Latest News

a, Know Your Athlete, Martlets, Sports

Know your McGill Athlete: Katie Caldwell

“When you swim for McGill, it’s all about what you do for the team,” Katie Caldwell, captain of the Martlet Swimming team, said. “I really enjoy that […] aspect of […] having that whole team behind you and scoring points for your team.”

Caldwell has experienced a lot during her McGill career. She was the RSEQ Rookie-of-the-Year in the 2012-2013 season before enduring a frustrating and injury-riddled sophomore year. She rebounded in 2014-2015 as captain of the Martlets and led them to a strong showing at the 2015 CIS Nationals. McGill placed ninth out of 23 teams, with 12 personal-best times. Caldwell took home the Martlets’ only medal with a bronze in the 400m individual medley. Coach Peter Carpenter, per McGill Athletics, called it “one of the most courageous efforts I have ever been a part of,” given Katie’s past injuries.

Despite that adversity, Caldwell has stepped up as a captain, and has cherished the responsibility of leading this year.

“You take on more of a role in showing leadership and a positive attitude,” Caldwell said. “I have to be there for the team, […] especially for the newcomers—[to] show them that that they can be a part of this [amazing atmosphere] and that they [can] lead the team in a few years.”

It was this team atmosphere that helped her through the difficult 2013-2014 season, when Caldwell dealt with some of the worst injuries of her swimming career. 

“They [would] put a smile on [my] face when it [was] a bad day or [I was] hurting,” Caldwell explained. “The team is like a second family.”

The junior’s injuries caused her to reevaluate her approach to swimming. She explained that she was putting too much pressure on herself to perform as a sophomore. Rather than placing this pressure on herself again, Caldwell sought to see what she could accomplish by trying to have fun again.

“This year, I [decided to] look at it as [I] did first year—[as] a new experience […] and [to] have fun with the team,” Caldwell said. “I ended up with a bronze medal, which was fantastic considering last year was nowhere close to where I wanted to be.”

Swimming runs like water in her family, and Caldwell began her career in the pool with Pacific Seas Wolves Swimming Club in British Columbia at the age of four.

“I was very involved because my sister was already swimming and when I was born we had a pool in our back yard,” Caldwell said.

 Her older sister Hilary Caldwell, an Olympic swimmer, is someone Katie has had healthy competition with and looks up to in equal measure.

“[When] we hit the age where we both did similar events […] we got a bit competitive,” the younger Caldwell said. “It’s [gotten] to a stage where she has excelled [in her swimming career] and I […] focus on my studies more [….] Now it’s [more like] looking up to her and what she has accomplished and being proud of her.”

Out of the pool, Katie is a passionate International Development Studies student with minors in Education and Education Psychology. She sponsors a child in Cameroon and sees Africa as an exciting place of development.

“I have a big drive to go to Africa and […] be a part of the development over there,” she said. “After school, I want […] to get involved in something along those lines.”

McGill Tribune (MT): What is the weirdest thing you have ever eaten? 

 

Katie Cladwell (KC): I am a bit of a picky eater and don’t like to try weird things. I have tried conch, which some people might not consider weird […] I was in Belize and I was told it was chicken, but it wasn’t.

 

 

MT: What TV shows are you watching at the moment?

 

KC: Too many. Some of my favourites are Suits—that just ended—and Game of Thrones. Another one is Sherlock. I like British TV, it has good humour which they can’t do in America. 

 

 

MT: What toiletry would you be if you had to choose? 

 

KC:  That is a very odd question. I have never thought about that before. I was thinking about toothpaste because it feels so good when you brush your teeth and your mouth’s refreshed at the end of the day.

 

a, Features

In war-torn Middle East, freelance journalists hunt for stories and sales

Since the Arab Spring began five years ago, much of what the Western world knows about the Middle East has been produced by a new band of freelance journalists on the front lines of the world’s most dangerous conflicts. Travelling to Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, and Libya without the backing of major media outlets, these young journalists have little formal training or resources required to safely cover stories in the region. On a good day, they earn $70 USD for a report from the front lines of the Syrian Civil War. For young journalists reporting from the Middle East, they weigh a hazardous lifestyle with the opportunity to write and witness history as it’s being made.

 

 

Jake Simkin, 34, was a commercial photographer in Australia before deciding to become a freelance war photographer a decade ago. Although he was earning a steady income shooting music videos and commercials, Simkin was uninspired by his comfortable life in Melbourne. After a brief stint photographing victims of the tsunami in Banda Aceh, Indonesia in 2004, Simkin reassessed his career.

“I came back home and told my friends about the horrible things I had seen [after the tsunami],” Simkin explained. “I found that people in Australia were so consumed by material needs, [but] I became obsessed with the idea of wanting to know what it meant to live and experience all emotions in life.”

In 2006, Simkin booked a one-way ticket to Kabul, Afghanistan, and began his career as a freelance photojournalist in the midst of the U.S.-led war against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. Speaking only a few words of the Persian language Dari, Simkin worked with fixers—translators knowledgeable of the local terrain—to help him find and cover stories.

While many of the Western journalists were fearful of leaving the American compound at that time, Simkin rode his motorcycle all through Kabul and even into the tribal regions of the country in search of better stories. In a decade of work, Simkin has sold his photographs to the Associated Press, the Guardian, and The New York Times. 

“As a journalist, you are exposed to horrible things, but you try your best to create change,” Simkin said. “I look for hope in very difficult places. There are people who haven’t given up on life, even in Afghanistan. Their stories need to be told.”

Throughout this experience, Simkin formed invaluable relationships that continue to resonate with him. One of Simkin’s earliest friends in Afghanistan was Nowab, a street kid he taught to skateboard. 

“Nowab was [the journalists’] favourite,” Simkin recalled. “He was such a smart kid. He taught himself English.” 

One day, Nowab spotted a suicide bomber near the American compound in Kabul. As Nowab tried to report the incident to the Afghan security forces, the bomber panicked and pulled the mechanism in his suicide vest. When Simkin received a phone call notifying him of the news, he realized just how integrated his life had become with his career.

“I felt a real sense of loss for a younger brother,” Simkin said. “Nowab, like Afghanistan, had become a part of me.”

In the years since Nowab’s death, Simkin has lost many other close friends and faced life-threatening situations himself. The ubiquity of death is perhaps the only predictable part of his job. 

In Somalia last year, Simkin was riding in an ambulance when teenage Al-Shabab militants attacked the car and fired a rocket-propelled grenade (RPG), killing the driver and the medic in the front passenger’s seat. 

“I was knocked out cold and covered in blood,” Simkin recalled. “I only survived because the Al-Shabab fighters assumed I was dead.” 

He paused for a moment.

“This job certainly isn’t for everyone.”

 

 

The foreign correspondent has always had a reputation for being a daredevil. In the earlier days of print media however, the risk of conflict-zone reporting came with a daily byline, a stable staff-writer position, and a steadily accumulating 401 K. 

Today, the equation has fundamentally changed. With media outlets downsizing every year, the biggest newspapers are increasingly relying on freelancers who are cheaper to pay and require none of the traditional benefits promised to contract workers. Many argue that this hands-off relationship allows newspapers to receive the best reporting from the Middle East without covering any of the risk.

For freelancers trying to make a living, the competition is fierce. Since only a finite number of outlets are buying articles to begin with—most digital media organizations now simply aggregate existing reports—journalists are incentivized to take more dangerous risks in pursuit of stories that sell.

Over the past few years, Iraq and Syria have become perhaps the single most popular area for young freelance journalists to launch their careers. In this region, there are sometimes as many journalists as local militia fighters.

 

 

 

Two months ago, Simkin crossed the Turkish border into Kobani, Syria, to cover the battle between the Free Syrian Army (FSA), the Kurdish YPG, and Islamic State (IS). He had recently been expelled from a group supporting freelance journalists in the Middle East for his repeated entry into Syria, but had since established an amicable relationship with a Turkish intelligence official and was granted permission to re-enter the country. 

Following a small unit from the FSA in Kobani, Simkin came under fire from IS militants and took refuge in one of the town’s bombed-out buildings. IS fighters emerged from a smoke plume moments later and shot the lead FSA commander metres from where Simkin was hiding. When the fighting ceased, Simkin emerged from the rubble and helped carry the wounded commander to the Turkish-Syrian border. After receiving medical attention in Turkey, he survived his wounds.

Allan Kaval, a 25-year-old journalist, was one of the many other people reporting on Kobani in those days of fighting between the FSA, the YPG, and IS. His story is typical of this new crop of freelancers covering the region. Originally from Paris, Kaval long studied the Kurdish issue, but only saw an opportunity to report on it professionally after the unrest began in Iraq and Syria. Today, he reports from Erbil, Iraq and sells the majority of his work to La Monde in France. He has reported on some of the year’s biggest stories, including the humanitarian disaster of the Yazidis trapped on Mt. Sinjar and the Kurdish front against IS, where he blends macro-level geopolitics in his coverage with personal stories of those affected on the ground.

My path crossed with Kaval’s one year ago at a government building in Southeastern Turkey just as his journalism career was taking off. I was shooting a documentary film on the dwindling Assyrian Christian community in Turkish Kurdistan and was waiting to interview the province’s Christian governor, Februniye Akyol: Kaval had just learned about the IS takeover of Mosul, and was hoping that a local Kurdish official would know where he could find a hole in the fence to cross into Iraq and cover the story. 

Kaval and I spent a few restless hours together waiting for our respective interviews, and we quickly bonded over the dangers of Middle East reporting. As a student journalist and filmmaker graduating this spring, I held abstract fantasies about travelling to war-torn regions and reporting on the defining conflicts of our day. Still, Turkish Kurdistan, a comparatively safe part of the region, was the furthest I was willing to go in pursuit of a story. Surely, my nervous mother would not be too fond of me spending my evenings in bombed-out sections of Syria and Iraq. 

I ultimately split from Kaval to go talk to Akyol, but found his take on the craft incredibly insightful for aspiring journalists like myself. Kaval rebels against the characterization of the freelancer as an adventurer. Humble and introspective, he sees himself as a vital chronicler of history. 

“People don’t choose war,” Kaval said. “They are only suffering the consequences of a war that has been decided by other people. The most important thing is to record these terrible stories, and through them, try to make sense of this bloodshed.”

Some of the most harrowing stories Kaval has covered have been on the border between Iraq and Iran, where Iranian-backed Shiite militias have ravaged Sunni villages. In one village, all of the residents fled an impending invasion by Shiite militia, but were unable to bring one of the town’s mentally ill citizens along with them. When the militia arrived to find a ghost town, they beheaded the lone handicapped man and kicked his head around as if it were a soccer ball.

“He was a mentally ill person,” Kaval lamented. “He couldn’t hurt anybody. He couldn’t even wash his body or eat for himself. It’s always the same horrible stories, every single day.”  

For Kaval, the hardest part of being a freelancer is not the lack of a steady income or the daily dangers, but the difficulty of balancing a personal life with his professional duties. 

“In the morning, I go meet people who have been kidnapped, abused, raped, and then return to my hotel and talk to my parents about the tiny problems they have at work, with family, or with the coffee machine,” Kaval said. “It’s surreal to, on the same day, inhabit two such different worlds.” 

 

 

 

In a recent piece for The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg argued that journalists in the Middle East can no longer be assured of their safety. 

“Extremists don’t need a middleman anymore,” Goldberg commented, with reference to the Jihadi groups’ use of social media to disseminate their messages. “Journalists have been replaced by YouTube.” In the past, “the transaction worked for both parties,” he explained. But now, journalists serve little purpose for extremists other than to be kidnapped for ransom or killed. 

His cynical assessment is unfortunately proving to be correct. Last year, 61 journalists were killed in the field, among the highest numbers in history. Nearly half of those reporters are freelancers, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. For reporters all over the region, this has been a soul-searching moment. 

“Every journalist has thought to himself: If I take the wrong road, I could get kidnapped by [IS],” Kaval acknowledged. “It’s something that everyone keeps in mind every day when doing their work.” 

Simkin agrees with Kaval that IS controlled areas are a no-go zone for journalists. 

“[Reporting in] their territory is absolutely a death sentence,” Simkin says of the region controlled by the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. “I am willing to go anywhere except for there, where the rate of failure is so high.”

Many of Simkin and Kaval’s contemporaries have been far less cautious. Earlier this year, Simkin was in a hotel in Turkey with Japanese journalist Kenji Goto the day before he left for IS-controlled Syria. 

“I was one of the last people to see Kenji before he got captured,” Simkin said. “He never told anyone where he was going.”

On Jan. 30, 2015, Goto was beheaded by IS. 

“If I knew he was going there, I would have convinced him that it was a bad, bad idea,” Simkin explained. “Still, I know it would have been hard to talk him out of it: He felt he had a duty to tell this story to the world.”

a, Opinion

Commentary: The dangers of empathic giving

A few weeks ago in February, James Robertson, a 56-year-old factory worker from Detroit, told police he no longer felt safe in his home. Ever since his car broke down in 2005, Robertson has walked 34 kilometres to work, five days a week. But after a touching news story about him went viral, a local college student started an online crowdfunding campaign that raised over $350,000 on his behalf.

The online response to his struggle followed a dangerous trend in society. In considering where to donate, people are swayed more by empathy than by rational thinking.

Despite the good intentions behind the donations, the money that Robertson received caused him problems. Robertson was now more wealthy than most of his neighbourhood. He constantly feared robbery, as neighbours— some friendly, some not—swarmed his front door asking for money. Robertson had lived in Detroit for 15 years, but when a nearby man was stabbed to death for his relatively measly $20,000 lottery winnings, he decided it was time to leave.

A simple question, such as “Who needs the money most?” could have elicited a more pragmatic response. While Robertson pocketed a small fortune and a brand new car, many others in his community were also suffering.

Herein lies the problem with crowdfunding campaigns. They give misery a human face, and then manipulate people’s empathy for money. This creates wildly popular tales, such as Robertson’s, which are picked up by social media and prime-time TV to be gobbled by the public. We can see Robertson and empathize with his struggle, and online campaigns allow us to feel like we’re helping.

In considering where to donate, people are swayed more by empathy than by rational thinking.

But empathy-driven decision-making is blind. What about people who don’t get time on the tube? Surely they deserve help as well. By letting emotion control our judgment, we end up giving too much to too few people.

For example, after the Sandy Hook shootings, Newtown, Connecticut witnessed a huge stream of toys that were offered to the students of Sandy Hook Elementary. But there is such a thing as too many teddy bears; the school eventually ran out of room, and had to ask people to direct their gifts down another path.

The goodwill of such benefactors is heartwarming, but the results of their actions, although not entirely their fault, can be ineffective and wasteful. In light of this, donors have a choice: They can be guided by empathy, and donate to help a few people with very sad stories, or they can spread out their donations in a way that will help larger groups in society whose struggles may not have received the same degree of publicity.

Of course, the former will continue to thrive. When people fund one man, they can watch his evolution on national news, proud to play a small part in a much larger story. But imagine what $350,000 could have done if spread among the people at Robertson’s door, or if used to improve public transportation for everyone in the neighbourhood.

The goal of charity is to alleviate suffering and maximize wellbeing. If those on the giving side take this seriously, they should help organizations aiming for broad change, even if thinly spread. In such, empathy—and emotion overall—can still be used to galvanize. But it ought not be used as a tunnel vision so heavily focused on a single person, ignoring the widespread struggles faced by others. Sadly, a shift from this practice is unlikely to occur, as donations guided by empathy and self-congratulation remain just a click and a credit card number away.

a, Arts & Entertainment

Album Review: Kendrick Lamar – To Pimp a Butterfly

Kendrick Lamar is at his best when he embraces the contradictions that define his life. He is one of the most famous rappers alive, but feels stifled by his culture and his past. He’s outwardly full of bravado and bluster, yet unable to get past his crippling self-doubt. Fame has let him escape from the hell of the inner city, but he “keeps runnin’ back for a visit.” 

All of this is on display in his new, game-changing album, To Pimp A Butterfly, making it more impressive that the album feels of a complete piece rather than just a collection of songs. Songs like “u” and “i” showcase the fluctuations in his psyche, cycling from self-hate to self-love. “Hood Politics” succinctly zooms from micro to macro on the issue of racial politics, starting with his friends in the hood and ending with the President of the United States. 

Musically, he has forged an iconoclastic sound inspired by Flying Lotus and jazz and funk standards of the ’70s, leaving behind the sound that typifies a lot of modern hip hop. He has also largely done away with guest verses, which gives him more room to show off the remarkable amount of control and range he has over his voice, moving between gruff, rasping, and high-pitched yelps of victory. This is a work of supreme confidence and insight, and deserves a spot in the hip-hop hall of fame, right next to Illmatic (1994) and Fear of a Black Planet (1990).

a, Science & Technology, Student Research

This Month in Student Research: Valérie Losier

When Valérie Losier, a U3 Physics major, holds up the project she’s been working on for the past academic year, it doesn’t look like the next generation of breast cancer detection technology. Nonetheless, the device—a labyrinth of wires connecting computers and sensors to a bra—may soon become common sight in hospitals and doctors’ offices.

The Popovich lab where Losier has spent the past seven months working is exploring a method of breast cancer detection that moves away from traditional x-ray mammography, which uses the densities of different types of tissues to make a diagnosis. Instead, this new technology uses microwaves to look at tissues’ dielectric properties—a measure of a substance’s ability to reflect and refract radiation.

“The whole basis of this research is that tissues of the breast have different dielectric properties,” Losier said. “You basically shine light [at the tissues], and depending on what is scattered off, you can construct a map [using] the dielectric properties.”

Since the tumours have different dielectric properties, it makes detecting them easy. The detection instrument’s safety presents a major advantage over traditional mammograms.

“X-ray mammography uses X-rays, which ionizes the tissues, and that limits the scans to one time per year, and that’s obviously not optimal,” Losier explained. “This method would be doable once a month because it [uses] microwaves, and they operate at low power [like] wifi and cellphones.”

Because no research has shown any problems associated with extended exposure to these types of waves, the procedure itself is essentially harmless. Losier’s work focuses specifically on the physics of sending out these microwave signals. Essentially, the machine generates signals in the form of wave pulses, which are then read by antennas. Differences in wave readings can then be interpreted to create a map.

“You get 240 antenna-pair readings, [which involve] a lot of algorithms to construct the map,” Losier said. “What I’m involved with is making sure that the signal is sent properly, and that you can read the signal properly in each antenna pair.”

Thus far, the instrument has been tested only in the lab. Losier has been preparing it for clinical trials and anticipates being able to test its accuracy on real tissues awaiting the Glen Hospital relocation project to finish.

Prior to working on breast cancer detection methods, Losier held positions in two other labs. 

“I’d done research in physics in my first year,” Losier said. “It was experimental physics working on a satellite instruments [….] Then I did research in atmospheric science after; it was theoretical, numerical work, and then I decided that I wanted to do an engineering master’s and I thought ‘I don’t have experience in engineering’ so I thought I would get involved with a group […] in the engineering department.” 

Losier got involved with the lab through a physic’s project course, and strongly recommends using lab courses such as a 396 course—known also as an independent research project—as an introduction to research.

“I just sent [my supervisor] an email,” Losier said. “I’d say [my] advice for anyone is to just get involved in September. Do a 396 course […] and if you do a good job, [the professor] will offer to pay you the next term.”

 

a, Arts & Entertainment, Theatre

Peer Review: Bring Your Own Juice

It is no surprise that McGill, a school of academia and research, is reputable for its political groups, newspapers, and environmental activism. Yet, comedy often fades into the background almost unnoticed. How ironic is it that in Montreal, a city that’s home to the Just for Laughs headquarters and festival, the comedy scene is underrepresented at McGill?  

Despite this fact, 15 talented McGill students brought the third annual Bring Your Own Juice (BYOJ) production to life at the Players’ Theatre this past Thursday, Friday, and Saturday. The live sketch comedy, the sole group of its kind on campus, is entirely original and is written collectively by all the actors performing in the show.

The sketch follows a nonlinear plot jumping from theme to theme, while juxtaposing comedic elements that are completely unrelated. Apart from a single skit that is repeated, the audience is exposed to a range of sketches, musical numbers, and even amusing dances. It is this SNL-inspired cohesive chaos that keeps the packed theatre laughing and riveted for the entire two hours. 

“[There are] a lot of people from a lot of different comedic backgrounds: Improv, stand up, writing, or proper theatre,” said Andrej Gomizelj, stage manager. “Because everything is written by a different person, you have two things coming next to each other that have no reason to be next to each other in any way—they shouldn’t be, but it works.” 

Swearing, sexual content, and societal stereotypes are prevalent throughout the sketch; however, for the most part, the jokes remain light and politically correct. In particular, an entire sketch is devoted to a Canadian spin, in which the actors attack every Canadian stereotype imaginable from an apologetic love of hockey to Canadian pride in free health care, finally concluding with a humorous chorus of “O’Canada.” 

“It may not be your sense of humour, but you begin to appreciate it,” remarks director Dan Moczula. “It broadens your perspective on what is humor, what is funny, and what belongs on stage.”  

Despite the fact that the entire show is written, refined, produced, and performed in a month’s time, chemistry between the cast manifests itself through almost every joke. Even during rehearsal, tension between the cast is minimal and dissipates quickly. 

“Conflicts are momentary, taking a step back it’s always about the bigger picture,” commented Courtney Kassel, marketing director. “I don’t think we’ve ever had any creative conflicts, which is really interesting because we have such a diverse style. We’ve always just ended up with something without it being a source of tension.” 

This year, BYOJ underwent a drastic transition from an autocracy to democracy, which revolutionized its creative production process. Now any member of the McGill community, whether undergraduate, graduate, or professor—theoretically—can submit a script. Individuals from last year’s production review the entries and then blindly vote on which scripts should be selected. The group is also gaining momentum in numbers, expanding from eight members last year to the current 15, as well as in performance time, as this is the first year the production will run for three shows instead of one.  

This holistic, bottom-up approach unites a group all working towards the same goal: Putting on a great show that will draw attention to comedy at McGill. 

“We always call it our ‘sketch baby,’ because it’s something we hold near and dear to us and also stay up way too late taking care of, devoting ridiculous amounts of effort and time towards,” Kassel explained. 

As McGill does not officially recognize the BYOJ group as an organization, it faces several challenges. They are heavily reliant on other associations for funding and room reserving. The group is currently in the process of applying for SSMU club status, but this is a timely process, Moczula claimed. 

“We want to make comedy a reputable thing at McGill,” he said. “What we want to be is an independent place for intelligent, critically-minded people [who] are able to make fart jokes, and can book our own rooms.” 

a, Off the Board, Opinion

Off the board: Gentrification, urban-ecoism, and cultural perspectives

The houses in Kathmandu, Nepal, where my grandparents live are very tall and narrow—there’s not a lot of buildable space in the actual city. My grandparents’ house doesn’t have central heating. It’s wired up to the electrical grid, but the electricity isn’t always there. For several hours a day, electricity is cut-off to certain neighbourhoods on a rotating basis around the city. This is known as load-shedding, and it’s done because there is simply not enough electricity produced to power all the homes all the time.

The details of how my grandparents live have often surprised people when I tell them. People often comment, saying that life must be very hard in Nepal, or that my grandparents are very strong to be able to live the way they do. When hearing this, I always feel defensive. My grandparents don’t need sympathy, and their life isn’t hard. It’s just how things are done in Nepal. I know that living with six people in a six-room house would be considered crowded in Canada, and most families who do live like that here are often lower-income; but in Nepal, it’s the norm. Most middle-class and even upper-middle class families live this way.

It’s also funny for me to think that the way my grandparents live is very eco-friendly. They don’t own any cars, or a fridge. They buy their food fresh daily at a local market. They don’t use a lot of electricity, and they don’t even heat their homes (and it can get pretty cold in Kathmandu—the highs in January are a balmy seven degrees Celsius).

The way my grandparents live actually reminds me of the growing urban-ecoism movement here in Canada. People buy local and organic, take public transportation, and try to grow produce in shared urban gardens, or in window-sill boxes.

My grandparents’ lifestyle is often received with pity, when urban dwellers who aim to do the same in Canada are lauded.

My grandparents’ lifestyle is often received with pity, when urban dwellers who aim to do the same in Canada are lauded. Perhaps it’s because my grandparents have no choice—they’re just living the way that most middle-class people in Nepal do. In Canada, however, choosing to take a bus instead of driving is making a conscious choice to save the environment.

In fact, the efforts of the urban-eco movement have caused a lot of problems for other people living in cities in Canada and the United States. I’m talking about gentrification, and although gentrification is caused by a variety of things—not just urban-ecoism—many of hallmarks of gentrification go hand in hand with eco-friendly living. More organic food stores, more local businesses and less global retail-chains, more people riding bikes everywhere often lead to increased costs of living. Food becomes more expensive, and the poorer families—who are typically people of colour—get priced out of their historic neighbourhoods as rent prices increase as the area becomes more trendy.

I’m not absolving myself from all this. I’m a student in Montreal—I like the artistic, creative culture here, I like shopping at smaller, local boutiques, and I try to buy organic when I can. Still, it’s interesting the way certain lifestyles are framed, depending on what part of the world is living that way. My grandparents in Nepal are very eco-friendly, and I don’t think the way they live contributes to gentrification. Yet when other people hear how they live, I’m often met with veiled pity. Being eco-friendly in Canada, on the other hand, is celebrated, despite perhaps the ways in which it can contribute to gentrification, which does have a tangible negative effect on the other, poor, often people of colour, living in the same cities.

a, Arts & Entertainment, Film and TV

Inside the Echo Chamber

We are in the midst of a culture war where the personal and the political are becoming increasingly intertwined. A new discourse of social consciousness is emerging as the generation that was born in a world with ostensible equity across racial, sexual, and gender lines comes of age and realizes that things aren’t as equally represented as the people at the top claim they are be. This has manifested itself in a million different ways across the McGill campus, from womens-only gym hours to ‘Farnan-gate.’ Beyond McGill, issues of proper representation abound; we can see that these issues are endemic of the culture at large. 

This problem extends to popular media in that representation of women and minorities in media is nowhere near what it should be. To wit: Recent data shows that 90 per cent of major motion picture leads in a given year are white, and 75 per cent are male. Close to 90 per cent of television writers are white. Seven of the nine major television network heads and seven of the eight major film studio heads are white males. This is, of course, grossly out of line with how demographics are distributed in terms of population, so why has this been happening? Civil rights have made decidedly huge leaps in the last several decades, but it seems like television and film have been changing at a much slower rate than the rest of the world. The problem begins at the top.

“[Lack of diversity] is typical of North American power in general,” says Dr. Morton Weinfeld, professor in the McGill Sociology Department. “This would be true of Fortune 500 companies. This would be true of leaders of the major Ivy league universities, et cetera.”

A lot of this comes from the fact that demographic difference is split along socioeconomic lines. White males are more likely to earn more and be placed in positions of power than any other demographic. This creates a sort of echo chamber in which the perspectives of the majority are constantly reaffirmed while non-majority perspectives are not given an equitable footing to showcase their stories.

The race and class hegemony also has secondary effects in terms of the type of media that gets produced and how people react to it. 

“An image is not just an image,” remarked professor Margaret Campbell, at the Concordia Department of Sociology. “It’s really close to people—the way they perceive themselves, their sense of identity, their personhood, the way they perceive others.” Thus, when a young black male watches television and sees that a huge proportion of black actors are being typecast as criminals, part of that gets internalized and the boy’s world gets a little smaller.

The same principle applies to how the society is influenced by content, which is what leads to such intense and vitriolic backlash against any changes in the status quo. While the actual number of people protesting increased diversity is small, it accounts for some of the most fervent and regular dissent—be it against women’s gym hours or what Lena Dunham’s antics on Girls. This problem stems from two things. One is that the majority has been used to having a monopoly on what airs for so long that any alterations to it are perceived as a threat. The other is that people of the overrepresented majority misread the messages of content as labelling them as tacitly or overtly racist or misogynist. It puts people on the defensive—since nobody wants to be called prejudiced—and sparks backlash and aggression towards the media that they think is criticizing them.

There’s also an uneasy clashing of genuine improvement and institutionalized discrimination at the executive level of entertainment. While some studios seem to be legitimately trying to produce content that more accurately reflects the demographic makeup of North America, it can be unclear whether the increase is due to valid positive change or a desire to appease the public. For instance, take the case of Sasheer Zamata, who was hired as a Saturday Night Live (SNL) cast member amid a public controversy that the show was not diverse enough. Now she is rarely used at all. SNL has, it seems, filled its quota. This sort of lip service clearly doesn’t benefit anybody—it only makes it more difficult for consumers to discern who is truly committed to diversity. 

However, it’s important to note that things may be getting better.

“[I remember] exactly when the number of leading visible minority characters on television was zero—an easy number to remember,” recalls Dr. Weinfeld. “The number of such characters as leading roles in film was zero. The number of [minority] newscasters was zero.” 

It’s easy to forget this fact when there’s so much that needs correcting, but things are changing quickly and noticeably. In television, we seem to be exiting an era where prestige dramas are defined by white men doing terrible things, and entering one where there’s a lot more balance in representation. Content creators like Tina Fey, Shonda Rhimes, Mindy Kaling, and Justin Simien (to name just a few) are engaging with their ideologies and struggles while dispelling the myth that feminist and racial perspectives come in one monolithic form. For example, shows like Black-ish and Fresh off the Boat succeed not because of their representation of minority culture, but in their portrayal of a very specific and singular family dynamic.

Real change is coming from the bottom-up, as well. Empirical data reveals that shows with an accurate amount of minority representation are watched more than shows that have less than the average, and television is slowly changing to meet those demands. Campbell extolls the virtues of social media as a place where everybody is on an even playing field. Mediums like Twitter offer an opportunity for broad social movements to organize with relative ease and influence the people at the top. While there’s the irony that most of the worst, least progressive speech also comes from these platforms, social media is ultimately doing more good than harm. Hate increasingly falls on deaf ears, getting lost in the white noise of the sheer volume of social commentary. What gets left over and recycled and reblogged and retweeted is a critical analysis of the present and a hope that we may live in a world that is as equal as we dream it to be. 

a, Arts & Entertainment, Film and TV

Pop Rhetoric: A fresh perspective? It’s a boat time

The airing of the show Fresh Off The Boat (FOTB) on ABC was met with much fanfare and hype. The show—based off the life of chef Eddie Huang, as numerous blog sites were quick to note—was the first TV show in American mainstream media starring Asian Americans since All-American Girl (1994) starring Margaret Cho. Though Cho’s show was cut from the network after one season, FOTB currently has strong ratings and is being applauded for its ability to make racial jokes without being racist.

I had always been slightly dismissive of the numerous studies connecting media representation and self-validation. Growing up as an Asian Canadian, I had known no shows starring people who “looked like me,” but I didn’t feel deprived. I prided myself on being race-blind, focusing on the universal themes of shows instead of jibes about the race of my protagonist. But I surprised myself with the fervour with which I approached this show. When I read about its inception on media sites, I scrambled to watch the first episode, and then the next. I had not realized my craving for a protagonist who looks like me until I had access to one. I didn’t realize how good it felt to see Jessica Huang, portrayed by Constance Wu, eat sliced apple straight off the blade of a knife while home tutoring her children. All the “Asian mom” moments I had joked about with my friends—the shared moments of, “Your mom does that too?”—were finally on the screen for thousands of people to see. I had not realized how much I needed that validation, of what constituted ‘normal’ behaviour for ‘normal’ families. 

There has been plenty of discourse regarding how FOTB should not be the messiah of representation of Asian North Americans. Both the creators of the show and the actors have come towards the media denying their intention to be representative of all Asian American family experiences. Instead, they urge critics to promote a more diverse range of Asian talent and diffuse the need for FOTB to be a beacon of representation. 

In many respects, I should not be able to relate to this show at all. I could add my two cents to the babble of complaints of the show’s fake Taiwanese accents or the forced frugality jokes. A “stereotypical Asian” child like myself would have still been hard pressed to understand the hardships of young Eddie, who deals with being an Asian minority in suburban Orlando—I grew up in a racially diverse neighbourhood of Toronto. But universal themes of childhood isolation, and even the first brush with racism (Eddie is called a “chink” by a classmate in the third episode of the show—I was the target of bullying as “that Chinese kid” in third grade), not to mention the show’s absurd twists of humour, make FOTB generally excellent in its own right.

Although I support the arguments against putting pressure on FOTB to be the “model show” for the “model ethnicity,” I can also empathize with the clamour of voices urging the show to depict their families in such-and-such scenarios. The voices are urgent and impatient, vibrant with the sense of possibility that this one show has conferred, as if trying to make up for 20 years of lost time. However, what they are asking of FOTB would be called, in my mother’s words, “trying to reach the sky in one step.” It’s important to take a breath and channel those newly realized energies into other channels—supporting new media initiatives with minority majority casts, becoming patrons of upcoming talent, and continuing the dialogue around racial issues. Here’s to hoping that in the near future, shows and movies starring minorities will become so common that casting choices won’t be the primary label they are known for.

a, Science & Technology

A guide to the galaxy

On March 19, McGill students and the general Montreal public were taken on a tour of the solar system—while never leaving 103 Rutherford. Dr. Richard Léveillé, a planetary scientist who has worked on NASA’s Mars Science Laboratory mission, presented to a packed room on what scientists have learned about our planet’s neighbours. 

Léveillé started the night by addressing the number one question plaguing space scientists: Why explore space?

“Space is a very dangerous venture,” Léveillé stated. “Sometimes there are risks involved; sometimes there is loss of life.” 

But ultimately, as Léveillé explained, it is innate human curiosity that drives space exploration forward. By answering questions about space, people can answer questions about mankind’s very own origins. 

 “What are the origins and evolution of the solar system?” asked Léveillé. “Why are there all of these different bodies in the solar system? Why are they different in some ways, and why are they similar in others, and how did they get that way?”

It turns out that the search for life, though exciting, is not the driving motivator for space exploration.

“The only mission to go to another planet and search for life […] was the Viking mission in the 1970s,” said Léveillé. “The missions now are not designed to go looking for life. They’re exploring and doing all kinds of wonderful things.” 

Today’s missions typically have the much more achievable goal of improving our understanding of the solar system. After its success with the moon landings, NASA has since branched out to send probes to the farthest reaches of our planetary neighbourhood, and even in the case of Voyager I, beyond the edges of the solar system.

Léveillé’s journey through the solar system started off with the closest planet to the sun—Mercury—and continued outwards to explore Venus, Mars, and Jupiter. 

Each planet is incredibly unique and as technology evolves, scientists are learning new things about their surfaces. In the depths of Mercury’s craters, scientists believe there may be ice. Spaceships have allowed scientists to observe lightning in Venus’ atmosphere, and recent evidence indicates that the planet may have been more volcanically active than previously thought. 

Mars is the target for a startling number of missions, including a number of orbiters and rovers such as Opportunity—whose 11-year mission was originally intended to last only a few months—and Curiosity, a project that Léveillé helped work on. Although there haven’t been any signs of life on Mars, its similarity and proximity to Earth, along with the presence of ice on its surface, make it an attractive target for missions. 

Some of the more ethereal and interesting parts of the solar system lay in the moons of planets. One of Saturn’s moons, Titan, is host to both an unusually thick atmosphere and, as observed by the Cassini spacecraft, hydrocarbon seas.

“It’s so cold on Titan that you can actually condense hydrocarbons—things like methane, ethane, propane,” explained Léveillé. “On Earth we have the hydrologic [water] cycle. We think we get something similar on Titan, only with methane.”

As evidenced by Léveillé’s talk, the Earth, albeit unique, is but one wonderful planet in a wonderful solar system.

 

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue