Finding Unity in Competition

Paul Wilcox’s discussion of the Transatlantic Series and the Achilles Club really underscored how coming together through sports, competition, and shared passions creates a common ground from which people with different backgrounds and worldviews can come together to learn from perspectives that are different from their own. I rowed throughout my four years of high school, and each year, members of the Men’s and Women’s rowing teams of St. Edwards Oxford, a boarding school in England, came to visit my high school in Philadelphia. Though my experience was not nearly as steeped in history and tradition as is the Achilles Club and the Transatlantic Series, I can enthusiastically agree with Mr. Wilcox’s assessment of how interesting, informative, and fun it can be to have the freedom to look at life in a different way. Even though I never went to visit St. Edward’s in England, I learned so much by just talking with the rowers about everyday, taken-for-granted differences. The students from St. Edward’s, for example, found yellow school buses to be exciting and fascinating because they had never ridden in one but had seen them in the movies. My teammates and I, however, had drastically different interpretations of the desirability of riding the bus to Boathouse Row. This example of the school buses is just one of the multitudes of differences between the United States and the United Kingdom that we discussed. In fact, most of our conversations centered around this topic. As the sentiments of Mr. Wilcox and Dr. Hill captured, it can be really inspiring and refreshing to learn that a vast and yet-to-be-discovered world exists outside of our everyday experiences.

As in the Transatlantic Series, there was some friendly competition between our two schools. After practicing together for about a week, boats from my high school and boats from St. Edward’s raced each other in the Head of the Schuylkill. Interestingly, rowers from both my high school and St. Edward’s  even joined as a crew to compete together in some races. Combing this experience of cultural sharing with the experience of coming together as teammates or competitors to celebrate a common dedication to a sport is really powerful. It is difficult to describe, but I believe that perhaps this power stems from the fact that after finding out just how different our lives, perspectives, and traditions may be, we find out how fundamentally similar we all are. We share a desire to continually improve, a desire to endure for the sake of our teammates, and a desire to win. After learning about the rich history of the Achilles Club and Transatlantic Series, I can certainly see why someone would want to re-experience this tradition eighty years later.

Thinking Twice Before Clicking Share: Fake News and Critical Skepticism

In a time in which the country is increasingly divided and the proliferation of fake news continues to widen the chasm of misunderstanding, getting together to talk about how to think more critically about what we come across in the media and how to expose ourselves to diverse perspectives is so necessary. The Table Talk this Monday made me more concerned about the potential consequences of fake news, yet our conversation also made me hopeful that if people recognized the consequences of fake news, they would be motivated to consider the credibility of news and double-check sources before accepting it and giving it power. What added to my concern was the realization that with individuals’ constant access to news outlets and the ease with which it can be shared, the damage of of fake news can be done in just seconds. Often, because fake news is enticingly outlandish, it spreads quickly, and even if its later proved false, the correction of fake news might not reach the expansive audience that the more exciting or concerning, albeit false, story did. Thus, people may never even realize it is false. This inaccurate news story can then shape individuals’ opinions and perspectives, fueling the division that prevents conversation, respect, and understanding between those with different views. The fact that people like to stay within their bubbles, as Magdala pointed out, further decreases the likelihood that individuals find out that fake news is in fact false. One of the major ways that media outlets inexplicitly slant the narratives they construct is in what they choose, and do not choose, to report. A particular news outlet or public figure might pass along a fake piece of news that aligns with their political leanings before it is proven false but neglect to share the the information is inaccurate after it is determined to be incorrect.

However, as I was glad to be reminded, the people have the power to accept and reject, to share and denounce, news. News requires an audience. If people make an effort to expose themselves to different perspectives, think twice about a story that seems unlikely, and subscribe to more credible sources to gain access to new avenues to check the credibility of information, fake news loses its power. Just as easily as people can share a fake news article and thus give credit to it, people can post about how a potential news story has been proved false and include a link to other sources offering a counter claim. I am really grateful that I went to the table talk discussion about fake news because it definitely gave me some new strategies for evaluating the legitimacy of news stories and some new ways of thinking about what it means to be media literate in the era of “fake news.”

Channeling (A Bit of) George Costanza

Sarah’s interview tips, tricks, and advice offered some much needed perspective and advice as summer internship search is in full swing. What I valued most about these tips were that they provided a mindset with which I can now approach any interview, or more broadly, any important and slightly intimidating challenge or event. Sarah emphasized that the most successful, productive interviews are two-way conversations between equals. She pointed out that viewing an interviewer as holding all the power not only increases one’s nerves but also can lead one to try to please the interviewer. The cost of solely trying to please the interviewer is that it prevents an interviewee from conveying their authentic self and setting themselves apart. This forcefully resonated with me. In a recent phone interview, with every question the interviewer asked me, a feeling of intense panic set in, I began frantically trying to predict what answer he wanted. Sarah’s advice made me realize that this approach is not going to get me very far. In trying to sell myself and determine if the job for which and company with which I am interviewing is a good fit, while there are certainly answers that better communicate who I am, there are no “right” answers. I was viewing interviews as tests, but really, interviewers are more like trial-runs. As Sarah reminded us, both parties, the interviewer and the interviewee, have something great to offer. The function of the interview is to determine if the interviewer’s passion and skills will be cultivated and utilized by the given position. Thinking of an interview this way leads to reduced stress that will ultimately increase performance.

The seminar also made me reconsider taking the cookie-cutter answers provided by career services as the interviewing gospel. While these are definitely a great resource and a starting point from which to consider how one can think about answering commonly asked questions, playing it safe with previously approved answers leaves little room to stand out. Nearly all job and interview applicants have access to similar answer templates and go-to responses. Regurgitating what one thinks an employer wants to hear prevents an individual from revealing a powerful piece of their story or unveiling a completely unique perspective. Channeling a little George Costanza and taking some risk could go a long way. I am definitely glad to have a new mindset about interviewing.

A Necessary Skepticism

What I found most interesting about Jonathan Robins’ talk was his emphasis on the interrelationship between political motive, economic gain, and public perceptions about the nutritional value of a given product or ingredient. While I realized that new scientific findings continually change what we believe to be the cure-all superfood, the healthy but delicious substitute, or the deadly downfall, I did not realize that fats and other ingredients that were previously discredited or found to be harmful have actually made a comeback and become widely accepted yet again. What is more, I really had no idea how deeply public perceptions about healthy eating and go-to ingredients were the product of political and economic agendas. On the contrary, it seems as though society often takes the newest claims about which foods are healthy and which ones are not as the most recent and thus most accurate empirically supported knowledge. I think that especially when it comes to health, people assume that the knowledge reported or the newest ingredient being advocated is disseminated with altruistic intentions to improve society’s health. At times, altruistic intentions could certainly be present, but after listening to Robins explain how surges or resurgences of advocacy for a certain type of fat or oil often depend on which is cheapest or easiest to produce, I will definitely be taking Robins’ advice to be skeptical about the latest claims I encounter.

In fact, Robins’ advice to be skeptical about the sources of our knowledge is useful guidance not just when choosing which fat or oil to use but in all aspects of life. This advice illuminates the larger reality that knowledge is put forth by a particular person or group for a particular purpose. Thinking about from where a particular piece of information is coming, considering who is advancing this information, and untangling what interests this source has in spreading this information can help us evaluate the validity of a certain claim. In a world where a multitude of new scientific reports are coming out everyday and “alternative facts” are fronting as truth, the ability to the dissect the continuous stream of knowledge with which we meet is a super useful skill.

How Food’s Role Has and Has Not Changed

As Jane Ziegelman was detailing the history of nutrition and home economics during the era of the Great Depression, I found it fascinating to think about how the perceptions about food that dominated that time period differ from those dominating thinking about food today. During both the era of the Great Depression and the present, discovering how certain foods affect bodily conditions is a source of interest and intrigue. However, Ziegelman discussed how, during the Great Depression era, there was a growing emphasis on food as fuel, not a source of pleasure. Food that was bland but offered an affordable supply of the necessary protein, calories, and vitamins was more than sufficient. Today, conversely, individuals are increasingly interested in food that tastes good but is also low in calorie. While nutrition is a prominent consideration in some conversations, in many others, a concern for nutrition and an emphasis on viewing food as fuel is all but absent. In its place is talk of fat-burning superfoods, juice cleanses to ward off cravings, and 5-day miracle diets. There is an increasing view of food as a tempting vice that people struggle to avoid. Flora Rose, Eleanor Roosevelt, Martha Van Rensselaer, however, viewed planning meals and inventing nutritious dietary options as a task to be mastered. This change in perspective is undoubtedly influenced by economic conditions and larger societal trends.

I also found it interesting to consider how even at a time during which America is relatively economically stable, considerable portions of the population still do not have access to nutritious foods. While nutrition deficiencies during the Depression caused considerable weight loss that led to weakness preventing children from attending school, unequal access to fresh fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and lean meats are leading to rising levels of childhood obesity and diabetes. In “food deserts,” or areas in which fresh food is not readily purchasable, families have to make meals with ingredients that are higher in calorie, more processed, and less nutritious. Michelle Obama dedicated much of her time as First Lady to address growing threats to health. In fact, many of the efforts of Michelle Obama’s “Let’s Move” campaign, such as teaching families how to cook healthy meals with ease, parallel the efforts of Rose, Roosevelt, and Van Rensselaer. Even with the continuous advances in nutritional science, from the discovery of vitamin A to the development of Milkorno and Milkoato, it seems that America is still struggling to make nutritious options accessible to everyone.

All in all, Ziegelman’s talk was super interesting. I also really enjoyed hearing about the role that Cornell’s College of Human Ecology played in providing nutritious options during the Great Depression.

 

Beauty Beyond Perfection

In addition to presenting a visually intriguing and thought provoking display of geometric patterns and unbalanced designs, Nicholas Carbonaro’s art provided a message about the beauty of imperfection that is much needed in society today. The collection I most enjoyed is “People on the Subway.” It consisted of several portraits of vastly different looking individuals, and these portraits were strung together and hung side-by-side, spanning much of the exhibit wall. Each person of the subway was created from a different combination of arrangements of spirals, patterns of triangles, collections of dots, and sequences of lines. The different combinations of these geometric patterns conveyed the personality of each individual. Following each detail of the portrait and reflecting on how these details combined and interacted created an experience similar to sitting on the subway and looking at the different characters with which you are surrounded. Similar to how people often pass the time on the subway by looking at others around them and thinking about what personality characteristics they have, what their biggest flaw might be, what their occupation is, and so on, “People on the Subway” prompted the onlooker to consider what was unique about each depicted “rider.”

Also, Carbonaro dynamically uses asymmetry and imbalance in his paintings, and this artistic device shows that difference and imperfection are beautiful and interesting. Perhaps more importantly, Carbonaro’s art shows that this imperfection is a universal human truth. Everyone is imperfect and asymmetrical in some respect. In a world where beauty standards create the perception that beauty requires a nearly unattainable combination of physical features, this art communicates that there are countless combinations of physical features, all of which represent a different form of beauty. In celebrating this difference, Carbonaro’s art encourages viewers to find beauty in all things. I also must note that Carbonaro’s dedication to his work and passion for creativity is inspiring. At a difficult time of the semester, his reminder to find creativity in everything was much needed.

Consequences that Transcend Borders

The experts on the Immigration Policy Panel Discussion provided profound insights about the effects the recent executive orders have had and continue to have on countless individuals both within the United States’ borders and beyond them. Raza Rumi put forth particularly a powerful assessment of the message that Trump’s Executive Orders send to the people of Iraq. He explained how the United States has infiltrated Iraqi soil, formed a partnership with its country and its people to fight terrorism, and altered the lives of Iraqi citizens and Iraq’s history. Then, with these Executive Orders, the United States has denied assistance, refuge, and acceptance of the people they have been promising to help. America has involved itself in Iraq’s fate, and in denying Iraqi people the ability to enter the country, the United States sends an emotionally damaging and disheartening message to them. This message unjustly suggests that people who have fought terrorism alongside the United States are dangerous, untrustworthy, and unwelcome. Additionally, the panelists discussed how one consequence of the recent orders is that non-citizens of the United States can be detained and, in some cases, deported if they commit or have committed a crime. Hearing about this consequence, I began to think not only of the effect it could have on countless hard-working individuals and their families but also about what precedence this sets for defining what it means to be an upstanding American. Human beings err, and to suggest that an individual is unworthy of living, working, and raising a family in the United States because of one mistake is to deny the the principles of liberty and continual improvement that America champions. A mother with three children and two jobs, for example, should not lose the right to stay in the United States because she wavered for one moment from the inner strength and discipline constantly required to live her life. Also, seeing the Cornell community rally around this cause and its international students was an empowering experience. I am glad to be at an institution for “any person, any study…from any country.”

The Art of Life

I loved how Shakespeare in Love offers the audience a new perspective from which they can view a work of art. Rather than seeing the product and wondering about what inspired its ending or who was the source of inspiration for the hero or heroine, the audience gets to watch the process while continuously looking for parallels between life and the artwork it inspires. In flipping this arrangement, the movie conveys several important points about how an artist creates a work of art. First, Shakespeare in Love reminds us that art needs an audience. The power of art rests in its ability to move an audience. Some told Will they wanted a comedy, others told him they wanted a play involving battle, and still others told him he should change his title. The array of suggestions with which Will constantly met underscores the fact that audiences are not passive observers. Rather, they have expectations and stories they want to see come alive. A writer has to find a story that resonates with all these desires or transcends them to create a new common desire to fill through his or her story. Also, Shakespeare in Love communicates that art creates a story out of the beauty, tragedy, excitement, suffering, triumph, and so on of the world. As the relationship of Will and Viola changed, the script transformed to reflect these changes. In a way, the parallel the film creates between life and art serves as a reminder that people should find the aspects of art that move and inspire them in real life. It assures us that the adventure, love, mystery, and passion found in art exists in the world as well.

In addition to challenging the way audiences usually view art, the film also challenges notions of love. Will had a wife, and Viola was betrothed to another man. When their relationship overcame one obstacle, another one sprung up in the distance. Will and Viola acted out their love on stage but were forced to part once they left this stage. As opposed to capturing the love story that ends with two vowing to grow old together or not grow old without one, the film captures the power of a love that will “never age or die.”

 

 

Giving New Meaning to Living in Rose

What I enjoyed most about learning about the history of the College of Human Ecology was seeing how its founding and growth was so uniquely “Cornell.” Cornell is an institution dedicated to finding the needs of the time and addressing them in an innovative manner. Fully encompassing this spirit, the College of Human Ecology’s founders reached out to the women of New York State to first understand what they wanted and then to formulate a way to help them attain these goals. The College of Human Ecology started as an effort to make the wives of farmers’ lives better in a time when this matter was not much of a concern. It was truly fascinating to see how Cornell embraced and lived by its commitment to be an institution where any person can pursue any study. As. Dr. Blalock mentioned, Yale University did not even admit women until the late 1960s, yet Cornell University was home to a college essentially dedicated to advancing the study of topics in which women were interested. Also, I think it is really interesting to see how the College of Human Ecology has remained true to its founding purpose of advancing and addressing peoples’ needs. From the study of human development to the study of fashion design, the College of Human Ecology continues to put forth empirical findings and practical applications that better the lives of humans.

Another aspect of the College of Human Ecology’s history that I found both fascinating and inspiring was how women embraced their role in the home and sought to carry out this role to the best of their ability. They studied child-rearing practices, experimented with counter top heights, and found ways to make nutritious and inexpensive meals during the depression. In a time where women’s roles were limited, the women of the College of Human Ecology sought opportunity within this role; in doing so, they expanded this role.

I loved finding out that Flora Rose used a progressive, willful spirit to empower women. Now, living in Rose House is reminder to push boundaries, to be open to new areas of study, and to look to respond to the needs of the community in which I am living. I am definitely glad to know Flora Rose’s story.