they consider populationbased promotion, prevention, and treatment strategies. Although the report has the potential to create positive and educational conversations about mental health, Raimundo still insists that there needs to be a shift of focus in such research in the foreseeable future.

“We do need to move forward and admit that, yes, there is something wrong, and that we need to find a way to fix it.

[Promotion-wise,] we need to be having this conversation more and focus on people—such as public figures—who have gone through this, and prove that recovery can happen.”

Hart House event critiques presidential debate WENDELLE SO STAFF WRITER

debate. “This established him as a credible candidate in the polls, and it blindsided Obama [during the first debate].”

“But this time Obama was much better prepared for it...‘That’s not what you said before,’ ‘that’s not what your party says;’ zingers like that about two or three different Romneys.”

Leduc also called attention to the fact that not all of Romney’s more ambitious policies can be applicable.

“Romney loves to say, ‘from day one’,’ but even if he had the current Congress, he’s promising a lot more than he can do.”

“

``Debates are always flawed by expectations,`` said Leduc. ``Expectations are always high for the president and low for the challenger.``

“I’m surprised that someone like Romney would link higher gas prices to Obama,” admitted Tsibilis. “I know he’s trying to resonate with Americans, but I’m surprised a business person like Romney would credit him instead of forces like globalization.”

The two presidential candidates explained their positions on several issues during the 90-minute debate moderated by Candy Crawley. It employed a town hall format of 13 questions chosen from an audience of 80 undecided voters, with options between the candi-

dates to follow-up in Hampstead, New York.

The candidates were also provided with opportunities to clarify their public image, through a question that asked Romney to differentiate himself from former president Bush, and the closing question had each candidate identify and correct the single biggest misconception surrounding them.

The Arbor Room audience was decidedly pro-Obama, erupting into cheers and applause in several parts of his speeches. When the moderator, Miller, asked the audience if they thought that Romney won the debate, no one raised their hands.

Nevertheless, Leduc alluded to the lack of importance debates have in the course of a campaign. “Do debates matter?” he asked. “The surge that Romney gained [in the first debate] will dissipate. Assuming Obama gains, that will also dissipate in a few days.”

“There’s a lot of studies in Poli Sci that show that poll results two weeks after campaigns, and before electoral debates start, are reliable [indicators of who will win]. Whether they are to be re-elected depends on things like the unemployment record, the percent of GDP,” said Leduc.

Tsibilis made a more direct prediction. “Tonight we saw a very presidential Obama, an Obama ready for the foreign policy debate,” he said. “I predict Obama will win.”

SARAH CRAWLEY

It’s a tight race, but Obama has the edge.

Political Science professors Arthur Rubinoff and Larry Leduc, along with Munk School of Global Affairs’ Masters candidate Louis Tsivilis concurred on this verdict, which was given minutes after the second presidential debate on Oct 16. The debate featured candidates Barack Obama and Mitt Romney discussing issues such as unemployment, oil and gas drilling, the government deficit, and female workplace equality.

“If Obama loses seven [of the states], he still wins,” said Rubinoff, who teaches US Government at UofT. “Romney faces a tougher job. He’s going to lose Ohio because of the article about the bailout on Wall Street.”

Leduc agreed that Obama and Romney would continue to battle over critical states. “One fact about electoral math remains; states with the most electoral votes are where the race is closed,” he said. “The race is still close.

They have enough electoral votes to tip [the race] enough either way.”

The public showing of the second presidential debate was sponsored by the Hart House Debates Committee, led by Karthy Chin. The televised debate was followed by a panel commentary by Tsivilis, Rubinoff, and Leduc, and moderated by PhD graduate Bradley Miller. The event was attended to standing capacity by students and members of the UofT community in the Hart House Arbor Room.

“We chose to do this event as we felt that it was an important discussion to have on American politics, considering the importance that America has... particularly on our economy,” Chin explained. “The [previous week] we had Michael Wilson, the new chancellor of the university discuss his opinions on the way the American presidential debate would affect Canadians.”

The panel praised Obama’s performance during the second debate. “The greatest boxer, like Muhammad Ali, floats like a butterfly and stings like a bee,” said Rubinoff. “Obama wasn’t out to knock out [Romney], but he stung and got him skillfully.”

Leduc provided context for Obama’s positive impression after the second debate. “Debates are always flawed by expectations,” he said. “Expectations are high for the president and low for the challenger… However, Obama did so badly in the first event that expectations were lowered for him. Because Romney did so well in the first debate, expectations were high for him.”

The panel members also scrutinized Romney’s position on the conservativeliberal spectrum. “We still don’t know the real Romney three weeks before the election,” Leduc said. He argued that the best description of Governor Romney was the accusation thrown at him by a previous political opponent: “I am pro-choice; Mr. Romney is multiplechoice.”

“He moved from pandering to the far right in the US to a more central position,” said Rubinoff, pointing out that Romney suddenly shifted after the first

KAREEM JARRAH STAFF WRITER Researchers at UofT and the Georgia Institute of Technology have shown that memory capacity and perception are more connected than was originally believed. Published in this month’s Hippocampus, their research has demonstrated that memory loss in people diagnosed with some forms of dementia, such as Alzheimer’s, may be in part due to the patient`s inability to differentiate between objects.

The trouble is that people diagnosed with memory loss have difficulty correctly perceiving objects.

“Not only does memory seem to be very closely linked to perception, but it’s also likely that one affects the other,” explained Morgan Barense of UofT’s Psychology department.

The study looked at the visual perception of three groups, patients di-

agnosed with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), patients at risk for MCI, and a control group of people with no history of memory loss.

The participants in each group were shown two images rotated side-byside. These two pictures were either the same image, similar except for a few minor changes (such as two slightly different blob patterns), or very different pictures (such as a butterfly and a microwave). The images were shown either in a high interference sequence or a low interference sequence.

In the high interference trials, all image pairs were either the same or slightly different. In the low-interference trials, subjects were shown pairs that were the same, slightly different, but also pairs where the differences between objects were greater.

The results show that in the high interference trials, MCI patients had more trouble identifying whether the

two images were the same or slightly different, but in the low interference trials MCI patients had more success in determining whether the images were the same or similar.

The dramatically different images interspersed in the low-interference trial reduced the amount of visual clutter the participants had to sort through. When the images were all the same or slightly different (such as in high-interference trials) the MCI patients were put under extreme perceptional strain. However this strain was removed when dramatically different image pairs were interspersed (such as in low-interference trials).

“Minimizing the degree of perceptual interference improved patients’ object perception by reducing the number of visually similar features,” said Rachel Newsome, a PhD candidate in the UofT Psychology department and lead author in the study.

The results of this study can be used to help those with MCI and other forms of dementia. By making very similar objects more dissimilar, dementia patients can better cope with the disease.

For example, all the keys on a telephone look very similar in shape, size and colour, and this can make something as simple as using a phone challenging to a person diagnosed with dementia. A patient with dementia might not only forget the number of the loved one they wish to call, but be unable to dial the number because the lack of visual differences on a dial pad causes them to confuse the numbers.

Furthermore, the group composed of participants at risk of developing MCI had similar results to MCI participants, meaning that this test could be used as an early indicator of cognitive impairment.

•

News • 29 Oct. 2012 • news@thestrand.ca

Perceptual deficits may be linked to memory loss dementia

3

OPINIONS

Cisnormative assumptions and queer sex JEN ROBERTON & EMILY MILTON “Always use a condom.” These words are canonized in the way people simplify discourses of sexual health—use a condom, and no STIs will come your way. Unfortunately, this oversimplification results in dire consequences for queer women when accessing health care, though they are not the only group marginalized and ignored in the dialogue surrounding safe sex. Class, race, ability, and so on create barriers to healthcare that go beyond sexual orientation. Even heterosexual women face significant shaming, ranging from interactions with friends to experiences with healthcare providers. In general, the onus is often on women to ‘take care’ of condom use and to

“

Safer sex is rarely talked about in WSW social circles, especially in contrast to their MSM counterparts.

disclose to their partner whether or not they are on the pill. Although things aren’t perfect in the heterosexual world of safe sex, a failure to discuss queer women’s sexual health on the part of health care professionals, between partners, and even in the larger queer community, is a serious problem.

Statistics are often used to frame queer women’s sexual practices as risk free. HIV transmission from sexual contact, in particular, is incredibly rare among women who have sex with women (WSW). It is true that, as per various studies done in North America and Europe, WSW are a low risk demographic for HIV and STIs. The Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, for example, concluded that 91% of the WSW who contracted HIV were also intravenous drug users. Notably, the study does not specify

that drug use was the mode of transmission, but instead simply states it is another ‘risk factor’. Sexual transmission is the presumed method of contraction for the remaining 9% of the WSW who become HIV-positive despite not using intravenous drugs. Presumptions surrounding the sexual practices and drug use of HIV-positive WSW add to the fact that such studies investigating sexual health are skewed by issues of disclosure, testing, and stigma, among other factors.

Cisnormative assumptions are tied in with discourses surrounding HIV and STIs. The word cisnormative can be broken down into the term cisgender—referring to an individual who identifies with their gender assignment at birth—and normative, which means relating to cultural mores. The CDC study can be read as cisnormative, for example, as it claims that there is no record of WSW HIV transmission. The marker of WSW functions on the presumption that all sexual partners will be cisgender women, thus assuming sexual contact will involve a certain type of gender presentation and genitalia.

WSW and queer, as identities or markers, are in reality broad enough to entail a large variety of sexual tastes and partners, including sex with trans* individuals, as well as cisgender men and women. Conventional discourses of sexual health polarize sexuality by negating the varying sexualities of trans* and cis individuals.

Another aspect of cisnormative assumptions is the notion that queer women will not get pregnant. This has further implications for queer women with a positive HIV status. There’s a common assumption that queer women will never experience childbirth, and therefore queer HIV-positive women will not be concerned about transmitting their status to their child. The already-ostracizing experience of being pregnant and queer is further complicated for those with HIV or hepatitis. All of these factors function together to create a culture of erasure when it comes to queer women’s sexual health risks and concerns.

Although we as womyn have little first-hand experi-

ence concerning STIs and HIV, we have faced challenges in access to healthcare and discussions surrounding safe sex. Our separate issues have often been exclusive to our identities as queer and straight cisgender women respectively. One of us has dealt with homophobic health care professionals, notably declaring that she would be a ‘virgin forever’ because she did not partake in penetrative penile sex. This is paired with having little to no access to female condoms and a low supply of oddly flavoured dental dams at UofT’s underfunded Sexual Education Centre. We have noticed that safer sex is rarely talked about in WSW social circles, especially in contrast to their MSM (men who have sex with men) counterparts.

The other half of this authorship, though not experiencing homophobia as a straight woman herself, has experienced shaming from her primary health care provider in regards to condom use and sexual activity outside of a serious monogamous relationship, as well as the assumption that a sexually active straight woman must, without question, be on birth control or another form of hormonal contraception.

This article was not meant to be in any way exhaustive. There are many resources out there that cater to WSW and trans* sexual health, with ACT releasing a safe sex guide called ‘Women Lovin’ this past year, as well as countless volumes dedicated to MSM. Women’s College Hospital heath care initiative has a program called ‘Queer Women Need Paps Too’ (yes we do!). Spaces are opening to address an absence in the way sexual heath is talked about. The first steps have been taken, but there is still a long way to go in providing women’s safe sex initiatives and creating dialogue about accessing care.

*The word ‘woman’ has been used in this article to refer to any female-identified individual across the gender spectrum

Reddit hate and the problem with an open forum EMMA BROOKS A couple of weeks ago, the internet was thrown into a frenzy over the unmasking of 49-year-old Michael Brutsch as of one of social news site Reddit’s most notorious posters and moderators. Behind the username “Violentacrez,” Brutsch was responsible for a number of offensive forums (known as “subreddits”), among them /r/ jailbait and /r/creepshots, which included photos of women and underage girls posted without their permission or knowledge. The outing of Brutsch prompted criticism of Reddit as a whole for its seedier side. Forums on the site are completely user-created and moderated, meaning that any manner of harmful content can be posted anonymously without fear of repercussions. Many have criticized the site’s managers for giving these members a platform for their hateful views, with regular users of the site pushing back and claiming that Reddit itself is not to blame.

Most of the arguments in support of Reddit focus on the site’s supposed role as an open platform: a place where free speech is the law of the land and no content is offensive enough to be banned unless it violates one of the five “rules of Reddit.” There are only two rules limiting what content can be posted: no posting of others’ personal information, and no child pornography. Anything else is left to the discretion of the subreddit’s

4

moderators. Some users ask, if the site’s administrators begin banning forums based on what is considered “offensive,” where will it end? We all have different ideas of what constitutes offensive content, and to remove content that violates some users’ sensibilities would undermine the site’s status as a neutral platform.

Unfortunately, the idea of running a site with a completely neutral platform in our current culture is fundamentally flawed. It isn’t controversial to say that we live in a society which values and gives precedence to the voices of straight white males, and this is no different within Reddit’s supposedly neutral community of subforums. This is the culture that allowed subreddits such as /r/jailbait to thrive; in Adrian Chen’s Gawker article, “Unmasking Reddit’s Violentacrez, the Biggest Troll on the Web,” he states that “‘Jailbait’ was for a time the second biggest search term bringing traffic to Reddit.” Rob McDonald, in an article for the blog The Black Kids Table titled “The First Amendment Doesn’t Oblige You to Have Racists Over for Dinner,” notes a number of comments that include racial slurs posted and upvoted over a thousand times on extremely popular subreddits such as /r/funny and /r/AdviceAnimals.

There is even a subreddit with just under 2500 subscribers whose title is a racial slur.

For someone who doesn’t encounter this kind of hatred and oppression on a daily basis, it’s easy to tell those who find it

offensive to just avoid this side of Reddit.

But when administrators and moderators allow this racist, sexist, homophobic, youname-it content to thrive uncontested, they are failing to maintain a platform in which every user gets a chance to voice their opinion. Women and minorities find themselves on a forum that allows speech that demeans them and strips

“

Unfortunately, the idea of running a completely neutral platform in our current culture is fundamentally flawed.

them of their humanity. Only those who are not personally implicated by this type of content can still consider it a neutral platform. The fact that women and people of colour are free to (and do) create their own forums does not balance the scales or justify Reddit’s failure to control the shocking content posted by its users.

According to the general manager of Reddit, Erik Martin, forums like this are the price that must be paid in order to keep the site an open platform. But is this format really threatened by the removal of subreddits comprised entirely of rac-

ist content or non-consensual photos of women’s breasts? The slope has to be pretty slippery before this kind of moderation leads to widespread censorship of users’ personal opinions. It is simply absurd to argue that this violation and hatred should be protected on the basis of “free speech.” Do we really need yet another platform for white men to broadcast their hate and congratulate one another with “upvotes” under the guise of free speech?

The fact is, while those who manage Reddit cannot be expected to locate and delete every hateful comment that is posted on their site, the power is ultimately in their hands to decide what content is acceptable. According to their five site rules, revealing the identity of Michael Brutsch was a violation, while the photos he posted without consent were not. The managers make the rules. It is their responsibility to interpret and define the role of an open forum, and it is their choice to value their users’ right to privacy over peoples’ right not to be the subject of hateful comments and explicit photos. This is something that must change. I’ve heard it said that the users who post this content will only take it to another corner of the internet if they can no longer post it to Reddit. But even if we can’t purge the web of these pricks, at least we can show them that there’s one more place that won’t tolerate their bullshit.

Electing the president of Ohio PETER BURTON In every US presidential election year, we hear that the decision will ultimately be made by a few swing states.

The 2012 election is not only adhering to this trend, but taking it to an unprecedented extreme. Last Monday one of my heroes, statistician Nate Silver, wrote in his New York Times blog that “Ohio is central enough in the electoral math that it now seems to matter as much as the other 49 states put together.” In this article, I will briefly explain how the 11.5 million Americans who live in Ohio can end up holding as much electoral weight as the 300 million Americans who don’t.

“

Statistician Nate Silver wrote in his New York Times blog that “Ohio is central enough in the electoral math that it now seems to matter as much as the other 49 states put together.

Of course, everything comes down to the Electoral College: the arcane system whereby states are allocated a certain number of votes based on their population and whichever candidate wins that state gets all of its electoral votes. Ohio is the seventh most populous state, so its 18 electoral votes are certainly a bigger prize than

most states can offer. But that alone doesn’t explain why Ohio is more relevant than its neighbor Pennsylvania with 20 votes, or giants like Texas (38 votes) and California (55 votes). The intuitive reason is that Ohio reflects the overall mood of the country better than other states, but we can make things much more precise.

The essential insight that allows us to deduce which states can swing the election is to realize that the voting preferences of different states are heavily correlated with each other. That is to say, any given state has some fundamental political biases based on economic and demographic factors.

Consequently, while the absolute preferences of a state’s voters will shift with the national mood, a given state’s preference relative to other states tends to stay constant. That is to say, no matter who wins the overall popular vote, we can expect the list of states ranked from most Republican to most Democratic to retain roughly the same order. The only thing that will change is who actually won a given state.

Let’s focus on just three states: Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina. Virginia is a swing state, North Carolina is a Republican-leaning state, and South Carolina is heavily conservative. So in an election where the national mood is neutral, we might expect Virginia to be very close, whereas the Carolinas would both go Republican. If the country looks red overall, we would expect the Republicans to win all three. In a good year for Democrats, we would expect Virginia and North Carolina to turn blue, but not South Carolina (this is exactly what happened in 2008). The point is that South Carolina is fundamentally more conversative than the other two—you would never have a situation where

FFLICKR/JEFFERYTURNER

AMERICAN ELECTIONS

South Carolina votes Democratic but North Carolina stays Republican. In a liberal’s fantasy where South Carolina indeed does go Democratic, you can be sure North Carolina and Virginia would be blue as well— and since North Carolina and Virginia would almost certainly be enough to swing the election by themselves, South Carolina would be an irrelevant bonus.

So all that’s left is to extend our Mid-Atlantic example to the country at large. Rank all the states based on their fundamental preference, from the most liberal to the most conservative. The thing about the 2012 election that’s different from previous ones is how clear and fixed this list is: America has become more polarized and the states are more static in their relative preferences. From Barack Obama’s point of view, as you move down this now well-defined list, each successive state will be harder to win. So the question is, as Obama goes down the list adding up the votes, when will he reach 270—the magic number needed to win the election? Which state puts him over the top? The answer: Ohio. Do the same thing for Mitt Romney and you get the same answer: Ohio.

Another way of putting this is as follows. If Obama wins the election while losing Ohio, he would need to win a state like Florida, which is significantly more conservative than Ohio—and it’s very unlikely that Florida and Ohio would suddenly reverse their fundamental preferences. Similarly, if Romney wins without Ohio, he’d have to gain a much more liberal state like Pennsylvania. The easiest and most likely path to victory for both candidates follows the I-71 from Cleveland through Columbus to Cincinnati.

STAFF WRITER Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney is against gay marriage, and doesn’t believe in abortion unless it is warranted by rape. In contrast, President Barack Obama has moved towards establishing universal health care and has appointed more openly gay officials than any other president in US history. So as young students who look forward to a progressive and egalitarian global future, you’d think it would be simple to hope that Americans vote for Obama, right? Wrong.

Once again, politics prove to be more complicated than just black and white.

On Dec 31 2011, the Obama administration implemented the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which allows the indefinite detainment of anyone suspected of terrorism, including US citizens. The most controversial aspect of this bill, however, is that Obama has taken the Bush administration’s Patriot Act one step further by allowing this indefinite detention to occur without any warranted proof.

The NDAA was never popular in Congress, and in response to concerns, Obama had actually promised to veto the bill to ensure it was never

implemented. However, on New Year’s Eve 2011, when most of Congress and the attention of American society was not present, Obama signed the NDAA and brought it to effect.

Obama’s actions in this regard can only be described as secretive and deceptive.

If there’s one point that I’m trying to make here, it is that the Obama administration has now reduced civil liberties more than any other president, let alone a Democrat, has ever done in US history.

And unfortunately, thanks to Romney’s clumsy debate speech impediments, this issue remains shrouded in mystery during the current presidential campaign.

If a president had promised to veto a bill, what would make him secretly implement it later on? One may argue that the current state of US foreign affairs requires increased protection from terrorists. This is valid, but the term “terrorist” reamains subjective under the NDAA. One real application of this bill is the persecution of journalists or whistleblowers that criticize government issues.

Case in point: the indefinite detention and torture of Private Bradley Manning, who was sentenced to solitary confinement for releasing videos of an American gunship killing innocent Iraqi bystanders and later joking about it. Although this sentence was given

before NDAA was signed, it encodes the same punishments for “treason.”

During his first term as president, Barack Obama has enforced many liberal policies that I personally agree with.

But although less radical than Romney, Obama is still not a political saint and our generation must realize that politicians can achieve better. We do not have to succumb to compromises between two faulty men. By refusing to acknowledge the criticisms of our own political parties, we often commit to a red or blue banner. Ironically, many liberals fall vic-

tim to the same excessive allegiance for which they mock Republicans.

Although the NDAA may be considered a minor issue of an ultimately preferable political party, understand that secrecy and restrictions of civil liberties violate the very foundations of freedom that America was built on. In this respect, when the option has become choosing the lesser of two evils, the real response should be to refrain from voting, stop ignoring faults of political idols, and rally protests to demand changes in Congress.

•

Opinions • 29 Oct. 2012 • opinions@thestrand.ca

ASHKAN SALEHI

SARAH CRAWLEY

Democratic ignorance and the NDAA

5

EDITORIAL “DIAZ” FROM PAGE 1

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 Matthew Casaca

Photo Associate

Thomas Lu Victoria Chuen

Art Associate

Sarah Crawley Vacant

Web Associate

Jamie Shilton Vacant

Distribution

Jen Roberton

Editorial Assistants Amanda Aziz, Emily Pollock, Grace Quinsey Contributors Tara Abrahams, Emma Brooks, Peter Burton, Allie Chenoweth, John Cockshutt, John Debono, Kareem Jarrah, David Kitai, Liza Kobrinsky, Anna Krepinksy, Johanna Lewis, Emily Milton, Jen Roberton, Ashkan Salehi, Wendelle So, Meraj Zafar Cover Photo Thomas Lu Copy Tara Abrahams, Allie Chenoweth

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 awkwardly 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

the horror of it is that in situations of love we usually run away from people who put us in conversation with ourselves. As a person of colour, [when you date a white person], first of all you get rewarded both inside and outside of the community. Second of all, it’s like an escape psychologically because you’re the one who always has authority around issues of identity. This person can’t speak back to you. Third of all, you can no longer be reminded of yourself. If you date somebody from your own group—which this is not an

“

[All of] my projects so far have been explicitly about how intimacy—so difficult to attain and so difficult to withstand—is in many ways the home that one must build for one’s self.

argument that people who date outside of their group are terrors. I’m not saying that.

But part of this process is the colonial process.

When you’re looking at someone from your own group, you’re suddenly confronted with yourself and history and colonization in ways that these other things don’t bring up. Look, Yunior is an interesting guy because we encounter him dating a white girl. But Yunior is like, “This is not where I’m going.” And for a man of colour, that’s unheard of. What decolonial love is and how we pursue it is a conversation. And for me, my conversation engages some of these questions and practices.

While he is the inheritor of this brand of misogyny that doesn’t really let him see women as full human beings, in a lot of ways Yunior also feels like a really decolonial character to me. He is into red-lipstick wearing, willful Latinas that take up as much space as they damn well please.

You get the feeling that he doesn’t shrink away from powerful women. How does Yunior embody the contradictions that are a part of ‘decolonial love’?

I think it’s more than a feeling. Yunior’s problem is that he likes strong women of colour who will find his ass out.

So you think that’s decolonial?

I absolutely think that. I mean, Yunior likes really fucking smart women. I think what’s interesting about his character is something that gets sort of skipped, which is that this motherfucker is a little bit—I don’t know I think that he’s—there are simpler ways to be a cheating asshole. Think about the women his brother favours. Rafa favours women who will not only put up with his abuse but who end up in these really fucked up codependent relationships.

Whereas the women that Yunior dates, they discover a transgression and they cut his fucking ass off. Where does he want to meet women? Like, where does he want

to meet women of colour? Where does he want to meet Dominican women? He seems to want to meet them in a place that’s equitable. In a democratic space, you know?

With respect to your upcoming book, Monstro, you said this during your interview with Paula M.L. Moya: “The whole reason I started writing this book is because of this image I have of this fourteenyear-old girl, a poor, black, Dominican girl, half-Haitian—one of the Island’s damnés—saving the world. It’s a book is about this girl’s search for—yes—love in a world that has made it its solemn duty to guarantee that poor, raced, ‘conventionally unattractive’ girls like her are never loved.” Talk to me about that image you have. I am also interested in how this girl will inform a character like Yunior through the whole intertextuality thing.

She is not from the same universe but can she been seen as a complement to the ways in which Yunior is also excluded (and excludes himself) from love?

[All of] my projects so far have been explicitly about how intimacy—so difficult to attain and so difficult to withstand—is in many ways the home that one must build for one’s self. We have Oscar pursuing love against all the prescriptions of a kind of toxic masculinity, yeah? We have Yunior trying to find love in a parallel story. Oscar Wao is trying to find love, courage despite dictatorship, and Yunior is trying to find love [on] a smaller scale. We see Yunior in the first book attempting to find what we would call familial love. Love of how does a family come together across fucking diaspora. So it’s no accident that here comes, hopefully, part four.

You know there are these “love laws”, to quote Arundhati Roy, that have been produced in a world that is overwhelmingly white supremacist. Whether it’s in our own community or it’s coming from outside, white supremacy rules supreme. And there is an ecology of love. There’s an economy of love. Some people are at the top and some people are at the bottom. Sure, there’s stuff that happens in between but no matter what as a dude, however low you are set on that scale, there’s always a girl set lower than you.

Hopefully there’ll be more of a textual connection because the girl in question is Isis, Lola’s daughter. You know, the daughter that Lola has at the end of Oscar Wao. The daughter that Yunior wishes was his, yeah? She’s named Isis. My joke in my mind is that this is Isis on Earth 3, in an alternate universe. What happens when the person who’s being asked to save the world is the

“

What happens when the person who’s being asked to save the world is the person who the world has spent all its time hating? What is the obligation of that person to this world?

person who the world has spent all its time hating? What is the obligation of that person to this world?

You seem to hold the genres of fantasy and science fiction close to your heart. I know you’re a huge fan of Octavia Butler. Talk to me about the potential that genre holds for you as a writer. You’ve been critical of the coded allegorical racism in Tolkien’s work in the past, but do you see the genres as holding the potential to be subversive?

No question. I mean, you don’t need to hear that from me. Critics have been doing that work now for decades. I think there’s no question. I think there’s a lot of confusion around the discussion about mainstream writers getting involved in genre type work.

How so?

Well because I think that [there’s] difference between being a genre writer versus being a mainstream writer who dips into genre. And I think that we have to be really careful about the way privilege works from

“

Whether it’s in our own community or it’s coming from outside, white supremacy rules supreme.

And there is an ecology of love. There’s an economy of love.

Some people are at the top and some people are at the bottom.

writers who are “in the genre” versus writers who in some way have mainstream legitimacy. And how we get fucking standing ovations for doing work that genre writers have been doing for decades and no one gives a fuck about them. I think we cannot have a discussion about the way genre works in mainstream and slipstream without the word privilege.

But the answer to your question is simply yes. Part of the reason Oscar Wao works for me is because I deploy the metaphors of the fantastic to make up the distance that realism cannot cover. I think that realism has failed to describe the Caribbean experience. Realism has failed to describe fucking Trujillo. It has failed to describe these kinds of dictatorships. But by deploying fantastic metaphors, I would argue that I’ve gotten closer to describing this reality and that people who do [this] get closer to describing reality. I feel like Toni Morrison, when she’s fantastic, Toni Morrison’s Beloved, is a better description for me of what it means to be of African descent in the New World than any realistic book. And that’s [also] why I can’t exist without Octavia Butler. She is the compass which guides me around the world.

Not that realism doesn’t have its role, I live and die in realism. But I can’t find myself or the world without the fantastic.

SEE “DIAZ” OVERLEAF

My last question is a timely one, since we’re in election season. You’ve said of the President, “Sometimes I wonder if he’s even trying.” This was said with respect to the President’s inability to narrativize his vision for America. Where else are you critical of that vision?

Well, how about his fucking immigration position? How about the fact that he’s deported more people than George Bush?

He deported more people in his four years than George Bush did in his eight. And he

has deported more Dominicans than three administrations. So the question is, what is it about his vision that has compelled him to be crueller than fantastically cruel Republicans? What about the fact that this motherfucker, when the economy collapsed, when this huge crisis [happens] he decides to call in the team that caused the crisis to repair it. I’m sorry, I might not be an economist but there seems to be something slightly short sighted about that.

Listen, it’s not as if he [didn’t] spend the last four years being overwhelmingly stalked for elimination by the Republican

SEX200 LEC0205 WITH Dear Dr. SexLove,

party. It has been systemic and it has been absolutely comprehensive. And yet, it’s as if he plays like he wants to keep people happy because they’re on his side. So I don’t get why you would play so safe when you are getting nothing from the group you’re playing safe for.

He was brought into office by young people and he abandoned them as soon as he got into office. Utterly abandoned the entire youth wing. He hasn’t made young people the centre of his platform, the centre of his administration’s [focus]. He basically decided, I’m going to go and do

Dr. SexLove

I am a Yorkshire gentlewoman from the nineteenth century. I love and only love the fairer sex and thus, beloved by them in turn my heart revolts from any other love but theirs. I have seduced so many women I can hardly keep track of them all. Usually I begin a courtship innocently enough by inviting a lady over to my manor for tea. I spend more and more time with her until I get her alone and in a vulnerable position. Then I make my move. I do all this under the pretense that I only want to be very good friends, but all I really want is to get under her petticoats.

Anyhow, after so many such adventures, I finally met the love of my life. Unfortunately she was poor and had to marry a man for money, but we continue to see each other. At first the affair was exciting (it’s so deliciously naughty to commit adultery!), but now I grow weary of sharing my lover with somebody else. I’ve spent some time in Paris to shake off this ennui—had a few romps

with some very pretty girls over there—but even these adventures are growing tiresome. I want to find a woman of my own social and economic status with whom I can settle down and share my life. Things are getting lonely in this big old manor.

I am writing to you because, of course, sex columnists of my own time period would not understand since such love between ladies is forbidden. Therefore, clever as I am, I have devised a way to send my letter through a time portal so as to ask for advice from one so wise and sympathetic as yourself (yes, we get The Strand in nineteenth century Yorkshire; I read it all the time).

Please, Dr. SexLove, tell me what I should do! Should I continue this hopeless love affair? I know that it can lead nowhere, but I fear that I will never love another as I love this woman! Should I cease these libertine shenanigans and settle down?

-Anachronistic Lesbian

something nobody in America wants and lost all his political capital. As the economy is collapsing he’s arguing that motherfuckers should have health care. Do I think healthcare is important? Yes. Do I think trying to push the most difficult project when you could have spent the first three, four, five years just hitting victory after victory is [wise]? Depends how you decide to order your battle. We’ve seen the consequences of that decision to his administration. I love him, I’ll vote for him, but he barely gets a C from me.

Dear AL, What a fascinating life you must lead! You just go, like Bob Dylan does “lay lady lay, lay across my big brass bed” and have a whale of a time! Have you ever considered keeping a diary? It sounds like it would be a riveting, raunchy read - maybe you could write it in code to keep prying eyes away from your naughty, naughty doings? Just a thought.

As to your issue, I suggest you continue laying those ladies to your heart’s content. Who knows, soon you could be tied down and find that special lady you’re looking for to be your partner in crime, but until then, I think it sounds like you’ll be most fulfilled if you just keep getting down to business.

Doctor SexLove

-

Editorial • 29 Oct. 2012 • editor@thestrand.ca

CONTINUED FROM OVERLEAF

•

7

FEATURES

L

ab coats and black robes; a large wooden coffin. Eulogies mourning the loss of evidence. The cheery yet out of place sunshine warming Parliament Hill. This is the funeral honouring the death of science.

How did science die, exactly? Consider freedom of expression, a Charter right most often associated with journalism or novels, poems and blogs. You may not realize how much this Charter right is applicable to science. “Sci-lenced,” a part of PEN Canada’s Non-Speak Week, was a talk featuring four panelists who discussed a pressing nationwide issue: the increasing muzzling of Canada’s federal scientists.

To be clear, the issue is not that scientists are being kept from publishing articles—the government cannot keep scientists from being published in academic journals. The issue at hand is that these scientists have been prevented from relaying their discoveries to society at large in less academic settings: through interviews with journalists.

Pippa Wysong, one of the panelists for the PEN Canada talk and a journalist of science and technology, shared her experience of gcontacting with federal scientists. Having been at this for years, she has experienced first-hand the recent change in government communications policy. She explains how back in the day, when writing an article about a scientific discovery; “I would call up Environment Canada and tell them that, ‘I’m doing an article about this research project, can I talk to Dr. Smith who’s involved with it?’ And often they’d just put me straight through to his office and I’d speak to him right away, or at the very least within the hour.” However, things are much different following a policy change in 2007. “I call Environment Canada and say, ‘Let me talk to Dr. Smith.’ They say, ‘Oh, this is going to have to go through an approval process.’ And in the end, I might not get my interview […] or I might get an interview three or four weeks later, which is probably past my deadline.”

This is becoming an increasingly common story, Wysong admits.

“I know environmental journalists who tell me that they rarely, if ever, even try to reach Environment Canada.”

This trend, however, does not appear to be occuring in the US. While attempting to cover a study done by Canadian scientists in conjunction with NASA, a reporter approached two sources—the National Research Council (NRC) in Canada, and NASA itself. His experiences with the two agencies could not have been more different.

Wysong retold his story: “He got an answer within fifteen minutes with

an interview […] from NASA. The NRC took weeks to respond. And at some point they actually asked him [to] send a list of questions. [All] he ended up getting [were] details of some of the equipment that was used in the study. [He asked for] a list of all of the correspondence that happened within the department dealing with [his] questions. And what he found was that eleven people were involved with corresponding and trying to figure out how to respond to this reporter’s questions: there were a number of scientists at different levels, there were different bureaucrats—it went all over the place—and it was pretty clear from the correspondence […] that none of them knew how to deal with reporters.” Wysong believes that they “just didn’t have anybody who was from a journalistic background who understood the purpose of looking for some basic details.”

This is very different from how research is handled in a university., as Danny Harvey, a professor in the department of Geography at UofT, explains. “People at university are excited to demonstrate our relevance to society, so their goal is to increase the profile of the university scientists. They try to get media attention. And it sounds like the goal of the media people in the government is exactly the opposite.”

The responsibility of getting media attention doesn’t lie with journalists when it comes to university research. “If we think we have a paper that will be of interest to society at large, it would be sent out through media relations. They’re constantly checking what we publish and then [they] try and see what they can [send out].” But it appears that in the case of government scientists, media relations personel are working hard to make sure scientists cannot talk to journalists at all.

Wysong described an even more obvious account of government interference in this process. Following a speech at a conference, “a freelance journalist that was in the audience approached the researcher just to get some clarification so that she could write a story about it. But an Environment Canada media officer happened to be there, inserted herself between [the researcher] and the reporter, and told the reporter that interviews had to be pre-approved by her office under new department policy. The questions that the reporter had remain unanswered, and the story was never written.”

CBC News broke a story earlier this year from the International Polar Year Conference. Scientists from all over the world gathered to speak, but Canadian scientists had extra members in their entourage: namely, media relations personnel. They followed the scientists

“

FLICKR/THE EGGPLANT

I call Environment Canada and say, ‘let me talk to Doctor Smith.’ They say, ‘Oh, this is going to have to go through an approval process.’ And in the end , I might not get my interview.

8

The Death

of

Science FLICKR/LAGOHSEP

by Sabina Frieman

through the conference, monitoring the interactions between them and the press. In More open, many argue, is exactly what the world needs to be. The United Nations a brief interview with a scientist who preferred to remain unnamed, they admitted released a report this past February that outlined 21 environmental issues to conthat “the strict communications measures were an embarrassment to Canada.” sider as we move into the 21st century. The fourth-ranked issue was entitled “Broken Only a month before, Canada was embarrassed by Nature, one of the most Bridges: Reconnecting Science and Policy.” This section of their United Nations Enprestigious scientific journals worldwide. In its Mar 1 2012 publication, the ed- vironment Programme report explains how there is a serious disconnect between itorial commended the Obama administration for helping “develop integrity scientists and the public, and a big part of that disconnect is the government. policies with clear guidelines for scientists who are approached by journalists.”

A poll described in the report revealed “a general slump in concern over global The journal then went on to condemn Canada for going in the opposite di- warming amongst US citizens since 2008. The poll shows a 13% increase, between rection of its southern neighbour, describing a “gradual tightening of media 2008 and 2010, in the number of those who believe that the issue of climate change protocols for federal scientists and other government workers.” They concluded has been exaggerated, and a 9% decrease in the number of those who believe that the with a powerful statement: “The way forward is clear: it is time for the Canadian issue is generally correct.” government to set its scientists free.”

There are two sides to this communication issue. The first is the scientists. The reThis brings us to July 10 2012, when scientists from all over Canada gathered port criticizes that “few scientists are trained to communicate results in a nontechniatop Parliament Hill to protest the death of science. Many dressed in either lab cal way. When scientists do try to communicate their findings, they sometimes lean coats or all black, and held signs that accused the Harper government of killing too heavily on alarming results—on the growing water crisis, or rapidly disappearing science, and of only favouring the evidence thatsuited their purposes. Bruce number of species. But this may work against effective communication because, as Walsh, member of the Board of Directors for PEN Canada and moderator of noted by scholars such as Garnett and Lindenmayer (2011), people tend to discount the Sci-lenced talk, quoted one of the scientists from this protest: “We serve the bad news.” The second is the process of making policies, in which science is either not public; we are public servants. We don’t serve political masters. Yet the political considered, or “it is ‘cherry-picked’ to legitimize decisions.” masters have gotten in the way.”

The report does offer solutions. It primarily presses for more meetings between So how did this happen? What made things change? In 2007, the Harper govern- scientists and policymakers, where science and politics can be integrated to make ment made a change to the Federal Communications Policy, well-informed choices for our country. The drafters also sugemphasizing the role of media relations in the communication gest framing science in a more positive way that showes more between its institutions and journalists. Environment Canahope for the future, making citizens more eager to believe it.

[In] the process da did a study looking into the impact of this policy change.

Another suggestion was to clearly communicate any uncerof making poliWysong read the published article aloud, which stated that tainties within research so that readers can make their own “scientists have noticed a major reduction of requests, particujudgements on what exactly is not known, as opposed to ascies, science is larly from high-profile media, who often have same-day deadsuming that the whole thing is uncertain. Though the report either not conlines... Media coverage of climate change science, our most also suggested making scientific journals more accessible, this sidered or it is high-profile issue, has been reduced by eighty per cent... [It point is weak—most people will not read through an academalso] noted that four prominent scientists who regularly spoke ic journal article to find out facts. Our disconnect lies in the ‘cherry-picked’ for the government on climate change science issues appeared media, who currently cannot relay scientific information acto legitimize dein only twelve newspaper clippings in the first nine months of curately to their readers. cisions 2008, compared to 99 clippings from the same period in 2007...

The report warns that if scientists and policy-makers don’t [Moreover,] the new communications policy has practically learn to play nice, “society will be less equipped and less suceliminated senior federal scientists from media coverage on climate change science cessful in managing the risks of global environmental change.” Until they do, the issues, leaving them frustrated that the government is trying to muzzle them.” most we can do is fight against the death of science.

Stephen Strauss, a prominent author with over 30 years of experience writting about science, tried to help explain some of the worries to his other panelists during Sci-lenced. While talking to a Public Information Officer, he found out that “anyone has the right, as a private citizen, to call up a government employee and they are required to respond. They have to respond, even if the response is ‘contact media relations’. It’s when the intent is to go on the record and provide quotes or conduct • Environmental assessments for resource an interview that you really must go through media relations.” Part of the worry is that “they don’t know, on some level, if someone works for professional media, [or] if developments are ‘streamlined’ they’re a blogger who’s just doing something on their own.”

• Officially withdraws Canada from the Kyoto Harvey wasn’t sure why it mattered who it was that asked the questions. “Unless Protocol the research is classified... If it’s published in fully accessible scientific journals, then anybody should be free to ask questions, and get answers to those questions—in the • Cuts funding to food inspection agencies interest of enlightening the public further on that research, if that’s something that • Reduces the habitat protection offered by the public is interested in.” the Fisheries Act Strauss explained how the problem was solved in the US: “What they’ve done is • Cuts funding to research facilities made people separate themselves from the department—“It is my opinion that...” So what you do is you separate the voice of yourself from the voice of your department.”

• Closes federal labs Walsh gave some background to this new policy, explaining that “this new policy only came in after Barack Obama was elected, and the policy that George W. Bush had is the policy that Canada has adopted under Stephen Harper. It sort of illustrates that the issue is not about too much media calling up scientists and bogging them down with all these queries. It’s just that there’s a different approach to openness.”

Science and Bill C-38

•

Features • 29 Oct. 2012 • features@thestrand.ca

“

9

TARA ABRAHAMS

ARTS & CULTURE

Canzine 2012

From art to zine: The politics of Canzine: A look at Canzine Toronto winter of our dissent of zine making—which is understandable, considering how personal some of Broken Pencil Magazine’s brainchild, the zines can be.

For fourth year Vic student Carmel Canzine – Canada’s largest indie zine festival – took place on Sunday, Oct Garvez, making zines is a fairly new en21 at the Bathurst Centre, attracting a deavor. Garvez and her friend and crecrowd of over 1,200 people. Zines are ative partner Yahlehly began making amalgamations of anything you want: zines last summer and haven’t stopped they come stapled or hand-stitched to- since. “It’s seeing what we thought was gether on printer paper, with the addi- an abstract idea become tangible,” she tion of artistically–placed blood, sweat, says in regards to what makes zine and tears optional. Zines first peaked in creation so appealing. The two friends the 90s, with most of these homemade worked over wine and Virginia Woolf creations homing in on indie bands and to create three zines featuring both art their music, their members, and their and writing. Beautifully hand-stitched and wrapped scandals, hence in coloured the original title, Anti “fanzine”.

It’s not only the zines vellum, Climatic EnHowever, zines themselves that mat- c o u n t e r s , are about more Shh…A Quiet than just music; ter—it’s the community Zine, and anyone and anysurrounding them, and Worthless Adthing can be included in a zine. the messages within vice (Because We Care) are From snippets of them, that makes the just as wonsomeone’s personal life to femzine scene such a great derful to look at as they inist activism, place to be. are to read. zines come in Garvez also enough flavours agrees on “seeing eye to eye” with both to suit everyone’s tastes.

The first zinester I spoke to, Ham- her collaborators and her readers; the ilton native Aly Margarets, publishes sense of community built from zine multiple zines both independently and creation and readership is important, in collaboration with other artists. Her which makes the zine scene all the more personal zine, Gender Fuck What, high- enticing for just about anyone out there.

Burgeoning zinesters, avid fans, suplights her own gender trials and tribulations with the hopes that someone else porters of the arts, or just the generally can relate to these issues, too. Accord- curious: everyone is welcome at Caning to Margarets, the most rewarding zine, and everyone should undoubtedly part of zine-making comes after attend- leave clutching a handful of stapled ing an event, when the emails express- sheets of paper with a few doodles and ing a love for or connection to her zines stickers thrown in. But it’s not only the come flooding in. “It’s the reminders zines themselves that matter—it’s the of what you’re doing for people,” she community surrounding them, and the says. Margarets’ other publication, The messages within them, that makes the Sads, is done with friend and collabora- zine scene such a great place to be. tor Chelsea Watt. “Take care of yourself when you read it, especially if you are prone to deep feelings,” warns the first page. Connecting to like-minded people seems to be a popular aim in the art

TARA ABRAHAMS

“

10

the panel: it provided an overview of important questions without describing ASSOCIATE COPY EDITOR many new details. For instance, Elmer Canzine is the last place you would ex- blamed Prime Minister Paul Martin for pect to seriously discuss political activ- instituting the “whole-of-government” approach because it centralized minism.

For some 17 years, the magazine Bro- isterial departments under the prime ken Pencil has organized Canzine, an an- minister, allowing the prime minister to nual festival that showcases alternative act as he or she sees fit. Prime ministeriarts and culture. With over 200 do-it- al centralization is partly responsible for yourself artists, cartoonists, publishers, the retraction of James’s art exhibition and authors displaying their work, there in Europe and her subsequent “blackhas always been something to see and listing.” As Franke James mentions in do at Canzine. But what distinguished Banned on the Hill (and in Europe!), Canzine this year was the addition of a the Harper government’s “public statenew panel called Chill Against Political ments [about whether she received arts funding] did Dissent in Art. The not always panel attempted to reflect the address the issues Canzine is not just a truth about of censorship, arts, forum for independent what they charity funding, were doing. ” and the Toronto artists...

But the fact G20 protests.

Canzine is also a fothat Harper As the panel plays dirty moderator Humrum for independent politics is not berto DaSilva sugpolitical thinkers and news, nor is gested, the three it news that panelists Franke activists. prime minisJames, Adam Lewters tend to centralize decision-making. is, and Greg Elmer each represent “the AAAs”: the interconnected spheres Condensing such huge issues into an of art, activism, and academia. Of the hour-long discussion was an ambitious three, both visual artist Franke James ideal for the panelists to uphold.

The addition of this panel implicitly and activist Adam Lewis have been targets of the Harper government’s ire: affirms that Canzine is not just a forum James was “blacklisted” for her criti- for independent artists, but that Canzine cisms of Alberta’s tar sands, while the is also a forum for independent political Toronto Police arrested and jailed Lewis thinkers and activists. Hand-made and without charge for his anarchist sympa- independently run, zines are not subject thies during the G20 summit in Toron- to the demands of mainstream publishto. Greg Elmer is an associate professor ing—a zine’s content is the product of its at Ryerson University and a co-author creator alone.

In a zine, a political dissenter can say of Preempting Dissent: The Politics of whatever they wish, free from duress. It an Inevitable Future.

Although their methods of politi- is because of this creative control that cal dissent are different, James, Lewis, zine culture continues to appeal to artand Elmer have similar views on the ists and intellectuals today. Zine culture Canadian government, which is much will continue to endure even if the govless democratic than many would like ernment’s reception toward political to believe. “There is definitely a chill dissent gets a little warmer. against political dissent,” Lewis said. His statement was an accurate summary of

MATTHEW CASACA

“

Next to Normal is anything but JOHN COCKSHUTT

Tarragon Theatre’s No Great Mischief

(or: why I’m learning Gaelic now) LIZA KOBRINSKY Alistair MacLeod’s No Great Mischief is a history map of the collected memory of the MacDonald clan—a modern resurrection of the Fighting Highlanders, and a family’s life on Cape Breton. David Young’s play adaptation of the novel brings to life the roaring music and resonating voice of MacLeod’s story.

R. H. Thomson plays Alexander MacDonald, who is visiting his older brother Calum (David Fox) in Toronto. Calum drinks himself into nostalgia and the two brothers stage generations of family history through brilliantly directed flashbacks. A chorus of magnificent actors (Nicole Lipman, the only woman on stage, stands out especially) make up the sempiternal members of the family clan. Thomson and Fox could make you cry, somehow simultaneously living in multiple decades of life; they could be 12 different men each.

Although the present day action takes place in Toronto, Colum pulls the story home to Cape Breton. The play’s director, Richard Rose, blocks out incredible winter landscapes on the island, with a raw set of a few chairs and some rusted family heir-

looms hanging on the walls. The walls of the stage glisten as yet another flashback unfolds. The two brothers play out the death of their parents on the ice—with a howling wind and thin lights, Rose’s stage looks like a glowing David Blackwood painting. The death itself is never directly presented. Instead, Rose leaves a dropped storm light on the stage, grim evidence of the bodies under the ice. And Thomson and Fox are inside, watching the lantern go out.

The play is full of music—the chorus sings in beautiful Scottish Gaelic throughout, a rallying and melancholic sound. For MacLeod, death is lamented in song and battles are fought with fiddles and voices. With composer Mike Ross’ music, the family stories take on extra depth. It is in song that the two brothers end the play, driving home to Cape Breton. The theatre is as cold as the storm they’re driving through and the chorus stands behind their make-shift car, singing “I see Cape Breton my love, far away o’er the sea.”

I sit in the theatre for some time after it ends, watching the stage get swept. I can hear the train rattle by outside. It’s as if I’ve been handed something almost too big to take home.

Consider the modern family. Add to it the untimely death of a firstborn son, a mother’s erratic grieving, a daughter’s musical brilliance, and a stoic father barely keeping it all together, and you have some idea of what Next to Normal, VCDS’ newest production, is about. Next to Normal began as a ten minute sketch critiquing the medical establishment and has evolved into a Tony Award and Pulitzer Prize–winning musical and a pioneering work in modern theatre. This material necessitates a truly star-quality protagonist: the grieving, bipolar mother, Diana Goodman, who is played by Ann Paula Bautista. Of equal talent is her daughter, the pressured prodigy, Natalie Goodman, played by Natalie Young. Following up is Daniel Newton as lanky and empathetic archetypal father Dan Goodman, and the haunting presence of the deceased son – the story’s very own Iago, now a fictional adolescent – played menacingly by Peter Perri.

The story of Next to Normal is dizzyingly complex and at times seems a bit much to handle. However, these doubts are assuaged by the show’s quiet moments of emotional rawness and technical brilliance For this reason, the audience is always on the edge of their seats, expecting somebody on stage to crack and go on a highly vindicating rant about the uselessness of Valium. I confess to having a soft spot for a story that deals with such sensitive and personal material, but the reality is that you should as well.

In a quick preamble before the show, CAMH representative Ellie Munn spoke about the importance of Next to Normal in facilitating discussion and destigmatizing mental illness. In a particularly interesting moment, she

asked the audience whether or not we knew anybody living with mental illness. We all raised our hands, evidence of the cultural impact that Next to Normal has on audiences across North America—everyone can relate to it.

The reality of mental illness in North America, and specifically in Canada, where almost a third of the totla population has been diagnosed with some kind of mental disorder, is extremely severe. Next to Normal is an indispensable step in the right direction: the cacophonic odyssey of a regular family’s struggle against stigma, loss, and, most importantly, the medical community with its cure-alls, expected side-effects, relative gains, and neverending circus of pills. The impersonal doctors Fine and Madden, played by Kevin Wong and Stevie Fitchett, are ghastly representations of the establishment and its often-destructive appraisals of mental illness and medication. In one of the musical’s more chilling moments, after taking a plethora of pills with nasty side-affects, Diana returns to the doctor and admits: “I feel nothing at all…”, to which Doctor Fine responds, his gaze directed at the audience: “Patient is stable.”

Most importantly the story brings no fairytale Hollywood ending to the table. Instead it leaves the viewer with a new understanding about the inevitabilities and difficulties of modern life, its minute-to-minute nature, its ups and downs, and how that affects the most sensitive organ of the human body—the brain.

Though not a perfectly executed production by any means, VCDS’ Next to Normal is an earnest journey into the heart of depression, anxiety, and paranoia. Throughout all the musicals ups and downs, it cuts invariably close the bone.

From left to right: Next to Normal actors Natalie Young, J. P. Mclean, Dan Newton, Ann Paula Bautista, Kevin Wong, and Peter Perri.

•

THEATRE ILLUSTRATION: WARREN GOODMAN

VICTORIA CHUEN

IMG

Arts & Culture • 29 Oct. 2012 • artsandculture@thestrand.ca

Theatre

11

FILM & MUSIC “Dispatches From Venus” A column on feminism and science fiction JOHANNA LEWIS STAFF WRITER

FANPOP

The BBC’s Merlin & She-Demons

As a fantasy and sci-fi geek with a soft spot for British television, I’m surprised I didn’t discover Merlin earlier. Once I started watching the clever retelling of Arthurian legend, in no small part because of my major crush on Angel Coulby (keep an eye out for this article’s second installment), I burned through its four seasons in record time.

I enjoy the campy fantasy style and even the incessantly repeated Merlinsaves-Arthur-while-hiding-his-magic plot line, but when viewed through a feminist lens, it quickly comes up short.

Merlin’s overarching plots are gendered in predictable and fairly sketchy ways: evil women like Nimueh, Morgause, and Morgana use “old magic” to threaten the king, the prince, and the Knights of the Round Table’s hyper-masculinized regime.

But what makes it particularly hard to make it through some of the episodes is that the show, again and again, plays into what Anita Sarkeesian of the Feminist Frequency vlog calls the ‘Evil Demon Seductress’ trope. In Merlin, this plot device takes different forms, but always involves someone who appears to be a beautiful young woman seducing Arthur/Uther/Merlin/[insert other Camelot dude-bro here], only to have their wily scheme revealed and foiled at the last minute.

In the first episode, a stereotypical witch (both old and ugly) kills a beautiful young courtier, and magically takes over her body in order to take her revenge on the king. She easily infiltrates

the castle and begins flirting with the king in record time. She almost kills half the court before her ‘true nature’ is revealed. You’d think the eligible bachelors of Camelot would learn their lesson given that something similar seems to occur at least twice a week—but no, the poor dudebros of Camelot continue to fall for it.

We have the lady-love interest turn out to be everything from a changeling waiting to take control of the kingdom by marrying Arthur (3x06), to a Sidhe who seduces the prince in order to offer him as human tribute (1x07), to a druid who turns into a beast at midnight and kills villagers (2x09). In a particularly ridiculous Season 2 plot twist, a two-parter called ‘Beauty and the Beast,’ Uther marries a beautiful woman who is actually a troll in disguise. Another memorable episode (4x08) has a girl seduce the entire mall population of a village before working her way through the Knights of the Round Table: not only can she control them with her enchanting ways, she can also make them deathly ill by kissing them (I wish I were joking) and turn into a monster just for kicks.

This plot trope of wicked creatures disguised as sexy ladies corrupting noble-hearted men and then trying to kill them or steal their kingdom has gotten old fast, and I’m tired of it. If Merlin could write some other women into their show, or, I dunno, play around with another story line, they’d be doing us all a favour.

Revisiting The West Wing in 2012 PAULINE HOLDSWORTH EDITOR-IN-CHIEF The first episode of The West Wing aired on Sept 22 1999, just over a year before George W. Bush was elected as the next President of the United States. During the time he was in office, (mostly conservative) critics complained that the show would be better titled “The Left Wing” or “The Feel-Good Presidency”—a show so determined to create an alternative reality for American progressives who longed to see a Democratic White House that it became self-righteous. Others described it as a revisionist history of the Clinton administration.

Watch it alongside the 2012 election, and it’s less of a nostalgic escape and more of a sometimes-uncomfortable re-writing of Obama’s presidency.

Though Martin Sheen’s President

12

Bartlet is often used as a tool of optimistic counter-history, he’s also not everything his voters wished for. “I wanted to retire five years ago,” a Supreme Court Justice tells him. “But I waited for a Democrat.

I wanted a Democrat. And instead I got you.”

“

It’s the Bartlet administration that keeps reminding you of the ways Obama has failed, as well as what you’d like to think he’s discussing over a brisk walk through the West Wing.

It’s interesting that the fictional Bartlet administration is problematized on the domestic front—his unwillingness to pursue hate crime legislation, his tendency to support women’s issues only when the numbers will give him something in return, for example—while his troubling foreign policies are largely celebrated.

“I’m going to blow them off the face of the earth with the fury of God’s own thunder,” he says of Syria in an early episode, as the show’s trademark rousing music swells in the background.

Aaron Sorkin’s unfortunate enthusiasm for American exceptionalism means that the characters rarely have the same fascinating, measured debates around foreign policies as they do around other areas of White House business. In the show’s third season, Sorkin invents a Middle Eastern country called Qumar, seemingly for the purpose of being able to

portray Middle Easterners as backwards and violent without explicitly mentioning real-life geography. Press Secretary C. J. Cregg’s rants about women in the Middle East read like boilerplate imperialist mainstream feminism—a serious flaw in an otherwise brilliant character.

But watching The West Wing alongside the current election, you still have that same feeling of seeing something better, more intelligent, more responsible, and more committed than you’d ever see on the news. Though the show’s writers reportedly based eventual President-elect and politician of colour Matt Santos on Obama—who was at the time a rising star in the party—it’s the Bartlet administration that keeps reminding you of the ways Obama has failed, as well as what you’d like to think he’s discussing over a brisk walk through the West Wing.

The Phoenix meets the Mountain Goats John Darnielle of The Mountain Goats opens up to a Toronto crowd at the Phoenix theatre

“

He stares out at the crowd, telling anyone waiting for an abuser’s death that something deep inside you will crack open; “I can tell you it is terrifying and beautiful.”

great pleasure in blowing his undergraduates’ minds with the story of Oedipus, and is about to launch into “Up The Wolves.” It is a sonic inferno entirely at odds with Darnielle’s unassuming appearance—he’s slight, kind of gangly, a little like a professor who might have taught you classics, or an American version of the Daily Show’s John Oliver. But when the stage lights come up he becomes a whirling maniac, snarling and spitting and sometimes, disarmingly, soothing us.

It’s the spoken word interludes that drive home what a tremendously personal experience this is. In introducing “Dance Music,” Darnielle visibly trembles; he wrote this song, he says, something rough in his distinctive voice, after the death of his abusive stepfather. He

runs through the crowd. In the middle of the show the bassist and the drummer slip off stage and Darnielle tells us the setlist is blank—under red lights he is stripped down and vulnerable, trembling violently and completely alone. The last song before the encore —“Spent Gladiator Two”—runs again with the desperate plea to “stay alive”.

The lights slide down and down as Darnielle almost-screams, “stay alive!” and then smiles, very faintly, in the darkness. “Thank you,” he says, and disappears. The crowd loses it, but there’s warmth to the chaotic applause; we know he’s coming back.

John Darnielle creates a kind of fervour I’ve never seen before. Towards the end of the set he discards everything—piano, guitar, even glasses, and just leans into the mic, arms outstretched. The crucifixion parallels are obvious and, I suspect, intentional. The red light on his face is a little malevolent. Darnielle claims that their latest album Transcendental Youth is “about Satan.” It is the first TMG album that includes horns, used to delightful effect here; the trombone player dances along, so unabashedly happy to be there he becomes a highlight of my night. Most of the songs they play tonight are from Transcendental Youth, but the crowd has taken them to heart, loving them as wholly as everything on 2004’s autobiographical breakout The Sunset Tree—except perhaps the anthemic “This Year” which makes us all scream, “I am going to make it through this year / if it kills me,” as though it actually might.

As slow as the Mountain Goats can often be, they are always vibrant, beautiful, arresting to witness. In a 2009 article in New York Magazine, Stephen Rodrick observes that Darnielle occupies a space largely uninhabited by rock stars and musicians. The people here don’t want to sleep with him (despite the intermittent proposals of marriage filtering up from the crowd) or be him. They want to hang out with him, to listen to him speak. I’m reminded of the way he introduced

“Dance Music,” speaking of “something inside of you cracking open.”

We’re here for the crack, to watch it, to feel it deep inside, in the places we never really look. That’s Darnielle’s gift, as a musician and a poet: he finds the pieces of us that we try to bury and ignore, and brings them up to the light in their full, hideous glory. There is no coincidence in the mouths around me silently forming every word and all the syllables; I wouldn’t be surprised if half these people had Darnielle’s

“

Introducing “Dance Music” Darnielle visibly trembles; he wrote this song, he says, after the death of his abusive stepfather.

words tattooed on their skin, or had ambitions in that direction.

The Mountain Goats troop back out, saluting us with dark brown beerbottles. A girl at the barrier throws a long-stemmed rose to bassist Peter Hughes, who passes it to Darnielle with a flourish. Behind the drum kit, Jon Wurster hides a laugh; Darnielle lights up, for a moment putting aside his tortured onstage persona to lean down and thank her—“I’m easy for flattery.” The boy beside me exhales like it’s the end of the world: “I wish I’d thought of that.”

The last song of the night—the brilliant, aching, furious “No Children,” a livid bruise of a song, devastatingly precise in its glorious, impotent, helpless rage—gets everyone out onto the floor. The generally reserved crowd undoes its cuffs, slips off its cardigans and suit-jackets and surges out, a pulsing mass that

SEE “MOUNTAIN GOATS” ON PAGE 14

•

Film & Music • 29 Oct. 2012 • filmandmusic@thestrand.ca

“This is a song about how you want to fuck your mother,” John Darnielle tells the crowd. The Mountain Goats’ lead singer and creative driving force is dressed in a white shirt and dark suitjacket, emnating a dapper and slightly manic aura. His eyes are bright, and his extended fingers hover over the strings of his guitar. He’s just finished telling us about a classics lecture he once took with a professor who found

pauses, looking out at the crowd: Mountain Goats faithful (the guy next to me, in his late teens or maybe early twenties, looks like he’s going to keel over just from Darnielle’s voice) mixed with newbies like me (the guy in front of me, mid-thirties, wearing a suit, clearly only there for his significant other and constantly mid-level angry).

There is something eminently kind, near beatific, about Darnielle’s soft voice. He stares out at the crowd, telling anyone waiting for an abuser’s death that something deep inside you will crack open: “I can tell you it is terrifying and beautiful.” There is something unpredictable and dangerous to watching Darnielle that makes it compelling, strangely more visceral. This is a song about domestic violence (“my stepfather yells at my mother / launches a glass across the room / straight at her head”), but there’s something light and unencumbered in Darnielle’s eyes that reassures me even as it scares me.

The set opens with “Lakeside View Apartments” and Darnielle comes out alone, smiling almost as sweetly as he croons, in homage to Elliot Smith, “and just before I leave / I throw up in the sink / one whole life recorded / in disappearing ink.” We’re here for him, everyone knows. The second song —“Amy, AKA Spent Gladiator One” —isn’t about Amy Winehouse, but “all the Amys who never made it”.

The constant refrain, “just stay alive”

FLICKR.COM/COUNTMEOUTBLOG8

ANNA KREPINSKY

13

An open letter at the Phoenix “MOUNTAIN GOATS” FROM PAGE 13 knows every syllable of every word. I think I recognize a girl who lives near me with her arms in the air, entire body yearning for the stage; we make brief eye contact with no hint of recognition. There are larger things in the world to worry about: Darnielle’s piercing, breaking voice. “I hope you die,” he cries, entire body wrecked, raw, “I hope we both die.”

After I get home, I’ll look up an interview where Darnielle explains the meaning behind crowd weepie “Love, Love, Love.”

He’ll talk about the

Greek tradition of love as an indifferent force, neither good nor bad: just overwhelming. It will remind me of this moment. Right now, I look around, at all the upturned brightly-lit faces, a rapt earnest mirror to Darnielle’s. The only thing I see here is pure, transcendent love.

FLICKR/COUNTMEOUTBLOG8

Album art from the Mountain Goats’ Transcendental Youth

Charlie Zone

Canadian cinema straight out of ImagineNATIVE, Toronto’s Aboriginal film festival STAFF WRITER Writing a gritty urban drama is quite difficult, as a creative team must find a balance between something that is well crafted but also looks and sounds authentic. For every Mean Streets and Boyz N The Hood, there are at least three attempts of the formula that make Little Orphan Annie look badass. Michael Melski’s Charlie Zone occasionally hits this mark, but the screenplay’s frustrating efforts to “surprise” its audience ruin the momentum of the film.

Set in the drug ravaged streets of Halifax, Charlie Zone tells the story of Avery Paul (Glen Gould), an ex-convict and former boxer who is down on his luck and struggling to get his life together. One day MacDonald (Jennie Raymond) hires Avery to kidnap drug addict Jan (Amanda Crew) and return her to her concerned family. What was supposed to be a simple job becomes a complex journey into the seedy underbelly of Halifax, and both characters are forced to reconsider their lives in hopes of finding redemption.

Melski puts a distinctively Canadian spin on the inner city drama. He creates a certain edge and grittiness that very few would expect to come from Nova Scotia. This is accomplished mostly through Melski’s camera work, which he uses to express a dreaded calm at some points and absolute chaos in others. While I have my problems with the narrative structure of the film, you can tell how much thought was put into every frame and that Melski is an intelligent filmmaker.

He also has a good eye for actors, and

14

•

both Gould and Crew give strong performances for different reasons. Gould has one of those expressive faces where an audience can tell the difference between their thoughts and actions. He plays Avery as someone with a very troubled and rough exterior, but a great deal of sadness underneath. While the audience may not necessarily agree with Avery’s actions, Gould’s performance opens Avery up for the audience to be understanding and sympathetic.

In contrast, Crew plays a character who wears her heart on her sleeve. This is the type of performance that could have

been overplayed, but Crew gives Jan an effortless charisma and sadness.

When I see this level of performance, craftsmanship, and dedication in a film, I wish I could say that the narrative at the film’s core was as strong. Unfortunately, Joe G. LeCair’s story suffers from a lack of confidence. There are so many surprises and twists throughout the narrative that it robs the film of its sense of realism. I won’t go into detail, but a great central story is ruined by unnecessary exposition, characters’ explicit statements of themes, and an overabundance of twists. By adding too much to

the story, the audience simply becomes exhausted and, despite the film’s many excellent qualities, I stopped caring. It’s unfortunate that a great character study is bogged down by these factors.

Overall, it’s always important to support local talent, especially when those involved have something interesting to say. I have a lot of confidence in the talent that LeCair and especially Melski display in Charlie Zone. While I cannot ignore how disorganized the writing is, with a clearer vision both LeCair and Melski will have what they need to produce a great film.

CROSS COUNTRY MUSIC

JOHN DEBONO

Mi’kmaq/Canadian actor Glen Gould in Charlie Zone

Cutting the Cord ALLIE CHENOWETH STRAND 4 LYFE It’s 7:15 on a Friday evening, and I’m sitting at home after a long day at work, sipping a beer, eating some Dutch gouda, and reading through issue three of The Strand.

Now I bet you’re thinking: “Seriously, how cool is this girl? She sounds sexy and intelligent, and probably is really good at making out. We should be friends and/or lovers.” Well, Strand reader(s), the above may be true, but I have a confession to make and it might change how you feel about me.

So… I don’t know how to say this exactly, but I, um, don’t have… Internet. At the moment.

You hate me. You think I’m totally weird. I just—I just don’t, okay? Please don’t ostracize me. My social life is dead enough as it is not being able to hitchhike onto other people’s plans from lurking on Facebook, which explains why I’m sitting at home on a Friday night reading The Strand. So I came across Stranded editor Will Pettigrew’s not-in-the-least-bit-pathetic plea for content and I thought to myself, “Gee, I really have absolutely nothing better to do than to write for Stranded.” Seriously, Will, you should consider putting out content-calls in the Amish community, because being without Internet means heaps of time that can be devoted to writing years’ worth of Stranded material. It’s not like it has to be funny, right? But I don’t know exactly what the best way to put out that content call would be, ‘cause they don’t have, like, Gmail, or anything, so best of luck, man.

So how did I get myself into this little predicament? I ask myself this every single fucking day. It’s a long story, so I’ll give the Cliff Notes. I’ve graduated and work full-time (not at a desk job with a computer, thanks for rubbing it in), and I’m pretty fucking broke, ‘cause stuff costs money. If I didn’t have to pay rent, I’d be swimming in it a la Scrooge McDuck and buy all the interwebz in the world, but the alternatives to paying rent are Chez Cardboard Box or living at home (shudder) in the suburbs (double shudder with a side of spew). And there’s this stupid, stubborn, masochistic little part of me that says, “You can stick it out! It’s not so bad! Seriously, billions of people go without Internet every single day, and you can too!” I thought, maybe this will be good for me. I can reconnect with reality! I’ll call people on the phone more often, I’ll get more reading done, maybe even do a little creative writing in my spare time. I could exercise more often! Think of all the possibilities! I’ll be free! Free at last!

Fuck. That.

I’m dying. I’m dying out here. I feel like I’m getting the sweats from withdrawal already. And I don’t have data on my phone either, because this whole not-having-Internet wasn’t something I ever foresaw happening to me in my life (I incidentally also didn’t foresee myself writing for

How the Internet works, essentially. Also, clipart rules.

The Strand after I left UofT, but hey, here we are). I am aware that this is very much a quintessential “first-worldproblem” and that I should STFU and keep my privilege in check and yadda yadda yadda, but these are the back pages of The Strand. I know someone’s got to have a hankering for some good ol’ fashioned ranting and complaining. But then again, you people have Internet and can stream a Woody Allen film whenever you want. That is a luxury I simply cannot afford!

So I know what you’re thinking, if I haven’t proven already that I’m kind of telepathic. You’re thinking: quit your bellyaching and go to the fucking library and use their Internet. It’s as simple as that. To which I reply, NO. NO, IT’S NOT, you cyber-privileged cretin. You’re not going to go to the library for hours so you can meander around every single blog ever, or take a quick gander at your old high school friend’s little sister’s Facebook profile. Would you go to the library to spend hours upon hours on Tumblr? Well, some of you would. But would you give a shit about your friends’ Instagram photos of food or their pug? No, you have to prioritize what you do on the Internet, and y’know, it honestly takes the fun out of it. I want to stream whole seasons of Avatar: The Last Airbender at two in the morning. I want to not know how the hell I ended up watching every single one of Usher’s music videos on YouTube (including the ones from when he was, like, 13) and somewhere in the middle learned how to do a fishtail braid. I WANT GIFS. ALL OF THE GIFS. But other than the self-indulging entertainment/procrastination provided by the Internet, it’s just plain inconvenient to not have it. I have minimal knowledge of current events, because basically my only sources of “news” are Metro, The Grid, and glimpses of CP24 when I take the subway. I did go on Twitter a few days ago, so a month from now I’ll probably still be making “binders full of

STRANDED RANTS & RECIPES

women” jokes though I won’t have a clue as to the actual election results.

I’m kicking myself for not pursuing such a useful field like meteorology instead of having this useless literature degree because I can’t look up the Weather Network before I leave the house, I just have to look out the window and guess what the weather will be like for the rest of the day. I didn’t study geography either, which is a shame because I now have to survive without Google Maps, so don’t invite me anywhere that isn’t south of Bloor Street unless you never want to hear from me ever again. (Fun fact: a great prank to play on someone who is Internetless: send them directions to somewhere that just doesn’t exist and see how they fare). I’m also obviously no PreMed, and let me tell you, if you ever find yourself without Internet, do not, I repeat, DO NOT get sick. You can’t WebMD your symptoms! How will you know if you have Lyme disease or Scarlet Fever or some sort of rare bacterial infection? You won’t! You’re going to die! True story: I had bronchitis recently, and I had to call my mom to Google where the nearest walk-in clinic to my apartment was. Isn’t that a sad story? Don’t you feel sorry for me?

And it gets worse! When you’re sick, you just want to lie in bed and snuggle up with the Internet to take your mind off your ailing health. But no, no, I was left to my own devices, so what did I do? Started reading War and Peace.

Newsflash—it is not a Russian version of Downton Abbey, try as my imagination might, but there is no replacement for sassy Dame Maggie Smith. It really has been a serious struggle. I don’t know if I’ll ever truly recover from this whole ordeal!

Tragedy aside, I guess not-having-Internet hasn’t been, like, the worst thing that’s ever happened to me. Mostly I do a lot of productive shit that I never really bothered doing when I was in university. Y’know, like, laundry. I’ve got more clean socks than I’ve ever had in my life. And I do dishes right after I’m done eating too. And—wait for it, this one’s a doozie—I get eight hours of sleep on the regular. That’s right, you heard me, EIGHT. The next time you find yourself yawning in class, think to yourself: Curse you, you saucy minx, Internet! And I don’t get angry as often because I never have to read through various Internet shit-storms. Imagine a life where you never have to read the comments section on any articles ever. It’s wonderful! Like, sure, no pictures of cute cats to cheer me up when I’m blue, but no trolls either!

Besides, eating gouda, drinking beer, and reading some fine student journalism is a perfectly respectable and enjoyable evening! Too bad I can’t post a Twitpic of that shit though—I have to leave my own coolness undocumented and unpublished. Ugh, what’s the point then? What a fucking waste! I give up! Talk to me in two months, I bet I’ll have sold my soul to Rogers just for that feeling of excitement at every RT. Sigh.

The (Freshman) Fifteen Dollar Challenge DAVID KITAI STRANDED’S FAVOURITE CONTRIBUTOR Bacon and Mushroom Sheppard’s Pie Hello again! It’s me, David, you know… the guy who wrote that one recipe…yeah alright I’m sure you remember. Well, dear reader I wrote you another one.

Here’s a classic British dish and honestly one of the best examples of delicious, cheap, filling foods out there. I mean come on, it’s beef, mushrooms and bacon topped off with mashed potatoes. How could you possibly go wrong?

Purchased Ingredients 5 Potatoes and a few Handfuls of Mushrooms (Kensington Fruits $4.45) 3lbs Ground Beef ($8.00 Kensington Meats) 2 slices slab bacon ($2.00 Kensington Meats) Assumed Ingredients (Those ingredients which can only be bought in larger quantities and/or should be found in any halfway decent kitchen) Butter or Olive oil (or bacon fat if you’re a total badass) Spices of many varieties (we’ll get into that one later) 2 onions 6 cloves of Garlic 1 Bouillon cube Some Cream or milk & butter A drop of wine 1 can of tomato paste

Recipe 1. Begin by peeling, chopping, and boiling the potatoes with a couple cloves of garlic 2. Season the beef in a large bowl with salt, dried herbs, paprika, half a bouillon cube mixed up in a little bit of warm water, and some wine. This step is the key to make anything good based on ground beef 3. Dice onions and garlic and sauté them in a large skillet 4. Add the sliced mushrooms and cook them until they shrink 5. Cut the bacon into cubes and throw them in the pan 6. Throw in the beef bit by bit and gradually cook it up with the onions and mushrooms and whatnot 7. Once the potatoes are cooked enough that they fall apart when pressed with the back of a knife strain them 8. Mash the potatoes without any butter, milk, or cream and once they are nice and mashed melt butter and milk in a small pot (or just use cream) and fold it in to the mashed potatoes. This will produce a wonderfully fluffy mash 9. Turn your oven on to broil and fill a deep roasting tray or casserole dish first with the beef mixture and the cover it with a layer of mashed potatoes 10. Throw it in the oven for about ten to fifteen minutes so a nice crust forms on the top of the mash 11. Eat it, it’s good.

15

STRANDED tHE FREE PEOPLE'S VOICE OF THE REVOLUTION!

GLORIOUS TRIUMPH OF PROLETARIAT AGAINST CAPITALIST OPPRESSION

COMMISAR PETROV, DZIGA VERTOV, COMRADE NEWMAN, AND THE WORKER’S CHAMPION UNION BILL

Stranded • 29 Oct. 2012 • stranded@thestrand.ca

Greetings comrades! I come with newsreel from the metropole detailing the august trials of our brothers in the revolution! The people’s will cannot be crushed! Rise!

Rise up out of your chains, from under the ruling class, and together we will return the means of production and its associated capital to the hands and tables of the workers! Do not believe their lies! They only wish the propagate their classist society indefinitely, but the time has come! They cannot sustain themselves forever! Their greed will only be their downfall comrades as the force of the people’s cooperation is the force of justice!

A scourge has come upon the great people’s republic of the GTA! The greedy gold-baron-capitalist wishes to invest in an elitist institution using the people’s wealth!

Hearing word of this, great worker and comrade,Union Bill arrives on the scene observe and report upon these horrendous transgressions of the people‘s law!

As a result, he fills their coffers with stolen capital!

Upon seeing this, Union Bill, the noble and great comrade, exposes the gold baron for what he really is, a capitalist swine!

He witnesses the elitist institute showering the capitalist with praise, in an attempt to hide his bourgeois sins!

Union Bill tries but cannot reclaim the worker’s capital alone!

Arriving now, peasant and comrade Neumannov attempts But to do so, the assistance of the true voice of the With this people’s platform, Union Bill and comrade to assist Union Bill in creating a strong proletariat force people, The Strand, and its gracious chairman, is absolutely Neumannov are able to create awareness among the in order to reclaim and redistribute the pilfered capital of needed! And in accordance with his just and true manproletariat, ensuring that the bourgeois pig’s surplus value the people! ner, the chairman agrees to assist the great proletarian is delivered to the people’s bank! struggle!

16

•

Furthermore, the capitalist, along with his elitist collaborator, the institution, are punished for the evils of commodity fetishism!

The revolution begins! Happy Halloween!