Category: Opinion

By Elizabeth Bacharach

Opinions Editor

Anyone that ran into me on Jan. 24 did not pass by without hearing the slightest mention about John Legend and his upcoming presence on campus. In simplest terms, I could not have been more stoked to touch the same ground as one of my absolute favorite celebrities and musicians, not to mention role models.

As an accepted student last April, I was browsing through our school’s Twitter and read a tweet announcing Mr. Legend’s potential performance. From that moment onward, I practically counted down the days until he stepped onto campus. I called everyone I knew and told them I was going to the best school ever, and also one that would host John Legend.

I started pursuing this performance the minute I returned to campus, pestering our Editor-in-Chief to make Legend our Arts and Life feature, maybe even pull some strings to get me an interview with the musician himself. As if a dream came true, 5 p.m. on Tuesday arrived and I was sitting side-by-side, shoulder-to-shoulder, face-to-face with John Legend in the flesh.

John Legend is a legend. From the moment he stepped into the lobby of the Weis Center for the Performing Arts, the room silenced, feeling the forceful presence of such an awarded celebrity. Mr. Legend walked slowly and humbly over to the eager media students waiting to simply shake his hand and hear him utter “Hello.” His voice is just as melodic, even while uttering just rudimentary words in person and his responses to rather trite—at this point, considering the amount of interviews he has endured—questions were well-composed, explanatory yet concise. In a 12 minute and 50 second interview, I felt as if John Legend was not of such high stature, but rather a relatable friend of a simple college journalist.

I was like a child on the night before Christmas, unable to eat, think or compose sentences, jittery with excitement after meeting such a legend.  Forget about dinner, all I could think about was seeing Mr. Legend again: listening to his speech and his musical performance.  I was in my seat at 6:45 pm, ready to see him saunter on to the stage, so close yet so far.

Mr. Legend’s speech was, if I do say so myself, beyond profound. He touched upon subjects that were relatable yet inspirational. John’s comments on creativity were so natural and well-spoken. His thoughts on creativity resonated throughout the audience, making me, as well as other students, feel as if we each have the capability to be as creative, talented and successful as he has come to be. Legend’s explanation as to his support of education was quite motivational. As he spoke about how lucky we are to be receiving such a prestigious and good education in comparison to those children, locked in place by socioeconomic immobility, who do not get the opportunity to expand their academic boundaries, I felt the urge to jump up and offer to join his Show Me Campaign, apply for Teach For America the minute I graduate and promise to donate whatever money I have to charities focused on education. A little drastic, I know, but that is how moved I was by Legend’s discourse.

As Legend’s voice reverberated through the Weis Center for Performing Arts, chills ran up and down my body. His acoustic performance blew away every one of his recorded songs on my iPod. This is not to say that I don’t listen to Legend daily—at the gym, walking to class and while doing work—but the combination of his voice live and his impeccable pianistic skills absolutely took my breath away. Legend surprised many, especially me, by playing, “Dream,” an unreleased song. His 11-song set list was a perfect culmination to a great evening.

It is quite clear that I have yet to come down from my John Legend high, so to speak. Since John mentioned he would love to come back to our university any time, I wonder … is now too soon?

By Ashley Miller

Contributing Writer

The Southern Republican Presidential Debate that took place last Thursday, Jan. 19 was eye-opening for many voters. It was timed perfectly to give South Carolina’s voters a final look at each candidate before making their selection in the primary the following day. The results seemed to reflect each candidate’s performance in the debate. Senator Rick Perry dropped out of the race previously that day, so the remaining candidates were former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, Texas Representative Ron Paul, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney.

The evening started off with an explosive argument between Newt Gingrich and debate moderator John King. For those of you who hadn’t heard, a scandal recently broke concerning Gingrich, his ex-wife, a mistress and a requested open marriage. When this was the subject of King’s first question of the evening, Gingrich’s response was angry, and justifiably so. Not only has the election thus far been riddled with a disgusting amount of concern over irrelevant personal issues, but to have this be the first question in such a pivotal debate was a poor choice on King’s part. King was hilarious when he realized what he had done and tried to shift blame from himself to a furious Gingrich. Sure, the whole situation was entertaining, but it was definitely rooted in some serious issues. Even if the rumors are true, how is it even remotely related to Gingrich’s ability as a potential president? I know that I am sick of all the personal attacks the media, as well as other candidates, make on TV commercials and the radio. It just distracts from the important issues.

Apart from this notable event, Gingrich was involved in several arguments with Santorum and Romney, but seemed to defend himself well enough in all. Gingrich said exactly the right thing about the SOPA issue, that it infringes on personal freedoms and that companies have the right to sue for legitimate infractions with current law. No candidate who supports SOPA is going to get the nomination.

Romney, a front-runner for the primaries so far, flip-flopped on several issues, most notably abortion. One of the biggest downsides to Romney is his inability to back anything wholeheartedly. He will say just about anything for a clap. I realize he really wants the win, but the way to get that is to stand strong behind every issue and not to change his stance. If elected, would he flip-flop on promises in office? He also notably declined to turn in his tax return, and then, in an unwise move, talked about how he would look over each year’s return carefully before he decided which ones he would turn in. If he doesn’t have anything to hide, why not turn them in? His attempts to explain why he wouldn’t were mediocre at best.

Santorum came in third, running on an everyday family man type of stance–-an image which he pretty much beat into the ground. Okay, we get it. You came from humble backgrounds. His biggest issue is that he is not moderate enough. Both he and Romney mention religion far too frequently. The separation of church and state is there for a reason. Religion is great for a candidate’s private life, but it has nothing to do with politics and so has no business in the political sphere. Another issue with all of these candidates is their stubborn stance on social issues. For a party who preaches the rights of state government and limiting federal involvement, these candidates sure are adamant about federal control of issues like abortion and gay marriage.

Paul came in last in the primary following the debate, but he is my personal favorite candidate. A lot of the things he says make perfect sense. If we have had troops randomly stationed all over the world for decades, why would we continue to pay for them to stay there when we could bring that money home where we really need it? And who wouldn’t want a reduced income tax? It also seems like none of the other candidates really have a problem with him, so he doesn’t get to talk that much during debates because he never gets involved in the little scuffles the others do. It’s a shame, because I would have liked to hear more of his ideas. I don’t think he will win, only because he is too far right to get the moderate and dissatisfied Democrat votes any Republican nominee will need to defeat President Obama in the coming election.

One of these guys is going to be the Republican nominee for the White House. But will it really matter which one? As is, none of them are going to get elected over President Obama. Many of them even have pretty good economic ideas (perhaps a bit radical at times, but our country is in massive debt). But the bottom line is that if any of these candidates want to have a shot at Obama, they are going to have to be less radical about social issues. A moderate stance is the path to win your way into the White House this fall, and so far it looks like we are in for four more years of President Obama.

By Jen Mok

Contributing Writer

College. It is supposed to be different from high school and the previous years of our youth. We may have all worn those Lacoste polo shirts, those Juicy sweatpants, popped our collars and had closets full of Abercrombie and Hollister duds. The tastes and trends that dominated our closets may or may not have changed. Whatever the case is, we have all once dressed a certain way to keep up with the social scene in one way or another.

During the four years of college, the social jungle and hierarchy that may have been daunting in high school is supposedly less apparent and students are more evolved: open-minded individuals willing to branch out into the real world. The individual refines and molds his character with experience and reaches a certain level of comfort with himself. The resulting changes include an increased intelligence level (we hope), perspectives and of course fashion. These adjustments are self-determined, with some influence from the college campus we belong to. Or are they?

There are jokes and rumors that our university is a school full of clones that have that certain preppy look. When we say preppy we don’t mean the Lilly Pulitzer and bright pink manifestation. It’s a different prep–-a sort of chic, East Coast, crisp and very J.Crew catalogue prep. And in all reality, there is a truth in this. The girls have their J Brand Jeans, J.Crew cardigans, Frye and Hunter boots while the boys have their Ralph Lauren button downs, Sperry shoes and Under Armour … well, you get the idea. The real question is not if the majority of our student population dresses this way, but if there is a certain pressure to dress this way. I feel as though our student body is knowledgeable and open-minded enough to not judge heavily on an individual’s appearance. While there may be a slight pressure to dress to meet the status quo, it is ultimately an individual’s independent decision.

A lot of students come from the New York tri-state area consisting of New Jersey, New York and Connecticut. They then, of course, have a common sense of style. Others foreign to this Northeast-metro fashion culture may feel a bit of pressure to change their style on arrival to the campus.

It is natural and completely understandable to want to change your style according to those around you. It is not just a way of fitting in but an easy way to feel more welcomed in a community. Changing your image is one way to feel more connected and accessible to others. However, many are more prone to alter their image due to their high attentiveness to certain alarming, small differences. One student may change one detailed aspect of their appearance, be it a small change in footwear or the way they wear their scarves. Many students are conscious of their differences and whilst not pressured or judged to change them, they feel more comfortable in changing to fit the majority. It is inevitable that some of us are less at ease when we view clear differences in others and ourselves. To relieve such stress, it may be best to simply change what we feel is starkly contrasting and unfitting for a setting.

On the other hand, not achieving the same preppy look does not automatically make you an outsider to the University community. Different styles are appreciated and on some levels even encouraged amongst peers. Fashion is not only a way for someone to express his or her creativity but it is a reflection of one’s culture. Where we are from and who we are, are sometimes best represented by the clothing we wear. No one is looked down upon for embracing a more edgy look or a very laid-back, casual t-shirt-and-jeans combination. We all know that you should be comfortable with what you are wearing. Your clothes are what you have to wear throughout the day and it is how you allow others to perceive you. In short, there is no pressure to dress “Bucknell appropriate” but there is no doubt that a big percentage of the student population have, what I label, an east-coast Chic Prep style.

Riley Schwengel

Contributing Writer

Last Tuesday, I had the pleasure of attending the lecture John Legend held in the Weis Center for the Performing Arts as part of the Beyond the Box lecture series on creativity. I thought the lecture was fantastic and the music truly awe-inspiring. There was just one hitch to an otherwise flawless lecture: during Legend’s performance, dozens of flashbulbs illuminated the music hall as people scrambled to get their very own pictures of John Legend playing the piano.  I found the constant flashing distracting, annoying and incredibly rude to the performer who had given some time out of his very busy career to come and speak to us.

As I sat in the audience, trying to adjust to the last flash of light that just obscured my vision, I began to wonder why people were taking so many pictures. I realized that a good amount of these pictures would be going up on Facebook, Google+, Twitter or whatever social networking site the photographer subscribes to. These pictures would be posted to prove that he or she had attended such a performance and so friends and family could comment with trite comments such as, “So lucky!” “Wish I was there!” and “Hope it was fun!” But to what end? Why couldn’t these people just be content with listening to the music instead of making sure they got a good picture for the folks?

The social media of today has brought everyone’s lives closer together; people can share ideas, stories, films, pictures and art without even leaving their homes and communicating face to face. I believe we have taken this gift of Internet expression and bastardized it; we just share too much information. Go onto any average person’s Facebook profile or Twitter account and you can see the evidence. Statuses give us mundane information like “I hate Mondays” “Shopping with the girls!” and “I miss my girlfriend.”  Accompanying such frivolous updates, there are also millions of photos of people posing at the park, at a party, at a ball game, eating chips, making pizza, watching TV, and the list goes on and on. Many people I know can’t go out to eat without snapping an inane amount of the trivial experience, and I ask, why? Why must we share every piece of information that we have in our day? Can’t we just be happy living our lives? Must we force other people to live it too, through pictures and messages?

I’m going to make a plea to the many Facebook addicts and social media hounds. Stop it. Use these great tools that we have been given for the truly fantastic and unordinary experiences you may encounter, not for mindless drabble. If you have some great news or an intelligent response to a current event, go ahead and post it, but if you are going to the mall, just turn off your computer and go to the mall. If you’re having a good time with friends, just continue to have a good time; there is no need to make sure everyone and his or her mother knows about it. And if you find yourself at a John Legend concert, put away your camera or smart phone and enjoy the music; you can tell your friends all about it when you see them in person. Trust me, they’ll believe you.

By Molly Brown

Contributing Writer

To be blunt, the University has a lot of clubs. Whether your interests lie in sports, volunteering, fantasy role-play or Harry Potter, there is definitely a place somewhere for you and your like-minded peers. All you have to do is show up to have a good time, right?  Not exactly.

How exactly do you join a new club, anyway? Do you rely on the barrage of emails after you signed a ridiculous amount of clipboards at the Activities Fair back in September? Do you travel in a pack with your friends, joining what they are interested in just for the sake of having someone to go with you for the inevitably awkward first meeting? Do you eavesdrop on people’s conversations in the Bison? Do you wander around and hope for the best? Whatever your approach, it is difficult to join a new club, both in clearing the communication hurdle of when and where a club meets and also in the more personal obstacle of putting yourself out there.

It is one of the greatest social fears to find yourself in a situation in which you do not know anyone. But when you join a club, you are inflicting this upon yourself voluntarily. Let us say you have ascertained the correct meeting time and place for a club based on one of the omnipresent neon flyers plastered around campus. You show up and those who are there are already divided into their groups of friends. If you are lucky, you might see someone you know from class. You sit down alone, clearly an outsider to the normal order of things. You feel so alone, all you wanted to do was find others who are interested in the same extracurriculars or continue doing what you love to do outside of class. You debate just getting up and leaving, wondering whether you would attract even more attention if you did. Someone turns to you and says hello, so you return the courtesy. The conversation continues and, gasp, you have a new friend! Then the meeting starts and all of a sudden, you are in.

As a first-year, I understand the quandary of joining a club. In fact, this very article represents overcoming the above situation entirely: it is my first article for “The Bucknellian,” assigned to me at my first meeting last week. I went, awkwardly sat by myself and was then included in the meeting with a smile just like that. First-years might feel especially nervous about putting themselves out there because they might feel apprehensive about joining a club that already has an organized agenda or perceived rigidity in membership. This is not the case. Students and the clubs they form are open to anyone who is interested and are helpful and encouraging of any students who want to join. The key thing about joining a new club is to keep in mind that every person in the meeting was in your position at one point or another too, and that you are all in the same club because of your unifying interests. And perhaps, in the future, when you are a seasoned club member and you see a person sitting alone before a meeting with a panicked look about him or her, you might be the one to extend the hello.

By Connor Small

Writer

We wait for it every year. The lights, the spectacle, the (usually) lame half-time show, the best-of-the-best commercials and, of course, the most hyped-up sporting event in America: the Super Bowl. What is it about the Super Bowl that is so attractive?

Last year, Super Bowl XLV had the highest TV rating of all time, with close to 170 million viewers tuning in for at least some of the game, most likely the commercials. These whopping numbers were a surprising bright spot for a football season filled with an array of new rule changes. It also marked the first time that the No. 6 seed, the Green Bay Packers, had reached the Super Bowl and we all know how that turned out.

This year’s contest, taking place in Indianapolis, pits the New York Giants against the New England Patriots, a rematch of Super Bowl XLII. As a Philadelphia native and diehard Eagles fan, I think I can speak for every Eagles fan when I say it tears me apart to root for either of these teams. Yet, I can’t help but admit that this will be a memorable Super Bowl. The two teams match up solidly and it should be a good game to watch, as both teams have high-flying pass attacks and sub-par pass defense, which should hopefully lead to a shootout.

Maybe the main reason why the Super Bowl has become so popular and such a vital event in American society is that it combines many of the elements of American culture. Ideas such as togetherness, competition, consumption, commercialism and pop culture are all prevalent during the event. Advertisements for every conceivable product are shown in creative and often humorous ways, and in fact, many Americans admit to only watching the Super Bowl for the commercials. In other words, there’s something for everyone.

Another crucial aspect of the Super Bowl, and probably my favorite non-football portion, is the half-time show. This year, the lineup looks promising with Nicki Minaj, Madonna and M.I.A. sharing the stage during half-time. Hopefully these three ladies will be better than last year’s entertainment consisting of Christina Aguilera, who forgot the lyrics to the national anthem, and the Black Eyed Peas, whose half-time performance left everybody scratching his or her head.

The Super Bowl has been, and will continue to be, a staple of American culture because of all the aspects of our culture that it combines. Everybody is kept entertained all the way through from the game, commercials and half-time show. 

High powered offenses, hard-nosed defenses and the rematch of the century: one could not ask for a better Super Bowl. After a very memorable season that saw all varieties of ups and downs, this matchup seems to be an appropriate end. While some fans have been crushed, and many are on their way to a chance for a repeat title, I think, just as last year, that this Super Bowl will be a highly rated, highly talked about match and the best-commercial-of-the-night battle will be as competitive as ever.

By Sara Blair Matthews

Contributing Writer

“How to Drop Five Pounds in Five Days,” “Why Fat is Deadly” and “Cut Carbs, Live Longer” are prominent headlines in our society. Clearly, America has an obsession with fat. We have come up with countless diet fads, shows such as “The Biggest Loser” and “Fat Chef,” and tabloid campaigns judging celebrities on how much weight they have gained. All of these areas feed off each other between making people feel simultaneously horrible and happy about themselves in relation to others. How many times have you or someone you know picked up a tabloid with someone’s face blocked out, reading “Guess who gained 50 pounds?” just to see who that person is and perhaps feel better about yourself? Think of the swimsuit picture of Tyra Banks, former supermodel, which blew up a few years ago. Yes, it was clear Tyra was not her former size-zero self, and the tabloids completely tore her apart for it. However, she had the guts to fight back and ended up wearing her swimsuit on her talk show to show the world that she was happy with how she looked and that she wasn’t intimidated by others’ criticism.

Most people cannot face their critics head on. For example, Paula Deen shied away from criticism for years by concealing her diagnosis of type II diabetes. Recently, she has faced much criticism because she waited three years to reveal her diagnosis to the public and waited to do it with an endorsement deal on hand. To many, it appears she is using her disease for profit and that she is not taking this seriously. She is well known for her “the more butter, the better” attitude, which has led her to her current predicament, but I’m not going to criticize her for her choices. Though she may not be the most healthy role model for Americans, she has never falsely preached about the health benefits of her food. She often says, “here’s a little mint, we have to have our vegetable!,” but most who watch her show know she’s kidding.

It is true America has a rising obesity problem, but I do not think fat chefs such as Paula Deen, Ina Garten and Mario Batali are to blame. I think it is up to the viewer to determine whether their food is the most healthful option for his or her lifestyle. If someone wants to cut down on his or her fat intake, he or she should know that when Paula cooks a recipe that uses two sticks of butter, three cups of sugar and one cup of heavy whipping cream, nutrition is not the aim of the dish. Americans should be held responsible for their own choices, and I don’t think it is right to blame it on these celebrity chefs just because they are more visible people in our society.

You also have to consider the viewing demographic of these shows. Most seven to 13-year-olds are probably not watching the Food Network in their free time. Food Network shows are mostly generated for middle-age adults, who frankly should have some idea of what healthy eating means. My dad loves to watch Paula’s show while working out, and he will come home and tell us how many sticks of butter she used throughout the course of that show. We love Paula, but we rarely cook her food in our home because we understand it does not lend well to a healthy diet. I think a lot of people probably feel the same way. Viewers love her personality, but realize that her food does not fit the kind of lifestyle they want to lead.

I think we should be responsible for our own choices. Yes, celebrities are very visible, and they do have the power to influence a lot of people, but we don’t always have to follow their lead. It’s in our hands to create a life that works for us each specifically. I would love to be friends with Paula, but I would never take weight loss advice from her. Ultimately, we need to focus on people’s strengths, especially celebrities, versus trying to use them as scapegoats for our problems. They’re only human.

By Nicole Della Cava

Contributing Writer
The rumor that eight women living in the same house is considered a brothel started in the 1960s, during a decade that saw a huge spike in the number of women attending college. No one seems to know at which school the rumor began, but the truth is that there is no such state law or any University prohibition against sorority houses.

Greek women at our University were asked whether they wanted sorority houses or a sorority dorm. Sorority girls opted to not have houses because they liked the camaraderie of a sorority dorm and dues are less expensive than if women owned their own houses. Therefore, Hunt Hall was built in 1928 to act as a sorority house for all the sisters of each sorority.

On the other hand, every one of the 11 active fraternities on campus has its own house. The only advantage that I find is that each fraternity has its own chef. Besides that, there are many responsibilities and liability issues that come with having a fraternity house. Fraternities host the parties and must register with Public Safety, as well as take responsibility for anyone who gets hurt or sick at their party. I do not think that it is unfair that fraternities have houses on campus while sororities do not because I would not want to live in such a filthy house. I would not get work done if there was a party downstairs every night, nor would I want to sit in the common room if it was covered in spilled drinks and food. The clean up that every weekend renders definitely takes a long time and that would be the last thing I would want to do on a Saturday or Sunday morning.

There is a trade-off that fraternity brothers make when choosing to live in their house. The brothers get to choose which sorority they want to have a party with each night. The sororities have little say in their social schedule because they are simply guests at the fraternity houses. Despite this, I find the sororities have parties with the fraternities they like and that is what matters. It is important that men have fraternity houses because it creates a more unified group. Together, they plan parties and events, while they talk and hang out during meals. Sorority girls bond and become sisters in the same ways even without the unifying factor of a mutual house.

Greek life on campus does not discriminate based on gender nor is it patriarchal. Fraternities and sororities have the same values on campus and coordinate parties well with one another. There are a variety of parties going on every night so no females on campus are restricted to be at a party that they do not want to be at. The sorority girls on campus are smart not to have their own houses because they are never denied entry into parties based on what sorority they are in.

By Jessica Isgro

Contributing Writer

I know that as a relatively conservative individual, I should support SOPA and PIPA. However, the prospect of this legislation passing incites within me a deep sense of revulsion. On the surface, these bills may seem at most annoying and unnecessary, but the harm they can inflict on this nation and our cherished ideals is vast. From a limited freedom of expression to an unprecedented means of censorship, these bills embody the antithesis of what we, as Americans, hold dear.

The intent of these bills is to protect the entertainment industry. I would be remiss to ignore the common knowledge that this industry has taken many a financial hit in recent years due to counterfeiting and online copyright infringement. This is something we should especially recognize as college students focused on spending our money on tuition, room and board and endless cups of coffee; not on over-priced DVD/Blu-Ray combo packs of movies that are readily available online. However, the answer to this problem is not to shut down such websites, to block them on our search engines or to penalize perpetrators with extensive jail time.

Those in favor of this bill claim it will decrease the unemployment rate by creating new jobs. However, if Internet companies fear liability or prosecution under these new laws, what is not to say they won’t take their business elsewhere? Companies may move overseas, taking not only our jobs, but also our citizens with them. Rather than solving a problem, an entirely new conflict is created.

The biggest pitfall associated with these bills is the concept that if the government can control what websites we can access, what can’t they do? More than anything, this seems like the beginning of a downward spiral that can only lead to a stronger hand in governmental control and a narrower definition of free speech.

Granted, back in the day when the founding fathers decided which freedoms we do and do not have, they were not concerned with intellectual property, economic stability bred from job opportunities in the entertainment sector and copyright infringement deep-seated in our technologically savvy nation. Yet this cannot be used an excuse. Their decisions were, conceptually, what we are entitled to as Americans, and it is up to our current generation to figure out how to accommodate these rights with our laws.

While in some ways, taking a stand against these proposed legislations is dicey (it’s undeniable that copyright violation is wrong and is illegal), the bigger picture is not a pretty one. I am not saying no to fining perpetrators of online theft. I am saying no to excessive punishment, to unfair censorship and to the ability of the government to legislate with an iron fist.