Vol. 57 Issue 6

what’s inside: VUSAC, UTSU (2) VICTORIA UNIVERSITY’S STUDENT NEWSPAPER

VOL. 57 ISSUE 6 •DEC. 11 2014 • WWW.THESTRAND.CA

TOronto protests, politics (3)

Earning Education (4) Ethics and Ebola (6)

Romance lit, digital media (10 - 11) Witchy women (11)

T-swift: Naughty or nice?

(12) multi-cam sitcom battle (13)

Ne

VUSAC COMMISSIONER RESIGNS AMID CONTROVERSY

EMILY POLLOCK EDITOR-IN-CHIEF After an attempted impeachment, VUSAC’s Arts and Culture Commissioner, Conor Tangney, resigned in a meeting on November 21.

The charges brought against Tangney included alleged intoxication while on duty as a VUSAC member during Frosh Week, exclusionary behaviour towards non-VUSAC members, and homophobic/sexist language. These charges have not been published or included in the VUSAC meeting minutes as a matter of public record.

The attempt at impeachment occurred during one of VUSAC’s biweekly meetings on November 10. There was little discussion before the impeachment vote save questions about points of procedure and a defence from one member on the charge of sexist language.

This member stated that it was “a private joke” unfortunate enough to have been made in the VUSAC office.

In response to the charges, Tangney said that he wished he had been informed of them beforehand so that he could have resigned. He did not make any other com-

the AGM

ment. He seemed resigned to his impeachment, saying, “I don’t have anything else really to say... It was nice serving with you all.”

Voting was done by secret ballot. Four VUSAC members voted for impeachment, four voted against it, and six abstained. The motion failed, and Tangney remained in office.

Tangney’s impeachment was going to be brought up again at the November 21 meeting, as there were additional charges brought against him. However, he resigned during an in-camera session at the beginning of the meeting, which non-VUSAC members were not permitted to attend. The latest charges have not been made public.

When asked to comment on Tangney’s resignation, VUSAC President Rowan DeBues said, “It is never enjoyable to see a VUSAC member feel compelled to resign. However, what we will do now as a council is take the lessons of this term and implement them…There is no denying that a resignation is a setback, but what is important is taking something negative and turning it into a positive for the council, and by extension, Vic-

torians.”

When asked why the charges were not put on the meeting minutes, DeBues said, “The charges themselves involved grievances filed by students who did not want to run the risk of being easily identified and who came forward anonymously.”

Not everyone is happy with the way VUSAC handled the situation, especially the failed impeachment.

When interviewed, an anonymous Vic student said, “I don’t think VUSAC knows what message they are sending out to students by voting “yes” or abstaining from voting to keep someone in after those charges.

It’s telling the student body that enabling homophobia and sexism is okay.”

Another anonymous Vic student says, “I don’t know why this issue amounted to such vote. Appropriate administrative or governing intervention would have kept things from being so ugly. This is an educational institution that should provide learning opportunities, and appropriate correction wherever necessary.

For someone to resign under such circumstances indicates a lack of professionalism on various levels.”

CRITIQUE AND COMMENTARY

On October 29, University of Toronto students had the opportunity to attend the infamous UTSU Annual General Meeting (AGM). Under both the Canada Corporations Act and the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act, a general meeting of members is required annually to approve of the corporation’s actions over the past year and its intentions for the future. This includes the presentation of financial statements, consideration of the Auditor’s report, appointment of the Auditor, and, in the case of this meeting, the changing of Board structure and amendments to by-laws.

The first criticism many had was of the choice of venue, since we all know that the lecture hall at OISE is one of the worst at Uof T. The flickering lights and the low rumble of the subway beneath almost served as foreshadowing for how the AGM was to proceed.

Among the things on the table was the extremely controversial decision to remove faculty and college representatives from the Board of Directors and instead create new positions such as indigenous students’ director, women’s director, and LGBTQ director, among others, to replace them.

The UTSU President, Yolen Bollo-Kamara, stated that the current board structure is “no longer permissible,” which is totally true. Under a new legislation called the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act (CNFPCA), all members of a not-for-profit corporation must have the ability to vote for every board position, which is not possible currently.

She argued that the new structure was a chance to “build a stronger, more effective students’ union.”

In her opening speech, she cited that many universities across Canada use this system of governance and that it was extremely successful in representing the diverse interests of modern academic institutions. However, she failed to address the unique college system in place at Uof T and the diverse challenges it presents.

Under the current system, there are two Arts & Science directors, three Faculty of Engineering directors, a single director from each college, three UTM directors, and one director from each remaining faculty. Under

2

SARAH NIEDOBA

ERIK PRESTON STAFF WRITER

the proposed structure, this would have been reduced to three Arts & Science directors, four UTM directors, an athletics director, a first-year director, two commuter directors, and the various minority group directors mentioned above.

Considering the unique system at Uof T, it is important to address the change of representation that would occur for the “average” student under the proposed system, who currently has the right to vote for UTSU representatives at both the college and faculty levels under the current system.

Under the proposed system, students who do not identify with the new minority positions would have their influence on the UTSU board significantly reduced, thereby impeding their democratic rights as students at the University of Toronto. Any students who do identify with the minority positions proposed would have the same level of representation as they do under the current system, albeit with their specific interests having more weight in board decisions.

Apart from this obvious change, the electoral process involved in the proposed system would be extremely complicated and much less accountable and transparent. Each student at Uof T explicitly belongs to both a college and faculty. The document on the UTSU

website addressing the proposal even states that “there will always the possibility that a student could be elected who is unable or unwilling to do their job.”

While this is also possible under the current system, this problem is magnified under a system in which there are few clear guidelines governing who can attain the position and who can vote for each position.

After all, any minority group students might identify with is not published on their ROSI account like their faculty and college are. This poses an obvious problem for the electoral process and is an obvious benefit to those seeking to take advantage of it.

Under UTSU by-laws, two thirds of the popular vote is needed to change the board structure. After nearly three hours and more tension-fueled interruptions to the proceedings than are quantifiable, the proposed board structure was defeated.

While a new system is needed within the next year in order to comply with the CNFPCA, the general consensus under the victorious “nay” camp was that the proposed structure was not sufficient. Further debate and consultation will be necessary to develop a structure everyone—or at least almost everyone—can agree on. The coming months will tell whether or not this is possible.

TORONTO PROTEST FOR FERGUSON ANTHONY BURTON NEWS EDITOR Protestors gathered Wednesday evening in front of the US Consulate at Dundas and University to protest the Ferguson grand jury’s decision not to indict police officer Darren Wilson for the death of unarmed black teen Mike Brown. Standing in solidarity with protests across the United States, organizers also used the opportunity to call for action regarding the September 2014 death of Jermaine Carby, who was fatally shot by the Peel Regional Police while a passenger in a car.

The name of the officer responsible has been withheld, and the driver of the car has been missing since the murder.

Carby’s cousin called for an investigation of the police’s behaviour and of the disproportionate police targeting of black people as a civil rights issue.

During her speech, she paused for the crowd to shout “shame” in response to the actions of investigators and Peel Regional Police. This was followed by a call to Stephen Harper, the Toronto Police Service, governmental policymakers, and the US Department of Defense for accountability on the behalf of all systematically oppressed groups. Candles were distributed to the crowd, with each person lighting their neighbour’s, until the entire crowd was lit both from the floodlights at the front and from the candles in their hands.

The protest began with the organizers rallying the attendees with a series of chants. The “No justice, no peace” chant was met with hesitation from the crowd. However, the energy of the organizers eventu-

ally spread, and the “Respect our existence or expect our resistance” chant could be heard as far north as College Street. The energy of the crowd remained at this level, with a five-second long “Fuck cops” chant being quickly drowned out by the slightly less antagonistic “The people united will never be defeated.”

Microphone issues were not a problem, as the crowd chanted during the breaks between speeches.

The 90-minute protest met with some controversy as the organizers laid out rules for non-black allies, including remaining on the outside of the centrallygathered group. TV crews from all major networks gathered on the side road beside the consulate and were barricaded by the four police officers that were present. The protest remained peaceful throughout.

TORONTO ELECTION STEVE WARNER CONTRIBUTOR Along with a new mayor, the October 27 municipal election saw Toronto return 44 city councillors in wards across the city. Mayor-elect John Tory is only one vote on council, and he will have to convince or appease 22 other councillors to pass his agenda.

Of the 44 councillors, a total of 37 incumbents ran for re-election. Councillors Gloria Lindsay Luby, Mike Del Grande, and mayoral candidate Karen Stintz retired. Doug Holyday, Peter Milczyn, and Adam Vaughan abdicated their seats midway through the term to run for other offices and did not run for their council seats again.

All but one incumbent councillor was re-elected.

John Parker, the two-term councillor for Ward 26 (Don Valley West) was ousted by challenger Jon Burnside, who received 42% of the vote to Parker’s 27%. In 2010, Parker received 31% of the vote to Burnside’s 29%.

Other incumbents were much luckier. Councillors such as Josh Colle, Joe Mihevc, Mike Layton, Josh Matlow, Jaye Robinson, Michael Thompson, and Norm Kelly were all returned to office with over 75% of their wards’ votes.

Not every race was so easily won, though.

Stephen Holyday continued his father, Doug’s, legacy in Ward 3, beating challenger Annette Hutcheon by 16% and receiving 36% of the vote (in 2010, Doug Holyday received 72%).

Known for his antics and outbursts during council sessions, Ward 7 Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti was returned to office with 49%, or 6,816 votes.

Nick Di Nizio, who ran and lost against Mammoliti in 2010, performed better than he did in 2010, but so did Mammoliti. Di Nizio went from a 29% showing in 2010 to 35% in October, while Mammoliti jumped from 43% to 49%. The result was no change to Mammoliti’s margin of victory over Di Nizio.

In Ward 12, Frank Di Giorgio, who succeeded Mike Del Grande as Mayor Rob Ford’s Budget Chief after Del Grande resigned in 2013, did not cruise to re-election like his Council neighbour, Frances Nunziata in Ward 11. Di Giorgio received 28%, narrowly defeated John Nunziata—brother to Councillor Nunziata—by 1%, or 238 votes. It was a tight race, with candidates Nick Dominelli and Lekan Olawoye receiving 23% and 22% respectively.

One of the more intense Council races, however, was in Ward 16, Eglinton-Lawrence. Mayoral candidate Karen Stintz had held the ward since 2003; after dropping out of the mayor’s race, she decided not to run for the ward for a fourth term. Christin Carmichael Greb won the ward with only 17% of the popular vote, beating competitor Adam Tanel by 269 votes.

Carmichael Greb received the last-minute endorsements of mayor-elect John Tory, Councillor Norm Kelly, and Stintz herself. Stintz’s policy advisor on transit, Jean-Pierre Boutros, came in fourth place with 10.7% of the vote.

Davenport saw councillors Cesar Palacio and Anna Bailão hold onto their seats by single digits as challengers Alejandra Bravo and Alex Mazer came close to unseating them. Bravo, who has attempted to

unseat Palacio in three separate elections, won 43% of the vote to Palacio’s 46%. Bailão received 46% to first-time challenger Mazer’s 42%.

It is, however, Ward 20 that saw the highest profile field of candidates. Joe Cressy cleaned up with 42% of the vote. Other candidates included Terri Chu (founder of Why Should I Care?, a group devoted to political engagement), fringe mayoral candidateturned council candidate Sarah Thompson, and Anshul Kapoor, a chair of NoJetsTO, a campaign lobbying against the introduction of jet planes at Billy Bishop Airport.

Jim Karygiannis, the now-former MP in the Liberal caucus, swept to victory with a majority of the popular vote, replacing retiring councillor Del Grande.

Councillor Ron Moeser narrowly won Ward 44 again this month. His result of 25% was just enough to fend off challengers Jennifer McKelvie and Diana Hall, who received 23% and 22%. This is Hall’s third time vying for Moeser’s seat.

And, of course, Ford Nation is alive and well. Although mayoral candidate Doug Ford lost to mayorelect Tory, his brother Rob will be returning to his council seat with a whopping 58% of the vote. His closest competitor received 10%, while Andray Domise received 8%.

October 27 was a good election for incumbents.

Now we must hope that these incumbents, along with the seven newly-elected councillors, can work together for the good of the city.

PREHISTORIC AGE DAWNS IN TORONTO JUSTIN NOVICK-FAILLE CONTRIBUTOR A new era has begun in the landscape of Toronto sports: the rise of the Raptors. The Raptors have surprised many around the NBA this season so far, racing out of the gate with a 13-2 record. Not only does that make them tied for the top spot in the NBA, but it is also the best start to a season the franchise has ever had.

The Raptors’ early success can be attributed to excellent teamwork, led by all-star DeMar DeRozan and perennial all-star Kyle Lowry. Not only do the Raptors have the second-best offence in the NBA, scoring 108 points per game, but they also allow the seventh fewest, at 96.4 per game. That difference of 11.6 points per game is also the best in the NBA. As a team, the Raptors also shoot 80.4% on free throws (third in the NBA) and only commit an average of 11 turnovers per game, fourth best in the league. The Raptors’ opponents have

also committed 16.3 turnovers a game, making the Raptors’ turnover difference of -5.3 second best overall. These numbers are all key to a team’s success, and maintaining a good standing in these categories should see the Raptors continue to succeed.

Individually, the Raptors have also had solid contributions from several players, led by the aforementioned Lowry and DeRozan. They score 38.8 points per game combined, while Lou Williams, Jonas Valanciunas, and Terrence Ross each average at least ten points per game.

These players have had fantastic per formances in individual games as well. Lou Williams scored a career high of 36 points off the bench against the Cleveland Cavaliers, while Jonas Valanciunas scored 27 points, the best in his career, against the Phoenix Suns earlier this year. Finally, Kyle Lowry is one of only three players this

season to record a triple-double in a game, a rare accomplishment. Playing well as a team is vital, but having these excellent games from various team members has also been key to The Raptors’ success thus far.

The Raptors have been an exciting team to watch this season. They have beaten major contenders, such as the Cleveland Cavaliers and the Memphis Grizzlies (the other team that is 13-2). Both their losses—one against the Chicago Bulls and one against the Miami Heat, both of which are good teams as well—have been close games. It is still early in the season, but if the Raptors continue to play the way they have been, they should finish among the best teams in the NBA and will hopefully accompany this with a deep playoff run.

(Note: All Raptors stats through November 27th)

3

H LETOVSKY IONS EDITOR

TO BUILD COMMUNITY, A BEAUTIFUL SPACE IS NOT ENOUGH IDEAL STUDENT

EARNING EDUCATION JILL EVANS STAFF WRITER Do you struggle to pay your tuition, worrying about whether or not you can pay back your loans and working several part-time jobs in a frantic attempt to save up enough? Or are you lucky enough to have a trust fund, rich parents, or some kind of wealthy benefactor to foot the bill?

If you belong to the latter group, congratulations!

According to “Good Education is Expensive,” a recent Varsity article, you’re the only sort of student who belongs at university. The piece, written by Trinity College student Jeffrey Schulman, argues against governmentsubsidized universities, essentially stating that university is—and should be—only for rich people.

I don’t necessarily have an issue with someone arguing against free university in Canada. Implementing widespread free or low-cost education similar to that of European countries such as Germany would be a huge change for Canada. Would it be worth it? I’m not sure.

I’m a philosophy major. I don’t know much about economics, but I do recognize a bad argument when I see one.

The main conclusions of the article can be roughly paraphrased as follows: (1) University is not valuable as an institution that provides job training, but rather as a place for like-minded intellectuals to network. Degrees are merely social status symbols. (2) Getting rid of tuition fees would make university worse and is a bad idea.

I want to argue the opposite: that university should be a place for people of all socioeconomic backgrounds, not just a playground for rich kids to discuss their interests. And that free or low-cost universities can work.

The university degree: useful job training, or just a status symbol?

“There is no sensible way to equate university with job training; preparation for work can be learned quickly, cheaply, and often on the job. The only value of an undergraduate degree in the labour market is as a symbol of class or of monetary and temporal commitment to doing that job,” Schulman writes.

Alright. I totally get the “university is not job training” argument. Most arts students are used to inevitable cries of, “But what are you actually going to do with that art history/English/philosophy/etc. degree?” Not every university degree has obvious practical applications outside of academia. However, it’s blatantly untrue to say that university can never prepare students for their jobs.

Many, many careers require a university education.

These include doctors, lawyers, teachers, architects, accountants, engineers, computer scientists… All these and other professions require in-depth training that most definitely cannot be “learned on the job.” A surgeon doesn’t show up for his first day of work and expect a quick crash course in human physiology. An engineer

4

can’t learn how to design a bridge in his first week at the office.

Although a university degree is undeniably a status symbol, it’s simply not true that social status is the only value of a degree. University is more than an elite social club for well-off kids. It serves to train the people who will build and maintain the infrastructure of our country, from medical care to city planning to the justice system and government. Do we really want every aspect of our country to be managed by people who all come from the exact same socio-economic background?

Or do we want diversity and a range of voices and experiences?

payers should pick up the bill? … It seems unfair to ask the childless who aren’t sending off any students,” he writes.

In case anyone else is not totally clear on how taxes work, I will briefly explain: Taxation is when a government takes money from income-earning citizens and redistributes it to pay for essential services. “Education?

But wait, I don’t have any children! Shouldn’t I be exempt from having any of my tax money go toward public schools? Also, I never get sick, so I don’t go to the doctor. Why are my taxes paying doctors’ salaries?” Sorry, that’s just how taxes work. Sometimes taxes mean that you technically have to pay for services that you personally will never, ever use.

Who should pay for universities?

Can a good university have no tuition fees?

As the Varsity article notes, university can be expensive, and since students are busy studying, they often don’t have time to work enough to support themselves.

So true! As Schulman suggests: “Freedom from work and financial concerns are necessary for someone to devote all of their time to academic thought. … Of course, someone has to pay these costs.”

But who? I, unlike many of my less fortunate fellow undergraduates, am an unbelievably lucky person. I have been blessed with freedom from financial concerns. My parents make enough money to pay my rent and tuition.

My life is easy. However, not everyone in Canada is so privileged. Many young people interested in a university education don’t have parents willing or able to foot the bill. What should these unfortunate young 99-percenters do?

Schulman admits that it might, possibly, be a good idea to “invest in the young” by helping them go to university if they can’t afford it. Our government actually already does this, through OSAP and the 30% off Ontario Tuition Grant. Universities also offer various bursaries and scholarships that can offset the cost of tuition.

However, it’s not easy to get a totally free ride, or to cover the (often high) costs of living in Canada.

OSAP does help a lot of students, but the maximum amount a single student can get through OSAP loans is $12,240 a year. This is slightly less than the current cost of tuition for a Uof T engineering student. Clearly, our government could be doing more to ensure that all interested young people have a chance at post-secondary education without fear of massive debt. “These students are just as greedy as Wall Street fat cats,” Schulman says of the “student radicals” who dare to suggest that free education in Canada might be a good idea. The desire for free education is not greed. It is not greedy to want to become an engineer without being in debt for years.

Why shouldn’t everyone have the opportunity to pursue the career that they want?

Schulman’s main issue with the idea of publiclyfunded education seems to be that an understanding of how taxation works has somehow eluded him: “If the state fully funds the best higher education, which tax-

Schulman is concerned that removing tuition fees might encourage “uncurious students” who aren’t actually interested in learning to go to university. Sure, it’s likely that making Canadian university free or cheaper would result in enrolment spikes. But uninterested students would still drop out fast. If you decide you hate university, the fact that it’s free probably isn’t going to deter you from leaving. Currently, about 9% of Uof T’s first-year students don’t continue their studies after first year. Schulman also suggests that decreased tuition could lead to a rise in residence fees, which is a legitimate concern. In EU countries with free education, it’s common for students to live at low-cost, privately-run dorms, thereby saving universities the cost of residence maintenance.

Schulman states that the German government “threatens a grievous harm” by removing tuition fees.

There seems to be some confusion here about the situation in Germany, where universities have never really had any tuition fees! What, really? Alright, actually, various German states have charged university students small fees in the past. But the concept of free education is definitely nothing new there.

The university program fees that the German government just outlawed had only been introduced recently as a sort of experimental measure. These fees were, at maximum, about 500€ (approximately $710) per semester. At Uof T, our program fees are currently over $1000 per semester, and this is on top of our tuaition. German students protested so much that the government decided to get rid of all student fees as of this year. It’s also worth noting that Germany has some of the highest-ranked universities in the world.

Schulman doesn’t seem to have been able to find much information about how university works in Europe. His only source on this topic is “a friend of mine in the Czech Republic.” However, at least ten EU countries have absolutely no tuition costs for citizens, and many others have very low tuition charges, generally under 1000€ (approximately $1400) per semester. They seem to be doing fine.

Op

CAN UOFT350 SUCCEED? Fossil Free Divestment Action Week wrapped up on November 14. It was organized by Uof T350, a newly-formed branch of the larger Toronto350. The group’s goal is to persuade Uof T to divest from fossil fuel companies and re-invest the money elsewhere. The week involved canvassing, an expert divestment panel discussion, and a pro-divestment march which was positively received by students. Around 200 people attended the march, and 210 people signed letters of support that were delivered to the Office of the President. These numbers speak volumes about the level of student engagement. They are also a testament to the work that Toronto350 has done to build momentum for the movement.

Co-President of Uof T350, Ariel Martz-Oberlander, is hopeful about the possibility of the university pulling its money out of its current fossil fuel holdings, and was pleased to witness the display of support at the action week.

“It boosted morale to see how many people care about this, and literally raise their voices. It can be scary to stand up for what you believe in, especially when it’s controversial. People really embraced their reasons to be there.”

The merits of divestment are part of an ongoing debate at Uof T, yet Ariel stands firm in her belief that it’s an important move for the university. She argues that the importance of divesting is largely symbolic. If Uof T were to divest, it would be the first university to do so in North America, which would send a strong message. “We want

to put pressure on corporations, show them that the social consequences of what they are doing are real,” she explains.

As for those who say divesting would hurt Uof T financially? According to 350’s representatives, divesting would not have any negative impact on tuitions, pensions, or funding for students. On the contrary, as time goes on, fossil-fuel holdings risk becoming stranded assets and are increasingly devalued. Perhaps it would be wiser for the university to invest its endowment in more sustainable sources of income.

In regards to the likelihood of Uof T divesting in the near future, Ariel remains in good spirits. After a 200page brief outlining the reasons to divest was delivered to the Office of the Governing Council last year, Uof T responded by promising to assemble an ad-hoc committee to discuss the issue. This committee was formed last month, and Ariel takes its formation as a positive sign of the university’s readiness to engage on the issue: “I feel hopeful about the school’s willingness to listen to what the students want, and I believe this is what the students want.”

The divestment movement is definitely one that allows students to engage directly with the issue of climate change. With this new 350 branch at Uof T and the success of the Divestment Action Week, hopefully students will continue to be involved with this movement and will keep calling on the university to divest.

ART BY EMILY POLLOCK

KENDALL ANDISON CONTRIBUTOR

THE INTERDISCIPLINARY WAY Programs like Waterloo’s Knowledge Integration offer a better return on investment

REEMA KUREISHY ASSOCIATE OPINIONS EDITOR It’s the last week of the semester, and between final assignments and breathing into paper bags, I don’t have much time to think about anything else… except for our flawed education system, of course.

The post-secondary experience consists of majors, minors, specialists, and breadth requirements. Occasionally, some programs will throw in an internship or co-op program to help build hard skills. For the most part, disciplines are organised very traditionally, with the STEM fields (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) privileged over others. Half the time, arts students are told that their degrees will lead them nowhere: they are given out too commonly and come with too few practical skills. Other times, articles argue that arts students do have something to offer the workforce in terms of their “soft, transferable skills,” like communication. Basically, though, science degrees will get us jobs and arts degrees won’t, though knowing how to write essays offers a glimmer of hope. This conflict between the arts and sciences leads to a strict view of disciplines.

We can no longer afford to think this way. Uof T (along with many other academic institutions) needs to implement a fluid, dynamic system of study where students aren’t confined to one or two subjects, and where they are able to engage with real-world issues using knowledge from multiple fields. This is (poorly) attempted with the mandatory breadth requirements.

However, students usually try to find the easiest “bird”

courses to fulfill those requirements, and often don’t end up making relevant connections to their majors or specializations. The colleges also offer independent interdisciplinary study programs, but they are often only at the upper level, have limited spaces, and are poorly integrated into the mainstream system.

We can become trapped in a theoretical bubble of academia where we focus on vertical specialization— going higher and higher in our pursuit of one subject or field with master’s degrees and PhDs. But shouldn’t we be making horizontal, diagonal, and overlapping connections to different fields?

Complex, real-world issues require interactions between different knowledge systems and specializations so that the solutions to these problems are diverse. For instance, with an issue like climate change, we don’t just need scientists. We need historians, economists, sociologists, lawyers, and writers. We need specialized experts, yes, but we also need people who are well-versed in different disciplines and are able to create links between them. When we make new connections between previously unconnected fields, we inadvertently come up with more innovative answers than before. Unfortunately, most of us aren’t receiving this kind of education.

Some universities seem to be catching on, though.

The Knowledge Integration program at the University of Waterloo is one example, and could be a fantastic model for other institutions to follow. This program rec-

ognizes the fact that not everyone coming out of high school knows exactly what program they want to go into. It also acknowledges that students have many areas of interest and skills that they would like to combine, but may be unable to do so with the traditional structure of disciplines in universities today. Students can choose courses ranging from philosophy to mathematics to fine art. The program then has core courses on critical thinking, research skills, project management, and, of course, inter- and trans-disciplinary education. Those core courses act as bridges between the other courses, since they focus on skills and theories required in all disciplines. The program, therefore, allows students to make connections that go further than run-of-the-mill breadth requirements do.

Our system has already made post-secondary education inaccessible for too many. But are we really getting a good return on our investment? The pressing issues of the world today—or at any point in time, arguably— don’t require solutions coming from one specific sphere of knowledge. Compartmentalizing areas of study limits the way we view the world and the problems within it. Conversely, breaking down the boundaries between these fields and seeing these problems from an interdisciplinary perspective leads to diversified solutions. It can also allow us to be more engaged and innovative citizens. Universities today have a duty to provide this sort of interdisciplinary education to their students.

5

Ed

Editors-in-Chief

Amanda Aziz Emily Pollock Paula Razuri

News

news@thestrand.ca

Anthony Burton Ben Atkins

Opinions

Jonah Letovsky

Features

features@thestrand.ca

Geoff Baillie Chantal Duchesne

Arts & Culture

Holly McKenzie-Sutter

Film & Music

Dominique Béchard Claire Wilkins

Stranded

Emily Deibert Olesya Lyuzna

editor@thestrand.ca

opinions@thestrand.ca

artsandculture@thestrand.ca filmandmusic@thestrand.ca

stranded@thestrand.ca

Production production@thestrand.ca

Design

PRIVILEGE & WILLFUL IGNORNACE

Vacant Vivian Che Grace Quinsey

design@thestrand.ca

Copy

Rhianna Jackson-Kelso

copy@thestrand.ca

Photo

Victoria Chuen

photo@thestrand.ca

Art art@thestrand.ca

Lynn Seolim Hong Wenting Li

Web

Thanasi Karachotzitis

Distribution

Vacant

Editorial Assistant

Kasra Koushan, Kiley Venables, Lily Wang

Contributors Kendall Andison, Jill Evans, Warren Goodwin, Han Kim, Reema Kureishy, Ellie Laffling, Neil MacIsaac, Neil McKenzie-Sutter, Cassandra Mazza, Justin Novick-Faille, Erik Preston, Angela Sun, Steve Warner

Copy Editors Bronwyn Nisbet-Gray, Alexandra Jones, Jacob McNair, Grace Bannerman Illustrations Lynn Seolim Hong, Emily Pollock Photos Bronwyn Nesbit-Gray, Genevieve Wakutz Cover Photo Genevieve Wakutz

The Strand has been the newspaper of record for Victoria University since 1953. It is published 12 times a year with a circulation of 2000 and is distributed in Victoria University buildings and across the University of Toronto’s St. George campus.

The Strand flagrantly enjoys its editorial autonomy and is committed to acting as an agent of constructive social change. As such, we will not publish material deemed to exhibit racism, sexism, homo/trans*phobia, ableism, or other oppressive language.

The Strand is a proud member of the Canadian University Press (CUP).

Our offices are located at 150 Charles St. W., Toronto, ON, M5S 1K9. Please direct enquiries by email to editor@thestrand.ca. Submissions are welcome and may be edited for taste, brevity, and legality.

t

Follow us on Twitter for news and updates:

@strandpaper

6

SOMETHING TO SLEEP ON: EMILY POLLOCK

OUR MASTHEAD

AMANDA AZIZ EDITOR-IN-CHIEF There is an old adage about how to go to sleep in a good mood: don’t read the news before going to bed. Numerous clichés back that sentiment up: curiosity killed the cat, ignorance is bliss, opening Pandora’s box. Somehow, we believe in the notion that we can either be happy or informed, but not both.

In an ideal world, we’d like to think that everyone has access to the same opportunities and resources, but that’s just a comforting lie. The ability to be comforted by this lie is a form of privilege. You can be born with privilege (white privilege, male privilege) or gain it (financial privilege, employment privilege). It does not take much more than stepping outside your door to realize that there is no balance on this earth, but the presence of privilege tends to blind people to the existence of these inequalities. We are diverse, our situations vary, and some of us experience hardship as a result of our differences. It should be common knowledge that not everyone is equal, but sadly it isn’t. Even less understood is exactly how this inequality manifests.

When explaining what privilege means, it’s easy to come up with a broad definition. Privilege can mean accessibility, stability, and, as was mentioned before, opportunity. It can also mean ability—especially when it comes to acquiring knowledge. People who have a lot of privilege have the privilege to decline accepting that knowledge—in other words, the ability to be wilfully ignorant. A person who comes from an upper-middle economic class background does not have to live anxiously, pay cheque to pay cheque, unlike someone who comes from a lower economic class. A cisgender heterosexual person does not have to come out to people continually about their sexual orientation and/or gender, unlike someone who identifies within the LGTBQIA+ spectrum. A white person does not experience judgment about their cultural background, unlike someone who is part of an ethnic minority. We are not equal, after all. It would be unfair to say so, as there will always be experiences that are outside of your personal realm of understanding.

If you are not experiencing struggle over a particular issue, and if you somehow don’t know anyone who is (consider expanding your friend group), a good way to educate yourself on the topic is to watch or read the news. What makes the media so interesting is that it can be a tool of disillusionment (hello, Fox News; how are you, Sun News?) as much as one of empowerment because of the dissemination of knowledge to the public.

We live in the age of the Internet, where news stories, social media faux pas, and prejudices are documented on an international scale. If we want to educate ourselves about what our society needs to improve on, we can do so by making a single Google search. The spreading of news is inevitable, but it can only get to us if we choose

to consume it.

It’s safe to say that anyone who had access to the Internet on November 24 witnessed the outrage over the situation in Ferguson. The grand jury did not indict Darren Wilson, despite the fact that he killed Michael Brown.

Brown was 18 years old, unarmed, and black. Wilson is 28 years old, was armed, and is white. There was sufficient evidence released to the public to show that Darren Wilson could have used a different means of defense, that he was racial profiling, and that his decision to kill Brown should have resulted in criminal charges. But he left the aftermath of the fatal event with his hands clean.

When the first press releases from Ferguson popped up on newsfeeds across the world in August 2014, the reaction from the media was surprise and shock. What makes this sensationalism problematic is that it presents the subject of the reporting as something new and unheard of. But people who have experienced such discrimination, as well as those who are willing to inform themselves about the discrimination happening today, already know what the media has reported on. From unfair run-ins with the law to micro-aggressive comments, some of us experience stigma, stereotyping, and prejudice every day—even when we are just stepping outside our doors. When the media presents these experiences as “breaking news,” framing them as shocking anomalies, it encourages the belief that inequality is not still a heavily prevalent issue.

The reaction of surprise isn’t only the media’s fault, but the fault of those who choose to think that such injustices are not capable of happening today, when in fact these events are commonplace. Just like an experience that is outside one’s own realm of understanding, just because something isn’t happening to you doesn’t mean that it isn’t happening at all. Reacting with such shock is a dismissal of those very injustices. The very act of being “shocked” about these injustices should be what’s shocking instead—this oppression has been ongoing for thousands of years. How is something that has been so unfortunately par for the course for so long met with such a regressive response? Choosing to indulge in privilege by remaining ignorant is choosing to permit whatever makes society so damn hurtful to live in. It’s akin to plugging your ears while someone is trying to get through to you about a recurring issue. Your choice in denial is a denial of validation and resolution.

Ignoring the news about what is rocking this world out of place might allow you to sleep successfully…if you can afford to ignore it. But is sleeping soundly in ignorance worth being a contribution to the problem? Curiosity didn’t kill the cat—complacency did.

Happy holidays from The Strand!

THE STRAND WISHES YOU A JOYOUS NONDENOMINATIONAL WINTER HOLIDAY AND A HAPPY NEW YEAR!

7

ETHICS OF EBOLA PANDEMIC HAN KIM ASSOCIATE EDITOR The development of a vaccination is normally a highly scrutinized process that, after a lengthy process of laboratory inquiry, requires around ten years of clinical testing in humans. However, given the unprecedented death toll of the Ebola pandemic, there is immense pressure among the scientific and healthcare communities to produce an Ebola vaccine. But at what expense do we condense a process that usually takes at least ten years into a few months?

Inevitably, we will be testing an underdeveloped technology in a population of professional healthcare workers without knowing if the vaccine will actually work. The alternative option to decelerate Ebola research in favour of greater scientific confidence, however, risks the further spread of the pandemic. Whether to globally jeopardize the lives of thousands at the expense of scientific rigour is one ethical question at hand.

Funnily enough, the ongoing frenzy for Ebola research could have been minimized if not for a phenomenon bioethicists endearingly term the “90/10 problem.” In short, 90% of medical research addresses only 10% of the global disease burden. Illnesses like cancer and neurological disorders, while unquestionably important, are anything but the top causes of mortality in developing nations. For these places, infectious disease is the primary concern. The deadly effects of the Ebola virus have been known since 1976. But for the same reasons NYC taxicabs hike up their fares for pregnant women (i.e. “surge pricing”), the financial incentives for Ebola research were virtually zero until the recent outbreak. Nigeria is the one odd nation with a Gates Foundationbacked hospital equipped to control infectious disease. Not surprisingly, Nigeria, despite being in the heart of West Africa, has eradicated all cases of Ebola infection within it.

But like exams, essays, and Plan B, the most concentrated efforts happen when the pressure is greatest. So we now have on our hands two issues. First, what sorts of trials best balance our interests in developing an

8

effective but timely Ebola vaccine? Second, what sorts of folks should we target for this incredibly experimental intervention (which might not even work)?

Let’s begin with the first question. The gold standard for testing a vaccine’s efficacy is the double blind randomized control trial (RCT). RCTs test two groups: the “test” group that gets the vaccine and the “control” group that gets the placebo. The double blind part of the experiment refers to the fact that neither the experimenters nor the subjects know which vaccines are the real ones and which are the placebos—this reduces the likelihood of potential bias. For example, an awkward scientist might subconsciously give the attractive subjects the “real” vaccine—which, mind you, might not even work and is potentially dangerous. Double blinds protect us from this kind of unprofessional conduct.

Justifying the ethics of an RCT requires what some clinicians call “equipoise.” There must be a balance between the two proposed options—for instance, if doctors genuinely don’t know which of two treatments are more likely to cure a patient, or if they seriously don’t know if a proposed treatment will do more harm than good. But the current medical protocols for Ebola patients are anything but promising. A recent article in the Lancet argues that experimental interventions have a slightly unfair advantage, because they hold out at least the possibility of benefit. However, such an argument rests on an incredibly optimistic outlook on Ebola research—research that, given the high-pressure environment surrounding it, has been rushed a thousand-fold.

Even if Ebola RCTs were ethically justified, however, what would we use as our placebo?

The humanitarian aid group Médecins Sans Frontières is vehemently opposed to administering placebos to anyone at high-risk for Ebola. Pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline instead suggests the placebo be some other vaccine that is not Ebola-preventative. But to me, that’s about as useful as wearing a pearl

necklace to a marathon—irrelevant and unnecessarily expensive for the situation at hand.

Using an efficacious measles vaccination, for example, as a placebo for Ebola-infested regions is a waste of resources. The likelihood of death by Ebola would far exceed death by measles in these areas, and a genuine placebo would be a more cost-effective strategy.

Now the second question: whom should we test our wild and hasty treatment on? In vaccine trials we’re trying to measure if people who might otherwise get sick in fact remain healthy. So, we need a high-risk group with enough members to conduct some kind of reliable statistical analyses. For this reason, early Ebola vaccine trials have begun in West Africa where the pandemic is wreaking the most havoc. But within West Africa, it is not exactly clear which groups should receive priority for experimental Ebola treatments. Providing experimental vaccines to the whole of West Africa is not an option due to limited resources. Some bioethicists suggest that priority for the vaccine be given to first responders.

After all, they are the ones confronting Ebola head-on. However, because first responders are already well-versed in preventing transmission, they are also the group least likely to contract Ebola, even without a vaccine.

In addition to the two broad questions addressed above there lies a myriad of other complications. How would we receive potential subjects’ informed consent, given the lack of time and the cultural and language barriers in place? Would these barriers question the nature of consent between intervention and subject? Will the pharmaceutical companies that develop Ebola vaccines receive an unjustified degree of benefit despite, given the pressing circumstances, using unusually at-risk groups as effective guinea pigs? While these ethical quandaries are useful for inevitable future predicaments, we might have been better off if we had confronted the global disease burden with a somewhat more proportionate approach.

EMILY POLLOCK

FE

Some bioethicists suggest that priority for the vaccine be given to first responders. After all, they are the ones confronting Ebola head-on. However, because first responders are already well-versed in preventing transmission, they are also the group least likely to contract Ebola, even without a vaccine.

9

a/c

JUDGING BOOKS BY THEIR COVERS ROMANCE LITERATURE AND THE TORONTO NEIL MCKENZIE-SUTTER CONTRIBUTOR

INTERNATIONAL BOOK FAIR

I only showed up for the Saturday of the first annual Toronto International Book Fair, but the event lasted the entire weekend, from Thursday, November 13 to Sunday, November 16. The Thursday opening night was an adults-only opportunity for drinking and talking about book stuff, which I kind of wish I’d known about because that sounds awesome. Friday focused on children’s authors, including Dav Pilkey, the author of the infamous Captain Underpants series, and Jeff Kinney, the author of Diary of a Wimpy Kid. The weekend featured talks from other famous public figures who are related to books or writing, including Peter Mansbridge, Robyn Doolittle, Anne Rice, and Chris Hadfield. The only titanic personality I saw at the book fair was Margaret Atwood. She was as iconic and grumpy as you would expect and the crowd that showed up for her was so massive that I could only see her in the screens on either side of the stage. The talks I attended on Saturday were what, surprisingly, gave me new insights into the industry.

It seemed like romance literature was something of an unofficial theme for Saturday. One of the most interesting talks I attended was an event called The Power of Romance Across Genres, which was led by authors Susanna Kearsley, Molly O’Keefe, and Simone St. James, and hosted by another author, Maureen McGowen. Her books, while also falling into the romance genre, focus on aliens and extraterrestrial romances, and the talk as it unfolded was interesting in itself.

*

massive Metro Toronto Convention Center, Day’s personality was able to come out. Hers was an incredibly entertaining talk; I came to understand why she has become a bestselling author just by listening to her.

After that, I listened to the talk by Meg Wolitzer, author of Belzhar. I ran into Jesse Gilmour, author of The Green Hotel, Robert Shoub, author of Look at Me, and Andy Lyberopoulos, author of The Blood Mile.

The picture that was taken of the two of us features a chicken, the chicken being a major character in The Blood Mile.

But my thoughts kept returning to the romance writers. One of the golden rules we are taught growing up is not to judge a book by its cover, yet I know that this is totally what’s happening in the English department at Uof T (not to single out Uof T, because I’m sure this happens in literature departments worldwide). As a young enterprising writer myself, this was the most interesting part of the event. Why judge a book by its washboard-chested, cowboy/vampire hottie cover rather than its literary merits? Obviously there are some real stinkers in the romance genre, but I know for a fact that the same is true of literary fiction.

The simple answer for why romance is ignored by so-called “serious fiction” probably comes down to laziness. Professors don’t want to look outside what they already recognize as “good writing.” The lesson I took from this is that real writers should be confident, read and/or write what they like, and stand by that.

FIFTY FIRST DATES

ANGELA SUN CONTRIBUTOR I had begun the day with a plan: My friend Kevin H. and I were going to take advantage of the pay-what-you-can admission at the Museum of Contemporary Canadian Art (952 Queen St. W.), and then I would suggest a stroll around Trinity Bellwoods Park. Unfortunately, I did not account for the fickle Toronto weather, but thankfully we were in a vibrant neighbourhood with plenty of other places waiting to be explored.

Along with the pre-requisite video installations and collages, MOCCA’s multidisciplinary Vera Frenkel exhibit also includes a fully-functional bar with, alas, limited hours. As we walked around MOCCA, Kevin and I discussed the importance of making sure that one

10

Kearsley’s books focus on romance and gothic ghost stories, St. James’ focus on historical romances, and O’Keefe’s are more what you would think of as a “traditional” romance. Differences aside, each author is respected in her field and has written dozens of books in the past several decades.

The writers discussed the makeup and evolution of the romantic literary genre. The writers explained that in the past, romances needed to end with a marriage and/or kids, but these days the main requirement is that the reader must know the couple is going to be all right. “There’ll be a second date, at least,” St. James explained. This was a genuinely funny talk, and I laughed my head off several times. The writers went on to discuss other subjects, such as Fifty Shades of Gray, and how much they hate the cover art that romance novels are infamous for.

It became clear to me that these writers dislike that their genre of fiction has been branded so negatively in comparison to so-called “literary fiction.” I really have to say “literary fiction,” rather than what I would like to say, which is “mainstream fiction”, because as it turns out the romance literary genre is mainstream fiction. This is the largest genre for books—an industry that draws $1 billion a year in North America.

The speaker that followed Margaret Atwood was Sylvia Day, a New York Times bestselling writer in the romance genre. It occurred to me that I had come across her name on posters on the TTC. Even in the

shared a similar attitude towards art with one’s date before taking them to an art gallery. Although we both appreciate visual art, we are also good-humoured about it. We speculated on how awkward it would be if we were with someone who was a more serious connoisseur than we were.

We then decided to take on the challenge of finding cheap eats in one of the most gentrified neighbourhoods in the city. I was going to suggest Chippy’s Fish & Chips (893 Queen St. W.), but we came across Nam Sandwich (874 Queen St. W.), a Vietnamese sandwich shop that was much closer. Kevin had the delicious fivespice pork belly sandwich, while I was quite satisfied with my La Vong fish. We also shared two large premade shrimp and pork rolls to set the mood.

We attempted an excursion in Trinity Bellwoods

For: Art Appreciators Neighbourhood: Queen West Total Cost: $24

Park, but soon realized that being outside was perhaps not the best choice for a snowy November day. Luckily, we spotted the sign of Artscape Youngplace (180 Shaw St.) through a line of frozen tree trunks and ran over, hoping for warmth. A former school building, Artscape Youngplace is now an “ideas laboratory” and “creativity workshop” (aka available space) for artists and creative organizations. We had tea at the Youngplace Coffee Pub, walked through the free interactive exhibit at the Koffler Gallery, and browsed the various hallway galleries. Trust me: the snow looked a lot more romantic from inside a warm building with hot tea in our hands.

Kevin’s Verdict: “A fun and informal way to explore Queen West either in all its culture or its absurdity…as long as you are both willing to embrace your inner hipster.”

VIVIAN CHE

TALKING ABOUT WITCHY WOMEN CHANTAL DUCHESNE FEATURES EDITOR Witchcraft is a pop culture staple, from the fascination surrounding the Salem witch trials to the popularity of Harry Potter. Magic has been a source of controversy throughout history, always relevant to religious, colonialist, and feminist discourse. With the debut of Bewitched in 1964, Western culture saw this fixation translated onto the screen. Since then, film and television have been the medium through which mass audiences have consumed narratives about witchcraft— or, more specifically, stories about the women under those black pointed hats.

Toronto-based literary magazine Little Brother has picked up on the social and cultural preoccupation with “witchy women.” Following the launch of their fifth issue in mid-October, the local publication recently hosted a lecture and round table discussion on the topic at The Drake Hotel. Called “What We Talk About

When We Talk About ‘Witchy Women,” the November 19 event was part of a quarterly series curated by Peter Merriman. It featured three speakers who gave their interpretations of the significance of “witchy women” in popular culture.

Kiva Reardon, founding editor of cléo, a journal on film and feminism, outlined how the public opinion of witches has changed over time. During the mid-seventeenth century, supposed “witches” were ostracized and often burnt at the stake as symbols of evil and darkness. Particularly in Salem, the women who were accused tended to be black, impoverished, or hold religious beliefs that differed from the strict Puritan faith that was in place. So how did witches go from being social pariahs to being cool?

A major change in the perception of witchy women appears to have mirrored the rise of the feminist movement. A product of her time, Samantha from Bewitched predominantly used her powers to improve her housekeeping skills. But with films and television

shows like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Charmed, Hocus Pocus, and The Craft, the 90s saw another cultural shift. The element of danger that had previously incriminated witchy women now made them powerful.

This power elicited fear in those who had persecuted witches over 300 years before, but by the 90s, female agency elicited admiration. Respect toward characters like Buffy and Hermione Granger meant that their franchises gained enormous fan bases while retaining a subversive element that made them cult favourites.

Witchy women continue to be widely popular in 2014, a fact that is evident from the recent success of the television show American Horror Story: Coven.

While no representation of witchy women is without its own problems in regards to equality, the show addresses race politics and sexual assault, demonstrating that witchcraft is still a relevant context for discussing social issues. Since the danger of witchy women lies in their capacity for good or evil, female empowerment remains crucial to the current archetype of the witch.

NO LAUGHING MATTER CONVERSATIONS ABOUT DIGITAL MEDIA ELLIE LAFFLING CONTRIBUTOR When I told my American literature professor that I hoped to one day write and publish my own work, he laughed. The sentiment of the dying industry and the nostalgia of writing was captured in that momentary snicker. Unbeknownst to myself at the time, social media was proving to be a positive and engaging way for writers and writers-to-be to articulate their creativity.

Toronto’s International Festival of Authors, which ran from October 23 to November 2, was an example of engagement with the creative industry offering interviews, readings, and round tables with authors and publishers alike. Encouraging a relationship between social media and writing, IFOA hosted a lecture that discussed writing within online communities. “Under-

standing Writing In The Digital Age” explored media platforms like Twitter, Wattpad, and Instagram as the contemporary pen and paper. Authors Emily Linden, Sina Queyras and Anna Todd, all notable individuals in the online writing community, discussed the relevance of digital media and the effects it has had on their writing. Much of the talk revolved around the relationship between author and reader and how the instantaneity of social media platforms allows for more truthful, unedited, unabridged writing. The focus of writing is no longer on syntax and grammatical reverence, but rather driven by content and by emotion. For Todd, writing has become almost a dialogue between herself and her readers. The ability to post her writing and receive instant feedback and critique has been an asset to improve her own writing.

The discourse of the lecture was focused on the revival of writing in contemporary society. This suggested that artistic exploration was still necessary and fundamental in a changing society. Even successful authors of the traditional kind are illustrating their curiosity of social media as a new medium. David Mitchell, the author of Cloud Atlas, published a story through Twitter this past summer. The 280 tweets created an ardent reflection into Mitchell’s fictional character, capturing realism in a much more immediate way.

The use of digital media, of typing narrative into 140 characters or writing on an online community, is an active response to the supposed demise of a creative tradition. These platforms and the innovative forms of writing that go with them are reminders that the future of writing is left in our hands, and perhaps now our keyboards. Who’s laughing now?

11

F/M

TAYLOR SWIFT:

ANGELA SUN CONTRIBUTOR

Swift “a feminist’s nightmare.” Oddly enough, the conservative media also began to shame her over her increasing number of famous ex-lovers. She became a Fey-Poehler joke at the Golden Globes. The good will and nostalgia produced by her music was countered with derision of her “weird obsession” with love. We had all hidden away our Swift albums for one reason or another. She had detractors on all sides. But then, the behemoth that was 1989 was released, and suddenly Taylor was back on top again.

Some critics claim that the current surge of Taylor Swift appreciation is because she seems brasher and more unapologetic on this album. They are impressed with her demonstration of self-awareness by parodying herself (or her public persona) in both songs and music videos. Some also claim that she has done a complete image overhaul: she has switched from being known for her famous boyfriends to her famous girl friends.

The focus is now, supposedly, more on her song writing abilities than her romantic exploits. Needless to say, I have a lot of problems with how female artists always have to work that much harder to be taken seriously.

As a listener who grew up with Swift (literally—I was born a year after), what really kept me interested was the relatability of her public and musical “feminist awakening”: a journey from being a young girl obsessed with the search for love (fuelled by the societal perception that the first kiss, first date, and first cis-boyfriend are a rite-of-passage) to a young woman who proudly calls herself a feminist. And haven’t we all been on that journey? I mean, 90% of my poetry in high school was about my crushes. But when I got to university, I found myself surrounded by empowering, equity-minded peers and my eyes started to open. Isn’t that what kind of happened to Swift (except with way more publicity, power, and riches)?

While Auto Straddle correctly pointed out Swift’s promotion of the Madonna-whore complex in songs like “You Belong With Me” or “Better Than Revenge,” I would suggest that perhaps it is all more complicated than that. In the “You Belong With Me” video, Swift portrays both archetypes. While portraying women as any archetypes at all remains reductive, this is at least a first step, as unintentional as it may be, in acknowledging that one girl can play many roles.

This duality also provides an alternative explanation for our continued fascination with Swift. She lives a fantastical life while continuing to produce songs that seem to reflect our own experiences. I know she is a celebrity with all the opportunities and wealth that I will probably never have, but when I listen to “Hey Stephen,” I am still reminded of that time I obsessed over a guy named Stephen in Grade 11. And I refuse to be ashamed of it.

The final thing that must be mentioned is that, whatever you think of Swift’s music or musicianship, it gets better. I remember hearing “Mine” for the first time and marvelling at how her lyrics have become much more complex and specific, although perhaps no less saccharine. It is no wonder that 1989 probably holds the record for producing the most number of quotable lines in her career thus far. “Blank Space” alone is full of them. “Boys only want love if it’s torture” is probably my favourite. Even the misquotes are famous—“Starbucks ex-lovers” anyone?

I don’t believe the tabloids that claim that The Stars Are Just Like Us! But what I am willing to accept is that Taylor Swift is a complicated human being. Any and all analysis of her is complicated even more by the fact that we have no idea which parts of her are merely a construction or which parts reflect who she really is.

I don’t think her new album is the feminist manifesto we’ve been waiting for, nor am I over the hype just yet.

But I am very excited to see what happens next.

SEOLIM HONG

I don’t remember when I actually heard my first Taylor Swift song. At least I don’t remember where I was or what I was doing. All I remember is that the song was probably “Love Story” and it may have been on YouTube because I remember the video vividly. The song was catchy but a little too cheesy for my taste, besides Miley Cyrus’s boring ex-boyfriend (Justin Gaston, remember him?) being cast as the male lead.

But several months later, “You Belong With Me” started blaring out of radios everywhere and I was instantly hooked.

You see, at that point in my young life, I had fancied myself an ugly, nerdy girl with a history of never having her feelings reciprocated. “You Belong With Me” seemed to have been written directly from my memories of being heart-broken in high school (never mind the fact that I was actually a cheerleader who didn’t even take Band). Apparently I wasn’t the only one, because two weeks later, any time someone started screeching, “I’m on the phone/it’s a typical Tuesday night,” a chorus of voices would join in. I suddenly found myself in a community of those who had loved and lost, strangely brought together by this anthem that was just as catchy and cheesy as “Love Story,” but which had somehow perfectly tapped into everyone’s collective fantasy of what our teenage years were like.

My continuing interest in Taylor Swift has always been a surprise to me. As a self-proclaimed feminist who is always concerned about the lack of diversity in media and perpetually frustrated by the reluctance of women to call themselves feminists, my love of Swift has been a conundrum. Aside from being the embodiment of America’s very rigid ideas of its “dream girl,” Swift was a successful singer-songwriter who believed in the “strength” of baring her emotions yet refused to associate herself with feminism. In 2010, a widely read Auto Straddle article called

NIGHTMARE OR DAYDREAM?

12

DRAWN TO THE DARKNESS An interview with Horror Film professor John Semley CLAIRE WILKINS FILM & MUSIC EDITOR Freelance critic John Semley is preparing to bring his thoughts on culture back to the classroom. A writer for publications like The Globe and Mail and Toronto Star, the Uof T alumni is returning to his alma mater in the spring to teach the Horror Film course for the Cinema Studies Institute. The Strand spoke with him about his plans for next semester, and his thoughts on the horror genre.

The Strand: So is Horror Film next semester the first class you’ll be teaching?

John Semley: At Uof T, yes. I’ve done some other teaching, and I used to be a TA for the class, but it’s the first time I’ve ever been a sessional lecturer or whatever it’s called.

TS: Are you nervous?

JS: Kind of, yes. As kind of a young dude I’m frankly a little worried kids won’t take me seriously. I think it’s a cool course, and I just hope I can get that across without, like, dropping my notes everywhere or accidentally swearing.

TS: Do you have any ideas of where you’d like to go with the course this year, or some favourite horror films?

JS: My thinking is really historically oriented, so I kind of want to move in a straight line through twentieth century to twenty-first century horror. I want to play up gore, which is so much more pervasive lately. When I was a TA for this course originally, there was no Walking Dead or Hannibal on TV. The culture of horror has exploded in the past decade. You have to work even harder to gross people out now that everyone’s seen everything. In previous versions of the course, the material talks about gore and edgy or extreme horror movies as if they are a subgenre, but now I would say it is the genre, this terrifying, abject imagery. That, to me, is the guiding theme for the course. I want to ask: Why are we interested in things that we find repellent or scary, these things that give us bad emotions, and why do we keep coming back to the same images and stories over and over? I want to examine the tension between pain and pleasure and how they overlap and work together.

TS: I’ve always found it interesting how people gather together to watch things that terrify them or make them cry, trying to get something out of their emotions that they wouldn’t normally access, and the fact that this is done in the public space of the movie theatre.

JS: Yeah, as a guy growing up watching horror movies there was a kind of “macho” element to it. My friends and I would walk out of the movie theatre like, “Oh, I survived this thing, I saw this gross scene.” But I think there’s more to it than just chest puffing. Even if you go back to the horror films of the 1920s, it’s all about using shadows to hide things that we don’t want to see. With horror films themselves, they contain things we don’t want to see, but we are driven to watch them. I’m really interested in the contradictory psychology behind it.

TS: I took an intro film course during my first year of university, but we mostly just studied the form and style of films. I like the idea of incorporating a psychological element.

JS: The thing I love about genre courses is that it’s kind of a grab bag of approaches and different ways to look at movies. I think that’s useful for this course, because it’s

taken by a lot of people outside of the Cinema Studies Department, and they get kind of a crash course in film studies itself through taking this one course.

TS: I think a lot of the time horror film seems to be dismissed as cheap gore or thrill.

To put the genre in an academic environment might change the dialogue around the material.

JS: Yeah, but I also hope it doesn’t, in a way! I think a lot of the appeal is exactly that it is cheap and thrilling. Academic literature often compares it to pornography, which I always find interesting. It’s less about giving the material validity through putting it in an academic environment and [more] just examining the material itself. I would say that films like Psycho or Rosemary’s Baby are among the best films ever made. The genre is not short on masterpieces. That’s one thing that kind of bothers me about the academic environment, is that it tries to look at something on everything other than its own terms, or tries to make a movie do everything but what it actually does. I’m big on looking at how things are on their own terms.

RAGE AGAINST THE DYING OF THE LAUGHTER Two young comedic leads try to make multi-cam sitcoms feel fresh NEIL MACISAAC ASSOCIATE EDITOR In the past year, TV networks have green-lighted semiautobiographical comedies at a rate more common for dramas that involve murder. Most seem prompted by the acclaim of Louis C.K.’s Louie but balanced by the goal of creating something more accessible. However, two new shows from young stand-up comedians feel more in the vein of ‘90s multi-camera sitcoms like Seinfeld or Martin.

ABC’s Cristela and FOX’s Mulaney are both written and produced by their eponymous stars, but take diverging approaches that feel more tied to network strategy than to creative motivations.

On FOX, Mulaney is the only multi-camera comedy on a network that is finding reliable success in building solid single-camera sitcoms around recognizable talent (New Girl, The Mindy Project). But despite his incredible stand-up special New in Town, John Mulaney does not have quite as bankable an audience as Zooey Deschanel.

After six episodes, his stab at refreshing the classic sitcom format has had mixed results. Mulaney’s premise of young professionals in New York and LA matches New

Girl and The Mindy Project, but feels hampered by an instudio audience that reacts identically to its weak lines and its increasingly frequent flashes of real talent. The general critical consensus of an exasperated eye-roll as well as low ratings do not bode well for the show, which has seven episodes left in its run.

With Cristela, ABC has generated a sitcom more in the style of Everybody Loves Raymond or King of Queens, featuring multigenerational families under the same roof plus the protagonist’s workplace. While Mulaney may have a more prodigious writing background, Cristela Alonzo starts much more confidently in terms of knowing what types of stories she wants to tell and how she wants to tell them. This comes at the cost of a staler final product. Alonzo may be the first MexicanAmerican woman to star in a sitcom she created, but her characters are well-worn tropes: an over-friendly neighbour, a snarky brother-in-law, an irritating mother, etc.

Given that ABC’s comedy line-up is exclusively shows about families in various regions and demographics of

America, Cristela feels like a safe bet for renewal after an announcement of a full-season order.

Both creators have been vocal in their decisions to shoot more traditionally. Alonzo says she wants the show to reach as broadly as possible to better humanize her under- and/or misrepresented culture. The value of that aspiration can be iffy; in-show, the white coworkers’ insensitivities are personally rather than socially symptomatic, and everyone remains too sunny to genuinely dig into issues. Mulaney seems very concerned with preserving the multi-cam’s past ingenuity, hinting at future episodes poking at the bizarre sitcom-NYC where every resident lives comfortably. But when compared to the groundbreaking work his friends get up to on Kroll Show or The Eric André Show, this argument feels inconsequential.

Both shows are buoyed by the potential of their creators, but bump against their medium’s limitations. Time will tell if they make it work or move on to projects more deserving of their talents.

13

F/M

BLUE COLLAR BEATS: The importance of subversive personas in hip-hop

WARREN GOODWIN STAFF WRITER When you think of rap, a singular archetype often comes to mind. Whether it’s the rippity rap-tastic golden age or the gangbanging ’00s, there are elements of the genre that are inescapable. Within the genre’s continuity lies the distinct edge that hip-hop artists have over other acts: generalizations of what “rap music” sounds like make the genre very easy to subvert.

Because of this, there’s always been an oppositional counterpoint to mainstream rap. Though it is usually reserved for rap “battlin’,” YouTube videos, or the artist’s SoundCloud profile, this subversive subgenre has fueled rap in ways that parody acts like Weird Al may never understand.

This quasi-satirical tendency often manifests itself in the form of comedic rap personas and almost always crops up at the height of a more serious hip-hop style’s popularity. While N.W.A. was coming Straight Outta Compton, artists like Busta Rhymes and A Tribe Called Quest were playing with language and asking serious questions about black identity. Likewise, Slim Shady served as a foil to rappers like Nelly and Mase at the end of the ‘90s. And more recently, at the height of millionaire hustler rap, a blue collar style has emerged in

the “Gib”-rapping Donnie Dumphy of St. John’s and the Chicago suburbanite Serengeti, both of whom celebrate only the pettiest of crimes and the goings-on of much more average lives.

By using the established parameters of the genre while flipping thematic elements, rappers of this subgenre defy genre expectations. They lack none of the braggadocio of more serious acts and are often just as technically skilled (excluding the intentionally naïve Dumphy). While there is obviously a satirical element to this subgenre, the skill of the musicians maintains the legitimacy of the music and prevents it from becoming parody. This continually proves crucial to the growth of the subgenre, especially in the initiation of new listeners. As a subgenre of its own, it may sometimes even surpass its inspiration, like the shabby chic hip-pop of 2013’s top track, “Thrift Shop.”

For every stereotype one could invent about hiphop music, it is possible to find a rapper doing the opposite. This inclusiveness is what makes hip-hop one of the most exciting genres in modern music—at least for those willing to give it a chance.

Further Reading: Check out Chicagoan rapper Serengeti’s latest LP, Kenny Dennis, and keep an eye out for Donnie Dumphy’s feature film debuting in the New Year.

MATCHING JEWELRY A 36” chain is a fairly heavy thing to carry around your neck, but that’s the exact boast that rappers El-P and Killer Mike made on their debut mix tape, 2013’s eponymous Run the Jewels. The tape’s combination of El-P’s quasi-futuristic beats and Killer Mike’s cavernous nasal flow made it one of the best collaborations of that year. Run the Jewels was rooted in El-P’s production of Mike’s R.A.P. Music, one of 2012’s best rap albums and a marked sonic departure from Mike’s Dungeon Family roots.

They found a format that worked for them. Since the mix tape, they’ve worked with each other exclusively.

Run the Jewels is the culmination of that collaboration.

Watch any interview with them and it’s clear why that’s the case: the way I feel about their bromance is the same way I imagine pre-teen girls feel about The Notebook. It’s not only their signature sounds that work together, but also their personalities: El-P is all too happy to help Killer Mike wake you up with “a fist to your face that’s fucking Folgers,” and provides good support for Mike’s myriad of complaints on politics, racism, and “fuckboys.”

To put it bluntly, the collaboration is not between two equals, but between two different musicians. This seemed all fine and good when El-P was behind the machines and Killer Mike behind the microphone. RTJ’s debut flirted with the idea of El-P and Mike as rapping equals. Run the Jewels 2, which was released October 27, does away with that illusion. El-P’s verses mostly feel tacked on both lyrically and sonically, like a reaction to the good portion of Mike’s verses that open the album.

It’s reminiscent of Jay-Z’s relationship with Kanye on Watch the Trhone—one of the two is consistently the better rapper on the album, and in both cases it’s the one without a hyphen in his name.

The key difference, of course, is that El-P’s production provides the soil in which Mike can grow into a gigantic, menacing sunflower. He seems to have a formula nailed down to create a futuristic pump-up banger. However, this album marks the first time in El-P and Killer Mike’s collaborations where Mike can keep up with El-P’s more sonically adventurous beats. This shines through in the filthy, pornographic “Love Again” and on the album’s closer, “Angel Duster,” whose

14

SEOLIM HONG

ANTHONY BURTON NEWS EDITOR

downright apocalyptic mood is reminiscent of “$4 Vic/ FTL (Me and You),” the closer to El-P’s 2012 Cancer 4 Cure.

Killer Mike has been quoted as saying that “Love Again” acts as a nod to the hardcore sexuality of early 90s hip-hop like 2 Live Crew and Akinyele. The sexual equality of the refrain, “I put that dick in her mouth all day/He put that clit in his mouth all day,” gives the track credence as a modern take on the genre. The urgent and raw-sounding production makes it feel like a consensual version of Kanye’s “I’m In It.” “Angel Duster” has the same spiralling-downward-into-hell feeling that’s been trending in many of 2014’s releases. It’s a final shout out, a “little toast to the no-ones” that uses its verses to summarize the album thematically: escapism and fighting against religion, racism, and systemic oppression.

At their core, Run the Jewels are about fighting

the establishment. They are an underground darling producer who struggled for anything more than critical acclaim and a skilled rapper who lived in the shadow of fellow Atlantans Big Boi and Andre 3000. They are hitting their stride 20 years into their careers. Lesser men would have given up at this point, but El-P and Killer Mike have found muses in each other. RTJ2 is about ironing out the kinks of working together as a duo.

Simultaneously, the steps outside of the boundaries that their mix tape made for them are almost all successes. In the year and a half since their first mix tape dropped, they’ve headlined NXNE shows and become critical darlings over their unique combination of Atlanta swagger and Brooklyn experimentation. After toiling in the rap game, trying to figure out how to play, they’ve taken matters into their own hands and changed the rules. They’re running the jewels, and they’re showing no signs of slowing down.

SEOLIM HONG

St

CASSANDRA MAZZA CONTRIBUTOR

REEL TO REAL: HOW I LEARNED TO STOP WORRYING AND LOVE THE RECESSION (Fade in.)

INT. OFFICE BUILDING. Cracks snake down walls. Settling of the building is unnervingly audible.

MILLENNIAL sits before prospective employer, visibly sweating through box-store dress shirt. Greying BOOMER leans back in ergonomic chair behind desk with nameplate engraved “RICH BOOMER.” BOOMER So. You’ve just graduated from university with a BA, a degree I see no value in despite bemoaning a shortage of critical-thinking graduates with excellent communication skills. Tell me, why should I hire you?

MILLENNIAL Well, ah, sir, I know I don’t have much professional experience, but I’m a quick learner. If you insist— ah, invest the time in training me— Millennial’s sweat has illegibly smeared the notes hastily scribbled on his forearm, which he is trying to read. If only he had had a week to prepare, he could have written an essay on why he should have this job!

MILLENIAL That was my dad, sir.

BOOMER (not listening) Tell you what. I know you need a job. I get that. So how about you work for me as a....temporaryunpaidintern.

The cracks in the ceiling shift with a deafening crunch. Dust falls into Boomer’s hair, making him look even older.

MILLENNIAL What?

BOOMER Don’t make me say it again! The UTSU is breathing down my neck trying to force me to pay you kids what I legally owe you!

Door falls off its hinge. Behind it a young woman falls to her knees; she’s obviously been listening.

BOOMER How do I know that you won’t just pack up and leave for a better job the second I train you?

WOMAN (hysterical) I got a graduate degree because I was told that it would guarantee me a job! I will take this temporary unpaid internship! No need to train me, no need to give me basic benefits, or job security, or fair wages! Who needs money! A bachelor’s degree is the new high school diploma, you know!

MILLENNIAL Sir, if you pay me well enough, and your company’s philosophy is something I agree with, I don’t see why I would ever—

BOOMER (turns to Millennial) See, kid? She’s got the right idea.

BOOMER (red in face) You millennials! You think you’re entitled to a job that caters to your “life goals” and “inner purpose” and “area of study I actually went to school for” just because you have a university education!

Suddenly, the girl falls through a newly formed hole in the ground.

She disappears with a small, high-pitched scream. A young, scragglylooking engineering grad jumps the precipice to enter the office.

MILLENNIAL Sir, I’m working two jobs. I’d have to disagree with you calling me entitled— A knock on the door. The floor sags as a middle-aged man pokes his head around the corner.

BOOMER I told you to leave! I fired you for a reason. I can’t afford to keep paying your salary!

MAN But I need a job to pay for my kid’s college education so he can get a job! A job for a job for a job— BOOMER Get out!

MAN (yanked out of the room by his few remaining hairs) Arrgghhh!

BOOMER See, kid? That guy’s got 20 years’ experience on you and is looking for exactly the same job. Only difference is, he’s willing to work twice as hard for it! Why should I hire you when I could hire him?

ENGINEER Hey there, everyone. I was in the neighborhood and noticed your building is collapsing! How about I build you a new one?

BOOMER Do you have experience?

ENGINEER I can’t get experience, because I can’t find a job, because I don’t have experience— The building sways sickeningly, Jenga tower-like.

Sir, I think this building is about to collapse!

BOOMER Nonsense! This arrangement has worked fine for years. I’ve got a corner office with great views. I worked hard to get this far! If this building goes down, I’m going down with it, and I’m taking you kids with me!

MILLENNIAL (voice quaking with emotion) Sir, all my life I’ve been told by your generation that I could be anything I wanted to be. Well, I don’t want to work anywhere that sees me as incompetent and unworthy of investment in job security or fair wages. If your generation can’t provide us with jobs, my generation will just have to make our own!

The engineer and Millennial exit the building. They make good on their promise, and eventually the office building collapses silently into dust.

15

St

life is good.

STUDENT WEARING SOCKS & SANDALS GIVES UP ON FASHION, LIFE

EMILY POLLOCK

PAULA RAZURI EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Last Thursday it was reported that an undergraduate student had entered Pratt Library at approximately 9:40am wearing Birkenstock brand sandals on top of a pair of woolly socks. Sources confirm that the student, Maggie Twene, proceeded to stay in the library for approximately 13 hours, filling her carrel with various food wrappers, books on literary criticism, and broken dreams.

A friend of the students spoke with The Strand.

“When I last saw Maggie she was wearing a baggy t-shirt that had killin’ it printed across the chest. She had been wearing the same toque for about 6 days.”

Sources close to Twene report how the student had lately taken to buying inordinate amounts of cupcakes and syrup-filled caffeinated beverages, despite her financial situation.

“My policy is: treat your self, bottom line,” says Twene through a mouthful of cheesy popcorn. “If I’m feeling down, then that’s a treat yourself moment. If things are going great, then of course I’m going to treat myself!” When asked if she’s worried about her physical health, Twene flashes a wide grin: “I’ve got the perfect system.” From her backpack filled with

a large number of socks (“the sandals don’t really protect you from wetness”), Twene pulls out a bottle of green liquid that sources later confirmed to be one of her “fix yourself” smoothies. “I usually just eat whatever I want and when my body starts to scream for sweet mercy, I help myself to one of these bad boys. Clean slate.”

Nutritionists deny the validity of the clean slate system. “You can’t just eat garbage for 2 days straight and then expect a few kale smoothies to reverse the damage. That’s not how bodies work.” Twene, however, believes she has cracked the code to living through the demanding exam period.

“I sleep for a period of 45 minutes, maybe 3 or 4 times throughout the day,” says Twene, who, swaying slightly, begins to reach for a “fix yourself” smoothie. I pretty much dress for comfort these days, since I don’t have time to do laundry or, well, anything really!” When reached for comment, Pratt librarians acknowledged the strange fashion choices and confessed to hearing “quiet laughter and Seinfeld re-runs” from Twene’s carrel, despite the student’s busy schedule.

IT’S THE THOUGHT THAT COUNTS: Holiday gift ideas for creative students on a budget OLESYA LYUZNA STRANDED EDITOR Yes, it’s that time of the year again. If you haven’t picked out presents for your besties yet, you should probably get started! Years of watching Mastercard commercials may have taught you to believe in a direct correlation between money and happiness, but this is not always the case. Here are a few low-key present ideas for a student with a tight budget and a whole lot of imagination.

1. Socks. Hand them over stealthily with a knowing wink, hide them in random places around the gift recipient’s house, or go all out with a treasure map titled “Search for Freedom.” When your friend finds the socks and gives you an odd look, say, “Master has given Dobby a sock. Dobby is free!” Make sure to assume an air of nonchalant benevolence. If your friend gets mad at you, well, how dare they! You give them their freedom, and the ungrateful asshole can’t even appreciate that—the nerve!

16 16

2. Surprise that one obsessively nostalgic friend of yours with a journey back in time: present them with the gift of A Day in the 90s. Confiscate all modern electronic devices and take them to the mall for the day, but don’t end up buying anything because consumerism is evil. End the day with an old-school slumber party complete with pink glitter nail polish, a round of Dream Phone, and Clueless on VCR. Make a point of arguing passionately about whether *NSYNC or Backstreet Boys are the greatest boy band ever. (For the record, it’s Backstreet.)

3. A good friend can appreciate a good pun, and this holiday season is a good time to find out just how good your friends are. There are a lot of options out there. For example, give your friend a pack of spices.

When they ask you what on earth you were thinking, smile brightly and say, “Season’s greetings!” Make sure to laugh heartily so they get the pun.

4. Christmas care packages are cute, personal, and very cheap to make. Pack half a dozen eggs, some milk, and some sugar and spice (and everything nice) into a gift box. This will transform these cheap grocery store essentials from boring to festive as a Make-YourOwn-Eggnog kit. A more general Christmas package might include emergency mistletoe (for suggestive dangling over an unsuspecting crush’s head), milk and cookies (to attract potential Santa Claus activity), and a Mariah Carey CD for a very festive mood.

5. If all else fails, break down and buy a $15 gift card to Starbucks, Indigo, iTunes, or whatever it is you crazy kids are into these days. Sure, we all like to pretend that it’s the thought that counts, and a gift card doesn’t exactly scream “I put a lot of thought into this present because I value you as a friend.” But who would say no to $15-worth of sugary, caffeinated beverages? I know I wouldn’t.