Eye - Feb7 - Columbia Daily Spectator
Transcription
Eye - Feb7 - Columbia Daily Spectator
The magazine of the Columbia Spectator 7 February 2013 / vol. 14 issue 2 the eye Millennial Love Measuring the opportunity cost of dating at Columbia photography by Lauren Field by Alessandra Poblador & Yasmin Gagne The magazine of the Columbia Spectator Editor in Chief Rikki Novetsky Managing Editor for Features Alison Herman Managing Editor for Optics Laura Booth Art Director Suze Myers Lead Story Editor Zoe Camp Senior Design Editor Annie Wang Head Copy Editor Natan Belchikov Associate Editors for Features Carolina Gerlach Parul Guliani Kierstin Utter Dunni Oduyemi Eyesites Editor PJ Sauerteig Interview Editor Gabrielle Noone View from Here Editor Adina Applebaum Fiction Editor Eric Wohlstadter Deputy for Online Content Kelly Lane Deputy for Multimedia Morgan Wilcock Visuals Associate Editor Hannah Sotnick Associate Editor for Online Content Amy Zimmerman Production Staff Katy Nelson Adil Habib Tian Saltzman Aida Duarte Eli Haims Isabel Michaelides Copy Staff Jess Pflugrath Spectator Editor in Chief Sammy Roth Spectator Managing Editor Finn Vigeland Spectator Publisher Alex Smyk LETTER FROM THE EDITOR “But why always Dorothea?” famously opines the narrator of George Eliot’s novel, Middlemarch. Professor Bruce Robbins wrote the quote on the board, and continued to explain: Dorothea is young and charming, our darling protagonist. Eliot’s point, however, is that Dorothea – or, rather, all the Dorotheas who exist in the world of nineteenth century fiction – is always at the center of attention. But who deserves to be the center of a novel, anyway? By having her narrator ask the question, Eliot provides the answer: Anyone. Dorothea is our perpetual protagonist because she is the pretty girl we expect and want, while we doom other characters to marginality simply from our lack of interest. The same is true of our time on campus. What becomes popular is what students allow to become popular, which is precisely the fun in crafting the sixteen pages that make up The Eye every week. By deciding which content goes into the magazine, we have the ability to determine, in a tangible way, which topics and genres of writing receive attention on Columbia’s campus. I am proud to introduce a new fiction section in The Eye. Our fiction will be short and punchy: a full story ADVERTISEMENT encapsulated on one page of the magazine. By featuring undergraduate fiction writers, we will grant the proper attention to artists who usually lack the opportunity to be publicly acknowledged for their talents. The Eye does not wish to replace Columbia’s treasured literary magazines. Rather, we hope to provide a space where fiction writers can be recognized more regularly, as opposed to only once or twice a year. David Foster Wallace once remarked, “Fiction’s about what it is to be a human being.” A century before, Ralph Waldo Emerson declared, “Fiction reveals the truth that reality obscures.” But, even if just for a moment, let’s forget our aphorisms. Sometimes at the end of a long day all we want is a good story. Email your story to [email protected] to get involved. Rikki Novetsky, Editor in Chief MILLENNIAL LOVE Measuring the opportunity cost of dating at Columbia pg. 07 by Alessandra Poblador & Yasmin Gagne photography by Lauren Field CONTENTS 03 EYESITES EYE TO EYE 04 Waxing Poetic IDEAS 05 Cyberspace Seduction Emma Stein FOOD 06 Man Meets Mushroom Jack Klempay FICTION 11 Blacktop TELEVISION 12 Little Girl, Interrupted Find Us Online: eye.columbiaspectator.com like us on Facebook facebook.com/theeyemag follow us on Twitter and Instagram: @TheEyeMag Contact Us: [email protected] Editorial: (212) 854-9547 Advertising: (212) 854-9558 © 2013 The Eye, Spectator Publishing Company, Inc. Nicollette Barsamian IDEAS 13 The Reblog Diet 20/20 14 Less Than Superman Macklemore’s Revenge VFH 15 Moving Pictures Eric Wohlstadter David Salazar Andrea Garcia-Vargas Allyson Gronowitz PJ Sauerteig Anne Steele BIZARRE TREND ALERT BY THE NUMBERS by PJ Sauerteig illustration by Brian Thorn by Deborah Pollack JEWISH SHOUTOUTS IN RAP album cover is Ross’ face and fur collar blended into a Star of David, and a standout track is the vocal skit wherein a (fictional) rabbi, Peter Rosenberg, congratulates Ross on his becoming a man, the day’s “lavish spread provided by Wingstop,” and the “beautiful titties hanging out” at the service. We don’t think anyone understands, let alone wants to even begin asking the ethical questions raised by these instances. Ross isn’t alone, however, in his fixation—A$AP Ferg (a confederate of A$AP Rocky) offers these lines in his trap anthem, “Work”: “My lawyer Jewish / He work hard / He put in work / He put in work.” It even seems like this little trend is making its way to Billboard radio: Bruno Mars (although not rap and definitely not trap) just released an album called Unorthodox Jukebox. What conclusions can we draw from all of this? Admittedly few. Is this parody? Is it demeaning? Is it appropriation or appreciation? One thing is certain, these guys aren’t getting any gelt for their Judaic lexicon. EYESITES We don’t pretend to understand the contemporary rap game. The trends, the lingo, the references—so much is lost on us. But as of late, one trend in particular has left us more baffled than usual. We are referring, of course, to the current affinity some rappers demonstrated for Jewish culture. And we’re not talking about Jewish rappers, like Drake. We’re talking about guys who wouldn’t know a lulav if it smacked them in the face. Remember Rick Ross’ monster album last year, God Forgives, I Don’t? Then you’ll remember these lines from the track “Presidential”:“Walking on Jewish marble, hand painted the ceiling / Happy Hanukkah n***a, it’s a wonderful feeling.” We didn’t know Jewish marble was a thing, but, then again, I’m not in Rick Ross’ tax bracket. In an even more inexplicable move, Rick Ross followed up on that album’s success by releasing another mix tape soon after—The Black Bar Mitzvah. The 4 MOHI STAPLES THAT SHOULD HAVE CLOSED If Morningside Heights were in a perpetual television series of Survivor, then winter break’s season finale would have left many in a state of shock and horror. Fan favorites, such as Absolute Bagels and M2M, were booted, both leaving space for new contenders and catalyzing the conversation about which other players we would have liked to see voted off the island, instead. 1. University Hardware: If you’ve ever wanted to know what it it’s like to be in an airplane bathroom with nine random strangers, shop here. 2. Uni Café: If you’re ever in the mood for pizza, salad, eggs, soup, lasagna, oriental noodles, a cup of Jell-O, cannolis, gelato, or really anything edible for that matter, you are in luck: Uni Café has anything and everything on its menu. Ironically, most of it is only that—edible. Did we learn nothing from Plato about multitasking? 3. Brad’s: Proudly serving bland, uninspired sandwiches that could put a coke addict to sleep. Considering its pristine location, Brad’s should try to conjure up more than muffins and bottled water to woo the masses. 4. Häagen-Dazs: Pinkberry has and will continue to crush you under mounds of healthier toppings and post-yoga sin. Just give up. Your forlorn employees gazing out the window apparently already have. FLOWCHART ENTERING THE SUMMER WORKFORCE Does the company pay its interns in cash only? by PJ Sauerteig Believe it or not, the time has already come for (most) students to start securing internships and odd jobs for the summer. But it’s not as easy as dressing up for interviews and sending out, “Hey! Still haven’t heard from you...” emails; it takes a little bit of discretion. This week, The Eye has prepared a little flow chart to help you separate the promising jobs from the ill-fated and the exciting internships from the deceptive. Does the company have a website? NO DON’T TAKE IT! YES: Is it a lifeguarding position at a local pool? YES: Does it use exclusively Helvetica font? NO YES DON’T TAKE IT! TAKE IT! MOVE! there an 18+ legal warning YES NO: Ispage before logging in? NO YES YES NO YES: DON’T TAKE IT! TAKE IT! Do you live in a Great Plains State? Did the company representative smell a little bit like methamphetamine? NO Is your boss an evil, bearded, Swiss monomaniac bent on taking over east Asia? YES NO TAKE IT! DON’T TAKE IT! 03 WAXING POETIC EYE TO EYE BARNARD ALUMNA ARIANA REINES ON HOW SHE MADE POETRY HER JOB by Nicollette Barsamian illustration by Kady Pu Poet Ariana Reines earned her B.A. from Barnard and went on to Columbia for graduate work. She has written several books, including The Cow, which won the Alberta Prize from Fence Books. She is also well known for her work translating French texts, such as Charles Baudelaire’s My Heart Laid Bare. Reines’ subject matter ranges from the occult to performance art, reflecting her diverse and conflicted reactions to her profession. Michael Silverblatt of NPR’s Bookworm has described her as “one of the crucial voices of her generation.” She is currently teaching a poetry seminar at Columbia’s School of the Arts. The Eye sat down with Reines to talk about the creative process, the art of translation, and her experience at Barnard. you love. It’s like sex. It is a much deeper reading. You get closer to the mind and body of the writer. That’s an intimacy that is really powerful. In that sense, I think it’s rapture. But translating texts that are problematic is painful. Translation is awesome and amazing [but] I’d be glad to never do it again unless it’s something that I really love. I thought I could be a half-translator as my job, but maybe I’m not literary enough to do it. Or maybe I don’t like being a servant. What draws you to poetry? I ask myself this a lot. Do I even know what poetry is? How strange is it to become a poet? I had a hard time admitting it. I felt I couldn’t say it out loud—it’s a feeling of essence. I love all kinds of literature. I read a lot of stuff that’s not poetry. I love all kinds of language and hearing people talk and all sorts of accents. I hope to live long enough to make all sorts of things—plays, screenplays. But there is something about poetry. It’s super corny, but it’s the heart of literature. I’m not interested in an intellectual virtuosity without a heart. It just excites me. It’s romantic. It’s a little bit of a delusion, but an attractive one. It makes me weak in the knees. You once wrote of your book, The Cow, “I wrote it and a lot of other things. It has many big ideas inside of it. It quotes from many sources.” How important is it for you that literature look back to the past? It was very important to me with my first book. I felt like I had to pass all of history, especially literary history, through my body. That’s ambitious. There was no way I could do it. I had wanted to be a writer since I was very young. I didn’t want my writing to be what I ended up doing, but I wanted to do wonderful, beautiful things with language. The quotations [in The Cow] are very angry. It’s not quotation in the fully respectful sense, it’s passing all of literature through a hamburger helper. It’s an expression of grief and mourning. I feel less dependent on quotations now. How do you feel about translating? Translating came first out of love, then necessity, then guilt. Otherwise I’d do nothing. There’s a part of me that is totally lazy and a part of me that loves working. I love to joke that translating is like doing ecstasy. It drives your brain, but it isn’t fun. It fries your brain. I don’t have very much patience for it. But it is a way to get intimate with a text that 04 “SOMETHING ABOUT POETRY.... IT JUST EXCITES ME. IT’S ROMANTIC. IT’S A LITTLE BIT OF A DELUSION, BUT AN ATTRACTIVE ONE. IT MAKES ME WEAK IN THE KNEES.” You also wrote, “I am not a Francophile. I do not like cheese. I do not like the Champs-Élysées.” So why do other people like French culture so much? For a lot of Americans, France has a bourgeois attraction. It can be argued that it always had it— that’s why we have the lingua franca, the language of currency ... that used to be French. Everyone spoke French. It was a cultural force across Europe. It has a snotty, bougie, problematic colonial and cultural history. No matter how many memoirs there are about eating pastries, people still write them. I [do] like thinking about the origins of the novel, a phenomenon that happened in France. You’ve written about your time at Barnard as very difficult, with your mother and brother having to move in with you. Do you think you got the “college experience”? I don’t think I had the typical college experience. I had lots of jobs, lots of on-campus jobs and lots of disgusting things. But my dad was hostile to me attending Barnard. And most parents like their children going to these kinds of schools. But the more you meet people, you see that they had harder experiences. Maybe the majority had to hide it. Maybe there were a lot of people at Barnard at the time who had experiences as dire as mine. I feel like I envied a lot of people. For a lot of people, college is a great time and can be lots of fun. It was fun for me, but it wasn’t easy. It seemed like a totally awesome party for some people. There is all kind[s] of privilege in the Seven Sisters and Ivy League. Barnard’s administration and the people I met were all extraordinary though. I’m not a ra-ra school spirit type of person, but I have a lot of respect for Barnard. All institutions have their problems, but Barnard is focused on empowering women. I’m teaching a class now [at Columbia]. I’ve only had one class, and it’s very eerie. My memories are still embedded in this place. A lot of good things and a lot of bad. I’ve been thinking a lot about institutions and if this is the best way to educate people. So how did you go from student to poet? What is the transition like and do you have any advice for aspiring poets at Barnard and Columbia? What forced me to be a poet? I took a poetry class at Columbia. I hated it, but it was a great classic poetry college experience. I also took a class called Imaginative Writing at Columbia. While I was a student, I was dealing with all this shit that I didn’t know how to handle. There are some real freaks to spend time with and share writing with at Columbia. That’s a beautiful thing. I became a poet when my brother went to the mental hospital, and I freaked out. I quit the Ph.D. program. I was trying to have a good experience at Columbia, but it was shattered. I wanted to become the artist I dreamed of becoming. A Proust without the pain. A girl Nabokov. I don’t know what I was thinking. I had to accept that I might never fit my ideal and maybe I was deluding myself. It was also luck and chance—I sent it [The Cow] out to friends, and it won an award. Then I became a poet, not somebody with a hobby. For anyone who thinks nobody will understand what they are doing, you never really know. There is something incredible about surrendering to the possibility. No matter how much you might doubt yourself, you never know what will happen. There’s no one way for a writer to be. a CYBERSPACE SEDUCTION by Emma Stein illustration by Suzanna Buck We live-tweet our lives. We Instagram every little morsel we put in our mouths. We update our Facebooks to indicate what school we get into, what classes we take, and what internship we score for the summer. Even so, there’s one digital step we can’t bring ourselves to take: pursuing romance on the web. For some reason, trying to find our match in the ether of cyberspace feels sketchy, unsafe, even uncool. But should it? On Columbia’s campus, we’ve begun to take baby steps toward making the Internet a socially acceptable place to search for love. For example, the recent founding of the CU Admirers Facebook page allows students to anonymously profess their ardor for others in ways that vary from sweet to creepy. While CU Admirers is a forum for simply expressing anonymous desires rather than realiz- FOR SOME REASON, TRYING TO FIND OUR MATCH IN THE ETHER OF CYBERSPACE FEELS SKETCHY, UNSAFE, EVEN UNCOOL. BUT SHOULD IT? ing them, some students are taking their online dating more seriously. In fact, college students are increasingly turning to dating websites such as DateMySchool. Founded in 2010 by two Columbia alumni, DateMySchool is unique in that it is available exclusively to college students, offering them a sense of security they might not be able to attain from traditional dating sites. According to Melanie Wallner, the director of public relations at DateMySchool, the site has nearly 200,000 members nationwide and is particularly popular at Columbia. “We’re most popular at Columbia and NYU: Over 30 percent of each campus uses DateMySchool, more than 50 percent of the dates that happen at these schools are set up on DateMySchool, and most of our success stories have come from students from those schools,” Wallner says. But despite these figures, many students are still reluctant to admit that they’ve tried their hand at online dating. A student from Lesley University in Cambridge, Mass., who met her boy- friend on the popular site OkCupid, acknowledges the stigma associated with online dating. “It’s often seen as a last resort—something to do when you’re all out of options and desperate to meet someone, or you’re too lazy to go out and meet people in social situations,” she says. “I personally am okay with telling people I met my boyfriend online, because I am happy with the way our relationship has progressed and the fact that we met online does not make our relationship any less authentic.” Rega Jha, a Columbia College senior, has several friends who use DateMySchool. While Jha acknowledges that a stigma against online dating exists, she believes this sort of thinking is outdated. “I think a slight stigma might exist, yeah, but only as much as it does in the rest of the world. I have several friends who use DateMySchool, and they’ve all found plenty of dates on there, some successful, some not so much, some Columbians, some NYU-ers, but in any case—it’s just another place to meet people, no more or less valid than 1020 or Butler,” she says. However, some students complain that DateMySchool isn’t really all that useful. “My roommate and I both signed up for DateMySchool at the same time, and within 10 minutes of creating a profile, we both received the same message from the same guy asking if we wanted to hook up,” says Mary Cosgrove, a junior at Barnard College. “We both promptly deleted our accounts. I did not think this site was useful at all for finding actual love, just more hookups.” But for students who are looking for just a hookup, online dating sites may be a good option. A Columbia College student who wishes to remain anonymous uses Grindr, an all-male locationbased social network that allows gay and bisexual men to find others interested in a hookup. IDEAS ONLINE DATING SHEDS ITS ON-CAMPUS STIGMA “For a top-tier school like Columbia where so many of us are striving to have really important roles in public and private sectors, it’s kind of understood that romance isn’t a huge part of that,” he says. “If I know I don’t want to find a lifelong love, why should I deal with romantic attachments that will drain my energy, especially when I can just use an app to find anonymous sex?” While he acknowledges that people may feel embarrassed about using the app, he thinks it should be more socially acceptable. “I have no shame about having consensual casual sex ... There shouldn’t be a reason that this isn’t just a normal, positive interchange between persons facilitated by technology.” This should be especially true at a school like Columbia, where students have access to the larger community of New York City. For schools located in smaller towns, like Princeton, online dating and trying to reach out into the community make less sense. Tiger Admirers, Princeton’s version of Columbia Admirers, wrote in an email, “We’re in an area where the only other people to meet our age are basically other Princeton students, so it seems silly to join an online dating website when you should just be meeting people in person. Perhaps if we were located in a city where there were lots of 20-somethings (like Columbia is, or even somewhere in Boston), it would make more sense, and thus be considered more socially acceptable and normal.” While online dating may not be fully socially acceptable yet, the gradual romantic shift toward the digital—demonstrated by the popularity of CU Admirers—is at least helping us grow more open with one another. And with the recent Manti Te’o fiasco, perhaps that’s all we can ask for. a 05 MAN MEETS MUSHROOM FOOD FORAGED FOOD MAKES ITS DEBUT IN FINE DINING by Jack Klempay illustration by Jiin Choi Foraging isn’t just for hoofed animals and Bear Grylls anymore; in fact, it’s become increasingly popular at a number of high-end New York restaurants. Strangely, foraging has received a warm welcome from New Yorkers, who seem to dread weekly grocery runs and encounters with dirt. This newfound acceptance is thanks to a handful of the city’s most progressive chefs, who are working to make foraged cuisine a mainstay in the restaurant world. Among these is Mads Refslund, executive chef of the year-old ACME restaurant in NoHo. Like a growing number of young visionaries in the culinary world, Refslund calls himself a forager. He is a pioneer of “new Nordic cuisine,” a movement that began in Denmark at the world-famous Noma restaurant and aims to limit kitchen ingredients to foods that can be foraged: grown, caught, or gathered locally. Looking at ACME’s menu, it’s clear that Refslund is something of a genius when it comes to adapting unusual foraged ingredients for the modern palate. Guests fawn over dishes like the roasted bass with wild onions, thyme, and nasturtium (wild watercress). Refslund explains that his method for imagining a new dish involves considering the connection between smell, taste, and memory. “The food’s not so weird that no one’s ever heard about it,” he said. “Everyone’s heard of pine, it’s just that they haven’t tasted it before.” Now they can, in ACME’s celery root soup with apples and pine oil. “They know the smell of pine, of fresh pine needles, and of Christmas trees ... So people have a certain taste in their head before they come here.” The final product is a sentimental taste of Christmas. As Refslund puts it, “We’re working with good memories and memories of childhood.” Refslund’s style of cooking raises a number of questions. How does he forage and farm in New York City? How does he manage to gather ingredients in winter, when many small farms shut down? Finally, how does Refslund focus on finding ingredients while simultaneously working as executive chef? Refslund, however, says finding ingredients is 06 easy, insisting that “all you have to do is look in your backyard.” During the cold season, he skips over the farm and heads straight for the woods, making at least twice-monthly visits to New Jersey or Pennsylvania in search of this season’s hidden plenty: juniper, pine oil, herbs, tubers, and seaweed. The rest of the time, a hired forager goes out and does the work for him. No matter what, the ingredients are always freshly gathered when they are brought in to the restaurant. STRANGELY, FORAGING HAS RECEIVED A WARM WELCOME FROM NEW YORKERS WHO SEEM TO DREAD WEEKLY GROCERY RUNS AND ENCOUNTERS WITH DIRT. I can imagine the joy Refslund finds in those woods. Every summer, my fellow Montanans and I run through gulches and up shady slopes in search of an elusive, noncommercial treat: fresh huckleberries. As the sun sits high in the big Montana sky and turns the dry hills to gold, we sweat and bushwhack in hopes of finding a patch that has not already been picked over. Needless to say, no one returns home until well after dark—hopefully with a bucket or two of berries for pie, jam, or immediate enjoyment. Foraging creates a new relationship with food— an appreciation for and connection to its origin. For many, this is the appeal of locally gathered food. But New Yorkers may be attracted to foraged cuisine by something else altogether: the image. Josh Slotnick, professor of agriculture at the University of Montana, is a firm believer in the importance of an intimate relationship with food. He explains, “If we understand where our food comes from, we have a better chance at having a food system that’s just, moral, and acceptable on every level.” Foraging certainly points the consumer in the right direction, but Slotnick says that those buying into foraged cuisine don’t necessarily care all that deeply about the history of their food. He’s worried that foraging could just be the “trendy thing of the day.” Foraged food in New York City has become a luxury, a delicacy reserved for those with the financial and cultural means to patronize a restaurant like ACME. Slotnick cautions that food should be more than just a fashion statement, “although if the intent is to eat closer to home and have more contact with the history of your food, that’s fantastic.” However, Slotnick also explains that “there isn’t enough forageable landscape near a major population center to feed people in any sustainable or substantial way.” Large-scale foraging can have devastating consequences on fragile ecosystems. From a sustainability perspective, urban agriculture is perhaps more practical. Still, Refslund is resolute in his dedication to foraging, if only for the quality of food it produces. “I’m not thinking about price,” he says, “and I won’t buy a lower quality carrot to save money. I will always pick the best carrot I can find.” Some might balk at how pricey these veggies can get (salt-baked carrots with sliced lardo and blood orange set customers back $14), but they may just be persuaded when Refslund explains how they’re prepared. The carrots are slow-cooked on low heat for three hours with juniper, and are turned over every five minutes, like a cut of meat. “I have a lot of respect for the carrot,” he says, “since I think the flavor is better than that of meat!” Carnivores, take note: The woods have come to town. a e M i ov ll i a n l n L e Measuring the opportunity cost of dating at Columbia In December, it was the crush of finals. In January, it was the biting cold. And now, in February, it’s the John Jay Dining Hall-endorsed cosmic joke that is Valentine’s Day. Whether they accept their single status with bold defiance or choose to mope around their respective rooms blasting Adele on Spotify, for three consecutive months unattached Columbia students have had reasons to wish that they weren’t so alone. Being single is the default romantic condition of Columbia undergraduates, be they male, female, straight, queer, or somewhere in between. Collegiate culture immerses us in stories of millennial singledom. Everything from HBO’s Girls to the proliferation of articles on dating culture has saturated our psyches with rationalizations for our endur- ing loneliness. Especially since Columbia Admirers bombed our newsfeeds with evidence that kids all over campus are smarting for love, affection, and even face-to-face human contact, the private question of “Why are we so very single?” has never felt so immediate. “Few college students in committed relationships” would hardly be a newsworthy headline, but it seems that something more than college angst is at play here. For decades, the college campus has been typified as a place for young people to embrace their freedom before adulthood, allowing students to dally among majors as they do among partners. First-years quickly, if painfully, learn the ropes of hookup culture (“I met him at Mel’s, why won’t he text me?”)—or, more likely at Colum- by Alessandra Poblador & Yasmin Gagne photography by Lauren Field IN FOCUS AND JUST AS WE PUSH OURSELVES TO GET A 4.0 GPA AND A CUSHY POSTGRAD JOB, WE ALSO FIND OURSELVES ROMANTICALLY COMPETITIVE, UNWILLING TO “SETTLE” FOR ANYTHING LESS THAN PERFECTION. 08 bia, the lack thereof (“Why do I even have a single?”). To many students, these questions are moot—romantic disillusionment is discovered as early as NSOP. But if college kids are supposed to flout relationships, why are so many students at Columbia lamenting the lack of love in their lives, be it fleeting or long-lasting? Being an undergraduate at Columbia in 2013 is a specific experience. It is worlds apart from that experience in fall 1983, when the first coeducational class arrived at Columbia College—or even from the experience of 2003, before Facebook took the Ivy League by storm. Just as our campus has evolved— embracing gender-neutral housing and rising levels of sexual diversity—so has the city that we inhabit, rapidly gentrifying and growing increasingly costly to live in. These trends are having tangible effects on our dating culture that are worth analyzing; however, for the purpose of limiting the scope of this article, we narrowed our focus to the heterosexual community on campus. We met with JungHee Hyun, a senior at Barnard and the current president of the Student Government Association, in the lobby of the Diana Center. Fresh out of an SGA meeting, Hyun explained how remain- ing single is in many ways a positive affirmation of her freedom and drive. “I chose to be single at a certain point in college,” she tells us, referring to the end of a previous long-distance relationship. “Doing my own thing and sustaining this relationship was contradictory. At this stage in my life, I wasn’t ready to give up anything.” Columbia students, having worked so hard to get here, commonly have their sights set on ever-higher levels of achievement. For many, that means putting schoolwork and one’s career above finding time for a significant other. “Hopefully, I’ll have time eventually to say, ‘Okay, the time has come for me to do this [enter a relationship].’ But that’s an extreme privilege,” Hyun says. “Maybe I’ll get married when I’m 28—but knowing where I am now, in seven years, who knows what I’ll be doing?” In 2010, the number of women surpassed men in the workforce for the first time in U.S. history. There are three women for every two men who earn a college degree. Still, many selective schools subvert the reality of higher levels of female achievement by maintaining equal gender ratios in their student populations. As students at a competitive university, we’re pressured to succeed in every aspect of life. And just as we push ourselves to get a 4.0 GPA and a cushy postgrad job, we also find ourselves romantically competitive, unwilling to “settle” for anything less than perfection. In addition to having perfect grades and a perfect postgrad vision, we seek the “perfect” girlfriend or boyfriend—the cherry on top of the Columbia dream. A Dating Market Failure: The Challenge of Choice To many students at Columbia, the Greek community is the hotbed of campus relationships—romantic, sexual, and otherwise. Phil Ross, a Columbia College junior and a brother of Delta Sigma Phi, took an inclined to pursue a relationship, no matter how much we may want one in principle. Postgrad Paradigms: From Competition to Compromise Those of us that intend to stay in the city after graduation, however, will find ourselves faced with entirely different concerns. We can expect to work long hours in competitive industries, to shoulder an astronomical cost of living, and to find ourselves completely exhausted. Thus, the highly competitive nature of Columbia, accentuated by the innate stresses, thrills, and distractions of the city, may leave us incapable of investing our temporal scraps in long-term relationships. Without exception, every student we interviewed expressed the wish to eventually marry. As passionately as they all believed in the value of independence, and as dedicated as they were to the pursuit of ambitious careers, not one subject denied the ultimate desire for companionship. We had almost finished interviewing Allison Lieblein, a School of Engineering and Applied Science senior, when she unexpectedly mentioned that she was engaged. Now together with her fiancé for three years, she plans to move with him to Columbus, Ohio, to accept a position at General Mills while he pursues a graduate degree at Ohio State University. “The reason we’re getting married so young—and I know that we’re young—is that neither of us wanted to live apart,” she explains. “We were willing to make compromises in order to live in the same place. Marriage makes that easier.” Lieblein and her fiancé applied to a wide range of companies and schools so that they could head, together, for the place where their offers best intersected. “Instead of just saying, this is the best company, this is what I want to go for—I put in a lot of time and energy to make sure I had a choice, and so did he,” she says. “That was important to me—that neither one of us was going to make all the sacrifices.” Though it wasn’t her plan from the start to marry so soon after college, Lieblein noted the undeniable advantage of the arrangement. “We were able to meld our career paths to each other, whereas if we had met later in life, we might already be on separate paths,” she says. Although her story contradicts the popular notion that high-achieving students will put their own career goals ahead of all others, Lieblein’s was the closest account we had heard to striking a balance between love and ambition. Here was a Columbia student who appeared to have “gotten it all” through compromise and collaboration rather than through competition. Had Allison found the key to Columbia-sanctioned fulfillment: committing early on, trading the highest heights of achievement for the lasting support and companionship of a loved one? munity. Although Ross knows fraternity graduates who continue to play video games and beer pong into their late 20s, he insists that “doing things associated with immaturity doesn’t mean that their dating lives are also immature.” He says that many fraternity graduates, working mostly in finance positions in the city, remain with college girlfriends out of a desire for stability in an unstable job market. “You could be doing 70, 100 hours a week—with that kind of work schedule, once you have a relationship, you try to keep it,” he says. **** For another postgrad perspective, we sat at Nussbaum & Wu with Rachel Pratt, who finished her studies at the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences last May. She embodied a nonchalant confidence, the enviable self-assured air of a young woman working in the city. We asked THE HIGHLY COMPETITIVE NATURE OF COLUMBIA, ACCENTUATED BY THE INNATE STRESSES, THRILLS, AND DISTRACTIONS OF THE CITY, MAY LEAVE US INCAPABLE OF INVESTING OUR TEMPORAL SCRAPS IN LONG-TERM RELATIONSHIPS. **** The same tradeoff surfaced where we would least expect it: in the Greek com- 09 IN FOCUS hour off from preparing for investment banking interviews to discuss the romantic framework of the “fraternity man.” As a financial economics major, Ross was quick to offer a supplyand-demand explanation for the advantages of men in the dating market on campus. “Men are spoilt for choice,” he says. When you factor in Barnard’s role within the larger Columbia community, the emerging landscape is representative of the gender ratios that will be present in the workforce when we graduate: namely, with more women than men. As a result, dating at Columbia is “a matter of opportunity cost,” Ross says, meaning that a man at Columbia has less to lose from seeking multiple partners because of the sheer number of options available to him. A “geographical mismatch” accounts for the insular nature of relationships in the Greek community, he adds. “People who go to Mel’s are a certain kind of people supplying a certain kind of good ... The person that you have coffee with or the person you spend the night with could well be in a different club.” With “not many avenues to meet people” other than the standard campus drinking holes, he says, fraternity men often “exclude themselves to other options.” The same is true for other students at Columbia: There is no middle ground between the darkness of The Heights and the fluorescent lighting of Butler 209 on which to make a real connection with someone. Ross estimates that the typical ratio of women to men at a Greek life mixer is two or three to one. “Does this give guys a power? Yes, I would say that,” he says. “But many guys I know still want a relationship—they just can’t find it.” Noted psychologist Barry Schwartz explored this phenomenon in his 2004 book, The Paradox of Choice. He argued that, in a society that “sanctifies the freedom of choice so profoundly,” the “benefits of infinite options seem self- evident.” However, as we consider the possible pleasures available to us, we hesitate to commit to any one option—leaving us paralyzed by choice. In his recently published Atlantic article, “A Million First Dates,” Dan Slater applied this methodology to a fixture of 21st-century romance: online dating. He reported that psychologists have found three factors that determine a successful relationship: satisfaction with the relationship, investment in the relationship (in the form of time, money, and emotions), and the “quality of perceived alternatives.” Students at Columbia are already overcommitted. From their internships to their extracurriculars, from their job applications to their studies, students find it difficult to make time to invest in a relationship, especially with the pressure of the New York City singles scene. Coupled with the availability of many “perceived alternatives” on campus, these circumstances make us less IN FOCUS her to confirm the hopes of many undergraduate Columbia students for their postgraduation years: If we remained single, would we at least find fulfillment in the degrees we had labored for? “That’s what we all think,” she says. “No one cared in undergrad, but it seems like everyone wants to be in a relationship now.” Pratt is equally candid when speaking about what she would demand financially of her partner.“I would never date someone who would expect me to contribute more than 50 percent financially,” she says. “The path that I’ve chosen to take has left me with a lot of debt and I won’t get involved with someone who will exacerbate that problem.” Her attitude feels particularly relevant to the high-debt, postrecession environment awaiting recent Columbia graduates. Pratt says that she had already felt the pressure to partner up while she was completing her graduate program. Out of 30 students in the sociology department, she says, there were at most four who didn’t have a significant other—a polar reversal of statistics in the undergraduate schools. “When people get to grad school, there’s more of an obligation to start solidifying your life,” she says of her experience. “You don’t associate being single with having fun anymore—you associate it with being lonely.” And even when the Columbia University stamp of distinction or the demands of pursuing a career don’t get in the way, New York City itself poses its own challenges to singles.“All of the 30-year-olds here act like they’re 20, and the 40-year-olds like they’re 30. People are less inclined to settle down because there are so many people here and so much to do,” Pratt explains. Her description aptly defines one of the great gear switches of adulthood: the end of sleeping around, and the start of settling down. Pratt is currently in a committed relationship, but she points out that many of her single peers have struggled to find a desirable partner in the city. Many of the stresses of that search are tied to the politics of interpersonal power. For example, Pratt tells us, holding a graduate degere raises one’s relationship standards: “Because I graduated from Columbia, there’s definitely an expectation to what I achieve ... We have specific standards, and it’s harder to find someone that you want to settle down with.” Currently, there are more women than men earning master’s and doctoral degrees, creating an imbalance of achievement between men and women in the postgraduate market. Although the effects of this trend have yet to be formally documented, Pratt’s economics-style calculations suggest that women expect their prospective partners to meet certain standards that, increasingly, men are failing to attain. “If we’re looking for men who are a little above us, it seems like men are more comfortable with someone below them. There’s a little mismatch there,” she continues, referring to the growing achievement gap. “I’m sure there are tons of men who find it extremely attractive to be with an equal—probably even men “YOU COULD CUT THE TENSION WITH A KNIFE AT THIS UNIVERSITY. WE’RE ALL COMPLAINING ABOUT IT.” 10 that want someone who’s above them—but that’s not what I’ve seen for the most part.” All Work, No “Game” In order to gain a fuller understanding of the machinery of undergraduate Columbians’ romantic discontent, we needed further elucidation of the male perspective. Enter Ryan Contreras, a Columbia College sophomore and our gregarious, theatrical suitemate—a known romantic on our floor who is always game, as he would probably say, “to shoot the shit.” With his perpetually amused air, Contreras sat down in our Wallach lounge to tell us why so many Columbia students are single. It is not only our preoccupation with work, but also our lack of that most essential of romantic skills: “game.” “We all worked very hard to get to this point, and consequently, probably didn’t have a relationship or something like that in high school—no TV-show romance. No Degrassi,” Contreras says. “Now I have barely enough time for my problems and my work as opposed to another human being’s. I’m a math major. There’s a bunch of dudes in my classes, and you ask me how I’ll meet girls?” He acknowledges the existential crisis of the single Columbian as much as he mocks it. “You could cut the tension with a knife at this university. We’re all complaining about it. As Plato said—aren’t we all just rent asunder from our other halves?” he asks. Contreras believes the strenuous Columbia application process results in a population with boys that “look for relationships more than hookups,” even when the romantic geography of their campus precludes relationships from growing. According to Contreras, the most satisfying conversations about romance he has had with friends have been those of woe: tales of rejections, awkward mornings-after, and a shared shortage of swagger. At Columbia and Barnard, we revel in the sort of self-deprecating humor typically found on New Girl or Workaholics: there’s no Jersey Shore bravado to be found here. Contreras explains undergraduates’ collective loneliness by suggesting that it’s the result of their childlike unwillingness to make themselves vulnerable. “A lot of people here are a little sheltered,” he says. “People don’t know how to express that they like someone, read the writing on the wall, that kind of stuff.” When prompted, Contreras denied that students are put off by each other’s lengthy lists of achievements. “I’m just intimidated by women!” he says, relative levels of success aside. “We’re all like little boys and girls in adult bodies, terrified of the other half that holds all the cards. And then you have technology, Columbia Admirers, enabling us to never overcome that little boy inside of us. It is my daily duty to overcome that terror, and I’m being as sincere as I possibly can,” he says. That moment of sincerity was Contreras’ cue for us to vamoose. Like any good, responsible Columbia student, he had to get back to his problem sets, leaving us to contemplate his words of wisdom. Thousands of Columbia students pining for, yet terrified of, love. Is it funny? Is it sad? Either way, it certainly rings true. a FICTION BLACKTOP BY ERIC WOHLSTADTER photo by Eric Wohlstadter The highway was different than Linnie remembered, widened and resurfaced, the northbound and southbound lanes split by a neatly mowed drainage ditch. Five years back, if her father would have leaned across the console of the U-Haul and predicted it would look like this, she would have thought: dementia. Then, the highway had been shelled with jilted fenders and bottles of urine, relics of the Escape. Now, it looked as if the roadworkers had chiseled through the broken cement and struck granite. The Escape. That was the nice way to put it. Thousands of cars logjammed from New Orleans all the way up to Shreveport. Hordes of families venturing into the piney woods to shit, returning to sunbathe on the roofs of their unmoving vehicles as babies wailed and the hurricane crept up behind them. Linnie thanked God her father had gotten out early. She thanked God he wasn’t yet too sick to drive. She also thanked God she had made the trip back with him, three weeks after the storm hit, to assess the damage to her childhood home and to see what if any furniture they could salvage. They had recrossed the border from Texas into Louisiana, had eased the U-Haul southward over the litter-ridden road. Linnie remembered thinking, This is not Mardi Gras, where the beads bury the streets one night and the next morning are gone. There are no streetcleaners to clear up this colossal mess. When they got to the house, they found that the U-Haul would be mostly useless. There had been nine feet of standing water, but while they had expected mold, they did not expect the house to look as if it had been shaken. Furniture clawed the walls as if trying to escape; the pool table, the couches, the washing machine. Everything overturned. In the kitchen, the refrigerator lay open in a black gloop of rotted food. The attic was the only area worth picking through, but even that yielded worthless items: a chest of 60’s-era maternity clothes, a set of chipped fiestaware. At the time, Linnie had been shattered, heartbroken. She watched her father step over and through the rot, watched him bend his arthritic back to unearth a soggy photo, a broken dish. She stood in the entryway for a long time, hugging herself. Then, she pulled him out and drove him back to Dallas. Two months later, he was in a nursing home. Three months after that, he was dead. It was only later, years later, that Linnie realized she had retrieved something else from the trip: a piercing memory of her father. It seemed to be the only one she fully possessed, the rest blurred with time and stripped to feelings of happy, sad, cold. But this memory was irregular, unyielding. Linnie could conjure up the exact clothing her father had worn (short-sleeve button-down and jeans) and what his breath smelled like (breathsavers and cedar wood). And it was this clamant recollection that caused her to refuel the old Impala, his own escape vehicle, still sitting in her garage, and make one more trip down to the city she had grown up in. She wanted to see the house again, to place him there, to experience what, five years back, she had so blindingly squandered. But the highway was different, new, and this dismayed her. It did not even have the bones of the old highway, the structure completely done away with. This highway was unrecognizable, a highway built for streamlined electric vehicles and trucks pulling shiny motorboats to touristy beaches. Linnie feared that the city would be unrecognizable as well, that it too had been completely demolished and resurfaced, buried and built over. She regretted selling the house. She should have held onto it, should have been the last one there, standing on storm-beaten wood, pitching cries at towering matrixes of metal and glass. My God, she thought, I buried pets in the back of that house. A dog and two cats. She remembered crying over their graves. Were they still there? Or had someone paved over them? Or were the bones long gone, having floated out of the earth five years ago and mingled in the debris? Huddled in that doorway, her father peripherating the wreck, had Linnie overlooked them all? The car jumped and veered. Linnie pulled on the steering wheel and righted it. Instinctively, she grabbed the rearview mirror. She had heard of funnel clouds that were not funnels at all but great round masses that gather cars and houses as they roll. She expected to see a darkness approaching behind her, ready to swoop her up underneath it. But behind her was empty. She looked back in front, both hands on the wheel, and settled into the seat. Then she realized: she had reached broken road. The highway was itself again. a Eric Wohlstadter is Events Editor of Quarto Literary Magazine and the new Fiction Editor of The Eye. He resides emotionally in Dallas, TX. The Eye is now accepting 900-1,200 word fiction submissions. Send your story to [email protected]. 11 IDEAS THE REBLOG DIET EATING DISORDER COMMUNITIES MIGRATE TO SOCIAL MEDIA by Andrea Garcia-Vargas illustration by Hannah Sotnick I was 16 years old the first time I came across a pro-anorexia website, covertly looking at the web page in case my parents came in. Dozens of images flooded the screen—girls in underwear with jutting clavicles, the skin over their ribs stretched taut. Pictures of A-list celebrities and nameless models alike were plastered across a variety of other pro-anorexia and pro-bulimia websites. The websites fawned over these women, labeling them as “thinspiration,”or “thinspo,” for short. The forums proclaimed anorexia and bulimia were lifestyles and provided tips on how to lose weight. For a couple hours a day, I would feed myself on these images and bits of information. At the time, I disliked my body and didn’t know better. After limiting my calorie count to just 800 a day—less than half of the minimum 1,800 recommended by the USDA— only made me feel worse, I quit and never went back to the websites again. My story was an easy one. Other people’s stories are harder. Today, the world of pro-anorexia, pro-bulimia, and thinspo is expanding from stand-alone websites to various social media platforms, including Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, and Tumblr. More and more people in these “eating disorder communities” are using Tumblr and hashtags on Twitter like “pro-ana,” “pro-mia,” and “purging,” in addition to keeping tabs on how many calories they eat a day and how close they are to their UGW—ultimate goal weight. With just the click of a button, these sufferers can easily find the same photos I did. These communities are catering to a population of young people, overwhelmingly women, who are insecure, struggle with their body image, and may suffer from eating disorders. The media has been in an uproar over these communities, wondering what social media platforms should do. The debate boils down to a single question: to block or not to block? Facebook, the world’s largest social network, has almost completely obliterated all pro-ana and pro-mia groups from their website. Instagram, on the other hand, has begun to monitor these communities more passively; if users search for hashtags like “bulimia,” “ana,” or “thinspo,” a graphic content warning and a link to the National Eating Disorders website appear—though users can still click through the link and see the enabling images and phrases. “If [social media platforms] begin censoring content other than that, then they begin restricting some of the only outlets these girls have to vent,” Adrienne Hein wrote over Skype. Hein, who is based in Ann Arbor, Mich., is the creator and owner of Fitspo.net and the manager of its Twitter and Facebook accounts. Fitspo.net is a form of “fitspiration,” a movement which typically focuses more on healthy eating and exercise as opposed to starvation. 12 While online forums are easily accessible, they aren’t the only spaces for venting, according to Dr. Evelyn Attia, the director of Columbia’s Center for Eating Disorders. Online forums and treatment (which often includes individual or group therapy) might provide venues for sufferers to vent, but medical attention can counteract the dangers of eating disorders where online forums can perpetuate or worsen them. “When a group of people who are ill get together, it’s possible that there’s some kind of comfort in the shared symptoms instead of connections around the shared struggle to overcome the symptoms,” says Attia. She later adds, “It is the challenge of all clinicians to help people move forward and not stay where they are, or worse, move backward.” After talking to Sydney, a 16-year-old girl in Ontario who keeps a pro-ana Tumblr, Attia’s statement makes perfect sense. Thanks to her Tumblr, Sydney and other girls (whom she calls her “ana-buddies”) encourage each other across cyberspace to achieve their weight goals. To Sydney, eating disorders are a lifestyle—a lifestyle that helps her get closer to achieving her ultimate goal of being thin. I asked her what she had to say about the consequences of consuming only 500 calories a day. She explicitly acknowledged that “pro-ana is not necessarily healthy because you can die from it.” But in spite of this, “I don’t care that it is not the healthiest choice. I lose weight fast this way.” How can we counteract this virtual enabling? Britney Cutler, who manages a Tumblr with a directory of all the fitspiration Tumblrs from her home in San Diego, is unsure of where she stands. To an extent, she believes that social media platforms’ efforts to make it more difficult to access pro-eating disorder communities could be “a good thing.” “Obviously, there’s Google and the Internet, so if people want to [find thinspiration], they can,” she says. “But it’s a lot more difficult than if you’re on a Tumblr for 18 hours a day and you can just click on ‘track tag’ for ‘pro-ana,’ ‘pro-mia,’ or ‘purge.’” That being said, Cutler is very much opposed to censorship in any form. Both Hein and Cutler expressed fears of a “slippery slope,” since blocking the existence of these tags, pictures, or communities could present a danger to free speech. Cutler further THESE COMMUNITIES ARE CATERING TO A POPULATION OF YOUNG PEOPLE , OVERWHELMINGLY WOMEN, WHO ARE INSECURE , STRUGGLE WITH THEIR BODY IMAGE, AND MAY SUFFER FROM EATING DISORDERS. nuances the critiques of pro-ana and pro-mia by pointing out that the existence of the tags isn’t necessarily “bad”—one of the friends who inspired her to be fit regularly re-blogs eating disorder recovery posts and inspirational messages and then tags them with “pro-ana” and “pro-mia,” so the very people who are searching for thinspiration instead stumble upon much more positive content. Blocking pro-ana and pro-mia from social media might seem like a quick solution, but one thing remains clear: Their existence is only a fraction of the problem of eating disorders. In Attia’s words, whether a person has constant access to the Internet and thinspiration websites or lives in a small isolated place makes little difference: “It’s important for everyone to realize that no one’s protected from eating disorders.” a Check out the accompanying video on the Columbia Center for Eating Disorders and Research at eye.columbiaspectator.com. Video by Eye Multimedia Editor Morgan Wilcock. LITTLE GIRL, INTERRUPTED by David Salazar illustration by Kimberly Flores The first time I heard of Alana “Honey Boo Boo” Thompson, I was watching a clip from Toddlers and Tiaras—the youth pageant show that would lead to the spin-off Here Comes Honey Boo Boo, making the six-year-old a household name. Initially, it’s easy for someone unacquainted with Here Comes Honey Boo Boo to dismiss it or ask themselves, “Why would anybody watch this shit?” But fans—and one of the show’s producers—might ask the dismissive viewer to take some time and “redneckognize” the underlying appeal of the show. Considering all the strange things the Honey Boo Boo crew gets up to, it would be easy to see the show as exploitative. It captures on camera exploits like the Redneck Olympics, Honey Boo Boo’s niece being born with an extra thumb, and the family making “sketti,” a spaghetti dish with a sauce made of ketchup and butter. Together, it sounds like a CONSIDERING ALL THE STRANGE THINGS THE HONEY BOO BOO CREW GETS UP TO, IT WOULD BE EASY TO SEE THE SHOW AS EXPLOITATIVE. recipe for the perfect guilty pleasure series, but for some fans, what others might lambast as pure trashiness is precisely why they tune in. “It’s exploiting them because it’s making them look weird. If they’re a fine family, why do they need a TV show?” says Calvin Hu, a School of Engineering and Applied Science junior who watched the first season of Here Comes Honey Boo Boo. “The way you watch Honey Boo Boo, it’s not like a documentary. When you start a documentary, you’re like, ‘I want to learn about nature or the Civil War.’ When you start watching Honey Boo Boo you think, ‘I want to make fun of some people in that part of America.’” Indeed, a lot of people might watch the show with a touch of schadenfreude and more than a little irony. And, as Time’s television critic James Poniewozik noted in his review of the show, “That’s the show’s selling point: holy crap, would you look at these people!” Poniewozik isn’t the first to notice this about the show. In September, The Daily Beast interviewed one of the show’s executive producers, Tom Rogan, who acknowledged this possible appeal of the show, but also ruled it out as a reason people watch it. “[Here Comes Honey Boo Boo] runs counter to their expectations; where they tune in expecting train wreck TV, and what you have is a loving, very cohesive, supportive family that is really enjoying each other and having a great time,” Rogan told The Daily Beast, adding that “you get caught up in the fun they’re having, and in their enjoyment of each other.” And while that may sound like the sycophancy of a person doing his job—defending the show he works on from what might be valid criticism—the argument is more common than one might imagine. As Poniewozik noted in his review, “While I was creeped out by the way Honey Boo Boo was framing the family and presenting them to us, I couldn’t help loving the Thompsons themselves.” Rogan’s claim, then, isn’t completely unsound. Fans of the show do find the family endearing, and see the show as an interesting look at a family that people aren’t used to seeing on TV or in real life. “It’s just really genuine, and she never wins pageants. But she loves it and she thinks she’s beautiful and each of them think they’re beautiful, and I love that because obviously most of TV doesn’t represent normal-looking people,” says Paulina Pinsky, a Barnard sophomore who admits to loving the show. Part of the appeal, she says, is that “their situations aren’t solved by buying a Chanel tennis racket or buying a Bentley,” as on, say, Keeping Up With the Kardashians and other reality shows that document the lives of the uber-rich. Of course, it’s hard not to focus on the possible long-term effects of being so young and headlining a reality TV show, especially one that isn’t regarded with genuine affection but rather with something akin to disdain. The Onion pointed this out in a fake op-ed, jokingly attributed to Honey Boo Boo, titled “You Do, Of Course, Realize That This Is Going To End Very, Very Badly,” which points out some of the possible drawbacks of early stardom and the family’s lifestyle. “It is definitely good that people enjoy gathering around the television and laughing at my chubby cheeks, and my tacky family, and all of our hysterical antics,” the article reads. “Just so long, of course, as people are aware that there is no possible scenario in which I will grow up to be a functional human being who is healthy and psychologically well-adjusted. Or successful. Or anything but a sick punch line, or worse,” it continues. With examples of the lives of child-stars going awry on full display thanks to the likes of Lindsay Lohan and Amanda Bynes, with their various run- TELEVISION HONEY BOO BOO AND THE POTENTIAL PITFALLS OF REALITY TV ins with the law and illegal substances, it makes sense that the writers of The Onion article foresee similar consequences for Alana. But an interview with Alana and her mom, June, on Dr. Drew’s talk show earlier this year, indicates this might not be the case. Despite her mugging for the camera, Alana admitted that she “hates” when fans approach her and answered with a loud “no!” when asked if she likes being on TV. Where Honey Boo Boo’s story will go remains to be seen, but according to TMZ, she’ll be helped along by a trust fund when she comes of age—one of five set up by her mother, into which she deposits the show’s earnings to help Alana, her three other daughters, and her grandchild. That’s enough to buy a lot of sketti. a 13 20/20 LESS THAN SUPERMAN by Allyson Gronowitz For cancer patients, aspiring cyclists, and the surprisingly large number of kids with an affinity for yellow silicone bracelets, Lance Armstrong was an inspiration, a paradigm of the unconquerable nature of the human spirit. In the words of my personal hero, Boromir from The Lord of the Rings, one does not simply ... survive cancer and go on to win the Tour de France seven consecutive times. But the thing is, one really doesn’t. With each new round of allegations over the past decade, I dutifully accepted Lance’s protestations of innocence. I wanted to believe that his key to winning was determination. I wanted to believe that his stubborn, unwavering will to live was wholly responsible for his miraculous recovery and athletic ass-kicking. I even tried to defend him with seemingly indisputable arguments such as, “Well, of course he’s on drugs—the guy had freaking cancer!” (Give me a break here, I’m an English major.) But in the recent interview with Oprah, the truth came out: Armstrong’s superhuman strength was actually more “super” than “human.” With this, the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency stripped him of his seven titles, and I had to radically reconsider my admiration. It’s been said that we will forgive our athletes for absolutely anything except cheating. However morally twisted this sounds, it is at least consistent with our image of professional athletes as embodiments of athletic perfection. When Michael Vick was convicted for dogfighting, his conduct was vociferously condemned, but bit by bit, fans began to brush over Vick’s ugly extracurricular activities in order to focus on what he does (or doesn’t do) as the Eagles’ quarterback. But Armstrong falls short on both personal and athletic fronts. For cycling aficionados—really, devoted followers of any professional sport—Armstrong violated rule number one: “Thou shalt not cheat,” thereby desecrating the sacredness of the race. In his cringe-inducing interview with Oprah, Armstrong defined cheating as “gaining an advantage over opponents,” and since “everyone was doping,” he didn’t feel like he was gaining any particular advantage. Well, Lance, if everyone jumped off a bridge...Actually, he’d probably be the one pushing them off in the first place. Although it pains me, I have to say that Lance Armstrong is a jerk. He’s a big bad bully who might as well kick kittens as part of his morning routine and casually steal candy from children. Cheating may be the most unforgivable crime an athlete can commit, but for someone like Armstrong, a guy whose public image extends well beyond the realm of cycling, his actions are unforgivable on the human level, as well. Not only did he cheat, but he bullied others into cheating, all while mercilessly ruining the lives and careers of those who attempted to expose him. And yet, I still can’t forget the other side of Lance Armstrong—the part that founded Livestrong, raised millions of dollars for research, lobbied Capitol Hill, and devoted himself to philanthropy. Can we separate the man who heroically battled mankind’s most nefarious epidemiological enemy and lived to tell the tale from the man who systematically tormented those who attempted to expose his dark side? Even as a former devoted fan, I have to say: no. His work on behalf of cancer survivors may be admirable, but Armstrong has a challenging mountain to climb before he can be accepted as the hero he once was. a MACKLEMORE’S REVENGE by My first exposure to Macklemore came in the form of his song and video for “Irish Celebration,” a bawdy, brawling ode to the rapper’s Irish heritage. Sampling Beirut’s “Scenic World,” the song’s brassy instrumentals inspired YouTube comments such as, “Siq beat—makes me proud to be Irish!” Fun fact: Beirut’s music is largely influenced by Balkan music, not Celtic drinking songs. What ignorance! This, combined with Macklemore’s less-than-inspired lyrics like, “Put a pint up everybody sing a song,” was strike one for me. I wasn’t a fan. Strike two came when I heard “Thrift Shop.” To me, the song seemed as if Macklemore, trying to catch the wave of “underground” tastes, had shown up a few years late to the hipster convention and was trying to sweep around for any frat boys or blog-fresh suburbanites just as late as he was. He represented everything that was wrong with the hipster movement—principally its hordes, clamoring but also doing an overly obvious job of clasping onto the tired aesthetic. Silly clothing! Irony! Hooray! “And We Danced” was strike three. In my mind, perhaps the only thing worse than cultivating a (questionably) “alternative image” is to pair it with 14 Black Eyed Peas-style lyrics—i.e., using phrases like “really, really, really good time” in one’s chorus. He had struck out. But then I watched the video for “Same Love,” and I was forced to reconsider my call. After “Thrift Shop” had already dominated Billboard’s number one position, Macklemore could have easily written another beer pong bump. But he didn’t. Instead, he produced a track advocating for LGBT rights and attacking socioreligious hostility toward the gay community just as the state of Washington was debating whether to legalize same-sex marriage. This is by no means the easy move for an artist attempting to gain the spotlight in the hip-hop/radio hits industry. His choice reveals (what I believe to be) something much more deliberate and self-aware going on behind Macklemore’s curtain. What if he used mindless lyrics in “And We Danced” simply because he knew people would listen to it anyway? What if, to the horror of “musicsavvy” Tumblr-ites everywhere, Macklemore actually understands how bad a light “Thrift Shop” shines on indie culture? What if the song isn’t a desperate appeal but a meta critique? PJ Sauerteig I can only imagine he secretly chuckles at all the “in the know” blogs that gut him for being a poser and that aren’t nearly as savvy as they think they are. And they can’t be all that savvy if they’ve failed to identify the trail of breadcrumbs he’s left behind. In a music scene so obsessed with genre, he has successfully created a frat party smash hit, a noble protest song, and a wannabe hipster anthem, all within a year. And while each has its respective merits, his work’s collective genius lies in the Chuck Close-style collage it renders of a giant middle finger—to genre, to “hip” listeners, to oblivious listeners, and to expectations in general. It’s easy to dismiss Macklemore, but I don’t think we give him nearly enough credit—not necessarily as an artist, but as a social critic and an astute stuntman. To dip into such varying social tastes and succeed brilliantly each time is impressive and alarming. His eclectic marathon run raises questions about artist autonomy and public standards, and makes us wonder if this out-of-nowhere Seattle rapper with a hip haircut is infinitely smarter than we think. Then again, there’s always the possibility that we’re just getting dumber. a VIEW FROM HERE MOVING PICTURES A RAILWAY JOURNEY FROM COAST TO COAST by Anne Steele illustration by Hannah Sotnick Los Angeles Union Station is the closest you can get to a Grand Central of the “other” coast. The majestic old structure boasts Spanish stucco and missionary mosaics that perfectly typify the Westerns I used to re-enact as a kid. This is the kind of place that can intoxicate the imagination and resurrect latent daydreams as dusty as the West in which it was built. Dragging suitcase and self along the aisles, I could very well have been a runaway, plotting my escape to Albuquerque (a place that was, to my 10-year-old self, the closest to “exotic” an American city could sound). It was August 2012, and in a stroke of bleeding romanticism and nostalgia for times I never lived in, I took a train from LA to New York. I managed to shush the critics (realists) by telling them it was cheaper than a cross-country flight, but if time is money, then I bankrupted myself at least five times over on the very first day. Including the stop in Chicago and the delays in Michigan (the train in front of us ran over 200 cows planted by a luckless farmer desperate for government reimbursement), the trip took more than 70 hours. Somehow, I managed to sucker my cousin Julian into coming with me and, as an act of “Aw, shucks, you kids have fun!” generosity, my aunt and uncle gave us a sleeper car for the journey’s first leg. The car alone fulfilled every Agatha Christie fantasy I’d ever had—complete with seats that transformed into bunk beds and picturesque views of the American frontier. Long-distance trains are roughly divided into four sections: sleeper cars like ours, Greyhound bus-style seats that we curled up in during the second half of our trek, a dining car complete with booths in the style of ’80s diners (apparently a testament to the number of shits the government gives about upgrading its infrastructure), and the gloriously windowed viewing decks that drown their occupants in golden light during that one perfect hour before the sun falls beneath the sky. Meals were by far my favorite time of day, not necessarily because the food was far better than the Tom’s Restaurant chow I’d been expecting (though no doubt this helped my state of mind and stomach immensely), but because of the people we sat with. Because of space, lonely pairs are asked (read: commanded) to sit with each other, forcing interactions that begin awkwardly, but end in a beautiful unraveling that I don’t think I’ll find anywhere else for a long time. Unlike college students during a hurricane, people traveling by train don’t get belligerently drunk when stuck in one place with the same people for over a day. They get nostalgic, vulnerable, and candid in a way that only the freedom of finality can bring. Why not bare it all? Hell, you wanted to talk about it anyway, and it’s easier to confide in a stranger than in people who actually care. Case in point: The day we hit Albuquerque was the day we met Lucas. He’d joined the army out of high school, allowing him to cross over the Mississippi for the first time in his life. We sat with him in the observation car for hours; he told us about how he’d found his best friend, how sonic booms make his heart shiver, and how he was going to be deployed to Afghanistan on his 21st birthday. “I’m one of the few guys that doesn’t really drink ... But I promised my mates that I’d take one shot, then get on the plane,” he’d said, a bit ruefully. His birthday was in January. By now, he should be overseas. I remember finding it being difficult to fall asleep on the second night of the trip when, unexpectedly, he handed me a copy of what he professed was his favorite movie: Good Morning, Vietnam. “I think it’s a comedy. It’ll make you laugh,” he said, “you’ll fall asleep.” Something tells me, though, that he knew he would never get it back, because when I woke up (with the circular DVD–unwatched–imprinted on my cheek), we had passed Oklahoma City and Lucas was gone. He was but one of so many that I encountered on the Southwest Chief and Lake Shore Limited, that quixotic dream of an adventure that left me a little bleary-eyed and overwhelmed as we stepped into Penn Station, ever-teeming and chaotic, even at midnight on a Tuesday. Riding the 1 train to campus, I found my eyes wandering from face to face, unconsciously searching for the same vulnerability that I’d been privy to in the days past. I hardly expected to find it in their hardened subway scowls—but surprisingly, I did: in the young man giving up his seat to an elderly woman, in the smile you can’t help but aim at the kid in a stroller, in the dollar begrudgingly handed to the man in the mariachi band, both parties all too aware of the fact that the melody has been replayed hundreds, if not thousands, of times. It’s there. I saw it, and smiled. Kerouac was right when he said that taking a train in the States is in no way like going on a road trip. There’s no room for whimsicality: you can’t open the windows of your car just to feel the wind pummel your tear ducts, or pause to enjoy a particularly stunning view. It’s passive and almost cinematic, like a theater you can’t escape. But as you lumber along in the iron giant, subject to the whims of a machine you can’t control, the people you’re with eventually blend into the scenery. You begin to associate the hail of New Mexico with the almost-soldier, the mountains of Colorado with the retired shoemaker. As you watch the movie of America pass you by, you’re living a movie right there on the train, caught between the dream of a blank slate and the tick of a clock that counts down the seconds until your return to reality. Until you are again with people that already know you, and will continue to know you, until the pull of the road takes you away again. Good Morning, Vietnam still sits on my desk. I’m hesitant to watch it, just in case it sucks. a 15 follow @theeyemag