Illustrations by Elisa Mirkil

Another article from the May issue of The Blue and White. Read on forthe final installment of managing editor Anna Bahr’s three-part series on the student debt at Columbia. This last part looks at General Studies. To review the first two pieces, which examine student loans in CC/SEAS and financial aid for international students, please visit theblueandwhite.org.

Just two years ago, Peter Awn, Dean of the School of General Studies, described the limited financial aid available to GS students as “untenable.” That year, GS students received, “percentage-wise, functionally half the financial aid dollars that [were] available to Columbia College students,” a dearth cornering GS undergrads into a future of student debt. Today, GS has surpassed its $25 million fundraising goal as part of the university-wide Campaign for Undergraduate Education—92 percent of which Awn estimates will expand the aid pool in the form of scholarships and grants. With this addition, he believes “the school has turned a corner.”

Awn’s optimism for the future of Columbia’s nontraditional undergraduate college surprised me. Nearly every GS student I interviewed shared a common grievance—the same frustration echoed in opinion pieces in the Spectator and desperate Bwog comments for years—that the value of a Columbia degree is compromised when it demands that scholars be borrowers.

When Hal Levy, GS ’14, graduates, he will owe nearly $160,000 in private student loans. “If I don’t go bankrupt, at the very least I will have no spending money for ten years. I’ll probably be wearing these same ratty clothes, trying to pay off my loans,” he sighed. GS prides itself on being one of a kind—a unique education, nonexistent at other Ivies, in which a diverse collection of nontraditional students earn traditional bachelor’s degrees. But its current program remains a feasible option for only one kind of student: he who can readily afford it. (more…)

Illustration by Leila Mgaloblishvili, CC ’16

One more piece from the May issue of The Blue and White: a Campus Character. Daniel Stone profiles University Senator Richard Sun. You can still grab a copy in Lerner. Or read the damn thing online.

At the suggestion of Richard Sun, CC ’13, we meet in the gaudily adorned lobby of Le Parker Meridian on 56th Street off 6th Avenue. Below five hundred dollar-a-night rooms and next to non-functional renaissance columns, a maroon curtain hides the Burger Joint. Waiting in the long line to get in, Sun tells me he likes the place partly because you “wouldn’t expect to find a relaxed and greasy burger joint at the heart of the hotel.” (It’s also near Brooks Brothers, where he has been shopping and the fare’s good.) Inside the cramped restaurant, as if to hide the fact that the hotel also runs it, graffiti uniformly covers the walls. Prices are written on cardboard boxes in marker. He orders two cheeseburgers and a milkshake. When it turns out they have run out of milkshakes, he opts for water. Then, we sit.

Sun wears many hats. At Columbia, most know him as one of the three University Senators who represent Columbia College, the man who knocked on hundreds of doors to secure victory in his campaign last year. Those who miss his semi-regular USenate email updates may know him as an RA in Carman, Economics TA, brother of Sigma Phi Epsilon, or member of the Ski Team. Many are also familiar with his collection of hard-to-get internships, including a semester in the White House and a summer working for Columbia’s favorite consulting firm, McKinsey & Company. In the past four years, Sun has garnered—along with his impressive resume—a complicated reputation as a public figure on campus. (more…)

Illustrations by Leila Mgaloblishvili, CC ’16

The final, May, issue of The Blue and White is on campus just in time for finals. Inside is an interview with Greta Gerwig, BC ’06; the final installment of a series on undergraduate student debt at Columbia; as well as a look at ROTC, years after the controversy. Issues are in Butler and Lerner; PDFs are online. Here, senior editor Will Holt, CC ’15, explains what you should know before you teach for America.

When Wendy Kopp first pitched the concept of Teach For America as part of her student thesis at Princeton in 1989, her advisor told her that she was “quite evidently deranged.” Nevertheless, the organization got its start just one year later with a dedicated charter corps of 500 recruits.

Kopp’s original vision of hundreds of elite college graduates teaching at some of the nation’s neediest schools may have once seemed the stuff of fantasy, but TFA has since trained over 30,000 teachers. 10,000 recruits were sent out to schools across the country last fall alone, and the nonprofit now boasts over $300 million in assets. In 2012, Fortune magazine named TFA one of the 100 best organizations to work for in the United States.

But many critics question TFA’s efficacy as well as the organization’s commitment to its founding ideals; some argue that many of TFA’s policies threaten to damage the schools they set out to save. For instance, the organization currently sends a third of its recruits to charter schools. Charters, though publicly funded, are generally endowed with more enviable budgets, larger donor bases, and better resources than their district school peers.

Moreover, recruits are often considered poorly trained. Many go on the job with fewer than 50 hours of teaching experience. These new graduates, without formal teaching degrees, are frequently sent to districts where budgetary constraints have led to layoffs of long-term professionals. Because TFA recruits are relatively inexpensive hires, veteran teachers have lost their jobs to corps members. (more…)

The final issue of The Blue and White is on campus just in time to offer perfect procrastination fodder. You’ll find an interview with Greta Gerwig, BC ’06; a critical look at TFA; and the final installment of a series on undergraduate student debt at Columbia. Scour Butler or Lerner for a copy, or check it out on the world wide web. In this piece, staff writer Naomi Sharp, CC ’15, gives us a taste of the day-to-day lives of Columbia’s ROTC cadets. 

Christian Vivadelli, CC ’15, meets me outside of Carman at 4:45 a.m. He has just rolled out of bed and comes down from his room wearing a navy sweatshirt. A few hours ago, he was working on a University Writing paper. (“The long one,” he adds as clarification.)

Illustrations by Juliette Chen, CC ’16

The sky is dark as we head down an empty College Walk. After years of swim practice, Christian is used to waking up early; in fact, he’ll be back on campus by 6:30 a.m. to train with the Columbia swim team. I ask him about breakfast. “I usually have a granola bar, but I ran out,” he tells me.

He opens the door of a black van parked outside the 116th street gates and we climb into the back seat. Like every Tuesday morning, a driver hired by Columbia is at the wheel. Patrick Poorbaugh, GS ’15, is sitting shotgun. Abigale Wyatt, GS ’14, climbs in at 125th street.

The commute to the Bronx’s easternmost tip takes less than half an hour this early in the morning. We pull up at SUNY Maritime, the New York City base for the Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps (NROTC), well before the 5:30 a.m. start time for Physical Training.

(more…)

Illustration by Britt Fossum

In the March issue of The Blue and White—on-campus and online now—now, Britt Fossum, CC ’16, tells us about some crazy desert science stuff Columbia used to be into.

“The strange part was the rationale for construction in the first place,” admits Dr. Nicholas Christie-Blick of Columbia’s Earth and Environmental Sciences Department, describing the glassy geodesic domes in Oracle, Arizona that rise out of the desert like something from a science fiction dream. Originally, the center—named Biosphere 2 after Biosphere 1 (the Earth)—was used for environmental research. The original experiments aimed to examine how humans interact with ecology by “enclosing” teams inside the domes for up to two years. The mission’s novel combination of field work and Survivor-style reality show was beset by invasive ants, illness, and allegations of pseudoscience, as it emerged that the researchers could not survive without outside interference. (more…)

To honor our heritage/amorous affair with our mother magazine, we will continue posting pieces from the current issue of The Blue and White. Keep an eye our for the mag in Butler, Lerner, and select residence halls. If you are interested in subscribing to the magazine, direct your correspondence to bweditors@columbia.edu. In this feature, magazine contributor and Bwog editor Alexandra Svokos, CC ’14, explores sexism, cyphers, and CUSH’s struggle to find a permanent place in the Columbia community. 

Illustration by Juliette Chen, CC ’16

“We currently don’t exist on paper,” John Lubeen Hamilton, CC ’13 and one of Columbia University Society of Hip-Hop’s most recognizable members on campus, explained. Originally started as an Intercultural Resource Center (IRC) Committee under the administration of the Office of Multicultural Affairs, CUSH was formed as a group that celebrates hip-hop culture, with a dedication to social justice—a seemingly paradoxical mission statement given that hip-hop is historically characterized by gang violence, sexism, and drug use. CUSH cultivates safe spaces, attempting to reconcile a socially controversial genre with the institutional principles of the IRC through critical dialogue. Its acronym-name seems to confuse the two goals: it’s unclear whether CUSH is attempting to grow a brand of hip-hop that adheres to progressive principles or is honoring music it loves while ignoring its unsavory foundation.

As most current members will attest, the founders—Ace Anderson, Mpho Brown, and Jon Tanners, all CC ’11—began the group as a more formal forum to hang out and talk about their favorite music. The group created a tradition of public events: cyphers, slam poetry showcases, discussions, film screenings, and new album listening parties. In previous years the cyphers—open events for freestyle rappers—drew crowds of 30-50 people, with a dozen rappers in the “circle” at its height.

(more…)

Illustrations by Anne Scotti

There is rarely any consolation prize for getting the middle seat on a plane—but, as staff writer Naomi Sharp found on a recent Spirit Airlines flight, sitting next to and meeting Jimmy Failla was one of them. “Maybe we all forgot to pay the extra fee for departure,” he reasoned good-naturedly, as passengers on the notoriously cheap airline grumbled about delays. Failla is not a worrier—as he puts it, “things don’t stress you out that much once you’ve driven a cab in New York.” The stand-up comedian, radio host, and soon-to-be author will chronicle his experiences as a cab driver in his first book, scheduled for release in the fall of 2013. This B&W staff writer from seat 10B (who, she has been informed, sleeps like his dog), sat down with Failla to hear his take on offensive humor, New York City, and why the best conversations in the world are between prostitutes and cab drivers.

The Blue and White: Your book is called Follow That Car: A Cabbie’s Guide To Conquering Fears, Achieving Dreams, and Finding a Public Restroom. Which is the hardest of the three?

Jimmy Failla: Definitely the restroom. It’s not even close. What is the easiest? Achieving dreams.

B&W: Really?

JF: Yeah, because you can adjust them. I had different dreams before I started driving a cab. It started out like, “I’m gonna sell this screenplay,” and “I’m gonna host the Tonight Show,” and then twelve hours later it was like, “I do not want to get stabbed doing this.”

I drove a cab for nine months in 2008, before the birth of my son. I originally drove it because I needed the money and I wanted to learn things, and then I kept driving it because I was crazy. And you have to be a little nuts to drive a cab.

B&W: Most other drivers are a little nuts?

JF: It really depends. There are a lot of guys driving cabs that are geniuses in other countries that aren’t licensed to practice heart surgery here. Then there are a lot of guys who are driving cabs in their 70s and 80s. It’s a lifestyle for a lot of people. You have two twelve-hour shifts you can work, but you do whatever you want during those twelve hours.

(more…)

Rejoice! The March 2013 issue of The Blue and White is now on campus. Pick it up in Lerner, Butler, or select residence halls (or find it “online“). To honor our heritage/amorousaffair with our mother magazine, we will continue posting pieces from the upcoming issue. In this feature, mag contributors Naomi Cohen, CC ’15, and Claire Heyison, BC ’13, discuss the complexities of the tenure process at Barnard and why a beloved Barnard English professor packed off for Brown University. Want more? Catch the writers discussing the piece tonight from 9-9:30 pm on 89.9 WKCR’s “Late City Edition.”

“It’s a body blow,” says Barnard English chair Peter Platt. “But we’re big and we’re strong. We have to pick up the pieces, and we’re doing that.”

Platt is referring to the loss of former colleague Bashir Abu-Manneh, whom he helped hire in 2004—and who, in November 2012, was denied tenure by his department, effectively ending his employment at Barnard.

Illustration by Alexander Pines, CC ’16

While students were quick to voice their resentment toward the tenure decision by circulating a high-profile petition demanding his reinstatement, Abu-Manneh’s colleagues in the department have largely refused to speak on the matter. Abu-Manneh, too, declined to comment.

Abu-Manneh taught a number of courses, including Cultures of Colonialism: Israel/Palestine; Global Literature; Postcolonial Theory; and Marxist Criticism. He was the only Barnard English professor who specialized in postcolonial literatures and the only professor on campus who taught a course built exclusively around Arabic literature in translation. While Abu-Manneh’s deep engagement with Marxist theory and Israel-Palestine was new for many students, his openness and dynamism attracted students of disparate viewpoints. Abu-Manneh is remembered as having the rare ability to strike a pedagogical balance that was neither dogmatic nor apolitical.

“Atypical,” says Platt of his role in the department. “I’ve always been a big fan of his.”

As Abu-Manneh was a campus favorite, his dismissal has invited speculation regarding the tenure process led to his rejection. In all cases, candidates are evaluated along three distinct criteria: teaching, research, and service. Linda Bell, Provost and Dean of the Faculty at Barnard, stresses, “Nobody can pass the Barnard tenure process without distinguishing themselves in all three areas.”

While these three expansive categories are known, because tenure deliberations are confidential, cases often invite drama. What’s more, Barnard tenure protocol requires that candidates be reviewed first at Barnard, then at Columbia. Since every step of the process is confidential (and since there are many steps), where and why a candidate was rejected is always obscured.

According to multiple sources, Abu-Manneh was initially approved for tenure by the Barnard English department, by Barnard’s tenure committee, and, since the case went over to Columbia, presumably by President Spar.

Abu-Manneh’s dossier was then passed to the Columbia tenure committee, which recommended that the Provost reject his case. While rejection at this stage is usually final, Abu-Manneh’s colleagues appealed to the Columbia Provost to return the case to Barnard in fall 2012. These appeals are considered on the merit of “evidence of substantial scholarly growth,” or publishing.

Because he had only published one book during his eight years at Barnard, the same panel that approved Abu-Manneh once before was now backed into a corner, as a process which was once based on three criteria was now whittled down to an evaluation of his publication history.

Of the four candidates considered for tenure in 2012 at Barnard, Abu-Manneh was the sole candidate that was denied. According to Professor Frederick Neuhouser, Chair of the Philosophy department at Barnard and a close friend of Abu-Manneh’s, “after maybe years of serving Barnard and Columbia with great energy, Bashir is feeling very betrayed by the tenure process.”

But what is the process like?

If you don’t know the following figure, you definitely should. In Campus Characters, The Blue and White introduces you to a handful of Columbians who are up to interesting and extraordinary things. If you’d like to suggest a Campus Character, send us an email at editors@theblueandwhite.org. From the current issue, on newsstands across campus today, staff writer Matt Schantz, CC ’13, continues our annual tradition of profiling the outgoing Columbia Daily Spectator editor in chief. This time around, meet  Sarah Darville, CC ’13.

Illustrations by Leila Mgaloblishvili

When I asked her how Sarah Darville, CC ’13 and Spectator editor in chief for the 2012 calendar year, kept sane under the pressure of running Columbia’s daily paper, Maggie Alden, CC ’13 and Sarah’s managing editor, thrust her phone in front of me. “I have a video to show you,” she said. Taylor Swift erupted from the phone’s speaker, accompanied by an image of Sarah jumping up and down on a red sofa in Spec’s office, curly hair exploding with each leap. When the video ends, Maggie laughs. “[Working with Sarah] was one of the most positive experiences I’ve had in my life.” Unpretentious and unrehearsed, Sarah inspires those around her with a (usually) quiet confidence.

“I’ve been a huge journalism nerd since I was a kid,” Sarah admits. Before becoming a voracious reader of grown-up newspapers, Sarah recalls reading Time for Kids. in high school, Sarah served as editor in chief of her school paper and bought a subscription to the Columbia Journalism Review.

Sarah hesitated to join Spectator her freshman year. “I thought I was going to become some new person when I got to Columbia,” she explains. But the feeling only lasted a moment. Sarah joined the paper almost immediately, working briefly in copy-editing before moving on to reporting. After two years covering the Manhattanville expansion and education in Morningside, Sarah was promoted to editor in chief.

(more…)

In the new issue of your favorite magazine The Blue and White, on campus later this week, you’ll read about the denial of tenure to a favorite Barnard professor, get some insight into CUSH’s split from the IRC, and hear from the wisest cabbie in New York City. Whet your appetite with this piece by senior editor Torsten Odland, CC ’15, on Operation Ivy League and how quickly institutional memory fades at Columbia. 

In the early hours of December 7, 2010, the following students were awoken and arrested for drug dealing by NYPD officers: Harrison David, SEAS ’12; Chris Coles, CC ’12; Stephan/Jose Vincenzo/Perez, CC ’12; Michael Wymbs, CC, ’11; and Adam Klein, CC ’12. Specifically, they’d sold: marijuana, cocaine, LSD, ecstasy, and Adderall. The bust was the culmination of a five month long investigation of the students, from whom undercover NYPD officers bought $11,000 worth of drugs over the course of 31 deals.

In the Office of Special Narcotics’ original press release, they referred to the sting as “Operation Ivy League.” Though Police Commissioner Ray Kelly denies ever using it, it is the name that stuck.

Illustration by Anne Scotti, CC ’16

Students from 2010 remember “OIL” as a “big deal.” Operation Ivy League united the Columbia community in confusion; the atmosphere on campus in the days after the arrests was described to me as a “collective daze”—OIL was “shocking” and “upsetting” and everyone was talking about it.

The responses to “Five Students Arrested in Drug Bust, ‘Operation Ivy League,’ ” Bwog’s first article covering the story, demonstrate how intensely Columbia students felt about the issue: “My thoughts go out to the countless individuals in the Greek community who fight everyday to show the truly positive side of their fraternity or sorority, only to have actions like this essentially reset the process. It’s an absolute shame”; “My heart goes out to the desperately poor people from third-world countries who risk their lives smuggling drugs inside their bodies because they have no other option. My heart does NOT go out to Ivy Leaguers who got caught.”

For the Columbia students who were there, OIL was an unforgettable event, about which many still feel strongly, both in support of or in disgust with the arrested. It’s remained campus news for two years–—Bwog published updates about each of the accused’s court cases, and still keeps campus posted when Jose Perez appears on network news to talk about the dangers of Adderall.

Two years from now, almost all of the undergrads who remember the atmosphere on campus in the days after the arrests will have graduated. Which begs the question: Does Operation Ivy League matter to Columbia students anymore? Let me put it this way: In Columbia history, can we put Op. Ivy League in the same category as “that time Snoop Dogg played Bacchanal?” Did it permanently impact the lives of Columbia students, or is it another “legendary moment” that ultimately amounts to a memory?

Read on to find out…

Most copies of the February issue of The Blue and White have been snatched up, but here’s looking forward to the March issue, on campus next week.  Today, managing editor Anna Bahr continues her three-part series on the experience of student debt at Columbia. To review the first piece, which focuses on taking out loans as an undergraduate, please click here, and look forward to the final installment, addressing debt at the School of General Studies, in the upcoming issue.

Illustration by Juliette Chen, CC ’16

Jean Pierre Salendres, CC ’14, applied to 15 universities. With the exception of Dartmouth, he checked off all of the Ivies on his Common Application. Of all his acceptance letters, only those from Columbia and University of Pennsylvania offered him financial aid—a surprisingly small handout from schools which publicly boast the magnanimity of their aid programs. Beyond the prestige, students hope for acceptance at these schools because of their nearly comprehensive coverage for undergraduates. But the generous aid boasted about in admissions pamphlets comes with an asterisk. Where American students are guaranteed a financially objective evaluation of their applications, international students have no such luck.

The principle behind need-blind admissions gestures toward affirmative action: it is intended to ensure socio-economic diversity, to address the growing income gap, and to “level the playing field” for disadvantaged applicants. Very few universities in this country offer any form of need-blind admission. Most that do are selective colleges with deep pockets; and most of these guarantee at least meeting “demonstrated need.” But it’s a pricey policy. Wesleyan University recently announced that it would end its need-blind admissions because of its high cost. Grinnell College plans to review its aid policies because its process is financially unsustainable.

More after the jump.

Keep your eyes open for the February issue of The Blue and White, coming to campus tomorrow. Until then, Bwog will honor our heritage/amorous affair with our mother magazine by posting highlights of the upcoming issue online. Among the treats to look forward to: financial aid for international undergrads, a look at Columbia’s strange investment in a supposedly safer cigarette, and the Sisyphean struggle of Bacchanal. Here, magazine contributor Naomi Sharp investigates the journey of Rembrandt’s “Portrait of a Man with Arms Akimbo.”

A Rembrandt painting that Columbia sold in 1974 for $1 million—$4 million today—is once again on the market, now with a price tag of $47 million.

Illustration by Katharine Lin, CC ’16

This development is only the latest chapter in the odd history of Rembrandt’s “Portrait of a Man with Arms Akimbo,” dated 1658. The painting was donated to Columbia in 1958 by supermarket billionaire George Huntington Hartford II, on the condition that it be sold to fund neurological research in the College of Physicians and Surgeons. When the Vietnam War ignited the 1968 student occupation of Low, protesters in the president’s office allowed the painting to be removed for safekeeping.

Amid doubts of the painting’s authenticity, Columbia sold “Portrait of a Man” to John Seward Johnson of the Johnson & Johnson consumer empire. Upon Johnson’s death in 2004, the painting resurfaced at an auction at London. It was proven to be a genuine Rembrandt and sold for $33 million.

The buyer was Steve Wynn, a Las Vegas casino owner. In the art world, Wynn isn’t exactly known for his curatorial finesse; during a now-infamous dinner party in 2006, while showing off his private collection to guests (including Nora Ephron and Barbara Walters), he managed to poke a six-inch hole in Picasso’s masterpiece “Le Rêve” with his elbow.

Fortunately, “Portrait of a Man” emerged unscathed from its brief stint with Wynn. In 2009 Wynn sold the painting—intact—to Otto Naumann Ltd, a private gallery on the Upper East Side. A former college professor, Naumann left academia after learning that garbage workers in New York were striking to protest a salary that was higher than his own. Now, Naumann is one of the leading art collectors in New York. Dutch paintings fill his quiet three-room gallery, where the only visitors are potential buyers.

(more…)

We continue to respect our heritage/amorous affair with our mother-magazine, The Blue and White by posting each issue of the magazine online. The latest issue, available this week around campus, is sure to delight: the Sisyphean struggle of pulling off Bacchanal; a conversation with The New Republic’s Leon Wieseltier; and a look at what Columbia’s need-aware policy means for international applicants. In this feature, senior editor Will Holt explores Columbia’s strange investment in and development of a supposedly safer cigarette. Forget that 20-foot ban and look back at the days when the university actively endorsed smoking. 

Illustration by Juliette Chen, CC ’16

On July 13, 1967, for just a few hours, it seemed that Columbia was about to trump the splitting of the atom: “a development of far-reaching importance which promises to benefit mankind” was announced by the President of Columbia University and the dean of its medical school. According to a statement released by CU News Office Director John Hastings that morning, this lofty “development” had something to do with “reducing the health hazard of cigarette smoking”—big news, considering that this was a time when Butler Library was filled with ashtrays.

Later that day at a major press conference, President Grayson Kirk and Dean H. Houston Merritt of the College of Physicians and Surgeons announced the invention of what, in Kirk’s words, “may well be a revolutionary cigarette filter.” The “Strickman filter”—named after its creator, an obscure New Jersey chemist named Robert Strickman—purportedly removed two-thirds of the tar and nicotine inhaled through traditional cigarette filters. Strickman, perhaps unsurprisingly, claimed that the filter made for a much safer cigarette without any loss of flavor.

Interestingly, the majority of the questions that arose in the weeks that followed weren’t so much about the invention as they were about the announcement itself. Why was a major research university, and not a tobacco firm, publicizing the Strickman filter? Furthermore, why hadn’t news of this supposedly groundbreaking invention come through the scientific community that was supposedly backing Strickman’s claims?

(more…)

Illustrations by Jiyoon Han

The Winter issue of The Blue & White is on campus now! It’s also on our website, theblueandwhite.org. Look for it in Lerner and Butler. Here, contributor Somer Omar profiles Jasmine Sudarkasa, a Campus Character.

If you have not yet met Jasmine Sudarkasa, know that she wants to meet you. She thrives on being surrounded by people, and confesses, almost apologetically, “I need to be constantly stimulated.” Such dedication to relationships especially stands out at Columbia, where people notoriously shy away from waving to one another on College Walk. “Being caring doesn’t take anything from you,” she urges.

What’s most striking about Sudarkasa’s undertakings, from her involvement with the Black Theater Ensemble to her downtown fundraising position at Theatre for the New City, is the extent to which she takes them personally. “I’m very careful about what I invest in, because if I like it I’m going to be about it forever.” And in spite of her individual conviction, her activities share in common a commitment to other people. “I just want people to be happy!” she affirms constantly. Indeed, nothing Sudarkasa does is solitary, and she remains firmly committed to the idea that community is “our biggest untapped resource.” (more…)

Illustrations by Britt Fossum

The Winter issue of The Blue & White is at the printer. The printer is such a tease! Ha! In the meantime, read on for Senior Editor Will Holt’s and contributor Torsten Odland’s takes on whether or not you should unhang that CU hoodie and represent.

Affirmative

Let me start out by saying that I hate this school. There’s nothing that I like about it. I hate you, and I probably hate all the other versions of you that you call your friends. I hate all our teams and clubs, and I hate all sports, games, and organizations. But I wear Columbia apparel, and I’m proud of it.

Why wouldn’t you?

“Oh, it’s not my style.”

Not your “style”? Don’t want to look like a “bro”? Or a “douchebag”? I get it: only stupid people wear shirts and pants with letters on them. They must be so naïve, trying to fit in with the cultic, stereotypically collegiate crowd-life of football and pizza and dubstep. It’s barbaric. Don’t they know what it means to be an individual?

Oh, I could just vomit all over you when you whine like that. After three years spent in this self-important hellhole, I’ve gotten better at retaining my disgust, and refocusing my qi. So let’s talk about this: what is your style? Please, I’m just dying to know who you are.

Ugly sweater, ironic hat, classic vans, skinny-ass pants. Why—you’re your very own iconoclast! When your friends see you rolling in with cuffed jeans, they look at each other in half embarrassment thinking, “Only he could pull that off.” Psych! I was being facetious, which is a trick of the mind. I see you thrifting for clothes that look like they’re sold at Urban Outfitters. I see you buying those suede boots. You look like everyone else that’s trying to forget that they’re a consumer-object—which is exactly the mentality that destroyed the revolution. The only difference between you and the “bros” or the people who wear velour tracksuits all the time is that you are trying so much harder to convince yourself that what you put on every morning means something. Your style is “I’m a hipster.” And hipsters can suck my dick. That’s a promise.

(more…)