Skip to Content, Navigation, or Footer.

Archives

The Setonian
News

Dorm rooms decoded: part two

Continued from yesterday, campus housing options are explored in anticipation of the housing lottery. Hodgdon Hall Hodgdon residents have the advantage of being able to get food without leaving their dorm, as Hodgdon Take_It_Away is located on the first floor of the building. Hodgdon is downhill, close to Dewick-MacPhie Dining Hall, the Campus Center, Aidekman Arts Center, and Davis Square. It is farther, though, from uphill classes. Hodgdon's rooms are large and square-shaped. There are 55 doubles of an average size of 14' x 14.5' and 40 singles. It also has one two-person apartment. For socializing, Hodgdon has a main lounge on the first floor. A separate study room is located off the lounge. Lewis Hall Lewis Hall is downhill next to Hodgdon and Tilton and therefore close to Dewick-MacPhie Dining Hall, the Campus Center, Aidekman Arts Center, and Davis Square. Lewis is one of the largest dorms and has rectangular rooms. Lewis has 57 doubles, 74 singles, and three triples. It also has one four-person apartment and two two-person apartments. The third and fourth floors of Lewis are non-smoking. Haskell Hall Haskell is located downhill, across from Bush and next to Tilton. Non-Haskell residents my find it easy to get lost: the dorm is organized by suites, and there are separate stair cases leading to different suites on the same floor. Suites consist of four doubles, two singles, a common room, and a bathroom. Because the suites are so small, suitemates often become close, but socializing with residents outside of one's suite is less common. A good experience in Haskell is entirely dependent upon how many people you can round up to live in the same suite. People who have moved in with a group of friends say that Haskell can be a great place to live. The common room and "semi-private" bathroom are definite benefits of this well-located dorm. South Hall South is Tufts' newest and largest dorm, having been completed in 1991. Perhaps because it was built so recently, it differs from the other dorms with its brightly colored thick walls. South is located downhill, further from the other downhill dorms and from Dewick-MacPhie Dining Hall, but closer to the Aidekman Arts Center and the Campus Center. Like Bush, South has single bathrooms. Each bathroom has a shower, separate toilet stall, sink and mirror. South has 22 small common lounges dispersed throughout the hall and a main lounge on the ground floor. In the basement, there is another common room with some fitness equipment, ping pong tables, and tables and chairs. Rooms in South tend to be small and rectangular shaped. It has 158 doubles of an average size of 9.3' x 16.4' and 51 singles of an average size of 9.3' x 8.2'. Richardson House Richardson House is the University's only all-female dorm. Richardson lacks traditional straight hallways, and its hardwood floors give it a cozy feel. Each floor has a full bathroom. It is a small residence, with only fourteen doubles, nine singles, and two triples. Richardson House is centrally located on Professors Row, so it is relatively close to buildings both up and downhill. It is also next to the Campus Center. During winter break, Richardson House is used to house students staying on campus, so its residents must move their belongings. Stratton Hall Stratton Hall is located downhill, next to the Campus Center and across from the Aidekman Arts Center. It was once a women's hall, but now houses both men and women. Rooms are fairly small. Straton has 22 doubles of average size 10 X 12' and several more with an average size of 8' X 10'. Hardwood floors give the rooms a cozy feeling. A main lounge is located on the first floor, adjacent to a pool room with a pool table. Like Richardson, Stratton is also used to house students staying on campus during winter break, so residents must move their belongings. Bush Hall Bush Hall is located downhill and is attached to Dewick_MacPhie. Because there is no accessible passageway to connect the two parts of the building, residents must go outside to enter the dining hall. Nevertheless, Bush residents are closer to Dewick than residents of any other downhill dorms. They can also find food at either Hodgdon or the Campus Center, which are nearby. Bush is a long walk from classes in buildings in the academic quad. It is only a short distance, however, from the Aidekman Arts Center, Pearson, and the Jackson Gym. One of Bush's best features is its single bathrooms. Every hall has eight individual bathrooms, each with a shower, separate toilet stall, sink, and mirror. Rooms are fairly large and square-shaped; there are 51 doubles and three singles. "Because Bush is so small, it becomes very intimate," freshman Bush resident Amber Woods said. One common room in the middle of each hall gives Bush residents a place to socialize. Metcalf Hall Metcalf is one of the most centrally located dorms on campus. Situated on Professors Row next to the Campus Center and just a short walk away from Dewick and the Tisch Library, Metcalf is certainly at the heart of campus activity. An interesting part of living in Metcalf is its Bridge Program. Bridge is a learning and living program that encourages students to pursue their educations outside of the classroom. Metcalf contains a wide variety of living situations, from spacious rooms on the East Side of the building that overlook Latin Way to smaller singles and doubles on the West side that overlook Professor's Row. Be sure you know what room you are signing up for when considering living in Metcalf! Also note that while the building is coed, sexes are segregated by wing, and the entire ground floor is female only.


The Setonian
News

The Best Damn Interruption'

At the beginning of the school year, in September or October, I don't really remember which, my co-editor and fellow columnist Elliott Wiley approached me with a new idea. Now, Elliott gets new ideas from time to time, and they usually have to do with either, women, sports, or cupcakes, so naturally I was interested. He told me that he was trying to start up a new sports show on TUTV, and asked if I wanted in on it. I have to say, I was more than a little disappointed that it had absolutely nothing to do with cupcakes, but I sat back and took some time to think about the proposal. On the one hand were the reasons why I shouldn't do the show: I have been a slave to the pen for my whole life, I believe that the written word represents human expression in its truest form, that TV has corrupted sports from the innocent, virgin form that they once held, in a time when a high school basketball player couldn't have shoe companies drooling hundred dollar bills in his face, when summer afternoon meant watching your favorite ball players live out their boyhood dreams in the shadows of legends, when 'Joe' really was just 'Joe' and "those twins" hadn't even been thought of. Plus I'm a pretty ugly dude-why would I want my mug flashed all across campus? But on the other hand were the reasons why I should do the show: TV's kinda neat. So I sold out. Sue me. It's not the first time this has happened. Look at Tony Kornheiser and Mike Wilbon. The second they got the chance to get on TV they took it. This is the exact same thing. (Humor me). Besides, Elliott assured me that he was doing all of the work. All I had to do was just show up on Thursday nights and run my mouth the same way I do everyday. Couldn't be easier. And so it was that I signed on to do a TV show. My life would never be the same. (That part's not exactly true. My life has actually been exactly the same since the show started, except for now instead of watching TV and eating cookies from 8:30 to 9:30 on Thursday nights, I tape a TV show. But I digress...) Colin Stewart and Andy Katzenberg were slated to join Elliott and me on camera, and after a month or so of talking about how cool this show was going to be, we finally got together to tape the first episode. We decided to call it "The Best Damn Interruption." (Note to reader: try to look past the blatant unoriginality in the title.) Before I go on, I'd like to explain a few things. There is a distinct difference between writing a column and appearing on a TV show. Being a halfway decent columnist doesn't necessarily make you any good on TV. You can see this everyday at 5 p.m. on ESPN on "Around the Horn"-a bunch of great columnists, all together, talking about what they know best, and the show sucks. The only one who's any good is Bob Ryan, and I still haven't been able to figure out how why he puts himself through the torture of listening to Max Kellerman every day. Unreal. The key to columnists being good on TV is chemistry. Look and Kornheiser and Wilbon. "PTI" is the best sports-talk show on TV, because those two have great chemistry. It's that simple. When Wilbon is gone and it's just Kornheiser with some other random writer, the show stinks because the chemistry isn't there. It's the same reason why sometimes "The Sports Reporters" is great, and other times it's miserable-chemistry. And I have to admit, I was a little bit worried about how the chemistry was going to be between the four of us. But we taped the first show, and we thought it went alright. And then we watched it. You see, what tends to happen when you have four people on a TV show, and those four people each have strong opinions about sports, each person tends to talk, and talk, and talk. And it gets really boring. It didn't take long to realize that we needed to argue more, rather than just say our own opinions. We fixed this problem over the next several weeks, and I have to say, the shows were getting better. They were getting less and less boring because we changed speakers more frequently, and they were even getting a little bit funnier. We even started to broadcast the show live. We all felt comfortable, the topics were usually good, and most importantly, the chemistry was there. Everything was good. Then Colin threw a giant monkey wrench into the whole business and left for Australia. The chemistry was threatened, and we were in danger of turning into a Wilbon-less "PTI" episode-you know the potential is there, but there's just something missing. Now we are in the process of trying to fill the void with different weekly guest hosts. It's a risky venture because with each guest the chemistry changes, but it seems to be working out well so far. Tonight we have Tufts Alumnus Larry Harris. (I think that speaks volumes by itself.) And we're still broadcasting live at 9 p.m. (Does this seem a little bit crazy to anyone else? Trying to compete with all of the other lineups on the most popular night of TV? Maybe I'm wrong.) And we recently added the most important component to the show-the studio audience. It adds a different feel to the show-the "wow there are actually people watching and reacting to this show" feel. It's really kind of nice. So if you should happen to find yourself with nothing to do tonight around 9 p.m., head down to TUTV studios. Between me, Elliott, Katzenberg, and (most importantly) Larry Harris, there's bound to be something you'll like.


The Setonian
News

Ask Angie

Q: I'm having a problem with identity theft -- it appears someone has stolen my identity. Here's the story: my name is Angie, I'm a junior majoring in psychology, and I enjoy sleeping, eating, watching movies and listening to music... perhaps this is beginning to sound a bit familiar to you? As you can see, this is quite a problem and I need some advice. What should I do, Angie?? --The "real" Angie A: Hmm. I can imagine that this would be a problem during your time at Tufts! Angie, I wouldn't worry too much. The biggest difference between us is that you ARE the real Angie and I'm not. After all, I'm simply a secret persona for another member of the Tufts community. A bit of a mystery, I guess! Don't worry, I won't tread on your Angie turf other than on Tuesdays (from next week on) in the Daily -- that way you won't have to protect your identity the rest of the week. Is the problem that your friends think that you're "Ask Angie?" Do people keep bombarding you with personal questions? It was a good thing you came to talk to me. Just show them this article, and tell them I told you to tell them that I'm not you! Or something like that... Q: My boyfriend has heard about this m?©nage-? -trois thing and he really wants to try it with me and another girl. I don't know because I don't like girls and I don't want to have another person in the bedroom, but I want him to be happy. We have been together for eight months. Should I try it? -- Scared to experiment A: The m?©nage-? -trois, or "threesome" is often the holy grail in a guy's mind. Your boyfriend likes girls. Your boyfriend likes you. You plus another girl would certainly seem to equal more fun in his mind... but often times that is, in fact, ALL in his mind. The reality is that since you've been together for eight months, this seems to be a fairly committed relationship. There is no way he's thinking about possible jealousy (on anyone's part) or the nasty consequence this sexual escapade could have on your relationship. Plus, there are the simple logistics to consider: who will he find for a one time deal? Will it be far more awkward than he could have imagined when it actually comes down to it? If he tries to rope one of your friends into it, imagine what that could do to your friendship! The fact that you're scared probably means this is a bad idea. You certainly have good reason to be hesitant, especially since you don't dig the idea of a same-sex experience. Since you never know 'til you try some of the time, ask your boy if he'd be willing to switch that extra girl for an extra guy and see if he's still so keen on the idea. It's cool that you're trying to keep an open mind, so if you do decide to go ahead with this, make sure you've talked over all of the consequences together -- and DEFINITELY use protection! Q: Angie, I'm really sick of my girlfriend's friends. We are freshmen and got together pretty recently, and I definitely didn't know what I was getting into. When we walk around together, her friends say hello to her but give me really unpleasant looks and they are rude to me whenever I'm around them. I'm not sure what the deal is. -- Often ignored A: Yeah, I can see how that would really suck. Have you confronted your girlfriend about this? Maybe she's oblivious to the fact that her friends are so rude to you, or if not, she could at least shed some light on the situation. It's possible that her friends resent you for taking up so much of her time. She used to be able to spend tons of time with them, but now she's on your arm in Dewick or hanging out with you in your dorm room. Since you just recently started dating, I'll bet you're spending every waking moment together. You should keep in mind that it's important for each of you to maintain your own network of friends. Don't let her (or yourself) allow friends to drop off the radar because you're so blinded with love for each other. It's also possible that her friends aren't too fond of you in general. Why not make some effort to get to know them and show them the cool guy you really are? Next time you're going with your girl to a movie, ask if her friends would like to come. Make sure to talk to them and show that you're not the enemy. They'll come around eventually, and meanwhile you may end up with some new friends of your own.


The Setonian
News

Old School': Not a perfect comedy

Old School is the kind of movie you expect will make you snort with laughter and leave you smiling with ridiculous images in your head. It's about three twenty-something guys who decide to form their own fraternity, and stars veteran screen charmers Luke Wilson and Vince Vaughn, as well as former SNL ringleader Will Ferrell. In other words, it's pretty much guaranteed to be funny. The makers of the film work hard not to disappoint. Absurd and humorous scenes are presented to you one after another: the opening shows the central character, Mitch (Luke Wilson), leaving a conference for "Real Estate Lawyers of America" to find his girlfriend (Juliette Lewis) in the middle of an orgy. The story continues with Mitch's friends Beanie (Vince Vaughn) and Frank "the Tank" (Will Ferrell) throwing a huge party christened "Mitch-A-Palooza" at Mitch's new house situated on their alma mater's campus. A pesky Dean tries to get rid of them by announcing that the house can only be used for school activities and Beanie thus establishes a fraternity that admits nerds, obese people, balding yuppies and an ancient war veteran. Snoop Dogg shows up at a party, Andy Dick cameos to teach his class, "The Art of the Blow Job" and even CNN's James Carville manages to drop by the set. In the end Mitch, Beanie and Frank are transformed into better men, the bad guy eventually loses and the good guys win. But, the satisfactory laughs Old School is supposed to deliver end up being tainted with a sentimental depth the film just cannot deal with. You are left feeling rather sorry and concerned for the heroes of the movie: not the effect a comedy is supposed to have on you. If you blink, however, you just might not see the serious issues fly over your head and you probably won't care about the fact they aren't handled well either. After all, the success of most slapstick comedy does depend on the fact that people sometimes just want to laugh and not much more. So is Old School worth watching? Yes, but only if you bring along a crowd of frat boys and a keg. The cast members themselves do what each of them does best. Luke Wilson plays the confused but cute Everyman that gets pushed around and Vince Vaughn recreates the married-with-kids version of his character from Swingers as a salesman for Speaker City who contemplates the party potential of Mitch's house while wearing a baby pouch. The third star, Will Ferrell, does everything from streaking down a street to performing a poetic gymnastics routine with a ribbon to show the madness that can erupt from the average repressed guy. But a movie starring veteran screen charmers who co-wrote The Royal Tenenbaums and starred in the indie hit Swingers can't simply make a movie whose main goal is to provide a raunchy laugh. There's got to be something more. As a result, tiny lines of seriousness and sincerity manage to creep into the movie. A co-worker of Mitch begs to be let into the fraternity whining about how much he needs to escape from his monotonous life and Frank "the Tank" is faced with the very adult prospect of a divorce. So, a movie that's supposed to make you forget about the rules you face in reality, and hopefully make you dumber than you were before actually ends up making you think: what are these guys doing with their lives? If growing up and committing yourself to a job and relationship is so horrible, how are you supposed to deal with the future besides going back to the college campus to wrestle in a pool of jelly?


The Setonian
News

Trinity's Light

"The unleashed power of the atom has changed everything except our modes of thinking, and thus we drift towards unparalleled catastrophe." -- A. Einstein, May, 1946. It is a media clich?© that "9/11 changed everything." Einstein's remark quoted above refers to an earlier and deeper transformation: the first explosion (and subsequent use) of the atomic bomb. A visit to the "Trinity Site" where this happened is worth making. On the first Saturday of every April and November, the road to Trinity through the White Sands Missile Test Range is opened to civilians by the military. After an easy 70 mile drive south from Albuquerque and a quarter mile walk from the parking lot, you will find sight of tourists smiling as they are photographed beside the model of "Fat Man," the plutonium Auschwitz which incinerated Nagasaki. If you have bad luck, as I did on my trip, the tourists will drift away and the desert quiet flows back. A black, basalt obelisk marking the explosion's location looks across the wasteland the Spaniards called the "Journey of Death" towards the "Shadow Mountains." Over this hostile landscape on July 16, 1945, dawn's early light was split by a flash "brighter than a thousand suns." That light still terrorizes us today. Terror of what it or its biological and chemical imitators might do in the hands of "others" helped swing the November election to the Republicans. Terror of what Saddam Hussein might do with them is used by the Administration to try to persuade the American public to make aggressive war on Iraq. (An aside: I believe that there are other motivations behind the Administration's actions: if there were no oil bonanza to be secured, nor a Daddy Bush to be avenged (or surpassed), nor a mid East to be made safe for Israel, its fervor for war might be less -- consider the different attitude towards the admitted nuclear state of North Korea. I think that the argument that a dictator as bestial as Hussein should be eliminated hardly matters to the Administration -- although is does to the public. It makes no sense to pursue a war that would kill many Iraqi civilians and generate worldwide hatred and mistrust of us, rather that containing Hussein until nature removes him -- a policy we successfully used with the far more bestial and powerful Stalin. If we attack Iraq in order to stop Hussein from acquiring weapons of mass destruction, we will have taken a decisive step. We will have abandoned the approach to nonproliferation that proceeded by constructing international agreements (however, imperfect) and will have opted instead for keeping such weapons out of the hands of "unreliable" states by means of preemptive strikes. Such a policy must, it seems to me, fail for three reasons: 1. Fear. A natural reaction to being threatened is to seek protection. Hasn't that been our own reaction, a reaction which has created ever more catastrophic weapons? Isn't it the quite rational reaction of a North Korea which sees itself as the next "Axis of Evil" state to be chastised by us? "Protection" against a hyperpower these days means nuclear weapons. More states will seek to acquire them. 2. Hypocrisy. In particular, the hypocrisy of the US which, since it first acquired atomic bombs, has been preaching abstinence to others. Under Article 6 of the Non-Proliferation Treaty the major nuclear states pledged to eliminate their arsenals. But, as US Government policies and numerous Government statements show, we never intended to and do not intend to in the future. Far from it. As the latest National Security Strategy paper (The New York Times Sept. 20, 2002) stated, our policy is to maintain absolute military dominance over the world. It is any wonder that many countries regard our support for non-proliferation as an attempt by a nuclear "have" to keep the nuclear "have nots" in their place? 3. Greed. As was clear from the beginning, there is no nuclear "secret"; there is only the matter of acquiring adequate technology and raw materials. Capable technicians are now in abundance and raw materials will be supplied by the free market. After all that is the free market's strength: if a consumer is willing to pay enough, a seller will appear. Greed overcomes all obstacles. For over 55 years possession of atomic weapons by the United States has been the foundation of our relations with other states. We have tried to keep other countries from imitating us but this policy is breaking down. Even now we are seeking the inevitable next step: the privatization of mass destruction, the beginning of an era when nuclear "devices" no longer are owned exclusively by nations but pass into the possession of private groups and even individuals. A world where individuals possess devices capable of evaporating cities is an unlivable world. In self defense nations will have to guard against their own citizens and the goal of a "War on Terror" will be to achieve an absolute control over the thoughts and actions of each person. Individual deviations from prescribed behavior will simply be too dangerous to tolerate once "Alabama gets the bomb." The inferno which America ignited at Trinity (blasphemous name!) lights a future which is a mix of Blade Runner, Brazil, and Hieronymus Bosch. This future is not inevitable but it is up to America to take the necessary steps to avoid it. America created these weapons, multiplied them, and led at every step of their technical development. While our nation still possesses some moral ascendancy, it must lead the world in renouncing the possession of these satanic devices -- unilaterally if necessary. They are all together evil. David Isles is an Associate Professor of Mathematics.


The Setonian
News

Portrait of a young artist: Jeff Rawitsch

This week's Student Artist is Jeff Rawitsch. He has been singing in choirs in school since the sixth grade and has continued to do so ever since. During his senior year in high school, he was the president of his choir. After graduation, he decided to take a year's deferment on his admission at Tufts to join a group in Los Angeles called the Young Americans. The Young Americans are a performance choir, whose main goal is to tour the United States _ and now the world _ promoting music education in schools. Over the course of one year, he traveled through the southern United States and to New Zealand and Australia as part of the company. "Being a part of that was the single most wonderful, educational experience of my life to date," Rawitsch said. Once he got to Tufts, Rawitsch joined the Chorale, Chamber Singers and Opera Scenes Ensemble. In Chorale, he had a solo entitled "Libera Me" last semester in a performance of Gabriel Faure's "Requiem," a piece with full chorale and orchestra. He has been on the Student Board of Directors for Chorale since he came to Tufts, and was part of the team that got Student Activities recognition for the Chorale last year. While there are no official titles on the Board, Rawitsch is lovingly known as "The Chairman" because he sets up the folding chairs for rehearsal. Daily: What made you first want to sing? Jeff: My homeroom teacher in sixth grade was the choir teacher, and every Monday she had sixth grade choir rehearsal during homeroom time. Anybody who didn't want to be in choir had to go to another teacher's homeroom during that time. Rather than doing that (I was a lazy guy), and with my mother's extra encouragement, I stayed. I've been in choir ever since. What a fluke! Daily: Would you rather get a solo in a full chorale and orchestral show at Carnegie Hall or, replace Justin Timberlake in N*Sync? Jeff: Hmm...let's see: Gain prestige among the musical elite, or have millions of teenyboppers pining for my autograph while dating Britney Spears? Tough call... Though I do think that N*Sync exemplifies everything that is wrong with pop music today (okay, okay, they are good to their fans and the Backstreet Boys are worse). But, if I chose that route, my sister would think me infinitely cooler. Daily: What draws you to classical music? Jeff: This is interesting. I am not actually a big fan of classical music when it comes to listening to it. But when I sing classical music, whether or not I can understand the language, the feeling of the piece definitely comes through. It is a very powerful feeling to be singing a Requiem line about the "Day of Wrath" at a low dynamic, with the orchestra playing intensely soft, then everyone bursting into double forte and standing up singing, "RISE AGAIN, YES RISE AGAIN!" Sheesh, listen to me. I can't even read music, and I sound like some low life music critic. Oops, sorry Marc... Daily: Jeff, let's settle this once and for all: American Idol or Star Search? Jeff: Since I've already dissed N*Sync, and at risk of losing ALL of my friends who enjoy so-called "Reality" T.V., I won't tell you how I feel about American Idol (but at least they sing oldies medleys with Burt Baccarach.) But, hey, if I was on that show, I'd be hot stuff, huh? I mean, really! It's about time, dammit! I'd have to beat back the ladies with a lot of male chauvinist rhetoric, or a stick, whichever is handier. And, if I won, I'd be a millionaire! Very few Child Development majors can make that claim. Besides, Star Search is for kids (whom I enjoy working with dearly.) So I say bring it on, Simon Colwell! We could both do a lot worse.



The Setonian
News

Dissent and civility

As University Chaplain, some of my primary symbols are bridges, quilts, and art. Bridges convey the notion that dialogue is always (at the minimum) two-sided. There is no such thing as a bridge that just goes in one direction only. A quilt takes the cooperation of many people. The Patches for Peace quilt that hangs in the campus center is a great example. Not every student organization that did a small square/patch perfectly agrees with each other. But all student organizations came together in a spirit of cooperation and made a very beautiful quilt. Finally, I see art as a symbol for my role as university chaplain. I don't like every piece of art that I see. But, fundamentally, I know that all art needs to be respected. For me bridges, quilts, and art represent dialogue, cooperation, and respect. Three very important characteristics -- even virtues -- that any family and in particular our Tufts University family needs. Dialogue, cooperation, and respect: three ideals that should not be lost or forgotten. Dialogue, cooperation, and respect: three ideals that are needed in a civil society and here in our Tufts University family. The great social ethicist, John Courtney Murray, wrote We Hold These Truths, in 1960. Here is a brief passage: "Argument ceases to be civil when it is dominated by passion and prejudice; when its vocabulary becomes solipsist, premised on the theory that my insight is mine alone and cannot be shared and when dialogue gives way to a series of monologues. When things like this happen, conversation becomes merely quarrelsome or querulous. Civility dies with the death of dialogue." I would extend the idea and say civility dies with the death of dialogue, cooperation, and respect. Tufts University was founded in 1852. The original charter explicitly barred any religious test for students or faculty. Dialogue, cooperation, and respect were three very important ideals from the Universalist tradition. Now in the year 2003, 151 years after the founding of our Tufts University family, are we in danger of losing a fundamental identity? It is my prayer and hope that for our Tufts University family, the symbols of bridges, quilts, and art can be adopted by everyone. Dialogue, cooperation, and respect for all, all the time. Then indeed we will be a light on the hill showing Pax et Lux, Peace and Light to all. Reverend David O'Leary is the University Chaplain


The Setonian
News

Wang's dumplings delight food critic

"I just don't really like Chinese food," my friend, the Hesitant Eater, tells me, wrinkling her nose. "It's just... kind of gross." I sigh. It's no surprise, considering the dismal selection around Tufts. Viscous, greasy plates of sweet and sour chicken, lackluster beef with broccoli, and crab rangoon are all she has ever eaten _ so of course she thinks Chinese food is bad. She will probably never try Wang's Fast Food on Broadway, right next door to Hannah's and only a stone's throw from campus. And I feel sorry for her. Because Wang's dumplings are fabulous. Dumplings, contrary to what Dewick-MacPhie and Kee Kar Lau would have Tufts students believe, are not supposed to be Peking Ravioli (And why "Peking Ravioli?" What's wrong with calling them dumplings? Is pad thai Bangkok Linguine? Is chicken tikka masala Bombay Stroganoff?). Dumplings are not meant to be the squatting lumps of dough with gluey meat logs trapped inside that appear in big metal steam trays from time to time in the dining halls. So when I heard that Wang's was supposed to have some of the best handmade ones in Boston, I was thrilled. I am dumpling-obsessed; I imagined our table laden with plates of them, small and steaming and delicate. It was going to be perfect. So, with high hopes, we arrived at Wang's around 6 p.m. on a Sunday. The restaurant was warm, quiet, and tiny, with only six tables in its awkward, C-shaped dining room. Its d?©cor is cheerfully un-chic: salmon-orange walls above brick wainscoting, blue and pink strings of Christmas icicle lights hanging in windows, and bare fake-wood tables with metal-backed chairs. A large whiteboard hanging by the front door lists the specials in Chinese. As we ordered, charmingly inappropriate music for a small Chinese restaurant (Marvin Gaye's "Lets Get it On" anybody?) played softly from a stereo under the takeout counter. The young server, soft-spoken and friendly, came to our table quickly. "You should try the scallion pie," she told us. "It's very good." We took her advice and later were glad we did. We also ordered soups as starters and five different types of dumplings to share for our main course. Wang's has an expansive menu, but the first two or three pages seemed boring and skippable. Our soups from the first part of the menu were unremarkable, though the scallion pie ($3.50) was very good, crisp on the outside with satisfying, chewy layers of dough. The Hot-and-Sour soup was hotter than most, but otherwise non-descript. Meanwhile the House Special soup wasn't special at all, with the suspicious gluey texture found in disappointing Chinese restaurants. But the back page of the menu, the dumplings page, was a gem. The dumplings listed more than made up for the mediocrity of the soups. At less than $5 for a plate of 12, you can order them boiled or pan-fried. We didn't discover the second option until after the meal _ but it would be worth trying. The waitress brought them out quickly, big platefuls of them quivering and almost translucent _ just the way I had hoped they would be. The Vegetarian Spinach dumplings were mellow, subtle, and rich. Filled with a mixture of garlic, spinach, tofu, and tiny cellophane noodles, these are also the purported favorites of "Ming Tsai, Celebrity Chef" as the menu keenly advertises. And the celebrity chef knows what he's talking about; I think I'd eat these every day, if I could. Best of all, I can: 50 frozen dumplings to take home with you costs only $12. The two male friends I came with tried to convince me that the Pork and Leek dumplings would be better than the Vegetarian Leek dumplings because, according to them, "everything is always, always better with meat." They were wrong. While Pork and Leek was ordinary, and my least favorite dumpling, the Vegetarian Leek -- with shreds of leek, egg, and more cellophane noodles -- was pungent, juicy, and much tastier than the meat version. Even the men admitted it. The Chicken with Chinese Cabbage dumplings were probably the mildest of the bunch while the Shrimp Delight with Pork were salty strong, and the favorites of the men at the table (with Vegetarian Leek a close second). Even the Pork and Leek plate, the only one that still had dumplings on it at the end of the meal, was better than any dumpling Golden Light has ever offered. We left full and in high spirits, our wallets only $10 lighter, and vowed to come back to try some of the actual entrees listed. But the dumplings were so good; it will be hard to stray from them. And there was one last, wonderful thing about Wang's. As we reviewed the takeout menu on the snowy ride home, we discovered two words that would make my friends very happy during the blizzard a few nights later: "Free Delivery." Why would anyone suffer through Peking Ravioli again? Wang's Fast Food, 509 Broadway (4 blocks past Ball Square), Somerville, MA 02145. Free delivery with orders over $20.00 and credit card accepted for orders over $15. (617) 623-2982.


The Setonian
News

Biting their tongues

Though college campuses have long been centers of political thought, universities have become increasingly cautious about expressing formal political opinions. University presidents must make careful calculations of when it is appropriate to speak on behalf of their institution. "There has always been political correctness, but there's been a big change over the last century," University Professor Sol Gittleman said. "At the start of World War I, if you opposed war, you were fired," he said. Much has changed over the past 60 years. This year at Tufts, about 20 professors have openly pledged to join a walkout in protest of war with Iraq, and these professors have faced no threat to their positions. The change has been for the best, Gittleman said, and it can be credited to an increasingly diverse university population that discusses old issues while incorporating new attitudes. Universities today are more advocacy-oriented and more concerned with policy than specifics, Gittleman said. "Sometimes people -- faculty, students, researchers -- get opinion ahead of fact. They need to remember we're supposed to be detached objective scholars." In expressing opinions, a college president can walk a thin line between encouraging dialogue and imposing silence, according to Tufts President Larry Bacow. "Presidents who speak too often or too forcefully run the risk of intimidating others," he said. Not everyone is as cautious when it comes to administrators' opinions, though. Freedom of speech should allow the president to speak on any issue, according to sophomore David Ng. "It's just his opinion," Ng said. "If he gives a chance for other people to counter the argument, then he has the right to do whatever he wants." But while presidents are entitled to their opinions on issues of national interest, "they must be careful not to speak for their institutions on such issues or to claim authority by virtue of their position," Bacow said. University presidents have more leeway when the issues are central to the future of their institution or its educational process. In the cases where a president may have special personal expertise, he should speak out, Bacow said. This was the case in the recent state budget cut of all $3.6 million in funding to the Tufts School of Veterinary Medicine. Bacow sent out a bulk email to the University community proclaiming his surprise and deep concern "about the implications of this cut." Bacow has also spoken out recently on national issues by expressing support for the University of Michigan's position in the Supreme Court case on affirmative action. The president's opinion should not be surprising since "the University has been committed to affirmative action for some time," Gittleman said. Since Tufts receives federal funds, the Supreme Court's decision could ultimately affect the University. Administrative opinions are also sought on matters of student body safety. After an off-campus house fire claimed the life of junior Wendy Carman, administrators sent home a letter notifying parents of the tragedy along with a list of important housing safety information. Though many students approved of the administration's handling of the tragedy, other instances in which Bacow has spoken about public safety have not met with much support from students. Student support has often lagged when the administration's opinions threatened their personal interests. The recent outcry over Bacow's disapproval of the Naked Quad run was one such instance. But according to Gittleman, Bacow was simply trying to remind students of their own mortality in a way that was "absolutely appropriate," he said. "I don't want my grandchildren going off to college and not being aware of the fact that there are dangers," Gittleman said. "That's something the president can and should speak out on." Some circumstances require the president to censor his personal opinion in favor of University policy, though. "There are times that the president has to muzzle himself," Gittleman said. But since Tufts is a private school, its administrators have more freedom to speak than those at public universities. For "land grant" universities like MIT, "there's always a Congressman standing there saying when you want to take federal money you do what you're supposed to do," Gittleman said. Personal discretion is another way university presidents can withhold their opinions. Earlier this year, Harvard president Lawrence Summers condemned campaigns for divestiture in Israel as a form of anti-Semitism. History professor Gary Leupp, a signatory of the divestiture petition, called the speech "out of line" and "intimidating." Bacow also opposed the divestiture campaigns and was mentioned in The New York Times for his support of Summers. Bacow later said that he agreed with the "open and vigorous debate" but said universities should not take official positions through their investment policies."


The Setonian
News

Under Yee's, Bones delivers a birthday bash with class

Twenty-first birthdays are strange. Despite the weeks of anticipation and the promise that you won't spend a dime on drinks, they never quite end up the way the birthday boy (or girl) plans. After all, you almost always wake up with a killer hangover from the eclectic blend of mixed drinks, shots and anything else someone decided to conjure up and declare birthday surprise. And, if you're really lucky, your twenty first will happen to fall right smack in the middle of the weekend, prompting all your friends to use your entrance into the adult world as a cause for supreme celebration: not to mention throw shots at you all weekend long. And so, this past weekend, in the midst of celebrating someone else's twenty and one year-old festivities by purchasing a shot of Grand Old Bourbon for the birthday boy, I proudly voiced my glib opinion to the table in the face of vain attempts by my other roommates to convince me otherwise. "Hey, it's not supposed to be fun for him. It's supposed to be fun for us." Needless to say, I'd had a few drinks. And how could I resist? We had managed to find the classiest establishment in all the Greater Boston area to celebrate our roommate's first day in the legal drinking world. Just a hop, skip, and jump from the Tufts campus, we found a place where the Scorpion bowls flow like water and cost nearly the same price. We were, of course, in the palace of all Chinese Cocktail Lounges -- Yee Village. Despite the common declaration that I bear a scary resemblance to the fifty something waiter/bartender/chef that presides over the cheapest Chinese wonderland in all of Boston, Yee's turned out to be the perfect place to start the night. The extraordinarily cheap prices hardly hinder the quality of the scorpion bowls, and although the same can't be said for the more normal cocktails (stay away from the Roy Rogers, Gin and Tonics, Screwdrivers etc), it's hard to pass up a dangerously large bowl of fruit juices and alcohol priced at just over six bucks. After we had pummeled our birthday boy with scorpion bowls upon coronas upon shots of bourbon and the most amusing tequila shot I've ever seen (you're supposed to lick the salt first, Mr. Montalvan), we were amazed to find that the pain in our wallets could never do justice to the hangover our roommate would have the next morning. God bless Yee Village. But the night wasn't over just yet. After paying our miniscule bill, we realized that for the first time in our lives, a bar (a.k.a. Lounge) hadn't crushed our piggy banks, thus causing yet another reason for celebration. But where to? Already nearing midnight on a Thursday, we knew The Burren and its neighbor, The Joshua Tree would be jam-packed, and despite the price controls at Yee's, none of us could afford the cab ride downtown. Then a brilliant epiphany: Underbones. A little outside the mainstream Davis bar scene, Underbones seemed the perfect way to continue our birthday bash. And when we heard about the late night nachos, everyone was sold. Underbones, the basement of the popular Barbecue pit Red Bones, combines a young crowd with a touch of hip southern flavor and some good (though loud) tunes. The dark, yet very comfortable setup with more than enough sitting room for a decent size crowd offers a unique alternative to the more traditional Boston bar. Although not quite the place you would want to head for a quiet night of conversation, Underbones definitely provides an atmosphere perfect for those who have quenched their thirsts beforehand and in the mood shout a little louder and get a tad rowdy. Plus, the late night menu, featuring killer nachos as well as other Red Bones favorites, is a perfect way to appease the after-hour munchies in style. Food, it turned out, was just what the occasion called for. After the plethora of drinks at Yee's, some late night PBR's and nachos at Underbones was just what Mr. Twenty-One Year Old desperately needed. Besides, we didn't want to go too hard on the guy. It was, after all, only Thursday. He still had the rest of the weekend looking him in the face come Friday morning. I happened to get out of bed, drink a glass of water, and use the bathroom just in time to glance the birthday boy trudging off to class the next day. Happy birthday, Los, I said with a smile. I'm pretty sure he didn't smile back.


The Setonian
News

Smoke out

The University should absolutely instate a smoke-free policy for all dormitories. It seems absurd that the rooms where students sleep are still not subject to the safety and quality-of-life rules that are already applied to classroom buildings. While it is unlikely that the policy will convince many students to quit smoking, it will immeasurably aid in creating safer and more comfortable living spaces for everyone on campus. ResLife would never tolerate any behavior or items in the dorms that threaten the safety of residents. Like halogen lights, candles, and incense, cigarettes pose tremendous safety threats and fire hazards to residents and should therefore be outlawed in dorms. And because it is impossible to completely keep cigarette smoke inside a dorm room, this is not an occasion for compromise. Anyone who has lived on a typical floor of a dorm knows that when students choose to smoke in their rooms, the halls often reek of cigarettes, even with the doors closed and the windows open. The argument in opposition to instating this policy simply does not hold water. Some students have cited the existence of substance-free housing as an option for those trying to escape cigarette smoke, but substance-free housing is in high demand and cannot possibly accommodate all students who want to live in smoke free conditions. On principle, nonsmokers should not be asked to accommodate to the needs of smokers. This isn't to condemn those who smoke, but simply to say that since smoke is the cause of health and safety problems, it should be the one to go. It would be unreasonable to ask nonsmokers to leave their dorms to accommodate those who are creating a safety risk. It is blatantly unfair of any University office to allow students to be exposed to the type of long-term harm and the immediate danger caused by cigarette smoke. For $4250 a year, no student should be asked to live in an environment that does not meet the highest health and safety standards.


The Setonian
News

Senate needs to work on reputation as well as student outreach

This weekend's senatorial "elections" are the latest in a string of incidences surrounding the TCU Senate that reflect the Senate's greatest problem: there is little trust or respect for the TCU Senate amongst the general student population at Tufts. The reputation of the Senate is that it is a group of power-hungry, exclusive, elitists, who are part of a useless bureaucracy. I do not necessarily agree with this view, but, especially since the start of the 2002-03 school year, the Senate has provided much evidence to support this hypothesis. The latest incident, as summarized in Jordana Timerman's Feb. 12 article "Election violated ELBO by-laws," shows a complete lack of an attempt at "Senate Outreach." Students were not given adequate notice or time to make a decision about running for Senate. The sole candidate was clearly an "insider," as she is in the same social circle as members of the Senate and the TCUJ. Since the open seat was so unexpected, most students had not thought about running for Senate in the middle of the spring semester. Students needed more time if they were to seriously deliberate running for office. The very idea that only one person wanted to run for an open seat should raise eyebrows for members of the Senate. If the Senate were a respected, representative organization, people would jump at the opportunity to run and serve their school. This problem is not limited to midterm elections, or Senate elections. Excluding freshmen, who always seem to want to get involved on Student Council, I mean Senate, there are never many candidates vying for each Senate seat. The lack of competitiveness in Senate elections decreases Senate accountability and leads to less-qualified candidates being elected. This fall, an unknown transfer student was elected to a sophomore seat, merely two weeks after his matriculation, seemingly going against the point of a sophomore seat. Overextended, unreliable candidates have been "elected" in the past. This problem is visible in other student government organizations, especially ELBO. Clearly, something is wrong if no one wants to be part of these organizations. It is certainly not that Tufts is lacking students who are willing to work hard for the community. The resignation of Melissa Carson brings up another issue besides her replacement. Based on the TCU Constitution, Andrew Potts will be fulfilling the duties of President. This does not serve as a problem in and of itself, but the only thing I have heard about Potts all year was the attempt to impeach him. I do not know about the rest of the Tufts community, but I feel a bit uncomfortable that someone whom some senators considered impeaching will now lead the TCU. I am made even more uncomfortable by the fact that it was never publicly stated why exactly senators wanted to impeach him. In every Daily article I read concerning the Senate, I see the same five or six names repeated. The Senate is a much larger body than these articles suggest. What are the other senators doing besides leading their own small pet projects? It is no wonder most senators get easily re-elected, as no one as any idea what it is they are actually doing. The TCU Senate does do some very important things for the Tufts community. However, it does not act as a representative body, and makes few attempts to accurately represent the concerns and wishes of the community. There are several reforms that need to occur before the Senate can expect to be a respected, effective body. 1. Any potential conflicts of interests need to be avoided, and, at some point, regulated. I have heard senators who sit on ALBO brag about how their particular clubs receive increased funding. Rumors of impropriety surrounding personal relationships abound. I am not implying that improper conduct has gone on, but anything that can be seen as improper makes the Senate look bad. 2. The Senate needs to work on its Public Relations. Although every presidential candidate talks about this, it never seems to be accomplished on a large scale. The Senate has open forums and such, and then complains that no one attends. Senators must actively encourage students, especially student leaders who dominate this campus OUTSIDE of Student Government, to attend these meetings. People do not attend meetings because they see no point, to talk with a defensive, unresponsive Senate. The Senate needs to make people aware of why they should care. 3. Diverse candidates for Senate must be actively sought. This includes racial and all other sorts of diversity. The Senate is not a pre-law, pre-Politician club. It is not an "Overachievers Anonymous" club. It is the governing body of all clubs at this school, and should accurately reflect the diversity of Tufts' many student organizations. 4. The door to the Senate should always be open... literally and figuratively. Too often I have seen students attempt to get into the Senate's second floor office in the Campus Center for various valid causes, only to feel they are interrupting groups' of Senators personal conversations. The Senate office should not be a place for personal business, nor is it a private study lounge or computer lab. In a more figurative sense, the Senate needs to be much more open with the student body. The privacy the Senate currently enjoys is ridiculous. 5. Stop being so darn defensive, and listen to students' complaints, even if you do not like or agree with what they are saying. There are reasons why people think poorly of the TCU Senate. The defense brought up by Senators whenever I speak with them personally is, "Well, anyone can run if they have a problem." Who wants to be part of an organization they do not respect? The Senate should encourage different people from different walks of the University to get involved. Noncompetitive seats will continue to lead to a decreased legitimacy. I hear how the Senate is a wonderful group of people, and there is camaraderie amongst them, yadda yadda yadda... That is all great, but the Senate does not elect the Senate. We do. Adam Pulver is a sophomore studying Political Science and Community Health.


The Setonian
News

Garage band GlassJaw opens up

GlassJaw is a punk-funk-rock band made up of four guys who fake their accents, swear more times than the characters in Pulp Fiction and claim that most bands have their priorities backwards. The band, which hails from Long Island, has been around for a while _ two of its members have been playing together for eighteen years. The Daily recently chatted with Justin Beck, the guitarist and one of the original two members of the crew, amidst comments from the other band members and, strangely, a siren roaring. Daily: Why the name GlassJaw? GlassJaw: (in a fake Albuquerque accent) I was 13 years old when I [and Daryl Palumbo, the vocalist] chose it. All the bands of the time had two-syllable [expletive] names, like Swiss Kick, Mouth Piece, Stand Off. We had a list of 40 something band names that sounded cool. Daily: So you were 13 when you started this band? GJ: Yeah, me and Daryl started it together. Daily: What about the rest of the original band? GJ: Well, the rest were Hare Krishnas. We had a few drummers that left for India. Daily: What was your first instrument? GJ: My mom tried to get me to play piano, like my older sister, but I wanted to play the accordion. I don't even know where it came from. Weird Al Yankovich? I do remember that there was this Yiddish music store, had a wall poster with a whole array of accordions. I thought, 'Holy [expletive], that's sick.' Daily: So how did you get into hardcore? GJ: All my friends were into it and I just gravitated towards the scene. Daily: You say it's a scene. What do you mean by that? GJ: I don't have any words for it. It was an awareness of issues, like Food Not Bombs. It was more than just some dumb kids yelling and beating each other up. Daily: Okay, onto the lyrics. How do you make the music fit with the lyrics? Do you help write them? GJ: The lyrics are just another instrument, another texture, another layer. It's a conglomerate. Daryl writes about his own personal experiences. Whatever [he] is singing about, whether goats or blue cheese, it's music first. Daily: Where would you like to go next with your music? GJ: The Chinese violin is [expletive] brilliant. The gamelin, [an Indonesian instrument] which is like a vibraphone, has different half-tones. It's a whole other scale and another language. Where I used to work, one of my old neighbors was this old-school Persian cat. He used to blast that [expletive] through walls. It's the most bad-ass thing. But I wouldn't actually use these instruments. You study other instruments to enhance your own [music]. Daily: What other jobs did you have while you were playing music? GJ: We didn't. This producer came across our tape, that's how it happened. It was a Saturday morning. We played for 15 seconds, and he signed us on. I said, 'I got finals!' I didn't tell my mom [that I wasn't going back the next semester] for two months. I still had 23 credits [left]." Daily: How did you get signed on with Warner Brothers? GJ: We were getting out of another deal and word got out. [Explative] ANR, this producer said he was going to jump in front of a train if we didn't sign. Daily: So you have reviews on a German e-pinion site and your own Japanese website. How do you feel about that? GJ: It's good that anyone outside of Long Island knows about us. Daily: So how do you feel about touring? GJ: I love NY and I hate leaving it. I hate being on the road because you're not productive. You wait and wait and wait to make new songs. Music is music and that's why we started a band, for the conception of it. Touring is what comes with it. A lot of people have got their ideas about being in a band backwards. Daily: Ever picked up anyone from an audience? GJ: If I believe in Jesus may he strike me down. It's horrid and disgusting. I don't pick anyone up. Daily: Dream locale? GJ: My dream place to play would be some place in Queens where I could easily eat my Malaysian food or Chinese food, go down the block and play. The kids would just come there. It would be the same place, but with different faces. I could beam kids down like on Star Trek. Daily: Any last words of advice? GJ: If you come to our show, don't throw any bottles at our heads. Throw vegetables instead. Those are my words of wisdom for you guys at Tufts. GlassJaw will be appearing in Boston next month. Check out their website, www.glassjaw.com for information on tour dates.


The Setonian
News

Joe's unfulfilling ending

The latest reality show sensation, Joe Millionaire, ended with a bang and a whimper as love won over greed, purity over promiscuity, and aloofness over bondage. America's favorite water cooler fodder came to its grand finale Monday night with the secretly poor Evan Wallace (Marriott) choosing the distant Zora over the passionate Sarah as his partner. As an added twist _ essentially a ploy to keep viewers watching the program _ FOX provided the new couple with a million dollars of their own to share. Somewhere around 35 million viewers tuned in to the two-hour series finale, which carried a great burden on its shoulders to deliver an exciting climactic ending. Last weeks' episode was a crock, as the entire hour had practically no original footage and was devoted to showing clips of the previous dates Sarah and Zora had gone on. Millions of viewers came away perturbed and irritated that FOX _ ingeniously if I might add _ prolonged the program another week. At the end of the penultimate episode, Paul the Butler promised a "shocking twist" in addition to Evan's fateful decision, raising the expectations even higher for the finale. By spending very little on production costs with the exception of editing recycled film, the network got an extra week of ad revenues with little effort. Monday night's program was essentially two episodes. The first hour showed interviews with the eighteen eliminated women, during which they spoke about their reactions to the show, their competition, and Evan's dirty little secret. While there were some fun moments, including the many unhappy faces of Alison and some all-around Heidi-bashing, most of the reminiscing was boring. The producers must have had a difficult time getting the dismissed ladies to talk, as they went to the indistinguishable Katy many times for her thoughts. The other problem with this clip show was that none of the women seemed all that upset about the "millionaire" lie. Sure, some of them felt the premise was degrading, but there was none of the "throw a drink in his face and slap him" melodrama that we viewers were expecting. One of the contestants, Dayana, felt she was eliminated because she could not fetch a nice dress to wear to the first night ball. Her interview was followed by clips of her shaking her booty in skanky clothing, along with proud claims of being a spoiled brat (Methinks Evan had some good foresight in not picking Dayana to move on to the next round). Hour Two capitalized on the building of expectations and lived up to them rather quickly. As Evan chose Zora to be the "winner" (although whether being with Evan is a real "win" is debatable), he soon after broke her trust by telling her the truth about his bank account. In a maneuver to prolong the tension even more, Zora was given the prerogative to take a few hours, mull over her options and choose whether or not to stay with Evan. In the meantime, the vicious porn-star Sarah was taken aback by Evan's decision, and bewildered by his declaration that he is a construction worker making $19,000 a year. As she packed up with fellow snubbed contestant Melissa, she was more confused than angry commenting how stupid Evan looked telling a woman that he is worth next to nothing. This had to be the biggest disappointment of the evening, as many viewers, including yours truly, was hoping for a spiteful and malicious response to Evan's untruthfulness. In the end though, justice was served as the apparent gold-digging Sarah lost out to sweetheart Zora. Part of Zora's explanation as to why she returned was that one of the qualities she disliked about Evan was his newfound inheritance. She was visibly still wary of whether or not she could trust him, as the two stood a few feet apart from each other like middle-schoolers at a Friday night dance. Her feelings are understandable, as there is still one big problem yet to be resolved: he hasn't told her that his name is actually Evan Marriott, not Evan Wallace. Regardless, as the two danced together as the credits rolled, one couldn't help but smile. As Evan described his relationship with Zora as a "roller coaster ride with many ups and downs," similarly, the series finale had a comparable outcome. His choice of Zora was a great peak to the show and the build up to the "shocking twist" was great, too, but in the end, the twist wasn't all that special. FOX making the new couple true millionaires was a touching idea, as Zora is also not rolling in money as a substitute teacher, but was this ending "shocking?" Hardly. While it kept true to the show's theme of the whole adventure being a "fairy tale" and "all fairy tales have good endings," the conclusion of Joe Millionaire offered an unremarkable ending that could never live up to its high expectations.


The Setonian
News

Basic' is anything but

Sometimes, one plot twist is enough. But, John McTiernan, director of the Die Hard Trilogy, and The Hunt for Red October, disagrees. His latest film Basic is yet another conspiracy film that implicates a crooked government agency in dealing with drugs and thus, inevitably, murder. The movie is your typical suspense thriller that not only believes -- but counts on the fact -- that each twist and turn will make up for the fact that it sucks. Essentially, Basic is a movie whose plot is so convoluted, its characters seem to lose interest well before most of the audience does. The film, starring John Travolta, Samuel L. Jackson and Giovanni Ribisi, magically ends with most of the main characters seated around a kitchen table drinking beer and laughing, following the tangled conspiracy plot line. Basic's inexplicable plot is about as awkward as the strange little mustache Samuel L. Jackson dons in the closing seconds of the movie. Before the first half-hour is over, a torrential downpour begins that will prove to be interminable for the duration of the film, and bog down the action. In fact, the rain itself is so overwhelming, at times, it proves to be much louder than the actors' dialogue. What I did appreciate about the film was a ridiculous little scene in which Connie Nelson, an Army lieutenant, and Travolta engage in an absolutely preposterous little tussle. The supposed "sexy" sparring between the two, finds the both of them squeezed into a close-up head shot with a rather phallic-like gun sticking up in between them. This "fight" is about as close as the film gets to a badly needed sex scene. Camera shots, like these, provide humor for the audience in places where the filmmakers' inability to produce correct emotions shines through. At one point, near the third or fourth -- I lost count -- climax, the camera switches back and forth and back and forth once again to the eyes of Travolta and Timothy Daily. Instead of the increased suspense McTiernan was hoping for, the audience around me giggled and all at once made silent resolutions to give the film a bad review. It is unfortunate that McTiernan's career has become such a joke. Likewise, it is a shame that the Oscar-winning duo from Pulp Fiction, Jackson and Travolta, has chosen to reunite with such abysmal filmmaking. The two actors' careers have combined for an astonishing 100 films, approximately. Most recently, however, movies like Battlefield Earth and Lucky Numbers have been significantly less than stellar. As for McTiernan, who had great success with films like Patriot Games, Medicine Man and his remake of The Thomas Crown Affair, much of the same can be said. For example, his last project before Basic was the debacle Rollerball starring LL Cool J. Despite the film's star power, even in the minor character roles filled by Taye Diggs and Harry Conick Jr., the film remains a disaster. If you want to waste your money, don't bother on another Travolta flick, for he has securely established his second successful downfall. As for Samuel L. Jackson, a man who makes at least ten to 15 films a year, I would just wait and see the next one. The bottom line is this: don't waste your time, money and brain cells this movie season trying to figure out something that is supposed to be quite "basic."


The Setonian
News

College Basketball Divides Kentucky

Big-time college basketball has once again created a rift within Kentucky's population. Red or blue? Cardinals or Wildcats? Louisville or Kentucky? In last week's polls, these two intrastate rivals had risen to two and three in the rankings. Not only are these teams fighting for state pride, they are connected by coaches and players, creating a very heated rivalry. For the Kentucky Wildcats, this position in the polls is just another trip around the block. The Wildcats are one of the greatest programs in NCAA history, and were dubbed "the Team of the 90's" by many organizations after winning three national championships during the decade. The Louisville Cardinals, on the other, have not had nearly as much success in the past few years as the Wildcats. However, with the re-emergence of Louisville as a national power, basketball fans in the state of Kentucky are forced to choose their allegiances with either the Cardinals or the Wildcats. Ashley Judd -- wearing her little white Kentucky tees -- has obviously chosen to continue rooting for her boys in Lexington, while many others in the state have begun to don Louisville red as March Madness looms. The relationship between these two teams becomes even more entangled upon closer examination of the coaching staff and of Louisville's lineup. After the '96-'97 season, Kentucky head coach Rick Pitino left the friendly confines of the University of Kentucky for the money and glory of the NBA in Boston. Despite his earlier success with the New York Knicks, Pitino failed miserably with the Celtics and was forced to return to the ranks of college basketball with his tail between his legs. After he was fired during the '00-'01 NBA season, Pitino chose to become the head coach of the University of Louisville. Not only was this of huge consequence to the people of Louisville -- who now had one of the premier coaches in NCAA basketball -- but also to the people of Lexington, where Pitino was a god who, they thought, would bleed Wildcat blue forever. At the beginning of last year's NCAA season, Pitino's first at Louisville, he was approached by a Kentucky player, Marvin Stone, who wanted to transfer to Louisville. Stone had never played for Pitino at Kentucky, but he was recruited by the Wildcat's former coach in his final year in high school. The newly relocated head coach was reluctant to take the talented big man because he was afraid of creating an even more strained relationship amongst Kentucky faithful. Ultimately, Pitino allowed Stone to transfer to Louisville and, as Pitino admits, he is a big reason for the Cardinals' return to prominence this season. Kentucky and Louisville met earlier this season in a game that captured everyone's interest in the state of Colonel Sanders' glory. On Dec. 28, Louisville outplayed Kentucky to win 81-63 at home. Since that win, Louisville nailed 11 straight victories to push the nation's longest active winning streak to 17 games. After its loss on the road to Louisville, Kentucky has won fourteen straight games. Earlier this week on Feb 12, Louisville was defeated by a conference USA foe, the St. Louis Billikens, 59-58. After dealing with its first loss in over two months of play, Louisville defeated another conference rival, the Marquette Golden Eagles (No. 12 ESPN), 73-70 with some last second heroics on Saturday. With six seconds left in the game, Louisville star guard Reece Gaines pulled up and hit a three pointer to put the Cardinals ahead for good after the game was tied seconds earlier on a Marquette three. This shot not only got Louisville back on the winning track, but it snapped Marquette's 28-game home winning streak. With Louisville's loss to St. Louis, Kentucky now takes over the nation's longest active winning streak with its two wins over conference rivals Georgia Bulldogs and LSU Tigers. The teams also flipped places in the polls, with Kentucky moving up to the number two spot. On Feb. 11, the Wildcats defeated Georgia (No. 24 ESPN) 87-67 in a decisive win over a talented team. In a game to solidify its standing as one of the nation's best, Kentucky disposed of the LSU 68-57 on Saturday to remain at the top of the SEC. Guards Keith Bogans and Gerald Fitch scored 20 and 15 points, respectively, and showed improved defense from the start of the season. But no matter what happens the rest of the season, Kentucky and Louisville have revived a rivalry that has the whole state of Kentucky talking.


The Setonian
News

Is the US serious?

When I listen to the American news these days, I feel as though I am watching Iraqi television filled with propaganda. I react the same way as the 23 million Iraqis, reach for the remote and turn it off. Some of the things I hear sound to be completely ridiculous. Is the US serious about what it is saying? Is it really going to defy the wishes of other nation-states in the world and attack Iraq? What does it actually want to do? Is it just me, or have others begun to notice this ridiculousness as well? Let me use one example: Has anyone heard about the US plan for attack? It is called operation "Shock and Awe," and was conceived at the National Defense University in Washington (www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/01/24/eveningnews/main537928.shtml). This plan calls for 300 and 400 cruise missiles to fall on Iraq each day for two consecutive days. These first few days are going to be called "Air Strikes day." It would be more than twice the number of missiles launched during the entire 40 days of the 1991 Gulf War. Pentagon official strategist told CBS news that "there will not be a safe place in Baghdad. The sheer size of this has never been seen before, never been contemplated before." According to military strategist Harlan Ullman, the planned attack will be "rather like the nuclear weapons at Hiroshima." Air Strikes Day will "take the city down," wipe out the water and power supplies in Baghdad, and leave the Iraqis "physically, emotionally, and psychologically exhausted." Is that not chilling? Are they talking for real? I want a voice of reason! I want someone to say something constructive to bring about an end to this Iraq nightmare. These days all I hear sounds like it is coming out of a poorly acted action film. I want an end to this, not a part two or three that is to reveal itself five or ten years later. Enough with the slogans, enough with the extreme language and enough of this game! Can we all escape the rhetoric before we do something stupid? This is not about being for or against the war. It is much more complicated than that. Right now, we are facing two dangers, US warmongering and Iraq's totalitarian system. Warmongering comes largely from the new conservatism that imposes a clash-of-civilizations formula on world politics. The tragic events of 9/11 provided an ideal backdrop to Donald Rumsfeld's "leaning forward" argument for aggression. Second, we have Iraq's totalitarian system that has been a menace to its own people, the region, and the world at large. Leaving these monsters in their place is an invitation to future catastrophe. Dozens of nations have chemical and biological weapons. None has deployed them, except Saddam's regime, first against the Iranian forces, later against Iraqi civilians. Governments should be held responsible for such crimes, right? Yet ironically, the United States let Saddam get away with no punishment for the actual deployment of chemical and biological weapons back in 1988, but it is now, for a plethora of hidden motives and reasons, adamant about confronting him for a possible deployment of such weapons in the future. This is the logic of preemption. Yet there is no law, domestic or international, that permits a prosecutor to go after an ex-convict for a future, would-be offense. Warmongering is shortsighted. An invasion of Iraq may well prove too costly or degenerate into chaos. The demise of the totalitarian regime, however welcome, will involve and unleash latent, uncontrollable institutional and social forces that many of us cannot even begin to imagine. A civil war may begin nobody knows where and end up in nobody knows what. A palace coup might be convenient for the US Administration, but it would be another tragedy for the Iraqi people. The US now is involved in a military crusade, with diplomacy as a reluctant sideshow. And it is not geared to the interests or participation of the Iraqi people -- which by the way, is the only way the Iraqi story will ever have a happy ending. US warmongering has the danger of causing extreme instability in the Middle East and temporarily masking an ugly array of problems in Iraq. What the world should think about is splitting the ruling group in Iraq, i.e. the Baath and Saddam's clan. I offer this solution only because an intervention is going to happen no matter what, whether or not the US alone is justified is doing so. But at least this suggestion/solution would embolden the people to take matters into their hands. A painfully slow process of regime disintegration has already been going on inside Iraq, and this political pressure would hasten the process along. An invasion, on the other hand, would wrench matters out of Iraqi hands and would risk untold consequences. There is a line of thinking that calls for this semi-reasonable logical solution. According to this group, Saddam and his top aides should be indicted for war crimes and then offered a safe passage out of Iraq in exchange for a transfer of power. Then, the rest of the clan would be told that it would not be threatened as long as it hands over power slowly to some sort of interim civilian government. Lastly, in lieu of an invasion, Iraq should be offered a mini-Marshall plan while the transition is happening inside the country. All this would cause a re-inception of the rule of law which is a vital necessity for Iraq. It is also a precondition for any viable, emerging democracy. Such an eventuality will be the best safety net for regional peace and stability. This would lead to a long-term solution, sparing thousands of innocent Iraqi lives and solve the problem of the weapons of mass destruction and the regime that controls them. It would also bring about the change needed inside of Iraq. I wonder though, will the US slow down and think this way or will it continue going down this blind path filled with rhetoric and propaganda? Rana Abdul-Aziz is a senior majoring in International Relations and Middle Eastern Studies.


The Setonian
News

Supersets can add variation to your workout routine

There is this kid in the gym who never shuts up about how intense his workouts are because all he does are "supersets" and "compound" sets. Are these really that much more intense than regular straight sets? What exactly are supersets and compound sets? -Paul B., Georgetown University Compound sets and super sets are advanced training techniques that are more intense than the more common, straight set kind of training. A compound set is a series of two or more exercises for the same body part, performed one after the other with little or no rest. These kinds of sets are commonly used for the larger muscle groups. With chest, for example, the following would be a good compound set: Start off with incline dumbbell flies and do ten to twelve reps. Once you've reached failure, go right into incline dumbbell presses for as many as you can. This simple method of continuing to fatigue a muscle with a compound movement after you have reached failure in an isolation movement is a helpful tool for adding mass and breaking sticking points in the gym. Supersetting is an equally intense exercise technique, though not as strenuous on one individual muscle group. Supersetting consists of performing two exercises back to back for opposing muscle groups. An example would be overhead tricep extensions followed by standing dumbbell curls. Another good superset might be leg extensions right into lying leg curls. Supersetting is primarily used for smaller muscle groups, but it can be applied to larger ones, too, like the chest and back. When used correctly, compound sets and supersets are great ways to add variation to your routine, and to keep each workout interesting. I've been lifting pretty seriously since I got here in September, but now I just feel like I am stagnating in the gym. My workouts are long and boring, and I think my strength is actually going down. I have cut back a little bit, and that has helped, but I am still pretty unmotivated at this point. Any ideas on how I can spice up my workouts a little bit and make them more interesting? - Freshman resident of Bush Hall The first thing you can vary is the order in which you perform each exercise in a specific workout. Take a typical chest workout, for example. A standard chest workout would normally begin with a heavy compound movement or two, say flat bench and incline dumbbell press. Then would come a finishing movement or two, maybe the pec deck or cable flies. To change it up, try just reversing the order of the exercises performed. Sure, your last sets of benches will be humbling because your chest will already be thoroughly fatigued, but variation is what will keep your body adapting and your muscles growing. Another thing you may change up is the way in which an exercise is performed. Take lying triceps extensions (also know as skull-crushers), for example. Instead of using a bar, try using dumbbells. Holding one in each hand, mimic the same motion, but with your thumbs facing you. This variation should place a little bit more emphasis on the long head of the triceps, thereby hitting the muscle slightly differently and giving greater benefit. Another example of variation may be changing up the position in which you perform an exercise. To illustrate, I will talk about seated dumbbell curls. Try adjusting the bench from a right angle to a slight incline. With your head against the bench, and your arms hanging at your sides, curl up slowly, keeping emphasis on the contraction of each arm. This exercise puts a little bit more emphasis on the upper bicep, which gives you more definition and separation between the bicep and the front delt. Another idea would be to take a chest and back workout and just do pull-ups and push-ups. These exercises using one's own body weight are a great way to build up stamina in the back and chest, as well as add definition. Also, these exercises hold some cardiovascular benefit that might not be present in a slow and heavy weight session. Through constant variation, you will be able maintain the benefit of each workout, keep the motivation high, and keep yourself form getting bored.


The Setonian
News

Walkout the wrong idea

Public opinion of the planned student-teacher walkout upon a US attack on Iraq is as divided as the opinions about military action. But in the end, the real losers from such an action are the students. Of course the planned walkout would be a learning experience. But it is ultimately no different than any other so-called "teach-in." As far as teaching goes, those in charge of such events are clearly just preaching to the choir. Forget about catch phrases like "educational opportunity." Let's call it what it really is -- a protest by a group of people with homogenous political ideologies, at least as far as war with Iraq is concerned. Protesting is famously rooted in college life, and its history in influencing Washington politics cannot be overlooked. But claiming that a walkout can serve as an educational tool here implies that a demonstration against war -- like ones going on all across the world -- is somehow a replacement for college courses. Tufts is far from an inexpensive institution, with individual classes that can be worth more than $100. With this kind of cash being spent, it is hard to justify canceling or missing any classes at all. Sure, there are probably classes that would fit well with a robust discussion about the ramifications of a US-led military strike. But there are plenty that would not. Try convincing majors in chemistry, biotechnology, or engineering that their time and money would be better spent talking about Iraq than learning what they are here to learn. The walkout pledge also creates a "with us or against us" attitude that doesn't allow for other opinions or circumstances. Someone could consider himself strongly anti-war and yet not see the need to miss class for a protest. A walkout is absolutely not necessary. The TCOWI could just as easily hold events throughout the week, if the US moves into Iraq, that students could go to as they choose and as their class schedules allow. It is possible to express political views and still go to school at the same time.


The Setonian
News

Dorm rooms decoded: a guide to uphill housing at Tufts

After a year's experience with college dormitories and hopefully with a compatible roommate in mind, many freshmen have high aspirations for attaining "the perfect room" for their sophomore year. Upperclassmen who want to live on campus are also eager to find the best possible housing. No matter what your year, making a housing decision is a stressful procedure. The Daily's guide makes housing options less confusing. Carmichael Hall In the freezing winter months, other Tufts students may have to put on five layers of clothing to go to eat, but Carmichael residents can just walk downstairs to the dining hall on the ground floor. A student parking lot is also directly behind the building. Carmichael's location is uphill on the residential quad, placing it close to uphill classes, but further from the campus center, Davis Square, and the Aidekman Arts Center. Rooms in Carmichael are some of the largest on campus. This year, there are 72 doubles, 97 singles, and five triples. The first floor is Healthy Living, the first three floors are coed by wing, and the fourth and fifth floors are all-female. The first floor of Carmichael has a large lounge and a separate study room; smaller lounges are found on the second and third floors. West Hall Besides being the traditional starting point for the Naked Quad Run, West is by far the oldest dorm on campus. It contains many unique rooms of various shapes and sizes. West has singles, doubles, triples, quads, and one two-person apartment located on the first floor. If you have trouble getting to class on time, you couldn't ask for a better location than West, which is the only dorm located on the academic quadrangle. West is by far one of the most social dorms on campus. If you don't wind up living in West, be sure to stop by on Saturday night. West is a very popular dorm for sophomores and usually is the first to fill up in the lottery. Houston Hall If you're looking to live uphill, Houston might be the place for you. Living in a Houston double can be somewhat cramped, but whatever it lacks in space, it makes up in location: no need to wake up early for classes at Olin or Cabot, plus it grants fast access to Carmichael. There are 126 doubles in Houston, all about 13' by 15'. There is also one four-person apartment on the first floor. Unlike Miller, Houston only has one common room, which is located in the basement, so most socializing takes place in rooms rather than in common areas Miller Hall Very similar to Houston in layout and room size, Miller's biggest benefit are the common rooms located on each floor. These rooms provide an open space for socializing. Each floor also has an enclosed quiet-study room that proves invaluable during finals. Other perks of Miller living include its location next to Carmichael, above the Oxfam Caf?©. Miller is a very popular dorm, usually filling up after West in the lottery. . Wren Hall Wren is different in layout from all other uphill dorms. Unlike the typical hallway structure found in buildings like Miller and Houston, the floor plan of Wren is arranged into suites composed of four doubles and two singles, a common room, and a bathroom. Keep in mind that suites are single sex! As in Haskell, which is similarly laid out, a good experience in Wren is entirely dependent upon how compatible you are with the people living in your suite. People who have moved in with a group of friends say that Wren can be a great place to live. The common room and "semi-private" bathroom are definite benefits of this well-located dorm. Wilson House Located on the corner of Curtis Street and Chetwynd Road, Wilson House comprises 11 doubles, 18 singles, and five triples. The house is coed, but all females live on the East side of Wilson House, while males occupy the ground floor and West side. Wilson House is good for those who want to escape the traditional dorm life and live in a cozier environment. Carpenter House For those who want an escape from the traditional dorm, Carpenter House is located uphill in back of Carmichael Dining Hall and near several off-campus eateries. It has 15 doubles, seven singles and one triple, all of different dimensions. The second floor is all female and the third floor is all male. The first floor has two bathrooms; the second and third floor each have one. There is a common room on the first floor. Carpenter feels cozier than the dorms because it is small an like Wilson House, it is an excellent housing option for students who want a break from busy, crowded, dorm life. Hill Hall If you find it tough to get to the gym in this weather, you might want to consider living in Hill next year. Besides its proximity to Cousens, Hill contains an aerobics studio where various clubs and classes meet. While some complain that Hill is "in the middle of nowhere," others claim that there are some real perks to being right on top of Boston Ave. If the gym isn't your thing, you'll certainly be able to get to Espresso's and Dunkin' Donuts easily to pack on the pounds. The common room in Hill provides great views of Medford and is typically a good place for studying rather than socializing. The rooms are huge and include singles, doubles and one three-person apartment.


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