Skip to Content, Navigation, or Footer.
The Tufts Daily
Where you read it first | Thursday, December 18, 2025
The Print Edition Print Subscription
Donate | About | Join Us
Advertise | Submit a Tip
Subscribe to our newsletters

Archives

The Setonian
News

Field Hockey Bounces Back

October 23

The skies were dark, the field was muddied after an early snowfall, and the Jumbos were coming off their most lopsided loss in recent history. Additionally, Tufts was facing Wheaton in a weekday game, in which the Jumbos were 1-4 on the season. Apparently, nobody let Tufts in on any of this. Just five days after falling 6-0 to Williams, the Jumbos returned Thursday with their biggest offensive performance since 2001, keeping a steady offense and earning an impressive 4-1 victory over Wheaton in Medford. Sophomore midfielder Erika Goodwin led the way, netting two goals within the first 10 minutes of play to set the tone for the rest of the game. "It feels good to score. It was so important to bounce back, to get the win," Goodwin said. "It's also really good to get this [win] in the middle of the week." Midweek games had been a thorn for the Jumbos, who before yesterday's victory had been outscored 12-7 in their five previous midweek games. They had only one victory in that stretch. Yesterday's change of pace from the weekday woes came by means of superb team play, combined with the air of a team gaining a sense of urgency. "Today we decided that we had to step it up," sophomore midfielder and scoring-leader Lea Napolitano said. "We had three games left, and we know that our next game [against league-leader Middlebury] is going to be tough. We came with emotion today." Napolitano scored an unassisted goal in the second half, the only score of the frame and padding the already secure 3-0 Jumbo lead, along with assisting on the two Goodwin goals. Freshman forward Tracey Rittenour scored the other Jumbo goal, putting it between the pipes 13:33 into the first half. Junior midfielder Jayme Heller collected the assist on Rittenour's second goal in the last three games. With the Jumbo offense dominating the game, the defense was able to rest and had no trouble diffusing the few Wheaton threats that came their way. Heller made several spectacular stops in front of Tufts' net both in the first and second half. These are fast becoming routine for the versatile junior who can score goals as well as provide sturdy defense. The Lyons scored their only goal with less than four minutes left to play in the game on a penalty stroke against Tufts' senior goalkeeper Julie Jackson. Jackson was tough on Wheaton throughout the match, playing all 70 minutes and saving six while earning her third win on the season. The win is a step in the right direction, regardless of whether the Jumbos put another 'w' in the NESCAC standings. "Today was just plain good. We finally found our offense," coach Carol Rappoli joked, regarding the Jumbo's biggest output since September 29, 2001 against Bates. "We could've played a bit better defensively, though." Rappoli had reason to be joking about the tight defense, as the Jumbos could have shut out the Lyons for their first defensive shutout on the year, had a controversial call not sent Wheaton to the line for a penalty stroke. Normally matter-of-fact and to the point, Rappoli, the field hockey coach since 1985, had reasons to be in high spirits. Tufts faces off against Middlebury on Saturday at home, and finishes the season at Colby in a week. If the Jumbos can win one of these two contests, they can make a strong case to go to the NESCAC tournament. The win against Wheaton already gives Tufts a strong push. "We have a big game on Saturday," Goodwin said. "It's so much better getting this win today, going into Saturday's game [against Middlebury]."

The Setonian
News

Jumbos don't want to repeat recent history

October 23

After opening up its season with three consecutive wins, the Tufts football team has struggled, losing in each of the last two weeks. This Saturday the team will try to reverse the trend with a win over the Amherst Lord Jeffs. The Jumbos are trying to avoid a repeat of last year, when they started off 3-0, only to lose their last five games. Tufts faces a tough challenge in Amherst, which ranks second in the NESCAC with a 4-1 record. The team has given up points in only one game this season, their lone loss to Middlebury. It is a team similar to NESCAC leader Trinity, in that both are built on powerful running attacks and dominating defenses. When Tufts has the ball, it will face a defense that doesn't have any real weaknesses. Amherst has held teams to just 2.3 yards per carry and is giving up only 76 yards rushing per game. The team has been similarly tough against the pass however, as opposing quarterbacks are throwing for under 140 yards per game. Overall, the Amherst D is allowing only 214.6 yards per game. Tufts offensive coordinator Mike Daly certainly is aware of what the Lord Jeffs can do. "They do a good job mixing up their coverages and stunts," he said. "And they're very fundamentally sound." Despite the strength of the defense, Daly says the team isn't going to change its game plan at all. "We always want to get the ball to our playmakers as much as possible. That's always been our philosophy, and it's not going to change," he said. Tufts will try to utilize the running game as much as possible, especially with the return of starting running back, junior Steve Cincotta. Cincotta ran for 328 yards over the first three weeks before suffering a sprained right ankle. Daly said that Cincotta is 100 percent, and he is expected to be very involved in the offense. Cincotta will be splitting time in the backfield with senior Tim Mack. Mack, who has been a wide receiver during most of his four years at Tufts, had a huge game against Williams last week in Cincotta's place. He ran for 114 yards on 22 carries. He will be used all over the field against Amherst, as Daly tries to get the ball in his hands as much as possible. Cincotta's return comes at a very important time, as Jumbos' sophomore running back Steve Lombardi is listed as day-to-day after suffering a separated shoulder in practice this week. Even if he does play, he is not expected to be seen back at fullback, where he started the season, as senior Adam Wylie has claimed that position over the past two weeks. Daly calls Wylie "one of the main reasons we've had the success running the ball that we have. He's one of the toughest, hardest working guys on the team." Defensively, Tufts has to deal with an Amherst team that boasts five or six skill players that are legitimate playmakers. The team averages nearly 433 yards of total offense per game, and has scored over 30 points three times this year. The Jumbos are expecting the Lord Jeffs to run the ball against them. "That's their bread and butter. Their running backs are the strength of their team," said Tufts defensive coordinator John Walsh. Amherst has three productive running backs. Bruising back Fletcher Ladd leads the team, averaging over 118 yards per game. He is complemented by the speed of Matt Monteith, who leads the team with seven touchdowns and is gaining 8.5 yards per carry. Those two are backed up by Ngai Otieno, who has averaged 5.5 yards per carry and scored three touchdowns despite limited playing time. The Amherst offense is orchestrated by explosive quarterback Marsh Moseley. Walsh emphasized his ability and the need to shut him down. "He's a playmaker. He's got a strong arm; he can throw and run. He has good vision and their coach tells him to run anytime his reads aren't there or he doesn't feel comfortable," Walsh said. Walsh also said that the entire defense has taken it upon itself to play better. The D is looking to shut down Amherst on third down and give the ball back to the offense as much as possible. They also want to get back to forcing turnovers. Over the past two weeks the defense has only one take away. Walsh said that number has to improve. Despite the losses the past two weeks, the team remains positive. Walsh said that that losing has made the team "hungrier and hungrier". "No one's giving up," Walsh said. "There's not a happy person on the team, but the attitude in practice hasn't changed. We're going to fight the whole time, that's a given. But we're not just hoping to give them a good game. Our goal is to beat Amherst College."

The Setonian
News

Hoffman and Hackman star and spar in Runaway Jury

October 23

There are two key ways to create suspense in a motion picture: one is using dramatic irony to gradually build up a general state of anxiety, and the other is extrapolating a situation where the characters know their exact surroundings, continuing to act much to the concern and apprehension of the audience. Then there are the movies that do neither, yet still attempt to fit into the "suspenseful thriller" genre. Runaway Jury, the latest film adaptation of the John Grisham novel of the same name, is one of these sad flicks. It makes many exerted efforts to spur excitement, but fails at nearly every turn. Taking a cue from so many other Grisham-inspired movies, Runaway Jury follows the trials and tribulations of one man, in this case Nick Easter (John Cusack), in his fight against a big, bad, evil law firm, usually made up of rich old white Southern men. In this particular instance, Nick is taking on the Big Gun Lobby by participating in a skewed version of jury tampering. Not that he's alone in this endeavor, as the Vicksburg Gun Manufacturers (the obvious baddies in the film) have hired notorious "jury consultant" Rankin Fitch, played with perfect wickedness by Gene Hackman. Even the prosecution led by Dustin Hoffman, as Wendell Rohr, has hired a not-nearly-as-evil-but-still-sniveling jury consultant in Lawrence Green (Jeremy Piven). The film then degrades into a confusing bait-and-switch chase with Nick and his girlfriend Millie (Rachel Weisz) trying to squeeze money out of either side in exchange for a favorable verdict. Nick and Millie's motive in this case is unclear until the very end of the film, at which point the audience is too frazzled to even care. Although it would seem obvious that a cool $10 million payment would be enough of a motive, screenwriter Brian Koppleman continually reminds his viewers that there is, illusively, 'something more'. Meanwhile, throughout the couple's ploys, Hackman and his staff of hard core privacy invaders search high and low for the couple's murky background for blackmail, looking for Nick's 'breaking point' so they can force him to turn the jury to a non-guilty verdict in the case. Yet Easter never appears the least bit concerned about his past being churned up, so why should the audience? The basis for all of the blackmailing and overacting that typifies Runaway Jury is the case made against the gun lobby. Prosecutor Rohr is representing the widow of an investment banker slain in a mass-murder at his office, and they are blaming the gun manufacturers for encouraging illegal gun sales. The particulars of the case are very unclear, and serve almost as a Hitchcockian MacGuffin in that the verdict really shouldn't matter in the narrative of the film. Notice the word "shouldn't". The CEO of the Vicksburg Gun Manufacturers, along with their lead attorney and Hackman's character, represent a vicious and despicable trio that is merely a part of the film's heavy handed, anti-NRA message. In the original Grisham novel, the nemeses were Big Tobacco; the filmmakers of Runaway Jury changed it to Big Guns in fear of being similar to The Insider, and besides, they make better villains. One of the biggest advertising points for the producers of the movie was that this flick would be the first to feature acting legends Dustin Hoffman and Gene Hackman on the same billing, who have been friends since rooming together as amateur nobodies. Unfortunately, though in the midst of excitement of this momentous casting, the producers realized that there was no scene between the two characters. So they wrote one in. And it shows. But it is worth it, as the incredible chemistry between them is the sole moment of cinematic excitement. It's a shame the two big boys don't get as much screen time as their younger, sexier co-stars. Weisz, in spite of her beautiful figure, looks lost in her role as the aggressive blackmailer and Cusack is no better as his character never seems to have a bead on what is happening The joy of other Grisham films was that the audience knew that the protagonist would win out in the end. Tom Cruise in The Firm and Matt Damon in The Rainmaker had equally weasely characters, but they had the confidence and charisma to pull off the roles. Cusack, in a failure that may not be entirely his fault, is usually two or three steps behind his enemies, where Cruise and Damon were much further ahead. Runaway Jury may be more exciting to a less cynical viewer, but the blatant pro-gun control message sucks the life out of the film. Not even the stellar acting of two reliable work-horses can lift the movie out of the doldrums of this predictable courtroom drama.

The Setonian
News

LCS fundraising hurt by Senate bylaw

October 22

Changes in student activities rules passed last year have made the Leonard Carmichael Society's semiformal a less profitable affair. The event, held last weekend, earned LCS $1,000 less than last year because new rules prohibit an organization from charging admission to an event funded with student activity money. Instead, organizers could only suggest that attendees make a donation. "It's inherently difficult to raise money that's just suggested on a college campus," LCS president Lisa Fishlin said. LCS suggested that students donate $12, $3 less than the admission price it used to charge. Organizers hoped that by asking for less, more people would be inclined to attend, but only 440 people attended, the same number as last year. Most students donated between nothing and $20. "They could come in and pay nothing, or could pay more or less," Kokaram said. "There was definitely a range." The rule change also prompted LCS to change the way it promoted the event. Because students were not required to donate, LCS members sold tickets in the campus center and the dining halls rather than using the InfoBooth in the campus center. LCS leadership made the change because they thought that while "the person in the ticket booth wouldn't be invested in the cause," students involved with LCS could convince students to donate by explaining where the money went, Kokaram said. LCS also changed its advertising strategy. In addition to increasing the overall number of ads it ran, LCS's advertising was built around a new focus on informing students about why students' donations were so important to the event's beneficiary, the Medford Headstart program. The new bylaw states that "any organization which does not budget income for an event may not sell tickets or charge money in exchange for admission to the event." When the Senate was considering the bylaw last year, LCS argued against it and suggested that since its semiformal was such an established tradition, exempting it from the bylaw would be reasonable. Then-Senate Treasurer Ben Lee said that an exception was possible, but no provision was ever made. The bylaw's backers argued that since event costs were funded by the student activities fee, requiring students to pay more money would be "double charging." "It's not right that students pay for something they have already paid for by the student activities fee," Senate treasurer Josh Belkin said. The $6,675 cost of the semi-formal -- including advertising, buses, food, and location expenses -- are paid for with student activities funding, Belkin said. In previous years, all money earned from ticket sales went directly to charity. "We don't want to seem like we're cracking down on LCS, we are simply trying to allocate money fairly among student groups," Belkin said. He said he would not be surprised if LCS earned less money this year. Despite the goals of the bylaw, LCS officers feel it unfairly limits their ability to raise money. "While we understand the reasoning behind it, we feel like there should be easier ways for students to donate to charity," Fishlin said.

The Setonian
News

The Domicle

October 22

Aren't you tired of that guy in your big lecture class? The one who always has a question, who holds up the class from getting out on time, and who seems to just want to hear himself talk? I'm confident that you could name someone in each one of your classes that you think talks too much. It's funny, because when you're walking with a friend, and see that guy from your philosophy class across the quad, you say to your friend, "dude, that kid is totally that guy from my philosophy class. What a tool." Only to hear your friend say, "Are you serious? He was in my poli-sci lecture last year and would never shut up!" I think, though, that we have the whole wrong idea here about that guy at Tufts. These people are getting a raw deal. Now it's true - there are plenty of people who are talking to hear their own voice, or are kissing up, or don't have anything intelligent to say. But barring those people, why do we make fun of students who actually talk in class? I had a professor a few weeks ago ask if everyone understood the topic and if anyone had any questions. No one in the 40-person class moved. And the professor responded to this silence with, "I think that I'm learning something about Tufts. When people understand things they will just stare at you and not say anything at all. If they have a question, maybe they'll ask." Why is this? Why must we only speak in class if we don't understand something? I think that for some reason, there is a pervasive attitude here that although we value academic success, we do not always value intellectualism. When teachers ask if there are any thoughts on a reading or movie, or if anyone has any comments, all-too-often the prof. is met with blank stares. I would be willing to bet that the majority of people in the room have an idea or question. Why won't anyone speak up? Why, when someone does speak up, do we turn to our neighbors and roll our eyes? If we have 50 minutes for a class and it's certainly not going to let out any sooner, why not fill it up with some discussion? I'm pretty sure that the professors here have heard themselves talk enough - they don't need to hear the lecture for the 24th time. And so it seems that in a room of blank stares, the one brave soul to speak up has so callously been branded that guy. Now listen - I'm as big a proponent of the phrase "that guy" as much as anyone else - but this cruel label should not be placed upon someone who has the mind to think of something intelligent and the guts to raise his hand. It seems so backward that at a University - where learning is the explicit point - we would cut down those who spark intellectual debate. It would be a beautiful thing instead if participating in class discussion were the cool thing to do. Instead we have 200 trembling freshmen (and 3 seniors) alternately waiting to see who will be picked to answer a question in Econ 1 and ready to pounce on any that guy who dares to ask a gratuitous question or offer a gratuitous comment. If the social classroom is rearranged, and it becomes cool to talk in class, I want us all to keep in mind that there still will be that guy. We should all still hit ourselves on the forehead in honor of that guy when he A) wears Oakleys in class, B) answers his cell phone in class for a reason other than a sports score update, or C) talks on and on for 20 minutes about how the lecture relates to "some movie" he once saw. That guy is everywhere - in every class, at every party, in every group of friends. Sometimes, he's so oblivious about his status that you can even greet him with an enthusiastic, "this guy!" upon his arrival and he has no clue. There's nothing wrong with dissing on that guy, because after all, that's who he is - that guy... that you diss on. But next time you're about to put the thoughtful smart kid from class on your that guy list, think again. Because when the revolution comes and it's cool to pee in your pants, you'll be sorry.

The Setonian
News

Order of workout depends on fitness goals

October 22

I really enjoy your column. In fact, it is pretty much the only thing I read consistently in the Daily. This is my first time asking a question, and I am kind of nervous. OK... here it goes: When I go into the gym, should I do my cardio first, or should I lift weights first? I feel more energized after my cardio, but I'm all gross and sweaty, and I don't like it when I sweat on the equipment (the guys do enough of that, in my opinion). What should I do?--Krista, Haskell Hall Whatever part of your workout you perform first is up to you. When you are going into the gym, ask yourself what you hope to accomplish by working out. Do you want to tone your muscles and build strength? If the answer is yes, then start your workouts with some light lifting. You will be fresher and will be able to work out with more intensity. Also, it is a fact that cardio prior to resistance training will hinder your performance with the weights. In other words, if you do cardio before you lift, you will not be able to lift as much. That said, there is a widespread fallacy that I would like to quickly address here. Ladies, if you go to the gym and lift weights, YOU WILL NOT GET HUGE! I can't count the number of times I have heard a female tell me that she doesn't lift weights because she doesn't want to get 'too big.' Females have a fraction of the anabolic hormones that males have. Think about it: if that guy you see grunting and banging away at the weights every time you go in there hasn't gained any mass in the four years he's been training, why on earth would you think that doing a few light biceps curls would suddenly turn your arms into 21-inch cannons? Anyway, the simple answer to the question is that the order depends on your goals. If your primary focus is muscle tone and some strength (and by strength, I don't mean the ability to bench press 225lbs; I mean the ability to carry all your textbooks without feeling like you will fall over), then do your resistance exercises in the beginning of the workout. If your main goal is fat loss and cardiovascular health, then perform the cardio first, followed by the weights. As for your problem with getting the equipment all sweaty: bring a towel. The 'grossness' factor can be steadily reduced if you put a towel down on the bench before you do your exercises. This will keep you from having to constantly wipe down the equipment after you use it. It will also eliminate that embarrassing butt sweat mark that is left over when someone has been sitting and gets up. I need a good ab exercise that hits the upper and lower at the same time. I lift a lot, but I am always too tired to go through a long, sufficiently intense ab routine at the end of my workout--Christina C., 47 Mason Well, 'G', your first mistake is that ab work has to be long. A simple and effective ab routine can be done in a quick ten to fifteen minutes. The primary focus for ab work should be intensity. High volume (read: endless sets of 500 crunches with terrible form) ab training is not only time consuming; it is also not nearly as effective as three to four sets of a stomach scorching, ab roasting exercise. Lie down on a flat bench with your legs hanging off the end. Half your butt should be on the bench, half should be hanging off. Keep your legs parallel to the floor. Keeping your arms straight, bring them over your head, touching the back of your hands to the head of the bench. Make sure your lower back is pressed against the bench throughout the motion. This is the starting position. Slowly and deliberately, crunch up. As you crunch, bring your arms from over your head towards your legs. Simultaneously, bring your knees in toward your chest. The end of the movement should have you looking like a V on the bench. Exhale slowly, and lower yourself back to starting position. This movement hits both the upper and lower abs, as well as getting your hip flexors. If you have any questions, e-mail me at fitness@tuftsdaily.com

The Setonian
News

Fulbright entrants sent to national level for review

October 22

The 38 students who completed their Fulbright Scholarship applications can breathe a collective sigh of relief now that the process is over. Results will be announced in early February. Charles Inouye, the administrator responsible for facilitating the application process, was pleased with the number of applicants. "It's wonderful to see [students] be ambitious and take on some project that will make this world a better place," he said. "It shows me what these students can do." Inouye likens the preparation for a Fulbright scholarship to planning for a junior year abroad: one makes the decision to study at least six months before leaving, and students must declare majors and go through applications and an essay-writing process as well. Political science major Kathryn Sutton knew since her sophomore year that she wanted to apply for a Fulbright to study successful women entrepreneurs in Tanzania. She said that John Jenke, Assistant Director of International Relations, proposed the idea to her early on, and ever since she has tailored her academic profile to fit this goal. For senior Mitchell Lunn, biology and French major, "the most challenging part of the application process was getting a project essay polished enough so that it would be easily understandable by a general audience." If he receives a scholarship, he will be studying spinal muscle atrophy (SMA) in France under the guidance of Dr. Judith Melki, who he met at an SMA conference. Inouye inherited his role with Fulbright applicants from his former position, Dean of the Colleges. James Glaser, who took over Inouye's position September, with the new title of Dean of Undergraduate Education, chose to remain on the sidelines this year. Because Glaser was transitioning into his new role during a period of particularly heavy work on these applications, he opted to take "learning role," with Inouye handling the main responsibilities. Inouye has worked with students for the past four years to help them prepare the perfect scholarship application, and he now has the process down to a science. When a student comes into Inouye's office, he hands them a 20-question quiz that addresses a range of topics, including the student's intellectual passions, leadership history, and future goals. Inouye then presents the student's options for scholarships based on these answers. According to Inouye, anyone who can confidently answer all of the questions has about a 40% chance of being awarded a Fulbright scholarship. Glaser was impressed by the "intellectually large pool of highly talented applicants." He "can only hope to replicate the success" of his predecessors. The key tasks for him will be providing students with resources, advice and encouragement. Inouye believes all students and faculty should be in closer contact with one another, and he sees the work on scholarship applications as an exercise in this. Glaser agrees that the greatest resources for students are the faculty and the faculty committees. Public health major Rachel Jervis was surprised how closely she worked with faculty members. Her meetings with different faculty members on campus were "beyond helpful," Jervis said. She hopes to study in Haiti should she be awarded the scholarship. The US Congress created the Fulbright Program in 1946 "to foster mutual understanding among nations through educational and cultural exchange." To date, the Fulbright Program has recognized the leadership potential of over 250,000 participants by presenting them with the award. Accepted students are given one year to pursue a specific course of study and work towards a project, or to teach English in specified countries. Preference is given to those with a proficiency in the language of the host country and to students who have not spent more than 6 months in a foreign country.

The Setonian
News

Jumbos notch critical 2-1 victory over Wesleyan

October 22

After a disappointing loss at Williams last Saturday, the Jumbos snatched a victory from the Wesleyan Cardinals Tuesday afternoon in Middletown, Connecticut in NESCAC action. The 2-1 win moves Tufts to 5-4-2 on the season with a 3-3-1 (.500) league mark. The Jumbos now have sole possession of fifth place in the NESCAC as Wesleyan drops to sixth. The top seven teams in the league qualify for the NESCAC championship tournament that will begin November 2. "[This win] was a good way to bounce back after the poor result of the weekend," associate head coach Andy Nelson said. "We defended very well as a team and created our own luck." Defense was the name of the game on Tuesday as the Jumbos kept the Cardinals to just one goal out of 29 shots. "It was a good game from a defending standpoint," Nelson said. "We now know that we can defend very deep in our end and do a good job of it." It was the offense, however, that stole the spotlight early on in the game. Just 5:04 in, Tufts got the ball forward to freshman Ben Castellot. The quick-footed first year took on a Cardinal defender and ripped a shot from about 18 yards. The ball sailed into the back of the net for Castellot's fourth goal in as many games, putting Jumbos on top 1-0. "Ben's been playing great," senior quad-captain Jesse Dinner said. "He was having a little trouble in the beginning of the season; now he's showing to be one of the most dangerous players in the conference." "[Castellot] has had more chances to score in the last few games," Nelson said. "We are creating chances for him." Tufts locked in defensively after Castellot's goal. "After we scored, we dropped off and went into a defensive shell for pretty much the rest of the game," Dinner said. It appeared Tufts would go into the halftime intermission clinging to the one goal lead. However, senior Cardinal Tivon Sidorsky capitalized just eight seconds before the halftime whistle to even the score with the help of a Tufts defensive lapse and a pass from junior Mike Ryan. In the second half, Tufts continued to buckle down defensively and keep Wesleyan away from the goal. "We limited them to only a handful of good chances," Nelson said. "[Wesleyan] had lots of shots from outside the box." 75 percent of Wesleyan's shots missed the goal completely. Junior quad-captain goalkeeper Scott Conroy was forced to make eleven saves on the day, but was helped by Tufts' tenacious D deep in its own territory. The score remained tied at one with the two squads battling back and forth until the 72nd minute, when sophomore Mike Guigli had a one-on-one with a Cardinal defender. Guigli shot for the far post, but the ball fell at the feet of senior quad-captain Mike Blea. The Wesleyan goalie was caught out of position, allowing Blea to tap in his fourth goal of the year. With the 2-1 advantage, the Tufts defense shut down the Cardinal offense for the remaining minutes of the game. This crucial NESCAC win sets the stage for what will be an exciting remaining few weeks of the season. "It was a great effort by the team; a much needed win." Dinner said. Tufts will continue on its road to the playoffs against fourth place Middlebury on Saturday at home. With William, Amherst and Bowdoin as virtual playoff shoe-ins, this weekend's match-ups should help to solidify the playoff picture for the rest of the league. "It's looking good for us right now," Nelson said. "If we win against Middlebury, we are definitely in the playoffs. [But] we will still be in pretty good shape if not."

The Setonian
News

Lots of anger from a Red Sox fan

October 22

Following the Red Sox painful 6 to 5 loss to the New York Yankees on Friday I began a phase of self-imposed solitary confinement and reflection. Surely, like all Sox fans, I was devastated -- but perhaps this was only the first stage of the healing process. I thought: Maybe it wasn't about winning. Maybe reversing the curse isn't that important. Perhaps instead it's about companionship and friendship. Perhaps instead it's about brotherhood and fraternity. Perhaps instead it's about taking the good with the bad. But after much thought and reflection I decided that truthfully, it is about anger. I am angry that I saw a Yankees fan as I passed in my lab this morning and he had nothing to say. He was not glowing from his victory. He was at total ease. And I hate that he was at total ease when we were up 5 to 2 in the 8th inning. I am angry that the Red Sox slogan this year was "Cowboy Up," a symptom of the radical right further taking over this country. I detest its addictiveness, and I cringe when I realize that three of our hitters spend more time saying, "God was with me on that pitch," than demanding where God was for them on the other twenty outs they made in clutch situations. I like that I live in Taxachusetts and I like that the current president, born and schooled in the northeast, decided that people from around here weren't his style. So as a plea for next year, can we please drop the "Cowboy Up" routine? I am angry that next year some new piece of s**t is going to be in right field for the Yankees, following in the lone of the ever-distinguished and calm Paul O'Neill and Karem Garcia. And I am angry that the current aforementioned object is so worthless to the Yankees that Joe Tore nearly called him Sergio Garcia in a post-game interview. I am angry that Boston Mayor Thomas Menino makes a bet with the NYC mayor every time Boston plays New York in a big sporting event. If they win, they get a lobster and clam chowder dinner for four. If we win, we get some of New York's finest food: pizza, hot dogs, and bagels. I am angry with my Long Island friend who argues that this is a fair deal and challenges me, "Have you ever had a New York bagel?" Yes, I have had a New York bagel; it is made of the same basic s**t that every bagel is made of: flour, yeast, and water. If I wanted a New York bagel, I wouldn't trade a 15 dollar lobster for it. I would drive down to Manhattan Bagel in Boston and buy one for 99 cents. I am angry that a friend of mine thought it was really cool that Boston Globe sports writers were contributing to a New York paper, and vice versa. It is bad enough that the New York Times Company owns our biggest paper. We do not need to read an editorial from a New Yorker telling us that Grady may be back next year and this is Buckner anew. Do not lecture us on Buckner -- we will tell you about his legend and his "Red Sox mystique" if we consider you worthy enough. I am angry at the stupid grin that Tim McCarver and Brett Boone sheepishly tried to hide as Aaron Boone's home run sailed into the upper stratosphere. Is Fox even aware of the concept of a conflict of interest when it chooses its commentators? But maybe all this anger is my attempt to avoid the lesson from Thursday's game. What did average Red Sox fans feel when they knew it was all slipping away? I am not sure. Maybe they started thinking about God, and maybe that crucial game proved that there is no God. No God could be so cruel, so vicious, and so ruthless. We were on our knees; we had our bibles at our side. We prayed. And there was no deliverance. Every Red Sox fan knew that if we were going to lose, we weren't going to get blown out -- we were going to lose by blowing a lead. However, I think that the game proved that there is a God. I doubt that he is a Yankees fan, and he is most certainly not Red Sox fan. But the absurdity of the Red Sox loss is too obvious to be the workings of a curse or a coincidence. I think he is just a laughing observer. He does not control if Trot Nixon gets a hit or not, as much as Nixon would argue otherwise. He does not bring Cowboy Up, Inc. to enforce a copyright patent and have thousands of shirts destroyed because they violate the law rather than give them to homeless kids. He can not grant Grady the intelligence of a chimpanzee. He does not control whether Kenmore Square gets burned to the ground following Armageddon (A Red Sox loss like this at Fenway). But he is the entire peanut gallery that enjoys the misery of Red Sox nation, and he understands my anger. Jacob George is a junior majoring in Civil Engineering

The Setonian
News

Lack of crowd after Red Sox loss surprises over-staffed TUPD

October 22

After witnessing the outpouring of students in response to the Red Sox's victory of the Athletics, police were prepared for anything to occur after game seven of the New York series. But student response to last Thursday's season-ending Red Sox loss to the New York Yankees proved to be relatively tame. For game seven, the Tufts University Police Department (TUPD) did not want to be short-staffed. "We wanted to be able to anticipate some activity either way. There was the thought that if they [the Red Sox] lose game seven, people are going to be frustrated and decide to become vocal and maybe vent their frustrations," TUPD Captain Mark Keith said. "The other side of the coin was that if they win, people are going to be jubilant and come out, and again try to act out their excitement," he said. Though extra officers were kept on as a precaution, nothing violent or dangerous transpired, according to Keith. TUPD was called to assist with two injuries following the game. "Two individuals had evidently put their fists through windows," Keith said. Neighboring towns were quiet as well. "Somerville had extra staff on, I think because there are a lot of establishments like bars in Somerville. Nothing happened there - they actually called us to see if we were in any need of assistance, but it was quiet," Keith said. Students on campus - Red Sox and Yankees fans alike - were aware of the overall lack of activity following the game. "I noticed a few extra police cars around during the game, but after it ended all I saw was about six Yankees fans hollering and wandering around the Res Quad," sophomore Christian Eager said. Freshman Mickey Leibner, a Yankees fan, was disappointed by the lack of excitement following the New York win. "A bunch of us went outside to celebrate, and when someone said, 'Let's go to Bacow's house,' immediately a policeman said, 'No.'" Red Sox fans were quiet across campus. "I heard Yankees fans outside, and I had no interest in leaving the room," sophomore Leigh Simons said. Like other faithful Red Sox fans, the last thing Simons wanted to do was celebrate. "[Red Sox Manager] Grady Little had just torn my heart out and stomped on it," she said. After the Oct. 6 Red Sox win over the Athletics to take the American League Division Series, hundreds of students gathered first on the residential quad, and then moved to Packard Avenue in front of Gifford House. Although there was no violent activity, the large number of students caught TUPD off guard, and officers said assistance from the Medford and Somerville Police Departments was necessary.

The Setonian
News

Reality TV is taking over Tufts

October 22

There's a class out there where students can complain about missing Joe Millionaire and not get eye rolls regarding their seeming lack of depth. In this same class, the students laugh at Jessica Simpson's moronic comments-upon opening a can of "Chicken of the Sea" tuna fish, she asks, "So is this chicken or fish?" -- and the instructors laugh alongside with them. In fact, it's all part of the normal routine of the Ex-College Explorations class "Reality TV as the Site of Knowledge Production." Co-taught by seniors Julia Karol and Karen Stern, this is one of two explorations courses that cover reality television as an academic subject. "Reality television has caught the imagination of the watching public," Director of the Ex-College Robyn Gittleman said. She believes that it is a chance to study American culture. "The fact that two out of the thirteen explorations cover the subject shows its popularity," Gittleman said. Taught through the Ex-College, the "Explorations" class is a program involving a freshmen advising group combined with an academic seminar on a variety of topics. While this class, considering its pop-culture content, may sound frivolous and non-intellectual, the truth is far from that. Karol and Stern assign readings on a weekly basis from academic journals, and moderate a vibrant and colorful discussion based on these readings in addition to clips shown in class. In past weeks, the class has discussed different subgenres in the genre of reality television, including the Jerry Springer phenomenon, epitomized by his 1998 feature film Ringmaster. The student reactions to this section ranged from, "I was embarrassed to watch it," to "It was hard to watch this for a class." Yet it is the discussion as to why it was so hard, and what made it embarrassing that makes this class so interesting. This past Monday, the subject at hand was 'family values' and how they relate to reality television. What is the role of television in shaping the idea of the 'normal' family? How do viewers relate to the families of reality television? What lessons does it impart on younger viewers in terms of the family? These provocative and interesting questions were just a few of the many topics tossed around in discussion. A few students learned about their family from shows like Full House, in which each episode concluded with a moral resolution of all the problems that arose in the Tanner family during their thirty minute time slot, all vamped by cheesy music to boot. Their younger siblings who watch reality television shows do not have the same ethical influences. "It's their Wonder Years," said one frosh, in reference to the '50s throwback sit-com starring Fred Savage that also had a moral high-handedness that appeals to family audiences. In a heated, or at least heated for nine o'clock on a Monday night, debate, the class split in two and argued the pros and cons of watching reality television with the family. One the one side, a show like The Osbournes, proves that not everyone is like the squeaky clean Tanners, that you don't have to be perfect to be a part of a family. Yet on the other, it teaches kids depraved family values and emphasizes contrived and abnormal familial situations -- like four grown up children finding a wife for their father on Who Wants to Marry My Dad? All of this could very well be mind-bending dialogue, yet does the subject matter warrant the deep discussions expected from an esteemed liberal arts university? Freshman Mike Stone, a student in the course, thinks so. "I think that reality TV is a great topic for a college course," Stone says, "it's incredible how much the morals and values depicted in the shows are reflected in American culture." Fellow classmate Emily Watkins views "reality television is a huge cultural phenomenon. There are high-brow and low-brow cultures, of course. It's a trend like gothic architecture, and definitely worth studying." The course also investigates the issues behind the impressive popularity of reality television, an issue of great interest to some of the students. Casey Beck, a self-described Bachelor devotee, finds that, "what's most interesting about the reality TV obsession (my own included) is that even though we are simultaneously disgusted by the shows and their blatant portrayal of American values, or lack thereof, we are also drawn to them and continue to watch week after week." Yet not all of the freshmen are addicted to the crack-like substance of reality programming. Nate Cleveland was at first disappointed, as this course was not one of his top choices. Even after this half a semester, he still doesn't like reality television, but he can "see why people like it, and how they get hooked. [The class] has prevented me from being prejudiced against people who like it." But even though they face the same insults faced by the Harry Potter fans a few of years ago, these reality television instructors know that their subject is a topic worthy of academic discussion. Co-instructor Stern finds that, "reality television is a growing area of study, and more and more articles and books are being published about it. It's really exciting to be teaching such a current subject, since there are always new shows and genres to discuss." The class is indeed exciting, because, where else at Tufts can you have a serious, scholarly discussion about the merits of Evan picking Zora over Sarah on the last Joe Millionaire?

The Setonian
News

Sticking to convictions

October 22

The Tufts Coalition to Oppose War in Iraq has reverted to name-changing and other PR stunts to attract students back to the coalition that last March assumed a prominent role on campus. Major combat operations in Iraq ended on May 2, so it is time to change the name from the Tufts Coalition to Oppose War in Iraq to an updated moniker, such as the Tufts Coalition to Oppose American Occupation of Iraq (TCOAOI). But will changing the name actually attract any more students to join the two dozen who remain members of TCOWI? It is unlikely that any name change, or a more catchy acronym, will bring students back to the coalition in its current protest efforts. The problem is that the war started and ended and is now history, and Tufts students who opposed the war have left the pavement at Government Center and returned to their carrels in Tisch Library and computers in Eaton. Why? Did they feel that their failure to stop the American-led invasion of Iraq meant they could not succeed at anything? Or did they just get bored? Or was protesting against war the cool thing to do last spring? In Europe, as in the US, record-breaking crowds jammed the streets of capital cities this spring to condemn the American march to war in Iraq. The difference, though, is that European opposition to the war has not fizzled out: on Sept. 28, thousands marched in the streets of London, Paris, Madrid, Rome, and Istanbul to protest the American occupation of Iraq. The crowds have shrunk from their astounding sizes, but dissent, dialogue, and debate are still strong. Political activism at Tufts is fired up with great difficulty, and quickly dies out. It is simply a "cause of the day activism," even for an international issue as significant as war. TCOWI does need to change its name because the US is no longer waging war in Iraq, even if American soldiers are still lost daily. But the more important issue is the vanished protesters. Students who oppose the President's foreign policy should find time to form positions outside of class, let their voice be heard and, most importantly, stick by their convictions.

The Setonian
News

TCOWI to shift focus after Iraq war

October 22

The war on Iraq may have officially ended, but a group of Tufts students and professors is still fighting to oppose the ideals the war represented and broadening its focus to rebuild its presence on campus. While the Tufts Coalition to Oppose the War on Iraq (TCOWI) continues to draw the support of some members, the organization's visibility has declined since its peak last spring. Today TCOWI -- which is not officially recognized by the University -- has 20 members. To survive, the group is trying to combat the perception that TCOWI is no longer necessary now that combat has ended in Iraq. "Part of what we see as our job is to convince people that the war is not over," said physics professor and TCOWI founder Gary Goldstein. "US designs on the Middle East are not over. Nothing has changed." Declining media, political, and University attention to issues in Iraq, however, have forced TCOWI to adjust its focus to continue making an impact. "Unless we can enlarge this circle, we're just talking to ourselves," Goldstein said. Many TCOWI members agree that the organization should expand its current focus on Iraq to a more general protest of American foreign policy. "I don't think I can remember a time when US foreign policy has been so disastrous," Goldstein said. "Our foreign policy is being controlled by people who want to control all of the Middle East. I find that quite frightening." Changing the focus would require changing the group's name, and according to Goldstein, the organization hopes to create a name that sounds more approachable and that will generate interest among all types of people. "We want people to come to our events [so we can] explain why we need to get out of Iraq," he said. "We want people who are unsure." TCOWI hopes to spread its new message and generate student interest by presenting forums in which people can talk about events in Iraq and the world. "We have multiple motivations [for organizing these events]," chemical engineering professor and TCOWI member Jerry Meldon said. "We want to get interested people involved [in the group], and as educators we want to expose students to these talks and get them to think." TCOWI began pursuing these goals on Monday, when it presented a lecture by Omar al-Issawi, a co-founder of the Arabic news channel al-Jazeera. Al-Issawi, described by Meldon as a "guru for international journalists," delivered a lecture on Middle Eastern affairs personal experiences interspersed with his stories from his experience as a member of the Middle Eastern media. TCOWI organizers said that the lecture's audience would see that Iraq is "part of a larger issue." More than 200 people attended the lecture, although few members seemed interested in TCOWI. Marcin Szajda, a graduate student at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, said he knew little about TCOWI. He attended the event because he was "looking for a perspective on the situation in Iraq from an al-Jazeera journalist." Szadja, like many other attendees, did not sign up to join TCOWI. TCOWI will continue to push its message by holding several more events this year. On Veterans' Day, veterans of Vietnam and the Iraq wars are scheduled to address students -- which TCOWI hopes will reveal the personal side of conflicts. "There is a lot of grumbling among soldiers and within the families of soldiers who have returned [from Iraq]," Goldstein said. "There is a lot of discontent among groups." TCOWI gained publicity and followers last year by holding numerous protests and demonstrations. Following the US declaration of war on Iraq, TCOWI declared a day-long teach-in on March 24. When former President George H.W. Bush delivered the Fares lecture last spring, the group gained further notoriety. It played a central role in planning an anti-Bush rally and march that culminated in participant arrests after some of the over 200 participants broke through police lines in an attempt to get closer to the lecture venue.

The Setonian
News

Jumbos take third at NEWITT Championships

October 22

After finishing second to Amherst at last fall's New England Women's Intercollegiate Tennis Tournament (NEWITT) Championships, the women's tennis team had their sights set on the top spot at this year's event. But yet again, the Lord Jeffs as well as tournament champion and old nemesis Williams stood in the way of the Jumbos' goals. Tufts finished third out of 24 squads who made the trip to Amherst for the three day event, which spanned from Friday through Sunday. Of the six singles players and three doubles teams who took to the courts for Tufts, eight of them made it to at least the semifinals. This is no small task, especially considering that each flight, meaning each bracket of nine, consisted of a round of 32 spots. But despite all the participants, it was only sophomore number two player Becky Bram who was able to get to the finals. "Relatively speaking, we did not perform as well as we would have liked," head coach Jim Watson said. "We weren't able to convert the close matches that we had been winning recently." The close matches were certainly in abundance, with the majority coming later in the tournament rather than early on. For the most part, the first three rounds in each bracket resembled the cake walks the Jumbos had grown accustomed to this fall season while playing non league teams, as well as some of the lower teams on the NESCAC totem pole. The highlights of the weekend for the Jumbos came in the form of redemptions. Bram, the third seed in the second flight, had a first round bye and then won two matches rather handily before she would have to face Middlebury number two seed Amy Roche, who handed Bram her only loss (6-0, 6-0) at Middlebury earlier this season. Bram turned the tables on her this time around, ousting Roche 6-0, 6-2 to move on to the finals. Bram then fell victim to MIT fourth seed Caroline Tien, 6-3, 6-4. Another pleasant surprise was the play of the only unseeded Jumbo participants of the weekend, the flight two doubles team of junior Neda Pisheva and senior captain Barclay Gang. Their first match was against a second seeded Amherst tandem, and Gang and Pisheva (2-2 on the season) didn't bat an eyelash as they eased their way to an 8-3 victory. The duo then handled a Springfield pair 8-0 before losing 8-4 in the semi finals to the Middlebury twosome and third seeds Jena Siegal and Amy Roche. That same Middlebury group beat Gang and Pisheva by the identical score in September. Siegal and Roche went on to win their flight championship. In other doubles action, the Jumbos' number one, but second seeded, pair of junior Jen Lejb and freshman Jen Luten suffered their second loss of the season 8-1 to a third seeded tandem from Williams that would end up winning their flight. Lejb and Luten had cruised through the first three rounds after a bye and wins over Wheaton and Colby players. In the third doubles flight, Bram and fellow sophomore Lisa Miller endured their first loss together of the fall, as they were downed in a hard fought match 8-6 by another eventual champion, this one from Amherst. They also had breezed through the first three rounds, beating Endicott, Wheaton and Connecticut College. "We were a little disappointed that we fell short of our goals, but I'm really proud of the way we fought all the way," Miller said. Miller, as well as Deary and Luten, all took their first singles losses of the fall season in their semifinal matches. Luten was the number two seed in the third flight and out dueled women from MIT and Trinity before bowing out to number three seed Alexandria Maclennan of Williams 6-4, 6-4. Miller, the third seed in the fifth flight, beat players from Wheaton, Wesleyan and Connecticut College before losing to first seed and eventual champion Courtney Bartlett from Williams 6-4, 6-0. Deary, the two seed in the sixth flight, suffered a similar fate, only in a much more riveting match as she was victimized 6-3, 1-6, 7-5 to third seed Katie Hudson of Amherst. Fourth seed Gang also lost in the semis from the fourth flight, 6-2, 6-1 to Middlebury's one seed Claire Smyser, who had also beaten her in September. Gang already beat competitors from Brandeis, Wesleyan and Wellesley to get to that point. "From Saturday into Sunday the situation wasn't great for us," Watson said. With the fall season complete, the Jumbos now turn their attention toward the spring, where they will face rivals Amherst and Williams in duel meets as well as play in the NESCAC tournament, and hopefully the NCAA tourney. "This meet didn't go our way, but it's just something to build upon for the spring," Miller said. "Williams came in third at this last year and they went on to win the NESCAC."

The Setonian
News

Back on track

October 22

Tuesday night, the women's volleyball team traveled to face the Brandeis Judges in a redemption match, which Tufts earned in a close 3-2 victory. The Jumbos struggled hard, and succeeded in pulling themselves out of slump that began with Saturday's loss to Amherst. Even without the demons of the weekend, Brandeis was expected to be a difficult team to beat. The Judges are ranked fourth in the region, and their 20-8 record tells a true story about their competitiveness. Until their bout with Tufts, the team had been on a nine game winning streak at home. For Tufts, this match was an important step in breaking a possible end of the season slide that could only spell disaster with just two weeks left to the regular season. "After losing that game [Amherst], we knew this was a team we really wanted to come out and get," coach Cora Thompson said. After the first game of the match it appeared as though the Jumbos had not worked out all their troubles from Saturday. They kept the game tight until the 26th point, when the Jumbos pulled out all the stops and managed to win the next four points to take game one 30-26, Thompson, however, was not satisfied. "In the first game we came out flat," Thompson said. "We could have controlled the game from the beginning." Echoes of earlier defensive problems in their passing game, combined with Brandeis dominance at the net to defeat the Jumbos in both the second and third games. Brandeis earned a combined 16 blocks compared to Tufts' four. This high number of blocks can be partially attributed to the breakdown of the Jumbo passing game that sent a lot of high, slow passes to the setter, giving the Brandeis net plenty of time to position themselves. In the second game, both teams were tied until point 20, when the Judges went on a rampage, scoring the next ten of fourteen points to quickly win the game 30-24. "We weren't connecting on the court," Thompson said. "As a team we have great skill but it is frustrating when things don't come together." In game three the story became even worse for the Brown and Blue. In their worst game of the season scoring wise, the Jumbos dropped the game big time to the Judges, losing 30-12. In a precarious two to one situation, and momentum definitely not on its side, it was now or never for Tufts. "I basically went into the huddle and said let's start from scratch," senior tri-captain Dani Cafasso said. "I just wanted us to forget what had happened in the last game, which was pretty terrible, and start out new in the fourth match." It worked. The Jumbos rallied in the fourth game, finally displaying the resilience this team has demonstrated all season long. Even after falling behind to start 5-1, the Jumbos burst back to life to earn the next 11 of 12 points. Never looking back, they went on to win the game 30-23 and forced a game five decision. "In game four we were a completely different team," Thompson said. "We had a great game defensively and we picked up our intensity. This had our offense running at a much higher speed." A new speedy offense and strong defense were two keys that Thompson had been counting on all season to push this team high in the NESCAC. In game five, the Jumbos rode their momentum to victory 15-13, earning the team a 17-6 record. Freshman outside hitter Kelli Harrison led the team with 20 kills, while junior outside hitter Emily Macy contributed 15. Both Macy and Harrison were able to employ jump serves in the fourth game, with Harrison earning four aces. Returning senior setter and tri-captain Lindsey Moses set the entire game, putting up a strong 56 assists. According to Thompson, the readjustment to Moses was one of the reasons for the slow start on Tuesday night. More than that however, she attributes the team's troubles to late season fatigue. "We have been going really hard with our new schedule. By now, our bodies are about as conditioned as they are going to be. Right now, it is all about heart and attitude. We have the skills to do it; we just need to stay mentally strong." Cafasso also believes that important to the team's success is their ability to reconnect as a unit. "We are trying to place an emphasis on team days without volleyball to get back the intensity we had up until this point in the season," Cafasso said. Up next for Tufts is this weekend's Hall of Fame Tournament at Mount Holyoke where the Jumbos will possibly have the opportunity to rematch MIT who they lost to early on in their first match of the season.

The Setonian
News

Movie-making at its most basic

October 22

Danish director Lars von Trier has returned to the basics in his latest film, Dogville. Von Trier gained a modest amount of fame in the mid-90s by co-creating the "Dogme95" school of filmmaking, which emphasizes a return to simplistic techniques, and he has utilized this method in his most recent project. In order to drive out what the Copenhagen-based collective saw as the "decadence" of modern cinema, proponents of the Dogme style of filmmaking adhered to a strict "Vow of Chastity" while making their films. Shot entirely with hand-held cameras and utilizing only sound recorded on location, Dogme directors sought to eliminate superficiality and artifice from their films by employing the most direct and simple techniques in their filmmaking methods, often avoiding all but the simplest sets and props and completely cutting atmospheric music. Although not technically a Dogme film -- the movie makes use of a musical score and some digital effects -- Dogville holds true to the principles of the movement, eschewing ostentatious productions techniques to create an intimacy with the viewer that, at times, can be almost disturbingly candid. Dogville is the story of a small, isolated town in Colorado. The townspeople of Dogville are almost absurdly poor: one family makes their living by sanding the edges off cheap drinking glasses and selling them back at a profit; another picks apples from a nearby orchard; yet another owns a sad-looking general store. Despite their cripplingly poverty, the people of Dogville are relatively happy and sedate in their meager existence until Grace, played here by a bleached-blond Nicole Kidman, wanders into the town after fleeing a group of gangsters. Tom, an aspiring writer and would-be intellectual, convinces the people of Dogville to hide and shelter Grace, if only to prove that they are as moral and humane as they appear on the surface. To repay the townspeople for their kindness, Grace begins to do odd jobs for her protectors. Yet, as Grace's dependence on the town for protection increases, her jobs become progressively more difficult and the citizens of Dogville begins to treat Grace as a slave; the men rape her, the women spit on her. Eventually, Grace finds herself chained to a giant steel wagon-wheel to prevent escape, and the gentle veneer of Dogville's residents is stripped away to reveal monsters. Viewers expecting the picturesque peaks of the Rockies to serve as a backdrop for the film will be disappointed. In Dogville, we never see Colorado itself, or even a cheaper Canadian equivalent. In fact, we never see a town at all. Von Trier filmed the entirety of Dogville on a soundstage and, keeping with the Dogme filmmaking ethic that seeks to eliminate any distance between the viewer and the events being captured on film, all we see is that soundstage - i.e. no buildings, landmarks, or landscape. From the air, Von Trier's town looks like a giant blueprint. The buildings don't have any walls and are only delineated by chalk outlines that have been conveniently labeled "Tom's House," "The Church," or "The Old Mine." There are some props in the film -- chairs and tables in most homes, a bell for the church -- but these are minimal and most things in Dogville are drawn out in chalk whenever possible, including a family's beloved dog. Even though it is a little bewildering to see characters knock on invisible doors at first, there is a point to von Trier's unorthodox set design. Because there are no walls in Dogville, we can see what everybody in the town is doing at all times. This transparency creates a sense of inescapable, almost stifling, closeness. Under these conditions, the townspeople's treatment of Grace seems all the more horrible and inhuman. The film's minimalism also means that the credibility of Dogville hinges on the believability of its actors' performances. Fortunately, the cast is impressive to say the least, bringing together foreign stars like Stellan Skarsgard and Udo Kier, younger actors known for their work in independent films like Chloe Sevigny and Jeremy Davies, and finally some heavyweights like Philip Baker Hall, James Caan, Lauren Bacall, and the aforementioned Kidman. These actors take roles that could have been cartoonish in less competent hands and imbue them with an undeniable authenticity. Between the unconventional set and talented actors, Dogville does succeed in telling a difficult story with a certain grace and subtlety. The degeneration of Dogville's residents from sympathetic helpers to monstrous abusers happens so imperceptibly that their treatment of Grace, almost too cruel to believe in retrospect, is nightmarishly real while watching the film. If Dogville fails anywhere, it is only because it is not entirely the anti-American film that von Trier apparently intended it to be. Except for the fact that everyone in the movie speaks English and that we are told the action takes place in Colorado, there is nothing that distinguishes Dogville from an isolated village high in the Alps. There's nothing distinctly American about the inhabitants of Dogville or their actions; or, at least, nothing that von Trier makes abundantly clear. In the end though, von Trier should be commended for making a film as powerful and disturbing as Dogville. Even with its A-list actors, Dogville would have been ridiculous if made in a more conventional way. Von Trier proves that, in some cases, simplicity is one of the most effective tools of a filmmaker.

The Setonian
News

Finding love abroad

October 22

"Is he gay, or is he just French?" -- a question posed frequently by us American girls studying in Paris. Is it his impeccable grooming, those closely tailored pants, or just the jaunty spring in his step that throws us off? Maybe it is the fact that in France, it is socially acceptable and not uncommon for men to kiss each other -- once on either cheek, that is. Whatever it is, it has got a few of us girls a little confused. Learning the relationship between the sexes can be no small challenge in a foreign country and France is certainly no exception. The French are generally very attuned to these relations -- the couples kissing in the parks are not always 15-year-olds, for example. For visiting men and women, however, it seems best to tread lightly until the rules of the game become clear. Women should know that France is a Latin country -- not exactly as macho some of its southern neighbours, but still a place where men practice something known as la drague (the noun form of "hitting on someone"). Most of the time, la drague is fairly harmless and occasionally, it is even charming. "J'?©tais charm?© par ton visage," began a Frenchman before inviting a friend of mine to have a coffee. Nice to hear, at least. But since la drague is not always so gentle, French women have developed some airtight defenses to cut off unwanted approaches -- flatly ignoring their curbside admirers and, when necessary, deploying the Icy Stare. I have seen some truly withering looks coming from otherwise attractive French women. Visiting men should therefore be forewarned that the Icy Stare is nothing personal. "Why is it that every time I try to pass a girl in a bar she stares me down into nothing?" asked one male friend. While it is possible that his appeal did not make the transatlantic journey intact, he most likely experienced an aspect of the Franco-American cultural gap that has stumped generations. And yet, dating -- if not finding true love -- is possible if both sexes are willing to meet somewhere in the middle. For those on the prowl, I suggest seeking out stressful situations created by the French government. France is a country of interminable lines -- the bureaucracy here puts the folks at the DMV to shame. And while it is generally not considered pleasant to spend an entire afternoon at the prefecture, one does have the opportunity to chat with the legions of people who are all mildly annoyed for the same reason. Conversations are easy to start: "Is this really the line?" is a reliable favorite (and, yes, it really is the line). Or, "How long do you think her lunch break is?" in reference to the woman behind the counter, the sole person who has the power to do whatever it is you need done. Both you and your interlocutor express a wish that she only takes one hour for lunch (alas, wishful thinking). At the end of a long day at the prefecture, therefore, it is not uncommon to leave with a few new numbers programmed into your cell phone. Having a common enemy turns strangers into friends fairly quickly. And the good news for one's social calendar is lines exist everywhere in France. A fair amount of one's waking hours are spent queuing to buy bread, sign up for classes, or use a bathroom (though not all of these situations encourage romantic beginnings). Waiting for a metro can also be fertile ground, but potential draguers are warned to tread lightly. The metro is a little too louche, a little too sketchy -- something about being underground and surrounded by strange smells that is not exactly sexy. Making eye contact on the metro is therefore not advised. While looking around on the T is a rather harmless activity, looking around on the metro can be taken as an invitation. The French therefore make ample use of the Middle-Distance Stare (kissin' cousin of the Icy Stare). Sometimes it seems hard to believe that a train full of people looking everywhere but at each other can find love. But then these same people emerge into the street where the old familiar rules apply and the irresistible static between the sexes is again in evidence: vive la drague.

The Setonian
News

Golf closes out season at New England Championships

October 22

The Tufts golf team finished out its season Tuesday, and although it had hoped for a better result, there were some bright spots. Tufts came in 32nd out of 45 teams at the New England Championships held at Captains Golf Course in Brewster, Mass. The Jumbos shot a combined two-day score of 693, 83 strokes behind first-place University of Rhode Island. The field was very strong, consisting of teams from Divisions I, II and III. The Jumbos only brought four golfers to the tournament instead of the usual five because many of the players had midterms and others were sick. One positive aspect for Tufts was senior captain Brad Hawes' performance. Hawes finished his collegiate golf career by shooting 78-80 to finish 27th out of 218 golfers. "I was very happy with how I played," Hawes said. "I actually played a little better on the second day, even though I shot a bit worse. The conditions on the second day were much tougher, the winds were really strong. Overall, it was a good way to finish out my career." "I thought Brad had an excellent tournament," coach Bob Sheldon added. Freshman Arjun Chawla had Tufts' second-best score, posting consecutive rounds of 85. Sophomore Dan Weinbeck shot rounds of 85 and 90. Senior Andrew T. Weiss rounded out the scoring for the Jumbos with a 94-96. The conditions made it difficult for almost anyone to post low scores, and Captains Golf Course provided a difficult test for the golfers. The cold weather, strong winds, and long holes made for some high numbers across the board. "Overall I felt my play was okay considering the conditions," Chawla said. "My ball-striking was pretty good, but the wind was absolutely incredible. It was gusting up to 40 mph at one point. Shots that were hit right at the green were going into the woods." Sheldon, however, did draw some satisfaction out of his team's performance. "Our play wasn't quite as good as we would've liked," Sheldon said. "But we did beat some of our NESCAC opponents. We got some revenge on Trinity, who beat us earlier in the year, and we also beat Wesleyan." Still, Sheldon would have liked his team to enjoy a bit more success this year. "Sure I was a little disappointed because on paper I think we are a little better than we played this year. We have a lot of guys on this team with low handicaps," Sheldon said. Hawes echoed Sheldon's sentiments, but he felt the team did its best. "Both the team and I didn't quite play up to expectations," Hawes said. "But when you're dealing with classes and it being a busy senior year for me, you just do the best you can." Sheldon also noted the difficult balancing job that golfers have to do. "It's also tough because golf is so time consuming and our guys have a lot to deal with. This tournament was on a Monday and Tuesday during midterms [so] it's hard to expect everyone to be out there." Overall, the Jumbos were not elated, but content. Chawla in particular was happy with his first year of college golf. "I really enjoyed the year overall. I played better in the early tournaments, but just being a freshman, I felt I did pretty well," Chawla said. "I'm going to work real hard over the summer to improve. I had a great time though. The guys on the team were cool and Coach Sheldon is a great guy." Sheldon and Hawes both believe the team has a bright future ahead. "The team is very young, so we do have something to look forward to," Sheldon said. Tufts has a strong core of freshmen, including Chawla, Matt Linde, and Justin Meier. Weinbeck, only a sophomore, was last year's NESCAC rookie of the year. With this returning core there is reason to expect big things from the Jumbos in 2004.

The Setonian
News

My preseason predictions

October 22

You know, I was planning to sit down here and write a column in which I made a series of bold (or maybe not-so-bold) predictions for the coming "political season." I figure, hey, if sports columnists can make playoff predictions at the start of the football season, then why shouldn't I be able to make some predictions at the start of the political season? You might have heard earlier this week that Gen. Wesley Clark and Sen. Joseph Lieberman decided to pull out of the Iowa caucus, which is the first real test for the candidates. Now some were quick to attribute those decisions as signs of weakness in the two campaigns. But I suggest that it is a tactically brilliant maneuver by both, and a strategy that Sen. John Edwards in particular -- and possibly Sen. John Kerry -- should consider following. Iowa is a unique case: it is a statewide caucus, not a primary. To win in Iowa, you need a massive organization that can really spread the word and pull strings with local party leaders. Dean's grassroots campaign and his fiery anti-war stance have Iowans raving, and he has had a presence in the state for close to a year now. Gephardt's connections there are long-standing, dating back to his last presidential campaign in 1988. And his union support and being from next-door certainly don't hurt. He and Dean have run away from the field in Iowa (though Kerry is hanging in a tough third) and given the structure of the Iowa caucus; it seems unlikely that the powers-that-be who will call the shots on caucus day are going to shift much in the next two to three months. So the strategy plays out like this: Dean and Gephardt will campaign in Iowa relentlessly and spend massive amounts of cash. In the meantime, Clark and Lieberman will be focused on stop number two and beyond: New Hampshire, then South Carolina and all the rest that follow quickly thereafter. Clark and Lieberman are hoping for a second-round knockout of whoever emerges victorious, though exhausted, in Iowa. And to spice it up even more: Clark and Lieberman are betting that the media will cheapen the "meaning" of an Iowa victory if some of the serious contenders sit it out. The media will immediately question if the candidates were helped by the other candidates not running there and will start to focus on New Hampshire to see how things play out with all of the candidates running. Some pundits have been quick to point out that skipping Iowa has failed in the past. But I maintain that there is a huge difference this time around: there are six honest-to-goodness serious candidates -- a four-star general, three Senators, a former House minority leader, and the former longest-serving Democratic governor in the country. Any one of tem could wake up tomorrow and realistically say, "You know, 14 months from now, I could be president of the United States." That's remarkable. It seems to me that there is only one way that this primary season could end quickly: if Dean were to win in both Iowa and New Hampshire. That is the traditional one-two punch that has knocked out all other contenders and has led to a party rallying around a candidate. And there is a potential for that to happen this time. But there is also the potential for utter mayhem to ensue. Imagine this: Gephardt wins Iowa, Kerry wins New Hampshire. Dean finishes a strong second in both. Delegates to the convention, unlike the Electoral College that selects presidents, are awarded according to the proportion of votes garnered in that state. So say Kerry and Gephardt each win with 26 percent in those states and Dean finishes a strong second with 22 percent in each. Dean could have more delegates after the first two states than either of the other two 'winners.' But if that's not bad enough, the real craziness begins the following week: on Feb. 3 there are half a dozen or so primaries. South Carolina is traditionally the biggie, but on the same day there are also primaries in Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona, Delaware, and elsewhere. If the first two split in some fashion (maybe not precisely as I have outlined, but in some similar way), then it is unlikely that any of the major candidates will drop out until after Feb. 3. But let's look at this: what if Edwards wins his neighboring South Carolina with Clark in a solid second? Clark wins Arizona, New Mexico, and Oklahoma. And Lieberman wins Delaware. This field is so split (look at the polls: even though there is usually a steady "frontrunner" outpacing his rivals by five percent or so at any given time -- it once was Lieberman, then Dean, now Clark -- consistently there have been at least four candidates clumped around the mid-teens) and the primaries are so close together that it is impossible to really say how this thing is going to fall out. It could even come down to those last primaries in early March in states where candidates have not campaigned at all. In such a situation, I could see Lieberman emerging victorious on the strength of his name recognition alone (candidates like Dean have pockets of high name recognition, but generally in areas of the country where they have campaigned relentlessly). Even still, if the delegates are sufficiently split among the candidates and no one has a majority, prepare for an adventure in Boston next July at the convention. A dead-locked convention would be a spectacle, that's for sure. In such a case, you might even watch out for a Clinton restoration to materialize before your eyes. Hillary might be the only candidate who could unite a divided convention and pull the party together to take on Bush. Imagine that. Now that's a crazy scenario. But is it a prediction? Nah, I wouldn't be that bold. Adam Schultz is a senior majoring in Political Science. He can be reached via e-mail at schultz@tuftsdaily.com.

The Setonian
News

Reproductive rights in danger

October 22

Our reproductive rights are the most threatened they have ever been since before the 1973 Supreme Court case, Roe v. Wade, that granted us the right to choose. Since 1995, there have been 335 laws passed limiting our access to birth control, abortions, and reproductive healthcare. President Bush has so severely cut funding to family-planning clinics that they are now understaffed, underpaid, and without the supplies they need -- forcing many to close down. He supports an abstinence-only sexual education program in the U.S., meaning that middle- and high-school students will soon have no access to information on condoms, safer sex, and birth control. Our president has cut funding to all international organizations that provide abortion services or distribute birth control in developing nations. This translates into millions of women giving birth to children whom they cannot feed, clothe, or immunize in countries where 700,000 women die a year due to pre-natal procedural mistakes. Even Massachusetts, one of the most predominantly liberal states in the nation, became the fifth state to ratify a bill giving health insurance benefits to fetuses but not to the mothers who carry them. The Supreme Court has the ability to overturn Roe v. Wade and deny women control over their reproductive destinies and their right to seek an abortion if they so choose. As we speak, the Supreme Court is strictly divided -- four on the liberal side, four on the conservative side -- with Sandra Day O'Connor swinging left and right, depending on the issue. Supreme Court justices sit on the bench for as long as they wish, usually until they decide to retire. Justices are being appointed at a younger and younger age, meaning that once appointed, they could easily sit on the bench for over forty years. The next elected president will appoint at least one new justice, but as many as four are expected to step down in the next four years. Roe v. Wade currently hangs in the precarious balance of one Supreme Court Justice's vote, 5 in favor, 4 opposed. If Bush is re-elected, he will undoubtedly appoint an anti-choice justice, giving them that one needed vote to overturn the decision. As unbelievable as it sounds, it is possible for our control over our reproductive freedoms to be taken away by merely one vote from one appointment of one Supreme Court justice -- someone the people cannot even elect. This is how delicate the situation is. And it doesn't stop at the Supreme Court. White men in suits in Washington are deciding for us what our reproductive freedoms should be from the floors of the Senate and the House of Representatives. While these self-righteous politicians cut government funding to day care programs, welfare, and sexual education, they want to deny women the right to choose the future of their families. Apparently, conservative politicians care more about fetuses than they care about children or mothers. If Bush is re-elected, it is more than probable we will lose our right to choose. The women's movement worked tirelessly to give us, their daughters and granddaughters, protection over our reproductive freedoms. It is now our responsibility to mobilize, act, stand up, and fight for the right to choose during our lives and for the lives of our daughters. Don't get me wrong: I am not saying abortion is a good thing. It is often the hardest decision a woman can make -- a burden that can be devastating to her, her family, and her partner. And by calling themselves pro-life, anti-choice activists make me sound as if I am anti-life. Let me clarify, they are not pro-life, they are anti-choice. I believe that every woman's situation is different, every woman has her own reasons to make her own decisions, and no one in Washington can decide that for her. It is easy for us, born ten years after the passage of Roe v. Wade, to take our right to choose for granted. We do not understand what it was like before this victory. We do not remember the thousands of American women each year who died having illegal, "back-alley" abortions in absolute desperation. We are the post women's movement generation, blessed with many hard-fought freedoms, and burdened with a new sense of privileged apathy. If you have read this far, I hope you are asking yourself what you can do to help. I have been the legislative intern at Planned Parenthood in Boston for five months, and I'm learning just how much work there is to be done. First of all, you can join Tufts VOX: Voices for Choice, a pro-choice activist group affiliated with Planned Parenthood, started on campus this year. Secondly, march in Washington D.C. with us! The four largest pro-choice women's groups in the nation, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, NARAL Pro-Choice America, National Organization of Women, and the Feminist Majority are coming together for the first time to unite in the March for Choice, the largest pro-choice march in history, April 25, 2004 (it is not Spring Fling weekend). We are sending the largest Tufts delegation we can (I mean busloads). They are expecting over one million women, men, mothers, fathers, children, grandparents, celebrities, students and activists to shut down the city in showing President Bush that this right cannot be taken away, that the women's movement has not lost momentum, and that we are mobilizing in huge numbers to support this cause. Please help protect yourself and this right: march with us, register to vote, help elect a pro-choice president, educate yourself, come to Tufts VOX: Voices for Choice meetings (Thursdays, 8 p.m., Women's Center), and spread the word. Dana Sussman is a Senior double majoring in International Relations and French.

Trending
The Tufts Daily Crossword with an image of a crossword puzzle
The Print Edition
Tufts Daily front page