Dear students,

I am writing in response to Kevin Lugo’s article on sustainability at Gettysburg College.  Student support of the College’s sustainability efforts is essential to our success in reducing the College’s carbon footprint. Kevin mentions some of the most substantive accomplishments to date, but achieving true carbon neutrality will require a sustained campus-wide effort over many years.

Kevin’s report on the Sustainability Common Hour on April 15 suggests that we adopt a well-coordinated and innovative approach to achieve a more sustainable community. I applaud and support the cooperative approach adopted by the student organizations that participated, their commitment, and their creativity.

I think the suggestions that Kevin puts forward in his article are all worth considering. The promotion of the appreciation and use of locally grown food is a natural for a community located in one of the nation’s most productive fruit belts. The proposal to create a sustainability council with representatives from all of our community¹s environmentally conscious organizations would provide the framework for planning and implementing joint sustainability initiatives.

The College is making steady progress toward carbon neutrality in 2032, the 200th anniversary of Gettysburg College. By 2015, our goal is to reduce our 2007 emissions by 25 percent. In the short term we are focusing efforts on reducing energy consumption with policy changes, education about the impact of individual changes in behavior, exploration of the replacement of our older heating and lighting systems with new technologies, and the provision of more energy-efficient travel alternatives for our community.

Thank you to everyone who participated in the Sustainability Common Hour. Perhaps we should consider making this an annual event to track our progress and brainstorm new ideas.

Sincerely,
Janet Morgan Riggs

Welcome to the new Forum!  It’s getting to the point where that seems like a weekly saying around here.  This change was less voluntary but more stemmed from the fact that, like all institutions on campus, we are affected greatly by the recession which has been sweeping the country for a number of months.

You will notice a number of changes to the site and its layout. Do not be alarmed or bothered though, The Forum will continue to strive to embody the highest level of journalistic integrity and quality.

Just a couple notes on the changes. These were hard to make, and we put off making these changes by saving money in a number of places. It just wasn’t enough in the end. First we tried laying off people from the staff, which didn’t work that well given that none of our staff members are paid. Then, with the growing hunger that swept campus, we had to eat several members, who valiantly sacrificed themselves for the good of the organization.*

Our final measure was to sell advertisements, a practice which you will notice has continued to the current embodiment of the site. A number of major companies have seen fit to advertise on our site, such as Hoss’s and Perkin’s, which we thank them for as it allows us to continue our work.

In the end, we had to go back to the basics. So with no further waste of your precious time, I welcome you to the brand new Forum.

*The articles on the site today are all dedicated to Editor-in-Chief emeritus Sebastian DiNatale who gave his life and his body to ensure the continued lives of seven writers and four editors. He will be missed.

The Gettysburgian, the newspaper which has catered to the college community since 1832 has experienced an unexpected rise in popularity since the recession hit Gettysburg. But the reason for the rise in popularity is not exactly what one would naturally expect. “The Gettysburgian isn’t really for reading anymore,” Editor-in-chief Sean Parke said. “And we’re okay with that so long as the shelf get’s cleared off every week.”

Arts and Entertainment editor Jen Bray also commented, “It’s kind of gotten to the point where we just don’t care about what’s in the paper. Half the time, we just print every other word. Who cares what the article is about? No one reads past the headlines.”

“Hell, we don’t even read our own articles,” Erin Cushing said, referring to a recent graph in which the Gettysburgian asserted that students on campus get one hour of sleep a night.

So why is the Gettysburgian so popular if no one is reading it? Because the college has cut off housing to a number of buildings to save money and the east coast has been hit by a cold spell, students have taken to using the Gettysburgian as insulation for their coats. “When the wind blows across the fields, there’s nothing better than a few pages of the Burgian between you and your coat to take the edge off,” sophomore Michael Altman said.

This use has become so popular of late that last Thursday there was a rush on the Gettysburgian when it was released and put out for the public in the CUB. The paper is also often used as a fire starters in any number of the trash can fires that students huddle around throughout campus. “It was a little awkward at first, coming from my background in rural Iowa, but after awhile I got used to using trash cans for warmth. And the Burgian is the perfect way to start the fire,” said one freshman.

Students have also noted its vital role in lining the cages of their hamster and gerbil cages, which some students keep in their rooms.

Other uses include grabbing a pile from the library and using them as a door stop, toilet paper, and stuffing bras. “It’s a little rough down there at first,” sophomore Robert Veech said, “but you get used to it. The only drawback is sometimes you get ink on your butt.”

Before parties, girls who have found themselves unable to buy new accessories as the recession worsens have turned to the Gettysburgian as a source to make themselves bracelets and headbands.

Finally, in a bit of a troublesome turn, a confidential source from Servo recently told The Forum that the Gettysburgian was now being used in certain high protein meals to boost the fiber levels. “There’s one special dish that came out recently that we used the paper in. I won’t tell you because we wanted it to be a surprise.” Sources point to a particularly newsbreaking meal, about which you can learn elsewhere on The Forum’s site.

The Gettysburg Dance Ensemble—a student-run, freestyle dancing club—held its spring performances this past Friday and Sunday, March 26^th and 28^th. The program, entitled “Move It!,” included dancing styles of hip hop, contemporary, jazz, salsa, swing/blues, and several others. The club’s president, Jen Giambrone, opened the show with quick words of gratitude to the contributors, and then it began.

The first jazz dance, performed to “Tik Tok,” seemed disjointed and disorganized. Unfortunately, it was followed by a similarly disappointing hip hop performance to the song ‘When the Bass Drops.” Fortunately, both of these dances could be overlooked because of the acts that precluded and followed them.

Majd Gammoh and Nav Sokhey’s duet was phenomenal; however, Sokhey performed even more spectacularly when she teamed up with Samir Lavalani to create their Bollywood Mix, combining music with the elements of film, and electrifying the stage with humor and talent. The dancers were energetic and overall, wonderful.

First-year Nora Dennehy’s solo “A Nervous Tic Motion of the Head to the Left” was wonderfully choreographed and danced. I truly appreciated that she didn’t turn her chance to shine into a sexually charged excuse to gyrate her hips and grab at her shirt erotically, as another dancer did.

Any time Steph Tait or Sara Thomas were onstage, it was nearly impossible to watch any of the other dancers. Both women danced with high energy and passion; by watching them, it was easy to see that they were enjoying and feeling the music.

Perhaps the most disappointing performance was to “Don’t Stop Believin’.” I was highly anticipating the dance because the song is so uplifting and enjoyable, but the choreography fell short and the dancers just didn’t step up and make it exceptional.

Another murder in the dancing realm occurred with the Center Stage-inspired dance to “Higher Ground.” While the film’s version of the dance is upbeat, intensive, and generally enjoyable, the Gettysburg version made my soul die a little. Horribly choreographed, terribly performed, and generally uncomfortable to watch.

As expected, the BOMB Squad performed well. Their movements were well-timed, and all of the dancers maintained the high energy throughout the entire piece—not an easy task. My only complaint is that the song “Tik Tok” was used earlier in the show (although the BOMB Squad used it much more effectively).

Although typically I have learned to expect great things from Gettysburg’s swing dancers, I felt that this performance fell short of others I have seen. The energy wasn’t there, and two of the lifts showcased in the middle of the stage looked as though they were physically paining the males involved. I recognize that it is not easy to lift another person quickly while keeping time to the music, but if you can’t do, don’t try to do it in front of an audience.

The Irish solo by Heather Smith was great—I would have loved to have seen more.

The “Ambiance” performance, while extremely unique and refreshing, was inhibited by the expressions on three of dancers’ faces—they looked as though they would rather be anywhere but up on stage. Fortunately, the piece was salvaged by the electric smile and clear bliss on Victoria Fievre’s face as she moved.

The best performance came towards the end of the program, and the unwilling guest I brought with me was glad that he stayed after seeing Britt Stonestreet’s rendition of the “Cell Block Tango.” The facial expressions of the dancers were in perfect conjunction with the meaning of the piece and the actual Broadway performers’ intentions. Additionally, Robby Ford’s lifts were impressive, and his dancing was top notch. The women in this piece really brought their best efforts and emotions.

The Dance Ensemble holds a performance each semester; the upcoming semester’s performance will be run by newly-elected president Sara Thomas and vice president Mallory Gardner, along with their fellow executive board members.

When the lights dimmed for the showing of Crazy Heart I attended, I noticed that I was the youngest person in the theatre on a Friday night by about 30 years.  Normally, a story that starts this way would only go downhill from there.  But Crazy Heart defied the trepidation that had set in because of the audience and a few questionable previews preceding the movie (Letters to John followed by Letters to God).

By now, just about everyone knows that Jeff Bridges won the Academy Award for Best Actor for his role in this movie.  And boy does he deserve it.  The movie is not always new or surprising, in fact, it is often predictable.  But Bridges’ performance, as well as those of the other cast members, brings the film to a whole different level.  Bridges fits perfectly into his role as Bad Blake, an alcoholic, down on his luck ex-country music star who is trying to stay afloat on the meager gigs he can get, including bowling alleys and tiny bars.  Unsurprisingly, he meets Maggie Gyllenhaal’s character, Jean Craddock, a reporter for a small city newspaper, with whom he begins a romantic relationship, as well as a friendship with her son, Buddy.

Their relationship is about as predictable as they get; the foreseeable issue of Blake’s alcoholism causing problems and trust issues along the way. But Bridges manages to bring a likability to a man who is more or less unsympathetic in his actions and treatment of others—he takes Buddy to a bar one day and loses the kid while drinking, and early in the film gets too drunk to perform a song he promised to dedicate to an audience member.  The acting is so genuine that the audience is able to forgive any predictability in the plot.

Besides the acting, the music is the other saving grace of the film.  Normally, I’m not a fan of country music.  Listening to Kenny Chesney and the like every morning on the bus to school tends to ruin such things (though I’d argue, as would Bad Blake, that there wasn’t much hope for “fake” country anyway).  The film gains a lot of ground by using music performed by Jeff Bridges, who has considerable actual musical talent.  T Bone Burnett and Ryan Bingham wrote the songs performed in the movie, most notably the final song in the film “The Weary Kind,” which won the two an Oscar, and is actually performed in the movie by Bingham (though Colin Farrell lip-syncs it).  The song is spot on (perhaps a touch too on-the-nose), beautiful, and heart-felt.

Since viewing the movie, I read that if Bridges had agreed to the role of Bad Blake, Steve Martin was the director’s second choice and he would have rewrote the film to have more of a Lost in Translation vibe.  This feeling is already visible in the film, as the film is slow-paced and quiet.  The focus of the film is not the action or the plot, but the performances and the feeling of the piece.  In highlighting these performances, director Scott Cooper and the entire team behind Crazy Heart have succeeded unquestionably.

Little is as exciting to people as the idea of the discovery of a long lost uncontacted tribe deep in the jungles of the Amazon.  The image brings to mind such movies as Indiana Jones and The Mummy.  But few people have actually had the opportunity to go on such an expedition.  Scott Wallace is one of those few.  Wallace spoke to Gettysburg College on Monday March 22, describing his expedition into the depths of the Amazon.

Wallace is a photojournalist who, while working for National Geographic was invited to accompany Sidney Possuelo, an officer for the Brazilian government’s Indian Affairs office on an expedition to find the territory boundaries of the mysterious, “uncontacted,” Fleschieros, a group about which so little is actually known that Brazilians don not know what they call themselves, what language they speak, or what ethnicity they are.  Flescheiros is the Spanish name for the group, which translates as “The People of the Arrow,” given to them because of their reputation as being deft archers, willing to defend their territory with the weapons.

Possuelo’s mission, however, as Wallace described, was not to make contact with this group, but to determine the boundaries of their territory so as to create a protection zone to keep the Fleschieros isolated from outsiders.  Wallace explained that Possuelo was worried about the Fleschieros being exposed to Western diseases that they do not have antibodies for, as well as the contamination of the Fleschiero culture with Western problems and concerns.

Wallace spent the majority of his talk showing photographs that he took on the expedition and describing his experience.  Most exciting was a story he told about finding footsteps along a path which they followed, eventually leading them closer and closer to the Fleschiero village.  Two of their porters disappeared and they set out to find them.  This brought them into the village, which they found abandoned, clearly in a rush, as there were smoldering fires, and pots of poison used for arrows and blowpipes hurriedly hidden.  After losing the trail of the missing porters, and fearing the worst, they left the village, and set up a camp a short ways away.  The porters appeared shortly later, telling of hearing screaming and yelling from the Fleschieros somewhere in the jungle nearby, terrifying the porters.

This story was the pinnacle of their long trek through the jungle which lasted almost four months, and included traveling by boat and canoe on the rivers and hiking through the jungle.  Wallace told of eating piranhas, boars, and even monkeys, as the expedition lived off the land.  Wallace answered questions at the end, when he described the experience as life-changing, and was immensely impressed with the opportunity he had to see a view of the “deep past” and that one can still experience the “primordial life” which is “underlying the ephemeral, fast-paced life” of the Western world.

Scott Wallace’s articles can be found on his website, covering a number of topics from all over the world.  He is working on an upcoming book on the subject of the Fleschieros.

Like all LOST fan(atic)s, I was ecstatic about the coming final season, though this excitement was fraught with worry and hesitancy.  I worried of course about whether the writers would be able to make it satisfactory.  Will we get the answers to our questions (both big and small)?  Will they be able to wrap up all the loose ends that have come up in five seasons?  Will they be able to prove that they’ve had it planned out all along?  Most of all, I entered into the new season with complete bafflement.  What on earth could happen next?  It seemed like one of two things could happen, but with LOST, who knows what will really happen.  And so I waited.

And when the first two-hour-long episode aired, I was met with the realization that instead of going one way or another, the LOST creators had decided to do two things at once!  Needless to say, my jaw was hanging, gaping, open for those two hours. (A note right quick, there are spoilers if you haven’t watched any of this season.) The acting in the premiere was perfect all around.  The pathos we see from Sawyer creates a new side to the character that we had yet to see.  True, heartfelt emotion for someone else.  The resulting anger over Juliet’s death is intense and terrifying.  The only problem I had at this point was that there were too many commercials.  It continuously felt as if we were getting two scenes with a gasp moment and then a cut to commercials.

The second episode was, sigh, a Kate episode.  Kate episodes are to me always the weakest episodes of LOST.  She just doesn’t seem to make smart choices and doesn’t seem to have an interesting story to tell.  The worst part is the love triangle with Jack and Sawyer, which has done nothing for me since about midway through the first season.  Fortunately, on the off-Island/alternate timeline, there is none of this drama.  It is, however, prominent on the Island as Sawyer prepares to get out of Temple-ville, and Kate decides to follow him.  The end of the episode is a cool reveal, but it was clear that this episode is set up for the main part of the season.

Episode three is a welcome Locke-centric episode.  Or, rather a Locke and notLocke-centric episode given that Locke is really Smoky on the Island.  Anyway, this episode features more great acting from Terry O’Quinn and it is utterly depressing to see him back in wheelchair mode at first.  But just as in the previous episodes, we quickly discover that the alternate timeline holds some surprises and changes from the reality we are familiar with from the Losties pasts.  We find that things have changed on the Island as well, what with Richard scared for the first time and Smoke running around free.  Again, there’s a big reveal at the end of the episode, and it turns out to be a huge one, even answering, or partially answering some of our longest-lasting mysteries about the Island.

Last week’s episode continued the exciting feel of actual storytelling from the previous episode.  Jack and Hurley go on a hike and find…a lighthouse!  With more hints at answers!  This leads to appearances by Jacob himself (at least his ghost), with more kind-of-answers to further the mystery in just the right way.  The alternate timeline revealed a big surprise as well: Jack’s got a kid!  And thus continues the Daddy issues theme that has been prominent through much of LOST.  The way that Papa Jack deals with his son turns the theme on its head and results in the most emotionally-engaging episode of the season.

And that brings us to last night’s episode, a Sayid-centric episode, which sadly returns to the set-up nature of the Kate episode.  This was a definite step back, but boy was the ending exciting.  Scary, even.

At this point in the season, I have to take a moment to worry that the purpose of the alternate timeline is to introduce Easter eggs for fans in the form of cameos from previous or current characters in new roles.  I have faith that this won’t be the faith, but it is a worry.  I also hope that it is not as simple as Smoke giving the survivors or at least the Candidates a choice between the Island and the alternate timeline.  Again, too easy.  I want more intrigue, and most of all, I want to have not figured it out yet.  I want more surprises, more jaw-dropping moments, which, in the 12 hours of LOST we have left to us, I am sure are still in large supply.

The last film of Heath Ledger’s career. The newest film directed by the unique and distinctive Terry Gilliam. A film that was almost shut down following Ledger’s death, but saved by the inclusion of three new actors to play one part. These are the things I knew about The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus

when I walked into the theatre. I guess that’s not entirely true. I had seen the trailer, and had skimmed a few reviews, which were largely mixed. And so I walked into the theatre a bit trepidatiously.

In parts, the film surprised me, confused me, but most importantly, as these things go, entertained me. Most impressively, other than the performances, which I will get to in a moment, was the way Gilliam handled Ledger’s demise.

The film tells the tale of the immortal Doctor Parnassus (Christopher Plummer), who centuries ago was visited by the Devil (played by a wonderfully sleazy and smarmy Tom Waits), and was granted the ability to guide the imaginations of others in order to engage the Devil in a wager between the powers of the imagination and the powers of temptation. Parnassus leads a traveling performance troop, whose stage is centered on a mirror, through which spectators can travel into a world where their imaginations take form around them. However, the stakes of their wager includes the clause that any child of Parnassus’ will belong to the Devil when he or she turns 16, and as fate (or the Devil, as we discover) would have it, Parnassus’ daughter, Valentina, is nearing her birthday. Because of this, the Devil enters in a new wager, the first to five souls wins, and Parnassus can keep his daughter. Just in time, it seems, the troop happens on a mysterious individual (Ledger) hanging from a London bridge with strange symbols on his forehead.

Fortunately for the film, Gilliam had completed filming the scenes in the real world with Heath Ledger, and following his death, he was able to rewrite the script and used Johnny Depp, Jude Law, and Colin Farrell to film those scenes that take place inside the mirror as the troop attempts to sway five souls to the power of imagination. The transitions are seamless, and while surprising, are not jarring, as I feared they would be. Gilliam’s rewrites made them seem natural and part of the story, more than just a plot device to explain or cover Ledger’s absence. It does lead to curiosities over what the story was before the substitutes were introduced, but more out of interest than dissatisfaction with the current film.

The story is not perfect, however, and focuses, as do many Gilliam films, on the visuals and spectacle of the film. It is not the story’s fault that it is not as strong as the spectacle, but more something that one comes to expect from a Gilliam film (see Brazil, The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, The Brothers Grimm, and more for examples). None of these are bad movies— Brazil in fact is seen as a cult classic—but all are extremely visually stimulating, and it is difficult for the story to keep up with the absolute strangeness of the physical nature of the film.

Parnassus does raise interesting questions and puzzlements, which seem to necessitate repeat viewings, and while strange in places, the oddity is not off-putting like some of the more ridiculous films can be. The viewer wants to see the film again to answer the questions about fate and hope and belief and, most of all, given the film’s topic, imagination. What is the higher power, imagination or temptation? And what role does choice and free will play in this conflict? That is the weighty issue at the heart of Doctor Parnassus, though the film forces the viewer to make the ultimate decision.

A cloudy, windy and threatening Saturday marked the occasion for Janet Morgan Riggs’ inauguration as President of Gettysburg College. The audience gathered outside Pennsylvania Hall was not deterred, however, and Riggs’ procession was met with enthusiastic applause from students, alumni, parents, and community members alike.
Before her acceptance speech, Riggs was commended by a number of important college constituents, including former Gettysburg College presidents, representatives of the college’s student body, faculty, and support staff. Governor Tom Rendell of Pennsylvania sent a letter to be read aloud on the occasion and Mayor William Troxell of Gettysburg. Troxell stressed the history shared between borough and college and the continued effort to bridge the two entities.
Riggs was installed as president by James Weaver, the Chair of the Board of Trustees after she was told of a scholarship foundation created in her honor.
Her speech first recognized her long history with the college, first as a student, then as a faculty member, and later as an administrator, and now as President and a member of the Board of Trustees.
Riggs emphasized her strong belief in the liberal arts focus in education and noted that this focus was especially important for the future. “The liberal arts have never been more important and relevant…In fact, we will depend on future citizens who are prepared in this way.”
Riggs mentioned also that because of her views on the liberal arts, she held a panel the morning of inauguration to discuss the “enduring
value” of this educational method and focus.
In describing the role of the liberal arts education, much of Riggs’ speech involved examining the words of former Gettysburg College presidents and Pennsylvania politicians, in particular Calvin Blythe, a judge and founder of Gettysburg College in 1832.
She explained broadly her ideas for the future of the college under her tenure. “We need to demonstrate our value more clearly, that we are making good on our mission…we must do a better job of working collaboratively across institutions.”
Riggs addressed the current economic crisis that faces the college and the country. She noted that “our biggest challenge may be affordability.” Commenting that Gettysburg College is not an “assembly line,” she said that, “we need to consider ways of expanding access to this kind of education, which means assuring its affordability to more people, not fewer.”
President Riggs spoke also about Gettysburg College’s unique position in the academic world. She identified the Eisenhower Institute, the Civil War Era Studies program, and the Sunderman Conservatory of Music as the areas which set Gettysburg apart from any competition. Riggs also noted the honor code which is in place as an aspect that makes Gettysburg College special.
She finished her speech by recalling a book she had read on the beach which described “dancing from the bottom of your heart.”
“…The opportunity to lead Gettysburg College truly is the opportunity to dance from the bottom of my heart. And I invite all of you who are Gettysburgians to dance with me.”