Tag: opinions

Categories
Opinions

Trump’s “shithole” comment is plain old racism

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin

The president’s choice of words with regards to immigration contradict the age-old American Dream

On Jan. 11, President Donald Trump was reported to have referred to Haiti, El Salvador and parts of Africa as “shithole countries” during a White House meeting about immigration reform, according to The Guardian. His response came as a reaction to the idea of allowing immigrants from those countries into the United States, according to the same source.

The Internet was quick to erupt with outrage following the horrific statement. Many people, including notable journalists such as Don Lemon and The Daily Show host Trevor Noah are labeling Trump as racist. The comments came as Haiti was preparing to commemorate the hundreds of thousands of lives lost during the 7.0 magnitude earthquake that struck eight years ago, according to CNN. According to Time magazine, individuals from Haiti have been under Temporary Protected Status (TPS) since the devastating earthquake struck the island back in January 2010. CNN reported that Trump appears to have ignored the fundamental humanitarian purpose of TPS, which allows people to live and work in the United States if their countries are affected by natural disasters, war or any type of political conflict that would prevent citizens from safely returning to their homeland.

Following Trump’s comment, an opinions piece in the Washington Post argued that American news media “has long treated black and brown countries like ‘shitholes.’” The news media in the United States has systematically reported on Haiti and African nations as poverty stricken and disease ridden—and that’s when those countries are even considered worthy of coverage in the first place, according to the same article.

However, I believe the news media did an exceptional job of calling Trump out on his racist comment. Essentially, what the president is asserting is that he doesn’t want to welcome anyone from those countries no matter how qualified they may be, all because of where they come from. A fundamental value of the United States is the American Dream—the idea that it doesn’t matter who you are or where you come from, you can still make it there. You don’t have to be rich to be worthy nor do you need a college degree.

Part of what’s important to keep in mind is that, not only was Trump’s comment exceedingly racist, but it’s also inaccurate. According to Vox, 30 per cent of people born in the United States have college degrees whereas 43 per cent of African immigrants have college degrees. Additionally, 10 per cent of white Americans have advanced degrees compared to the 25 per cent of Nigerian Americans who do. These facts completely refute Trump’s ignorant opinion about people from Africa. In my opinion, the fact that Trump seems to believe an entire country should not be welcome in the United States is the textbook definition of racism. You can’t dismiss entire countries whose populations are not white—let alone refer to them as “shitholes”—and not expect to be called a racist.

I believe there have been numerous examples of Trump demonstrating he is indeed racist, despite many people only now starting to realize it. It’s especially appalling that words such as “shithole” are being used to describe entire countries and continents by those in the White House. For years, African immigrants as well as Haitians and Salvadorans have been coming to the United States and bringing up the learning and entrepreneurship rate—thus helping make America a greater nation, according to The New York Times.

Politically speaking, it would also make no sense to exclude parts of the world seeking entry into the United States given that an influx of immigrants will only help better the economy in the long run. In my opinion, Trump’s racist comment is yet another piece of evidence that the United States is being led by a man who applies policies that will “make America white again.”

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin 

Categories
Opinions

We need to have a conversation about content

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth.

YouTuber Logan Paul’s controversial video sparks discussion about boundaries, consumer habits

If you’ve been anywhere with Internet since the beginning of 2018, you probably heard about the backlash against YouTuber Logan Paul for his video posted on Dec. 31, 2017. The video explicitly showed the hanging corpse of a suicide victim in the Aokigahara forest, infamously known as “the suicide forest,” which Paul filmed during his recent trip to Japan.

The criticism has been focused on Paul’s questionable decision to film, edit and post a video of a corpse, especially since his audience is largely under 12 years old, according to the American video game website Polygon. Many people have been condemning Paul for the video, from big-name YouTubers like Philip DeFranco, PewDiePie, Jenna Marbles and H3H3, to celebrities like Sophie Turner, Whoopi Goldberg and even Dr. Phil.

According to Variety, Paul himself was the one to take down the video on Jan. 2, and it took another 11 days for YouTube to formally respond to the controversy and cut ties with him. The website decided to remove him from their top ad platform service and ended production on all his YouTube Red series. This has been an appropriate but unacceptably slow response.

In my opinion, this slow reaction hints at YouTube’s willingness to turn a blind eye to Paul’s behaviour. After all, when Paul initially posted the video, it was reviewed and deemed acceptable by YouTube several times, not to mention hand-picked to be on the website’s trending page, according to Buzzfeed News.

This stings even more given that other creators on the platform are resorting to companies like Patreon and Twitch to get funding due to YouTube’s guideless algorithm. The algorithm—which didn’t stop Paul’s video from being accessible—has previously banned and de-monetized videos for mentioning things like the LGBTQ community, according to The Guardian.

As for Paul, his apology for the incident left a lot to be desired for those hoping for deeper self-reflection from the YouTuber. He has since been filmed by TMZ at an airport saying he is ready to continue producing content, and that he has learned a lot of lessons since the controversy. Unfortunately, I don’t believe Paul has had to worry about his financial situation, despite YouTube cancelling his Red series.

He’s right to not be concerned. Despite the loss of subscribers due to the scandal and outrage from the parents of many of his viewers, Paul’s channel is doing great. Whatever statement YouTube was trying to make with Paul’s punishment is falling flat, in my opinion. Subscriber increase has put him in the green since his controversy, according to Social Blade, a statistics website, and he is still promoting his ‘Maverick’ merchandise. Despite the incident, many of Paul’s fans have remained incredibly loyal and aggressively protective of him, calling his critics ‘haters.’

In November, YouTube had to crackdown on inappropriately violent content aimed towards young children, according to media network The Verge. It seems parents just aren’t looking at what their kids are doing online. The extremely graphic video created by Paul has been a long time coming. In his apology, Paul admitted he has made vlogs everyday for 465 days, and he constantly feels the need to push the envelope for his impressionable young audience.

As much as the blame should be put on Paul and YouTube for letting this disgusting content be published and trending, a larger issue hasn’t been highlighted. More open discussions need to happen between children and their parents about video content. I believe unchecked behaviour on the part of the viewer and the content producer is what allowed this video to be created. As much as Paul claims to have learned his lesson, we need to ask ourselves as consumers if we have to learn one too.

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth 

Categories
Opinions

Believing women is not a radical idea

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin.

Whether it’s the good, the bad or the oh-so-ugly, what happens in Hollywood often feels detached from our everyday reality. Perhaps this is why, despite the entertainment industry’s widely discussed “open secret” of rampant sexual misconduct and abuse of power, it can be upsetting and even shocking to learn of disturbing allegations at our very own university. What is even more troubling, however, is the fact that sexual harassment and assault at Concordia has never been a secret at all.

Recently, sexual misconduct allegations at the hands of Concordia professors have surfaced. An online essay written by Mike Spry, a former Concordia creative writing student, described cases of professors from the English department abusing their academic power to prey on students. Although no professors were named, the essay includes claims that English professors had sexually harassed female students. According to Spry, one professor even rented a hotel room so he could “entertain young writers away from his house and family.” The essay also mentioned “drunken nights of misbehaviour” and how professors would coerce female students into inappropriate and sexual situations under the guise of discussing their creative work.

Last week, Concordia president Alan Shepard announced that the university is taking several steps to investigate the allegations. He also claimed he was unaware of the incidents until early last week when Spry’s essay was published. We at The Concordian think it’s important to note that numerous current and former female Concordia students have been speaking up about the English department’s sexually abusive, toxic environment for years.

Similar allegations of sexual misconduct in the English department were made public in 2014 by former student Emma Healey in her online essay titled “Stories Like Passwords.” In response to Healey’s allegations, several students wrote a formal letter to the English department in 2015 describing the inappropriate atmosphere and stating they felt “uncomfortable and unsafe,” according to the Toronto Star.

Heather O’Neill, a Montreal author, has also spoken out about experiencing sexual misconduct at the hands of the late Concordia professor Robert Allen when she was a student in the late 1990s. According to The Globe and Mail, O’Neill described the sexual harassment and abuse of power within the department as “pervasive.” Stephen Henighan, a former student of Allen’s, told the Toronto Star that the “toxic culture” in the creative writing program can be traced back to the mid-1980s.

It is crucial to point out that many people at Concordia failed to support these students or investigate their claims. The university should have pursued these allegations earlier. Even The Concordian and The Link failed to report on the issue when Healey and O’Neill’s claims were made public, or when any of the other female students’ claims were submitted to the department. We all failed these victims.

While we remain hopeful about the investigative actions Concordia claims to be taking now, we would like to highlight that we are all at fault for this delayed response. We need to listen to survivors when they come forward. We need to give victims the benefit of the doubt. We need to be proactive when we hear even a whisper of an allegation. We need to do better—all of us.

The harsh truth is that Concordia would not be addressing these allegations had it not been for Spry’s essay. It is extremely unfortunate that it took a male writer making these claims for us to finally take action, while, for years, many female voices went unheard.

Abuse of power is a complex problem that must not be ignored. To do so would be incredibly irresponsible. We at The Concordian hope the publicity surrounding the recent allegations at Concordia teaches us all to do a better job of listening, believing and taking action—the first time.

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin

Categories
Opinions

Politicians and policies are no laughing matter

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth

Putting a humourous spin on current affairs distracts the public from serious issues

It seems like a natural human reaction to downplay upsetting situations with humour. It makes them seem less scary. We watch funny movies to cheer up, we joke about our stress and make light of our procrastination even though these actually make us want to cry, and we laugh at our mistakes and embarrassments.

However, when the world’s political climate is so bad that we have to cover it up with humour, that’s when I believe the perception of politics can get dangerous.

Lately, I believe the media, including news outlets and social media platforms, have been taking a comedic approach to politics. More and more headlines make readers laugh rather than worry about what’s going on in the world.

Think about it. A little over a week ago, the media erupted because U.S. President Donald Trump drank from a water bottle in a funny way during a press conference—the response was heightened by the fact that Trump mocked Senator Marco Rubio in 2016 for doing the same thing, according to CNN.

While this story succeeded in making people laugh, it holds no importance in political discussion. There is no way that Trump drinking water was more important than the content of the press conference. As specified on the White House website, Trump made remarks about his trip to Asia and commented on his plan to rapidly reduce the nearly $800-billion annual trade deficit the United States has with other nations. Yet no one talked about that. Using humour to distract the public from the real issues is no joke. In my opinion, it minimizes their importance and severity.

When political affairs boil over, a tweet or a funny anecdote often take the spotlight rather than the issue at hand. For example, Trump tweeted “covfefe” in the middle of the night back in May. According to CNN, he was tweeting about bad coverage from the press concerning the Russia investigation, but he accidentally typed “covfefe” instead of “coverage.” This particular tweet was posted a few days after the FBI announced concerns about Jared Kushner’s ties to Russia and one day before Trump withdrew from the Paris agreement, as reported by The New York Times. Yet, stories and speculations about the meaning of “covfefe” seemed to be all anyone was talking about.

The negative consequences of unnecessary and misdirected coverage are profound. I believe one example would be the role this type of coverage played in the 2016 United States election. According to the Washington Post, Trump did not spend any money on television ads for the first 202 days of his campaign. This was possible because of all the free publicity he got from the media for the most ridiculous reasons. This attention made everyone familiar with his name and, in my opinion, definitely affected his popularity when it came time to vote.

However, we should stop pointing fingers across the border and begin examining our own issues here in Canada. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau receives a lot of global media attention, but I don’t believe it’s for his policies. In my opinion, most of the attention he gets is based solely on his good looks. For example, he appeared on the cover of GQ magazine in May 2016 and was listed as one of Vogue’s “10 Unconventional Alternatives to the Sexiest Man Alive.” While this is not a form of humour, it is still a distraction from the policies and current affairs that impact Canadian citizens.

Politics is starting to seem more like a reality TV show. When reading or listening to the news, media consumers should be asking themselves: “Will this matter in a few years?” Reporters should be focused on politically relevant information that the public needs to know. In my opinion, if something won’t matter in a few years, it isn’t important and shouldn’t be published in the first place.

News media producers should also think twice before taking a comedic approach to politics. A journalist’s job is to inform the public about national and international affairs and keep citizens informed. By turning these important issues into jokes, they aren’t equipping citizens with the tools needed to be active members of our democratic society.

Politics is not a topic we should be covering up with humour because, unfortunately, it’s usually no laughing matter.

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth

Categories
Opinions

The winter blues, SAD and self-care

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin

Now that the fall semester is almost over, it’s time to build snowmen, drink hot cocoa, curl up with soft blankets and binge watch every Christmas movie on Netflix. But with the change of the season can come changes in mood, perhaps even seasonal affective disorder (SAD).

While up to 15 per cent of Canadians experience the less severe “winter blues,” according to CBC News, SAD is a form of depression that affects between two and three per cent of Canadians. The disorder has a range of symptoms, including weight gain, irritability, difficulty concentrating, sleeping more, being lethargic even after sleeping and avoiding social situations. On the surface, it can seem like a natural instinct to want to curl up in bed and sleep more during the winter. But, unlike bears, humans shouldn’t want to hibernate for an entire season.

The disorder is caused by a decrease in sunlight, according to CBC News, which can throw off normal routines. Light therapy—either sunlight or a high-intensity light unit—is often used to control the disorder and improve a person’s mood. This can be an effective remedy for the larger part of the population who deal with “winter blues” as well.

Instead of closing the blinds and avoiding what little sunlight there is during the winter, buy high-intensity lights and keep the blinds open to let some natural light in. Sunlight and darkness affect the level of the serotonin hormone in your brain, which boosts your mood and helps you stay calm and focused, according to the Huffington Post. If you avoid sunlight or exposure to light, your serotonin levels can decrease which will increase your chance of developing SAD.

According to the same source, another symptom of SAD is increased carbohydrate cravings. Among the ways to combat SAD or the winter blues before it gets serious is to add an extra serving of complex carbs to your diet—but rather than cupcakes, consider oatmeal, quinoa or potatoes for their nutritional value. Also increase your intake of fruit, vegetables, dark chocolate and fish—all which can help maintain energy levels and battle fatigue.

According to CBC News, 80 per cent of those affected by SAD are women between the ages of 18 and 60. That isn’t to say others aren’t affected by the disorder—and that’s why we at The Concordian hope you check in on your friends and family to see whether they’re just feeling bummed out or if there is something more serious happening.

It’s equally as important to check up on yourself. Around this time of year, it’s common to feel stressed or anxious due to exams and final projects. But if you’re feeling anxious, lonely, isolated or sad during this time of year, talk to your doctor who can refer you to a mental health specialist, or try implementing some of the abovementioned recommendations.

Another important way to fight back against SAD or the winter blues is—you guessed it—exercise. Of course, it’s understandable that the idea of getting out of bed in the winter can seem unappealing, let alone putting on your running shoes and going out in the cold. But, as the Huffington Post explains, exercise releases endorphins which are hormones that help you feel good. They can improve sleep, boost your immune system and help regulate your mood.

While three 30-minute sessions of exercise per week can sound difficult during the months of icy roads and crowded gyms, once you start the routine, it will become easier. We at The Concordian recommend trying out a new winter sport, whether it’s skiing, ice skating or winter cycling. Even if it’s just a walk in the park, the goal is to get outside so your body can absorb vitamin D from the sun.

We at The Concordian hope your winter break is filled with great holiday movies, snowball fights, warm fireplaces and relaxation. Good luck with your final exams, and remember to take care of yourself.

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin

Categories
Opinions

Ontario strikes and the search for solutions

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth

One student explores the debate surrounding teacher strikes and education

Student protests and professors on strike are not new concepts. Each time they happen, though, questions are raised about the nature of education and the rights and responsibilities of both teachers and students.

On Oct. 16, the Ontario Public Service Employees Union went on strike, according to CBC News. Classes were cancelled as professors, instructors, counsellors and librarians fought for change. Twenty-four universities were affected, including Humber College and George Brown College in Toronto.

Students were tense as they lost precious time and money, not to mention the feeling of uncertainty they had from not knowing when the strike would end. On the other hand, teachers were fighting for more stable contracts and better pay. This was a difficult situation for both students and teachers. It makes me wonder if there is a solution that could improve the situation for both parties.

James Luckow, a professor of educational psychology at Concordia University, said he believes university teachers should have the right to go on strike because the impact on students is minimal. “Usually they do not lose a year,” he said. “In the end, it is not the end of the world. They can make up for the lost time in the summer.”

According to CBC News, it is illegal for transit workers, ambulance drivers and other essential service employees to go on strike in Ontario. Teachers are not included in this law. Luckow said he doesn’t believe teaching is an essential service, arguing “is anybody dying if teachers go on strike?”

When asked if he thinks there is a solution to the teachers’ concerns regarding their salaries, Luckow said, “unless there’s an unbiased mediation where an outsider determines the wages, the problem will persist.”

Mira Facchin, a retired English CEGEP professor, said teachers should be able to go on strike because it can improve the quality of education. “If we value education, we need to value the work of the teachers and pay them accordingly,” she said. “In Ontario, students are paying $5,000 a year on average. With that money coming in, they should be able to secure more permanent jobs for teachers.”

On the side of the students, the frustration is palpable. More than 500,000 students were affected by the strike, according to the Huffington Post. In response to classes being cancelled, upset students created the Twitter hashtag #Wepaytolearn to express their anger over being robbed of their time and money. Additionally, according to an interview with the Toronto Star, NDP Member of Provincial Parliament Peggy Sattler stated that “because of the extended semester, some students wishing to write their paralegal entrance exam with the law society won’t be finished in time for the February exam sitting—putting students behind by at least six months.”

However, there were options available for students during the strikes. According to CBC News, colleges remained open and some support services, such as tutoring, student associations and fitness centres, were available to students even when classes were cancelled. Some students took their education into their own hands. Journalism students met to publish articles and medical students simulated patient-physician interactions amongst themselves to practice what they had learned during the semester, in the hopes of making the transition back to school easier, according to CBC News.

The Ontario strike finally concluded on Nov. 21 and students returned to class. Yet, as a student myself, this whole situation concerns me, because it could easily happen at any school in Canada, including Concordia. I do believe teachers should have the right to go on strike, but there should be measures in place to ensure students are looked after in these cases. We should be striving for solutions that benefit both students and educators. After all, teachers shape students, and students are our future.

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth

Categories
Opinions

Vandalism: An occasionally necessary subversion

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth

Can vandalism of historical statues ever be justified as activism?

My views towards vandalism always depend on the circumstances, but I do believe it can be justified to promote change.

In the past month, Canada’s first prime minister has been in the headlines. According to a Montreal Gazette article published on Nov. 12, an anonymous group of “anti-colonial anti-racists” claimed responsibility for spray-painting a statue of Sir John A. Macdonald in Place du Canada in downtown Montreal. The group filmed themselves in the act and posted the video online. The same article specified that the activists claimed Macdonald was a “white supremacist.”

According to works published by Timothy Stanley, a professor at the University of Ottawa, it appears Macdonald was indeed the first to incorporate racism into Canadian politics. He hated the Chinese, wove laws allowing colonialists to profit from Aboriginal property, and believed an Aryan Canada was key to a successful future, according to Stanley. Allowing problematic figures to remain glorified in ore not only casts a shadow on our public spaces in a literal sense, but also on our identity as an egalitarian society. In my opinion, if Canada prides itself on promoting freedom and acceptance, it must recognize the faults in its initial development.

Acknowledging past racism is important. Recognition serves as a tool for reconciliation and a sign of respect towards those who were preyed on throughout history. If the government does not address aspects of its antecedents and instead allows racist figures to remain honoured in statues, memorial buildings and commemorative plaques, I believe it actively encourages institutionalized racism. Every individual’s vision of progress is subjective. While I might believe vandalizing a statue of Macdonald is a way to demolish respect for supremacists, others will surely disagree.

Yet if Macdonald thought it was acceptable to exclude entire cultures from a developing Canada, are we not allowed to believe it’s acceptable to deface his statue with red paint? In my opinion, “damaging property” is sometimes the most productive way to promote change.

Yet, I do not always agree with others who use vandalism to convey a message, such as the anonymous graffiti artist Banksy. I find his street pieces, which comment on issues that plague the world, extremely clever and tasteful. However, due to his disagreements with the concept of institutionalized art, he also has a history of defacing paintings preserved in galleries.

I view these modifications—such as painting a gas mask on a woman’s face in a piece at the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art—as counterproductive in the spread of free art philosophies. Banksy’s tweaking of other individuals’ work seems more like a juvenile prank than a calculated move. The purpose of the Macdonald vandalism was to debase a racist, whereas Banksy’s modifications just disrespect artworks.

Some might feel that vandalizing Macdonald’s statue is too radical. However, racism is sadly embedded in Canada’s past, therefore society must make an effort to recognize injustice in an attempt to achieve equality. I believe many of us want to break away from what the founders of Canada’s Confederation built off of. However, if our streets are still sprinkled with statues of known racists and colonialists, is it possible to be progressive? There are peaceful ways to protest without paint, but I believe vandalism expedites change by calling attention to injustices that hide in plain sight around our cities.

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth

Categories
Opinions

With remembrance should come appreciation

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin.

More initiatives like the Invictus Games are needed to offer purpose and strength to veterans

In the aftermath of any war, I believe nothing is more important than honouring the contributions and sacrifices made by the soldiers who fought in them, regardless of their age, gender or nationality.

This year marks the 100th anniversary of the Battle of Passchendaele and the Battle of Vimy Ridge, as well as the 75th anniversary of the Battle of Dieppe. These historic battles transformed Canada into the country it is today. According to a public opinion survey by Historica Canada, 29 per cent of Canadians intended to attend a Remembrance Day ceremony this year. The results of this poll indicate a three-point increase compared to the attendance in 2016.

On Saturday, Nov. 11, thousands of people, both military and civilian, gathered on Parliament Hill in Ottawa to honour the sacrifices of our country’s soldiers and veterans. According to Craig Oliver, the chief political commentator for CTV News, the crowds at Remembrance Day ceremonies 30 years ago were far smaller than they are today. Oliver attributed the growth over the years to the increasing number of young veterans.

“A new generation has learned to appreciate that sense of self-sacrifice that the military represents,” Oliver stated during the televised live coverage of the ceremony. “It’s great to see crowds growing the way they are, and it’s particularly great to see young people coming out, appreciating self-sacrifice, as young people do. More than my generation ever did.”

After returning home from a war zone, it is easier for younger veterans to appreciate the sacrifices of their contemporaries compared to veterans who are a few generations older, according to David O’Keefe, a history professor at Marianopolis College and a former member of the Black Watch (Royal Highland Regiment) of Canada. This results in a higher turnout for military ceremonies like Remembrance Day, he added.

Unfortunately, regardless of this increased appreciation, I believe there are still many problems that hinder our veterans from enjoying a peaceful life. According to an article from The Globe and Mail, veterans still face a myriad of issues ranging from homelessness to trouble with pensions to mental illness. For example, O’Keefe said, even though there is a stronger medical understanding of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), this doesn’t mean the government or society has done enough to help veterans deal with this issue.

My conversation with O’Keefe showed me that society and the government in Canada are not putting enough importance on improving healthcare and pensions to help struggling veterans. Fortunately, noticeable efforts are slowly being made to help veterans adjust to post-military life in terms of their mental health and social interactions. One such initiative is the Invictus Games, an international multi-sport event for wounded and handicapped veterans and their associates, that was launched in 2014.

According to O’Keefe, the Invictus Games help make the return of wounded veterans to civilian society seamless and restore a sense of normalcy to their lives. According to the Toronto Star, adaptive sports like the Invictus Games are a new way to offer support to veterans and their families. Sports give veterans a purpose and mission again, and can help them improve their mental and physical health. “You are capable and still able,” O’Keefe said about this change in mentality for wounded soldiers. “You are differently abled, as opposed to disabled.”

Sporting events are also a chance for veterans to reforge a bond of camaraderie with their peers, and to use these bonds to inspire and educate others about their experience, according to the Toronto Star.

As times change, so does our inclination to honour the deeds and sacrifices of our veterans. Especially with the number of World War II soldiers dwindling with every passing year. Today, we must evolve beyond the idea of remembrance to enter a new age of appreciation for those who defend and protect our nation.

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin

Categories
Music

Changing your opinion about an album

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth

How reviewing albums can make you jaded towards music you actually like

When discussing our music tastes, the phrase “art is subjective” tends to come up a lot. I mean, why shouldn’t it? We all like what we like, and there is really nothing we can do to change that except open our minds to new types of art and let our tastes evolve.

Although art is subjective, when it comes to reviewing music, there is pressure to critique it from an objective perspective and explain why a piece is good or bad. However, your opinion of a song, album or artist will always differ from someone else’s. The sky is blue is an objective fact. Metallica being the best metal band of the 80s is not a fact, it’s just my opinion.

This idea of being objective brings me to how the pressure to “get it right” when reviewing albums has made me overly critical of songs and artists I actually enjoy. I realized this about myself while listening to Lil Uzi Vert’s album Luv Is Rage 2. I initially gave the album a 4/10 rating in a review I wrote for The Concordian.

At the time, I was stuck in the mindset of trying to use objective criteria to review albums. I would look at lyrical complexity, diversity of tracks and other factors that, for the most part, are actually subjective. Sure, some albums have more production value and took more time to create, but that doesn’t mean one is more enjoyable than the other—that really comes down to taste.

For example, I compared Lil Uzi Vert to Kendrick Lamar. These two artists operate in the same genre, but with completely different styles that can’t be compared. Yet, when I reviewed Luv Is Rage 2, I rated it in comparison to Lamar’s DAMN, an album I would easily give a 9/10. This method of reviewing is not only misguided, but can lead you to develop a bad first impression of an album.

As mentioned above, I recently revisited Luv Is Rage 2 because of a song Lil Uzi Vert did with The Weeknd called “Unfazed,” which I stumbled upon on YouTube. With my review of the album long gone from my memory, I thoroughly enjoyed the song and went back to the album. As I went through each track, it was as if I was listening to the album for the first time. Instead of trying to dissect it, I came away with a whole new opinion on the album. To be honest, it might be one of my top-five albums of the year.

In the last month or so, I have been making a more conscious effort to critique music on a subjective basis, something I should have been doing from the beginning. Ultimately, it has led me to enjoy more albums because I am less likely to make unwarranted criticisms. Not to mention there are a plethora of other albums I have changed my mind about.

One such example is this summer’s collaborative mixtape between Toronto producer-artist NAV and Metro Boomin’. Although I never wrote a formal review for the album, I remember hating it initially because I was looking at it as an album that just came out after DAMN. This ultimately made me critique the lyrics hardly and not appreciate it for what it was. Listening to it now, however, I like it a lot and have realized the album has a ton of content I relate to.

If it weren’t for giving the album a second chance and ridding myself of the pressure to look at music critically, I would have missed out on one of my favourite projects of the year.

The same thing can be said about DAMN, oddly enough. I loved the album when it came out. However, I was also looking at it from a critical perspective. I was trying to rate it based on criteria about what makes a “rap” album great, rather than determining whether or not I enjoyed it. While I did enjoy DAMN. and still think it’s a great piece of art, I just don’t like it as much as other albums. It’s almost as if I forced myself to give the album a good score because Lamar is such a respected artist.

I guess what I am trying to say is that, when critiquing a piece of music, just go with your gut and how it makes you feel. Don’t judge it based on some “good album” criteria that doesn’t exist. It’s cliché, but art really is subjective and, if you keep looking for objective reasons to like or dislike something, you’re taking away from your enjoyment of that art.

At the end of the day, it’s important not to be ashamed of your tastes. As listeners with individual preferences, we shouldn’t give in to the pressure of liking or disliking something just because critics do.

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth

Categories
Opinions

Saying ‘yes’ to student press

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin.

Some of you may have heard about the recent existence referendum held at McGill University to decide whether or not The McGill Daily and Le Délit—McGill’s only francophone newspaper—should continue to publish on campus.

McGill students could cast their vote between Nov. 13 and 16. According to Inori Roy, the coordinating editor at The McGill Daily, just over 64 per cent of the university’s undergraduate and graduate students voted in favour of keeping the newspapers running. Just under 36 per cent voted “no.”

Needless to say, we at The Concordian were very pleased to learn that these newspapers will be staying on campus. We would like to take it as a sign that the student press is still valued. In an interview with Roy, we learned more about the referendum and the power of the student press.

According to Roy, the existence referendum is a normal occurrence that happens every five years. The process indicates to the administration that the newspapers still have the student body’s support before the university renegotiates its agreement with the publications to allow them to collect fees from students, rent space on campus and distribute newspapers at McGill.

The two newspapers that were part of the referendum are published under the Daily Publications Society (DPS), a student-run organization at McGill. “The DPS wanted to keep us alive,” Roy said. “Besides the ‘No’ campaign, there was no one who particularly wanted us to shut down.” According to Roy, many of the issues put forward by the ‘No’ campaign “were founded on misinformation and lies, and so they had issues with our editorial line.”

The McGill Daily, which has existed since 1911, has a mandate to publish anti-oppression and anti-racist articles that might not be covered by mainstream media, Roy said. By publishing such pieces, the publication’s staff hope to give a voice to marginalized students on campus.

Despite the referendum result and high voter turnout, there is still work to be done to increase student engagement and interest in on-campus publications. It is important to remember that the student press not only informs readers about campus news and gives students a space to freely express themselves—it also holds universities accountable.
Our thoughts are mirrored by Roy. “We often write stories about things that are happening in student governments that otherwise wouldn’t get out,” she said. “I think we provide a better service in openly criticizing and being aware of the mistakes the administration is making and trying to provide them with this insight on what students need. So I think the integrity of student governments and administrative action would be severely compromised if we ceased to exist.”

As McGill’s existence referendum also highlights, student engagement is the driving force behind the student press. We at The Concordian strive to continuously publish stories that are interesting and important, to keep our readers informed and involved in campus life, and to help students improve their writing skills and express themselves. We are also grateful to every student, faculty and staff member who take the time to pick up a copy of our newspaper. Thank you for reading.

We at The Concordian would like to congratulate The McGill Daily and Le Délit for being able to continue doing what they do best for the next five years. We hope they continue to shed light on the stories that deserve to be told and encourage the students who want to write them.

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin

Categories
Opinions

The real reason behind gun violence in the U.S.

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin.

Blaming mental illness for shooting massacres is offensive and misleading

Blaming mental illness for gun violence is not okay, and I believe President Donald Trump is only causing more harm when he encourages the use of guns to supposedly prevent gun violence.

On Nov. 5, a gunman opened fire at a Baptist church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, reported The New York Times. The shooter was later found dead in his car and identified by authorities as Devin Patrick Kelley. He killed 26 people.
Trump, who was in Japan at the time, blamed the shooting on mental illness. He called the tragedy “a mental health problem at the highest level” and described the shooter as a “very deranged individual,” according to The New York Times. I believe Trump is using mental illness as a scapegoat for acts of violence. He also specified that “this isn’t a guns situation,” according to the same source. This further proves his incompetence as president.

In my opinion, Trump is unable to tackle this nationwide issue in an objective fashion. He is turning away from the real issue destroying the lives of many Americans each year. According to the not-for-profit corporation Gun Violence Archive, approximately 13,286 people were killed in the United States by firearms in 2015.

Not only is blaming gun violence on mental illness largely false, it is also offensive and misleading. Doing so increases the stigma around mental illness and perpetuates the incorrect assumption that mentally ill people are violent. In fact, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the majority of people with mental illness are no more likely to be violent than anyone else. Only three to five per cent of violent acts in the United States can be attributed to individuals with serious mental illness, according to the same source.

Not only does Trump fail to assign fault where it is due, I believe he is promoting gun violence. Two days after the Texas shooting, the president praised another man in the church who shot Kelley. “If he didn’t have a gun,” Trump claimed, “instead of having 26 dead, you would have had hundreds more dead. That’s how I feel about it,” reported NBC News. With his pro-gun stance, Trump is fostering the view that gun ownership helps prevent massacres, and gun misuse is due to mental illness.

While I do believe mental illness and the availability of psychological services in the United States needs to be addressed, I think it is clear that gun control is what will prevent so many mass shootings from happening. The best way to prevent these tragedies is to ban the weapons that are used to hurt so many rather than promote equally violent retaliation. In the aftermath of the 2006 Dawson shooting here in Montreal, the college built a garden to promote a peaceful, safe space and began offering a non-violent communication course for students to take as an elective. I strongly believe this is the type of attitude the American president needs to have if there is any hope of lessening the number of tragedies his country regularly faces.

Following Trump’s response to the Texas shooting, the hashtag #LivingWithMentalIllnessIs began trending on Twitter. This is a positive step towards something bigger. This hashtag gives people who live with mental illness a platform where they can share their stories and disprove Trump’s views of why gun violence takes place. I also hope this hashtag promotes peaceful communication between people and ends the stigmatization of mental illness as a dangerous or violent disorder.

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin

Categories
Opinions

How to stay safe, warm as a cyclist in the winter

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth.

The weather is changing, but that doesn’t mean you have to avoid bike paths

Now that stores have started playing Christmas music, the arrival of winter is inevitable. Don’t let cool temperatures and flurries signal the end of your cycling season. Pedalling around in the bitter cold and snow can actually be a good time.

Yet, before heading out into the great white north, there are a few factors to consider. A good way to ruin winter cycling for yourself is by being underdressed and underprepared. Following a few simple steps will help you avoid frosty misery.

Dressing properly is the foundation of winter fun on your bike. Fingers and toes are the first to freeze on a cold day, so pay particular attention to gloves and socks. A wind and waterproof glove with an insulated liner is the ideal choice but can be expensive. A frugal alternative is to wear nitrile or latex disposable gloves underneath any winter glove, as they provide a fairly resilient waterproof layer.

Thick socks are a no-brainer for staying warm, but don’t go overboard. A tight shoe will feel colder than one that doesn’t constrict your foot, regardless of how cozy the socks are. I have the best luck with a pair of regular socks underneath thick wool ones. The army surplus stores on St-Laurent Street sell the classic red-striped wool numbers at an affordable price.

Rosey red cheeks may be cute, but they hurt when pedaling around the city on your bike. So wrap up your face. A cycling balaclava is a good investment, as it is breathable and provides great coverage from wind and snow. A frugal alternative is to use a cheap neck gaiter that’s long enough to pull up over your ears and around your face. Whatever you wear, make sure it is thin so that the fit of your helmet is not compromised.

Layering keeps me comfiest on a chilly day. A bunch of thinner shirts and sweaters under a windproof jacket feels warmer than a big, puffy parka, especially on a bike. Also, the mobility of thinner layers is a huge plus when cycling in challenging conditions. By wearing multiple layers, you can regulate your warmth. As soon as you start sweating, it’s going to be really tough to stay warm. Having wet clothing in sub-zero temperatures means you’re going to get really cold. Layering is a great way to avoid this frosty fate, as you can remove certain pieces of clothing when you start getting warm.

When it comes to your bike, it’s best to make sure that it’s durable and comfortable. Buying a new set of brake pads is a great way to welcome the winter. While a wet chain lubricant might make a bit of a mess, it’s worth it because your chain will stay protected from salty road spray. It is also super helpful to spray your bike down with WD-40—a common and cheap penetrating oil—after every sloppy, winter ride as the spray displaces water and stops your bike from rusting.

Riding in the snow is challenging, but you can set your bike up for success. Lower your seat a little bit so it’s easier to put your feet down if you’re in deep snow. If you don’t have big, knobby winter tires, it doesn’t mean the snow is impassable. Take a little bit of air pressure out of your tires, especially the front one, for a little more grip. Lastly, pedal in an easy gear. Having your feet spin around with little resistance means your back wheel is less likely to slip.

Enjoy the snow and bundle up, because Montreal is a great city for cycling in the winter. The Maisonneuve bike lane is plowed daily, and most smaller lanes are sanded to keep the road’s grip. Make use of a city that supports winter cycling, and enjoy it.

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth 

Exit mobile version