|
Episode II: the next class
by Dave Nurenberg
Want to know my favorite scene from the entire Star
Wars trilogy?
It's when the aged hero Obi-Wan Kenobi confronts his
now-evil pupil, Darth Vader, who jeers his former teacher that things have
come full circle.
When all seems lost, Obi-Wan turns his head and makes
eye contact with young Luke Skywalker fleeing the Death Star ... and
Obi-Wan smiles. He smiles, lays down his lightsaber, and lets Darth Vader
slay him. Obi-Wan knows that despite his own defeat, he has actually won,
because the galaxy now has a new hope.
At Brandeis, too, the torch has been passed to a new
generation of heroes, and just in time - there is so much to be done.
Here are
the top 10 battles Obi-Wan suggests for the new Lukes and Leahs to take
up:
10. Get student representation in tenure and hiring
decisions. Why? Take Susan Moeller Ñ despite her immense popularity,
consistent high course ratings, and impressive achievements, she's been
denied tenure because a bunch of non-students deemed her work "too
politicized." Take the ornery, insult-slinging Ed Koch, who most students
can't stand. He's a big
name, somehow we keep him.
Undergraduate Departmental Reps
(UDRs) already sit in
on hiring meetings in some departments. Give them a vote here, and also
during stage one of the tenure process.
9. Get stronger student representation in trustee
decisions. Outsourcing, tuition hikes, and demolishing Ford Hall are all
issues we have a lot to say about.
We have an investment in this school, both with our
tuition now and donations later. Give our trustee rep a place and a vote
on all committees.
8. Direct, popular election of senior speaker,
without a faculty/student/administrative
committee decision at the end. Elections in the real world aren't subject
to approval by a secret caucus. This is our graduation, not Jehuda's.
If the administration fears being embarrassed, I say they should be
embarrassed at quashing their students' rights.
7. Special protection for student media.
Freedom Magazine's defunding gave a frightening example of the Senate's power to punish a magazine for printing something they
don't
like. The SAF protects the Justice, Watch, and BRS from this.
Protect the rest of us. Institute a bylaw that no
media group (the BMC charter already defines a media group)
can be dechartered or receive any financial penalty
based solely on the content of what it prints.
6. Keep an eye on
Aramark: Workers still tell me they're
overworked, prices are still high, lines are still ridiculous. Make sure
Aramark does not walk on their employees or the students in their quest
for profit.
We
already lost this year's Bronstein BBQ, supposedly because Aramark was
unwilling to take the loss that Dining Services traditionally did.
Profits aren't everything. Sometimes it's worth losing some cash
to enjoy yourself. What else is money for?
5. 24-hour library and a 24-hour place to eat. Find
the money somewhere. What about the dough we've supposedly saved from all
this outsourcing?
4. Student representation in the housing lottery.
'Nuf
said.
3. Permit and encourage student expression. Loosen
the tight sign-hanging policies that result in even "approved" notices
being torn down hours after they're hung. Set up kiosks for display of
notices and artwork all over campus. Show the world we have some life
here.
Give Admissions and the Orientation Committee some
Valium. The Media Coalition, UTC, and Ultimate Frisbee, to name a few,
have all hit roadblocks trying to plan events for prospective and incoming
freshmen.
This school tries so hard to present an
'image,'
and winds up presenting an image of a wasteland. Want to improve our
abysmal freshman retention rate? Let us show them a good time.
2. SAF Education. The image of the SAF remains one of
a money sink greedily controlled by special interests. We're already
entitled to see their financial activity Ñ have the Senate publish a
newsletter. SAF leaders, reach out and help the allocated clubs. Don't boast or take on elitist, conspiratorial airs.
1. Bulldoze Usdan. Leave Ford Hall standing, and
instead demolish this travesty claiming to be a student center in favor of
a genuine place to gather, have events, and come together as a community.
If the administration is too afraid
we'll use all
that free space to organize, that's all the more reason to do it. Alumni
seeking to donate: I cannot think of a worthier cause.
Heroes, you've got your work cut out for you.
May the force be with you, always.
To the Editor:
In recent weeks many members of the class of 1999
have voiced their concern regarding their Senior Class Gift process. As
the staff person responsible for the successful implementation of the Gift
and as an alumnus of Brandeis University, I would like to express my
sadness and concern regarding the turn of events surrounding this gift.
Maintaining a need-blind admissions policy is one of
the many ways that Brandeis sets itself apart from other prestigious
universities throughout this country. President Jehuda Reinharz has, in
fact, made fundraising for scholarships his number one priority and in
turn the University's number one priority. Because of this priority, one
of the gift options given to the senior class was a scholarship. In
addition, other options included funding for an undergraduate fellowship
or the funding for an Alumni Career Network on the Internet. Approximately
22 percent of the senior class voted and of those who chose to vote, 62
percent voted for the scholarship option. It is clear that those students
who voted for their senior class gift also understood the importance of a
scholarship.
In conjunction with the Senior Class Gift Steering
Committee, the Office of Development and Alumni Relations has sponsored
two wine and cheese receptions (Oct. 23 and Feb. 4) and one party (April
22). The Senior Class Party last Thursday was a huge success with over 225
seniors in attendance. The 99 Days till Graduation party, which has been
discussed in numerous news articles and letters to the editor,
unfortunately was not planned in time by the Senior Class Gift Steering
Committee. We decided it would benefit the class of 1999 to postpone this
event and choose a date that would allow for better planning and
preparation. Based upon the success of Thursday night's party it seems
clear that this was the right course of action.
Contrary to popular belief, we are not "in it
for the money." Our main concern, as I mentioned in the March 30,
1999 issue, is to unite the class of 1999 and raise funds for the
scholarship. I hope that in the few remaining weeks, we can increase our
current level of participation to that of at least 50 percent in honor of
the University's fiftieth anniversary, in honor of the friends that you
have made, the professors you cherish and all your hard work over the past
four years. Thank you to all who have already participated, and to those
who have yet to participate, on behalf of the Senior Class Gift Steering
Committee, I'd like to thank you in advance.
Adam M.
Greenwald '98
Assistant Director of Alumni Relations
To the Editor:
I am writing in regard to your coverage of this year's
Bronstein Weekend. I must commend you on the excellent front-page article
detailing the Weekend's activities. However, I take exception to some of
the comments in the same issue's staff editorial.
You begin by stating that "events were [once]
well publicized and well attended," implying that this year's
festivities suffered from a lack of interest. Yet the theme dinner,
concert, drive-in movie, Stein night and Medieval Faire were all well
attended.
You recommend that a laser light show replace the
fireworks we are no longer capable of hosting. As Sara Greengrass remarked
in your "Bronstein goes medieval" article, this was in fact
considered. The idea was rejected due to both the prohibitive cost of such
a show and a very unimpressive demonstration we received. Surely the
Justice Editorial Board doesn't advocate Student Events' throwing large
amounts of money at an underwhelming event.
You infer that another rave was not held due to the
negative publicity. I can assure you that this never factored into our
decision. The rave was never intended to be an annual event. Rather than
stagnate, Student Events has made it one of our goals to continually bring
new and innovative programming to the students of Brandeis.
Finally, I must take issue with your comment that the
weekend was "poorly ... planned." While you are certainly
entitled to your criticism (and in fact I appreciate constructive
criticism), it does nothing to improve the situation. I applied for the
job of Bronstein Weekend Coordinator because of my personal desire to see
more and better programming on campus, and I have done the best I could in
pursuing these goals. Of course I would like to do better. But I can't do
it without your help.
Virtually all of this year's Special Events Committee
volunteer meetings went unattended. I can't bring you the programs you
want unless you tell me what they are. So, if you have an idea for a great
event for next years' Louis Louis or Bronstein weekends, drop a note in my
mailbox in the Student Events office. Leave me a voicemail at x64753. Send
me an e-mail at studentevents@brandeis.edu. Attend a volunteer meeting.
Apply for an Assistant Director or Coordinator position. Get involved!
I want to get the same things out of Student Events
that you do - fun, exciting programming for the whole campus to enjoy. So
let's rise above criticism. Let's be more constructive. Let's work
together towards realizing these goals.
Jesse Richman '01
Bronstein Weekend
Coordinator
To the Editor:
Did you ever wonder why the Brandeis Union Senate had
this reputation for being grossly negligent and disgustingly inefficient?
For not caring about student concerns? I thought they just got a bad rap,
until today.
I walked into Usdan, ready to purchase my formal
ticket, only to hear from a fellow student that they were sold out. Sold
out? My high school prom (also called a junior/senior formal) never sold
out.
When I went to the Senate Office, at 2 p.m., the door
was slammed in my face by a Students Events person who was "just using
the duplicator." I looked at the office hours to find out that the
senators assigned to the block were not there.
When I called said senators, Zach Bennett and Ari
Greenfield, neither were in the rooms. I left pretty huffy messages on
both machines having been so frustrated already. Ari called me back.
He had an equally huffy reply but a few days later he
extended a heartfelt apology and expressed genuine concern and
disappointment over the whole situation.
The next step in my quest for answers was to write an
e-mail addressed to the Union Senate.
Here is a response I received from senator Esteban
Schabelman: "Now, the fact that some senators were not at their office
hours can easily be explained. We are in a transition period, from one
constitution to another, and some positions were eliminated. Needless to
say, things are a bit hectic. Please excuse the disorder until we get the
transition sorted out."
Of course, Student Union President, Ellie Levine
assured me that the posted hours were accurate. So already the senators
are confused among themselves.
I understand all about transition, I am president of
a club which recently ratified a new constitution, but if the senate knows
that certain senators can't make their office hours, or if office hours
have changed, why can't they at least just change the sign on the door?
Is that too much to ask?
Schabelman concluded his letter saying that the
formal was not really affiliated with the senate and that I should address
concerns to Sara Greengrass and Jon Heafitz .
When I finally reached Sara Greengrass, she had this
to say: "The Junior/Senior formal has always been a limited event, and
for that reason we advertised that students should purchase tickets
early."
I would like to assert that nowhere was it advertised that we should
purchase tickets early.
I am looking at several flyers and the poster in
Usdan and no mention of the word "limited" was used. And how am I
supposed to know that the formal has always been limited? This is the
first year I would have had the opportunity to go. My only information via
flyers, signs and broadcast messages on my voice mail was that
"tickets
will be on sale until April 23rd," and here I was, shut out on the 21st.
To add insult to injury, one particular senator has
now decided to use the word "harassment" to describe my trying to hunt
down clear answers to this whole mess.
Now, I
know there will most likely be a reply to my letter next week, so I want
to say at this time that I am not harassing senators and never intended
to make their lives inordinately difficult.
I went to the senate office with every intention of
asking who was in charge of the formal. When I found the senate office
closed and locked during office hours, I was quite upset.
Those senators because they are not on the
junior/senior formal committee may not have a duty to field questions
about the formal, but they do have the responsibility of being in the
office to direct me to the correct party.
I believe I had every right to call them and ask them
questions.
At the time of my initial phone calls, both senators
were technically on duty. "Onduty" does not mean not in the senate
office nor does it mean being hostile to questions from the student body.
It is not my fault that there is a big crisis over
the jr/sr formal and as a student I have every right to present my
grievances to the student senate without being called "wrong" or
"harassing."
And I
feel that the student senate has been treating the unaccomodated juniors
and seniors in a very flip manner Ñ as though our concerns are petty and
invalid. I wonder how many senators will be on that junior/senior formal
waitlist with the rest of us!
I have a friend that frequently uses the phrase,
"What
a mess," to describe exasperation and a feeling of sadness about a
situation. And that's what
the formal has become, a mess.
This whole ugly situation disgusts me and makes me
wonder if senators realize that they were elected to do a job Ñ to me,
that job includes serving the student body, and if they don't want to do
it, they should not take on the responsibility.
So if you're on the waiting list, or thinking about
it, consider what my friends and I are doing: picking up our
already-rented tuxes, throwing on our formal dresses and going out for a
classy dinner and some fun on our own.
It will
most likely be less headache than the formal and we'll get the added
benefit of not having to deal with any more of the senate's runaround.
Amy Mendosa ‘00
Editorial: A toast to new traditions
On a campus where students often whine that there is
nothing to do, it was heartening to witness the widespread turnout for
this weekend's "E Pluribus Unum" (Out of Many, We Are One) events. The
variety of activities, from Saturday night's "Culture X" to Sunday
afternoon's rededication of the chapels, highlighted the weekend's intercultural theme.
The celebration was a testimony to the value of many
months of planning. Future event planners should take heed of the hard
work the 50th Anniversary Committee devoted to the weekend if they wish to
emulate its success. Of course, the fact that the administration strongly supported these activities, giving both funds, time,
and publicity, cannot be ignored. Perhaps a similar interest in
university-wide activities beyond this year's 50th anniversary
commemoration could foster a more lively campus and a more tight knit community in the future.
The weekend raised the vital question of what
diversity means at Brandeis. While we cannot pretend to be the most
ethnically or religiously diverse campus, an important part of the
Brandeis tradition involves a tolerance for differences and a history of
discussing and celebrating our varied cultures.
"Culture X" successfully brought together a wide array of ethnic
groups, not only to showcase their traditions individually, but also to
meld their respective cultures into joint performance pieces, creating a
powerful sense of unity.
Many community members have expressed their interest
in making "Culture X" a yearly tradition. Such a university-sponsored
event would be a valuable addition to our young university. It could
expand the community's understanding, and recommit us to the founding
principle of hosting diverse groups. As we wind down our 50th anniversary
year and embark upon our next half century, perhaps we should also strive
to recognize our diversity by participating in more cultural events year
round.
Editorial: Theft preposterous
The recent campus thefts, highlighted by last
week's burglary in the Bursar's office, illustrate the inadequate security
measures currently in place. The University must immediately review and
upgrade its protection systems and practices.
This is an embarrassing blunder on the part of the
university. The absence of an alarm in the Bursar's office enabled a
perpetrator to enter and exit the office with relative ease. It is
particularly disturbing that the Department of Public Safety and the
University did not act upon the potential danger of leaving valuable items
in an office lacking proper protection. Only after the theft of $15,000
did the University install a proper alarm system.
The recent break-in gives the administration a
tremendous impetus to install similar systems throughout offices on
campus. The University has finally conceded that numerous sections of the
building are still inadequately protected. It is currently receiving
estimates for a complete alarm system in the Bernstein-Marcus
Administrative Complex. Not only must administrative officials be
concerned with keeping money secure: they should also assure that
important files and paperwork stay protected from unauthorized people.
In comparison with other schools, our University has
fairly lax security measures. The administration should learn from this
debacle in Bernstein-Marcus and take security into greater consideration
when planning future buildings, including residence halls.
The University can feasibly limit the occurrences of
crime on campus. However, administrators must pay more careful attention
to basic safety issues on campus. Acting proactively and eliminating
problems before they develop will help prevent future theft and
insecurity. In comparison to the cost of not having adequate security, the
price of a quality alarm system seems relatively low.
Last dance; last chance for class get-together: sold
out
by Susanna Chilnick and Corrina Lesser
What's
the point of having a Junior/Senior Formal if
all of the juniors and seniors can't go?
Last week, rumors that the Formal was sold out were
confirmed, to the dismay and bewilderment of many students.
While a
limit was never advertised, only 500 tickets were ever available.
Apparently, when booking a hotel, the coordinators of the event assumed
that less than a third of the
combined junior and senior classes would be interested in attending. As a
result, the maximum capacity of the room booked was 500 people.
On Friday, juniors and seniors received a letter from
Jr./Sr. Formal co-coordinators Sara Greengrass '99 and Melissa Sherman '00
explaining that the reason only 500 tickets were allotted was that
"each
year fewer than 500 people have attended."
While this may be true, it is small consolation for
those who were unable to get tickets.
In the wake of the ticket debacle surrounding last
semester's Brandeis at 50 Gala, it is unfortunate that the coordinators
of the Formal did not attempt to gauge the interest in this event. Perhaps
a survey sent to the Classes of '99 and '00 earlier in the semester
would have prevented this mishap.
The Formal is an opportunity for all juniors and
seniors to get dressed up and celebrate with friends. But for those
students who will be saying farewell to Brandeis in a few short weeks, the
Formal is a last chance for the class to be together before graduation. It
is unfortunate that so many seniors will not have this privilege.
To the
Editor:
Last week's editorial criticizing the whimper that replaced the historic bang of this
year's Bronstein Weekend grabbed me. I agree with the insight into Brandeis spirit, that we
"need to foster traditions that the campus can rally behind ... to instill a feeling of camaraderie among community members." It is, therefore, disappointing that E Pluribus Unum Weekend seemed to receive much less student support than it deserved. Surely the schedule provided the
'right' ingredients: free admission to the dazzling extravaganza of Culture X, the main event of the weekend with its free food from area restaurants (no Aramark at all!) and free after party going until 3 a.m.; lectures and discussions on Friday, Saturday and Sunday with community and student leaders working for social justice and interfaith harmony; and the gift of wonderful weather all weekend
long. So, why did more students not attend these events? Perhaps indifference or obliviousness keeps others from celebrating the hard work and the ideals embraced by the performances and leadership of my peers at
Brandeis. Despite everything working for Culture X and the rest of E Pluribus Unum Weekend, many on this campus ironically seem to incessantly complain about a lack of social life yet fail to notice, much less attend, dynamic and exciting events that can reinvigorate
one's attitude and broaden one's horizons. While "any event that draws large numbers and rouses student interest is likely to be controversial," E Pluribus Unum Weekend created no controversy other than a challenge for Brandeis students to open their hearts and minds outside the classroom. I know that this challenge will not go away, but I fear that the
"silent majority" will continue to ignore this task.
Andy Shugerman '01
At-Large Member, ICC Board
Meal Plan
Rip-Off
by Ray Sass
A much discussed topic among students at Brandeis is the meal plan. This is a system of governing the students' money and controlling how they may pay for their meals. The current options include: a 10 meal, zero points plan; a 14 meal, 20 points plan; and a 21, zero points meal
plan. The major problem with these systems is the lack of compensation for missing meals. When a student misses one or more meals in a week, he is allotted one guest meal. This is to say that if a student misses eight meals in one week, he is allotted one guest meal. What this amounts to is highway robbery over the course of a semester. Students are forced to sign up for some meal plan. They do not have the choice of going off the meal plan all together and buying all their meals with cash or even buying all points. My question is simply, why
not? Many campuses, including BC, have an all points meal plan and any points not used at the end of the year are returned to the students in dollars or are carried over for the next semester. The notion of charging the students for only what they spend seems like an honorable enough idea. Why not institute a similar system
here? I don't think the Board of Trustees has instituted the current system of meal plans to unfairly take money from hard-working students who are, in many cases, struggling to pay for this expensive education. I think that rather they have just not considered the situation enough to realize that is what they are
doing. Recently a conference was held in which the Board of Trustees discussed the meal plan and possible amenities to be made to it. What they decided to do was keep the same system that stands now and change the prices. I spoke to one woman in the office of Dining Services and was told that,
"Really the only way you can get off the meal plan is to move off campus or live in Grad." I think that there should be another way, and I believe that many of you
agree. My suggestion, powerful student body, is that we all let the administration know what we think by calling or stopping by the office of Dining Services in Kutz 9 and letting them know what we think about the current system. To make a change, we will have to take some steps to effect one.
Let's do it, Brandeis!
Mod 5 bad art; great campus
bond
by Levi Pinsky
"Mod 5" is the best thing to happen to Brandeis since I arrived here. I
couldn't understand what was happening during the first show, nor could I figure out which character was which. But, I have no doubt that the new program has done more for Brandeis students than most other events or organizations on
campus. The day of the "Mod 5" premier, I decided with a few friends to watch the show in Shapiro Lounge. I figured there would probably be a crowd, so I arrived a little early. The throng that gathered soon-after exceeded all my expectations. Dozens of people poured in at a time, eventually filling the room to capacity; people stood on tables and at distant points all over the room trying to catch a glimpse of the screen. I recognized faces that I
hadn't seen since Orientation. Abuzz with anticipation, the crowd awaited the theme music and opening images of our
school's very own TV show. Alas, the television would not pick up Channel 2, and Channel 3, which was supposed to air the show as well, instead broadcast some Waltham High School Choir performing on a football field. Undoubtedly a very worthy program, but not what we were looking
for. I'm not exactly sure what happened next because all of a sudden the room fell into chaos; we needed our
"Mod 5" fix. Next thing I knew I was outside surrounded by people running in different directions. Rumor had it that two people were in Ziv Commons watching
"X-files" - a lynch mob formed to overthrow the heretics and restore
"Mod 5" to the screen. Others ran towards Usdan. Luckily, I ran into some friends whom I had been separated from in the ensuing chaos, and we joined a mass migration toward the Student Center. I
hadn't seen that many people out after eight o'clock at night since school started. It was refreshing to find that the school
didn't empty out after dinner-time. Mounting the hills of Brandeis, we searched as one person with one heart for the object of our pilgrimage, a big screen showing
"Mod 5." At Usdan, we encountered another large crowd attentively viewing the show, but, to our chagrin, the TV gave off almost no sound. I saw a girl on the screen sitting in a towel, rubbing moisturizer onto her leg and talking to some guy on a couch, but I
couldn't hear what they were saying. I figured they probably weren't discussing Kosovo or the Boston Red Sox losing streak. A little disheartened, I sat down with everyone else and tried to figure out what was going
on. As I sat in the crowded Lower Lobby, the silence in the room suddenly struck me. Everyone sat spellbound, attentively trying to hear the dialogue and thereby gain some feel for the plot. In my time here, I have not been to a lecture that commanded this type of silence; one could undoubtedly hear a pin drop. Everyone participated in this self-enforced silence as if, without having to say anything, we all realized the magnitude and importance of the
event. Later, when the face of one of the students in the Usdan crowd popped up onscreen during the
"Shout out" section of the show, everyone cheered, congratulating him on his feat. No one had to say anything; everyone just realized how cool it was to have
one's face on the screen, so we responded as a group with praise. The show truly created a sense of cohesion in the room and this undoubtedly spilled over throughout the campus. When I saw a friend of mine pop up in a little cameo in the show, I got excited and told the guy sitting next to me. Who
didn't laugh out loud when he saw Hector from the Snackery lending one character a pen to take down a
girl's phone number? We all took pride in our campus and fellow students for the simple reason that they were on TV, representing us and our daily
lives. Regardless of the show's questionable artistic merit, it has a very positive impact on our community. Through the fact that we all come together to watch the show and cheer on our peers who make the program what it is, we create a more vibrant and unified campus. We create an atmosphere of school pride, where Chumley's and the library take on added significance and novelty, which Brandeis lacks and sorely
needs. Hopefully "Mod 5" will continue to gain the support of Brandeis students and persevere as a positive source of pride and unity for our university.
To the
Editor:
I would like to formally announce my acceptance of the position of Director of Student Events for the 1999-2000 school year. I was offered the position on Friday, April 16, and accepted the following day, but I have decided to write this letter to make this fact public. I will be
"in training" from now until May, at which time I will begin my tenure
officially. As some of your readers may know, I am a sophomore who has been involved with Student Events since arriving here last August. Halfway through my first year, I applied for and was selected as the Coordinator of Entertainment, a position that I have held this year under the title of Assistant Director for Entertainment. During my tenure, I have planned shows by the Violent Femmes, They Might Be Giants, Blues Traveler, Jiggle the Handle, and this
year's extremely popular comedy coffeehouse series. I am sure that many of your readers feel that Student Events is not worth the money that it is given. One of my goals that I hope to accomplish as director is to prove the students at Brandeis that Student Events is a worthwhile organization. I would like to dispel any notions that all Student Events does is spend money and put on events that few members of the Brandeis campus attend. Unfortunately, I am not going to outline my exact plan for doing this. However, I would like to assure the students at this school that it is in their best interest to keep watching for further details - Student Events is going to undergo many changes in the next few months, and all of them are going to benefit the Brandeis
community. In closing, I wish to assure your readers that I empathize with their feelings toward Student Events; I may be an
"insider," but I am also a student at Brandeis. Having experienced the faults of Student Events first-hand, I can see what must be done for it to improve as an organization. I hope that the students here can keep their minds and eyes open for change;
we're ready when you are!
Joshua S. Bob '01
Director of Student Events
Political experience more fun outside of
class
by Aron Estaver
"They don't have to rhyme," I told him, looking over the campaign slogans he handed me.
"But they sound cooler if they do." "Trust me, they don't
have to." And as I painted signs the next day, I made sure that none of the ones I painted rhymed. Before I joined my
friend's senate campaign, I had only actively participated in politics once in my life. That was in fifth grade, when some friends and I launched an elementary school campaign supporting Mike Hayden for governor of Kansas. Granted, the first and second graders we targeted could barely write coherent sentences, let alone debate serious policy issues, but we still had fun. Since then, I
hadn't given much thought to the political processes and elections. Possibly being a political science concentrator, this concerned me. So when a friend asked if I wanted to help out with his senate campaign, I readily agreed. After all,
it's not like I had anything better to do (homework doesn't count).
The next day, he kept asking me if he looked right for the photo. "Is my hair okay? I want to look good for the picture."
"It looks fine." He looked fine." A lot of people vote the way they do because of the pictures, you know." I was well aware of this sad-but-true fact. So we typed a colorful fact sheet about him to put next to the picture, humorously poking fun at the seriousness of everything. We are just college students, after all. He had a long list of programs he wanted to implement, services he wanted to fix. I was impressed. I complain about everything, but rarely do anything to fix what I
don't like; and based upon everything that had been going on in the Senate, I really
didn't care to get involved in it myself. Yet I was more than happy to help someone that wanted to. We can always use new idealists to at least try and fix
what's wrong with the system. "Where do you think we should put the signs?" It was a day before the election, and we were still painting signs. Granted, it
wasn't the best way to run a campaign but, in the words of Alanis
Morissette, "You live, you learn." "I've never done this before. How about right next to everyone
else's I suggested. Running around a darkened campus, he taped up his signs. The signs with the slogans I
didn't think should rhyme. "A man walks into a bar. Ouch. Vote for Steve." I looked at him and the sign I was holding.
"Well, at least we don't have to worry about offending anyone with this one." And the next day, after everyone had voted in the primaries, he became nervous. I became nervous that he was nervous.
It's never good to second-guess yourself or your actions. But we made it. Ah, the exhilaration of knowing that your campaign was better and at least a little more effective than others. And after the ballots were cast and counted two days later ... he
didn't win. "Well, I'm a better man for losing," he said, pausing to reflect.
"But hell, I e-mailed 217 people!" Despite the loss, it was a great experience for the both of us (and everyone else who helped). Not only did I discover where the Student Senate office is and where exactly all of those signs are painted, but I also gained a little practical political experience. Maybe all our work
didn't get us anywhere, but at least we had a hell of a great time. Isn't that what college is all
about? And if you should see signs around campus about this time next year, please forgive me. Nothing rhymes with
Aron.
To the
Editor:
When I learned last semester that our Senior Class Gift had already been selected I felt disappointed; I had missed an excellent opportunity to participate in choosing a gift that would represent the class of
'99 for years and years to come. Like many seniors, I don't have a lot of extra time but I feel that leaving a legacy is a worthwhile cause. Imagine my surprise when I continued to read the memo informing me that the Brandeis Administration had made the decision that all future class gifts were to be scholarships. Woe is me and all my naive beliefs that the senior class generally picks the Senior Class gift. Upon questioning the Administration I was informed that the specifics of the scholarship had yet to be decided on. The Administration did not want to completely and totally exclude the Senior Class from the selection process, so they threw us a tidbit: we got to pick what kind of scholarship we give. Well let me jump for
joy! Past gifts included renovating the Castle lookout and putting a clock on the exterior of Farber library. These are excellent gifts that the entire Brandeis community can enjoy. A scholarship can also benefit the entire community, perhaps indirectly, through recognition of the
recipient's accomplishments; although it does primarily benefit one
individual. However, I am not writing to object to a scholarship being the Senior Class Gift. I am writing to protest the selection of the Senior Class Gift by the Administration. A simple vote by the senior class to choose a scholarship, a clock, whatever, would have satisfied the principles of democracy to which we, as a class and society in general, subscribe. But wait
- we did have a vote, didn't we? We got to pick which kind of scholarship we wanted. I find laughable any suggestion that this vote was anything other than an administrative tactic to make the senior class feel it still had some say in the selection process. The reality is that we were voting on a gift that the Administration had already decided (last semester) was to be nothing other than a
scholarship. The gift expresses the senior class' gratitude; it is our way of saying
"thank you" to the faculty, the staff, and our fellow students for four years which we will keep with us no matter to which corner of the globe we travel and no matter what we choose as our
occupation. The senior class is giving the gift to neither the Administration nor to Alumni Relations; the senior class is giving the gift to the entire Brandeis community. Administrators are a small group indeed on the long list of people, that includes faculty, current and future students, their parents, visitors, etc., who will receive the gift It is therefore troubling, to say the least, that administrators should see themselves fit to dictate what the gift, or type of gift, should
be. Another fact is that the gift is above and beyond any dues owed to the University. This very fact makes the Senior Class gift something special, something to be treasured. With this, I am simply reminding the Administration that a gift is offered voluntarily. It is not something for the receiver to expect or choose in advance. That the receiver has no inherent right to the gift is a fact that our present administration has
overlooked. I would like to take this opportunity to point out that there already existed a system of checks and balances to prevent a senior class from giving a completely inappropriate gift, like replacing Bernstein-Marcus with a nice new pond. A senior class presented its idea to the Administration for final approval, allowing the Administration to halt the presentation of a gift that might damage the overall appearance of the University. Students and administrators worked together to find a suitable gift. The Administration has told you current seniors and seniors of future years,
"no more." Alumni Relations is disappointed with the senior class' failure to eagerly rush in and raise a lot of money for the gift. I propose that this was a conscious decision by seniors not wishing to take part in raising money for a gift that they were not allowed to choose. Alumni Relations' canceling the
'99 Days "Till Graduation" party represents its recognition of our class' actions and is its childish response. Alumni Relations' point is,
"If you don't give us a lot of money, we won't give you a party." The rescheduling of this party was a weak attempt at improving the horrible impression Alumni Relations has made for itself. Good luck.
Here's a clue: The only way to improve your image is to give us back the power to choose our
gift. One important question that has been thus far overlooked is why the Administration is doing this. It has been suggested to me that this is a method for balancing the budget. Paul
Rosenstein, an administrator with whom I spoke, informed me that the University has decided that it most needs scholarships at this time. The
Administration's dictation that scholarships will be the designated gift for the next few years can serve to significantly lighten its budget-balancing burden. It can then allocate fewer funds from the budget for scholarships. I really hope that the Senior Class Gift has not been reduced to a mere dollar figure on a budget. However, one must admit that this explanation is rather
compelling. Is this controversy deserving of the attention and fighting it has received? My response is that it is not one over which I will fight; I will simply refuse to participate in it. I will not spend my time, nor do I expect any other Senior to spend his/her time, working on a gift that the senior class did not select. I must reemphasize that had the senior class selected a scholarship over some other option as a class gift, I would be behind it 100
percent. This pre-selection process by the Administration has severely strained the Alumni/Class of
'99 relationship. The senior class did not ask for this tension to be placed on this relationship, it was simply heaped on it by the Administration. I anticipate that future senior classes will be equally dissatisfied with the
Administration's choosing of their senior class' gift. I would like to formally request that the Administration end this pre-selection process and give the senior class back the power to choose the Senior Class Gift. If the senior class is not responsible for selecting the gift, then the gift is not really from the senior class. When the gift, whatever it may be, is presented at the end of this year, it will read
"To the entire Brandeis University Community." I hope that it will also truthfully read
"From the Class of 1999."
Orion Macdonald '99
To the
Editor:
As of late, a bevy of correspondence has been generated in regard to the Senior Class Gift, and a style of compressing extensive lapses of information within a few short paragraphs has emerged. As a member of the Steering Committee, I wish to clear up any misconceptions and present some rationale for decisions made thus
far. One of the major complaints has focused upon the issue of control. Members of our class have speculated that the Senior Class Gift Steering Committee had been forced to present the University with an intangible gift. Questions like,
"What kind of gift is it if they are telling us what to give?" are legitimate, but they are short sighted. I was never told what gift to give. I was not
"commanded from above" to give a gift at all, nor was I bullied into giving an intangible gift. It is understandable that the intricacies of the deliberation process are unclear to most, but that does not mean that student thought and informed choice were absent from the
decision. The Committee decided upon three options for the class to vote on. Little cognition is required to realize that one of the options was indeed a tangible gift. The proposed Alumni Network was indeed tangible, it just did not take up the space that the suggested fishpond, wishing well, and apple-orchard would require. No categorical ban on tangible gifts was
made. Insufficient space is indeed a problem that plagues our campus, and therefore is relevant in the specification of a tangible gift. Tangible gifts have proven quite difficult, because on the whole, they have been presented whimsically and with little rational thought to the actual campus in receipt of these gifts. Our campus is relatively new, and therefore is always in some state of change. In fact, some might recall that the campus once had a wishing well. This heart-warming structure had to be removed so that a building, actually,
Feldberg, could be constructed in its stead. Destroying a wishing well so that Brandeis could have computer capability is a good trade, and it is but one example of the present issue facing the entire campus. Over the next few years the university will finalize the campus master plan. Only then will there be some guarantee that tangible gifts will not bear similar fates to that of the wishing
well. The recurring theme that should be visible is that the Committee's sole agenda has been to enable the class of 1999 to leave a true legacy. Gift giving always bears an interaction effect between giver and recipient, and the Committee had the uncomfortable responsibility to sit at the heart of this interaction. Regardless, however, the needs of both students and school were
met. The legacy that we leave is the creation of a fund to help students out in times of need. By donating to this fund, the Class of
'99 not only will be aiding and improving Brandeis, but will be helping students of years to come. It will withstand the test of time and will not be affected by the master plan for campus restructuring. It will continue to grow, and the fund will be continually built up by our donations. The Senior Class, as indicated by the ballots, overwhelmingly accepted this
agenda. It is disturbing that this gift has met any resistance. Regardless of the perceived quality of an
individual's Brandeis experience, it is reasonable that one should want to help another student to at least have a Brandeis experience.
"But we have already paid $120,000 ... why should we have to pay more?" has been the mantra of resistance. In response, we don't have to pay more, but we have the responsibility to give something back. Tuition does not cover the entire cost of our Brandeis enrollment, and alumni giving covers a large percentage of the deficit. Does it not make sense that we, as very soon-to-be alumni, lead the way and encourage students to give something back? Do we not have the responsibility to pave the way for the class of 2009? Besides our memories and didactic experiences, we are graduating with degrees. If Brandeis were to close next year, our degrees would be worth very little the year thereafter. Inversely, one of the many metrics used in determining the standing of the university is the percentage of alumni giving. Why would we not want to take care our investment and play an active role in its
growth? We have now selected a Senior Class Gift that will last and that will not only help Brandeis, but a student in the future. The fund will continue to grow, and we will be proud, not only of the innovation of the gift, but the reflection of consciousness and school pride demonstrated
therein. Let us do this the right way. Let us start this fund in unity.
Gavriel Z. Bellino '99 Co-Chair,Senior Class Gift Steering Committee
To the
Editor:
I am not one of "the most useless and socially unaware students on campus," and none of the other members of the Brandeis University Student Union government fit that description either. I take great offense at being labeled as such. Ms. Dimino should choose her words more carefully in the future and perhaps she should invest some time in research before she writes another article like
"Who do senior speakers represent?" We all know that the Student Senate is one of the easiest targets for criticism at this school, so it really comes as no surprise that Ms. Dimino chose us as the target of her
tirade. I once thought the same things about our student government as Ms. Dimino expressed in her editorial. For the three years before I became a Senator I truly believed that the Senate was merely a
"prop organization used by the administration to pretend that they actually care about student input ..."
I still had that attitude when I was sworn in as a Senator last year and I was determined to change things for the better. After I began working with the other Senators I realized that no one in this body is a prop because every member of the Student government is too principled and has too much integrity to let themselves be used in that way. I will not deny that sometimes the administration tries to control the Student Senate just as a puppeteer pulls the strings on his marionette. However, this year, everyone on the senate has been working feverishly to let the administration know that they can not treat us like that. The conflict that the senate has with the administration is not
"ludicrous" as Ms. Dimino suggests. We have worked in a very constructive and professional manner to alter our relationship with the Administration. You can not expect to get anything done at this school through conflict; change only comes through a process of applying constant pressure on the administration by letting them know that we care very much about a particular issue. Just look at how we managed to get the late night library hours reinstated.
I'm sure that if you'd talk to Senator Zach Bennet, who spearheaded that effort, that you would walk away with a very different view about our student government. Now I have one more issue to discuss: the accusation by Ms. Dimino that the student government is comprised of a group of mostly heterogeneous white males. All that I can say about this is that if it is true, it is no
one's fault but that of the students of this university. The student government opens its elections to everyone and since there happen to be more females then males at this school there is therefore a larger pool of potential female candidates here. Anyone at this school has the ability to form a club, so I suggest that if you care so much about this issue, Ms. Dimino, that you form a chapter of the League of Women Voters here. You could form this club with the purpose of encouraging more females to run for office and helping them to get elected to office. I for one would vote to charter this club, but it is not my responsibility to form
it. I work hard at my job as Student Senator for the Senior class, and I take pride in the work that I do. I do not ask for special commendation from anyone, but it would be nice to know that what I do is appreciated. It hurts me very much to see the Student Senate trashed and attacked constantly by the students of this university. I put a lot of time into this endeavor and I pour my heart and soul into it as well. The people who attack the Senate should realize that what they do is only hurting those who are trying to help them and making it harder for us to do our job. The Senate
can't change things alone, we need student support. Perhaps, Ms. Dimino, you should direct your efforts at rallying your fellow students to get involved. Criticism is easy, problem solving is not. You should try to remember this before you criticize others in the future.
Matthew Sugarman Student Union Senator, Class of
'99
To the Editor:
In all my life I have never read an article as asinine as Maureen Dimino's article in last week's Justice. First, even though her article is about the senior speaker election, she berated the senate Ñ an elected body that has no direct say nor vested interest in the senior speaker position Ñ for not doing anything.
"What does [the senate] do for the student body?" she asks herself. Well, let me answer this. The student senate has this year extended the Boston shuttle hours, extended the library hours back to the old schedule, gotten 2-ply toilet paper and hand dryers in Massell and North for next year, received a $35,000 pledge to improve the weight room, created a more representative constitution, provided for more funds to clubs next year, put urinal dividers in the
men's rest rooms in Usdan, made a web page to facilitate club information, helped fund senior week, junior/senior formal, the @Brandeis information publication, and many other smaller projects. There are others that have been left off of the list, of
course. Maureen complains about the inadequacies of your representative body without knowing anything about it. She complains about an all white male conspiracy to elect only white males to the senior speaker position, even though she never ran for the position and offers no solutions. What should we do, exclude white men from consideration as future senior speakers? She complains that the senate is the
administration's pawn with regards to the senior speaker elections, yet doesn't
even know that the senate established the process by which the senior speaker is selected (by the senior speaker committee). She complains about Jon
Zimmermann's naming as senior speaker, even though she admits in her article that she
doesn't even know him. In fact, she doesn't even know that he is not a senior class senator (as she misstated in her
article). That's not her only mistake. How can she tell that the senior speakers of the past six years were all Caucasian? I can see that they are males, but she presumes to tell us that they are white, straight and middle-class without confirming her statements. Another mistake: she calls the senate an,
"All male prop-organization." Next year's Student Union President is Ellie Levine (who, in case you
couldn't tell from the name, happens to be female). Also, there are, for now, three minorities and two women out of eight total elected senators
(that's two thirds non-"white male"). I am ashamed that she is so misinformed; maybe the senate should spend more money to inform apathetic students; however, I think that would be a waste of resources that would be better spent on clubs. Maureen starts her article by saying,
"If I was going to find the most useless and socially unaware students on campus, I would approach the student senate." Maureen, you
don't have to go any further than the nearest mirror.
Esti Schabelman Student Union Senator, Class of Õ01
To the
Editor:
On the evening of Thursday, April 22, I repaired to my room after a long day of classes and meetings and, like many other Brandeis students, the first thing I did when I arrived was to check my voice mail. Among the messages I had received during the day was a university-sponsored broadcast message, sent on behalf of the Leftist League and the Feminist Majority Leadership Alliance, urging Brandeis students to travel to Philadelphia for a demonstration demanding the release of Mumia Abu-Jamal, a radical activist convicted for the murder of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner in 1982. As this letter should make clear, this was not a message I was pleased to
receive. In this letter, I am not seeking to convince anyone of Mr. Abu-Jamal's guilt or innocence. While I do believe, based on an objective study of the evidence and the facts of the case, that Mr. Abu-Jamal is guilty of the crime of murder, I respect the right of others to
disagree. While I have serious doubts about the motives of many pro-Mumia activists, as a strong believer in the individual freedoms granted by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, I acknowledge their right to organize for or against any cause they choose. While some pro-Mumia activists will likely disagree with me, I sincerely believe that the pluralistic democracy we enjoy in the United States is the fairest and freest system of government. As one distinguished observer put it,
"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others."
The intent of this letter is not to excoriate the "Free Mumia" crowd, but to criticize the University's insensitive and ill-considered decision to publicize a politically-charged cause such as this through a broadcast message. I have no problem with clubs on-campus using flyers, posters and other media to publicize their events, but I do not consider it appropriate for the University to in effect endorse a certain position on controversial and divisive issues through the medium of the broadcast message. The University has been doing a lot of this lately; readers may remember a message from a few weeks back urging all students to
"show their support for NATO's actions in Kosovo" by attending a rally in front of Goldfarb Library. While it is my understanding that the organizers of said rally intended it to be a politically neutral,
"support-our-troops" event, the wording of the broadcast message sent to publicize the event implied otherwise and suggested a University-endorsed position on a divisive political issue. The same impression is given by the message promoting the pro-Mumia rally; the
message's description of the loaded term "political prisoner" to describe Mr. Abu-Jamal in itself constitutes an endorsement of the
"Free Mumia" movement and alienates students who hold different views, just as the wording of the Kosovo broadcast message alienates students who do not support the bombing of
Yugoslavia. These two incidents should lead the administration to reconsider its policies regarding the use of broadcast messages. Broadcast messages should be used only to inform the University community of non-political, university-sponsored events, traffic problems and other happenings of a universal importance. They should not be used to further the agenda of individual clubs or to endorse a position on issues which generate much friction and strife both among the university community and among society as a
whole.
Joseph Koczera '01
|
Other News:
To the Editor: Jesse Richman
To the Editor: Amy Mendosa
To the Editor: Andy
Shugerman
To the Editor: Orion
MacDonald
To the Editor: Matthew
Sugarman
To the Editor: Esti Schabelman
To the Editor: Joseph
Koczera
|
